Future Equipment of WWIII

[ryacko]

Feel free to comment.


Firearms

LSAT Light Machine Gun
Caliber: 6mm Cased Telescoped

LSAT Assault Rifle, Bullpup
Caliber: 6mm Cased Telescoped

US Tanks

M60 Tank
A mainstay of national guard stockpiles, this tank is currently exported as military aid in the global conflict.
Weight: ~54 tonnes
Engine: 750 hp diesel
Main Armament: 105mm L52 Rifled

Super M60
Roughly inferior to the M60 Phoenix, and grossly inferior to modern tanks, the Super M60 was an attempt to upgrade national guard stockpiles to modern standards using plans from the eighties. The Super M60 however is primarily lent to allied nations to make up for any production shortfalls they have, although it is also used for defence.
Weight: 56 tonnes
Engine: 1200 hp diesel
Main Armament: 105mm L52 Rifled

M1A2 Abrams
Once only kept in reserve stockpiles, the M1A2 is once again serving on the frontlines to equip newly formed units as war production continues to ramp up.
Weight: 63 tonnes
Engine: 1500 hp turbine
Main Armament: 120mm L44

M1A3 Abrams
Only superficially similiar to the M1A2, this tank has been thoroughly redesigned, including a diesel engine, and easily repairable modular armor, along with more lightweight modern armor arrays.
Weight: 58 tonnes
Engine: 1400 hp diesel
Main Armament: 120mm L55

M1A3E2 Abrams
Functioning much like the Sherman Firefly of WWII, the M1A3E2's loss in ammunition capacity is made up for through firepower and additional armor. Typically one or two M1A3E2s make up the average US army tank platoon. The massive overpressure zone, noise radius, and dust cloud from firing makes this tank unwieldy as well, with some poorly reinforced buildings potentially collapsing as a result of overpressure. 70% first hit kill probability against a T-14 on the frontal arc.
Weight: 65 tonnes
Engine: 1400 hp diesel
Main Armament: 140mm L47

M2 Tank
Tank undergoing combat trials. Using watertight hatches and compartments, it can ford rivers up to 45 feet depths before internal flooding. 60% first hit kill probability against a T-14 on the frontal arc. A proposed name for the tank is "Schwarzkopf."
Weight: 68 tonnes
Engine: 1500 hp hyperbar diesel-electric
Main Armament: 120mm L50 ETC Solid Propellant Gun, reduces propellant jitter allowing for more powerful propellants to be used

---

Russian Tanks

The Russian army is suffering a manpower shortage during this conflict, as some tanks are staffed with only two crew.

ERA-equipped Cold War Era Tanks
Old tanks built during the cold war modernized by slapping aplique ERA tiles on top. The ERA tiles are notoriously unreliable as a result of wartime scale production levels, with many being either duds or too sensitive, resulting in accidental or sympathetic detonations. The Russian army insists this is propaganda.

T-90 Tank
Main Armament: 125mm

T-14
40% first hit kill probability against an M1A3 Abrams across the frontal arc. 30% first hit kill probability against an M2 tank across the frontal arc.
Main Armament: 155mm Medium Pressure, roughly the same muzzle energy as the 140mm L47 NATO


Misc Equipment

French Felin, integrated future warrior combat system: currently the only future warrior combat system fielded throughout an entire army. Other NATO nations are currently slowly integrating systems into their armies but remain behind the french.

[Brother-Captain Gaius]

Why would a cripplingly obsolete main battle tank be used alongside fantasy future small arms? If M60s are involved in this hypothetical war (which you've given very little information on), why wouldn't M4s and M16s still be the standard small arm?

[Mr Bean]

Wait, why does the M1A3E2 Abrams exist again? Unless the T-14 has super magic armor there's nothing the 120mm can't get through at range (sans reactive armor) because we've long since hit the armor/weight ratio problem of making super heavy tanks unrealistic against modern weaponry.

[ryacko]

Why would a cripplingly obsolete main battle tank be used alongside fantasy future small arms? If M60s are involved in this hypothetical war (which you've given very little information on), why wouldn't M4s and M16s still be the standard small arm?

M4s and M16s are still drifting around, I might post an addendum section. Afterall, even M1s and AK-47s are still used today in a variety of conflicts. Although the US army has largely upgraded to the Lightweight Small Arms Technology weapons, especially since firearms make up a small amount of military expenditures, and it's been long enough for the LSAT to be mass fielded since it's adoption.

On another note, M60s aren't used for frontline purposes by major nations. But the US and Egypt still keep and use M60s.

[Sea Skimmer]

So people have time to bullshit around with technology that doesn't work yet, but are also upgrading M60 tanks the US has as of this point been largely retired even from the reserve stockpiles? Yeah that makes about no sense. Anyway without more information on what you mean by world war three and why both sides didn't vaporize each other in a war going on long enough to field new tank designs, this is completely pointless.

[ryacko]

What technology doesn't work yet?


You have no imagination. Why don't you go and ruin every thread in this forum saying, "why doesn't everyone nuke the other side?"

[Terralthra]

Dude, you asked for feedback. Don't bitch if you get feedback you don't like.

[ryacko]

Dude, you asked for feedback. Don't bitch if you get feedback you don't like.

Now you're just trolling. I appreciate feedback, but then, should I ruin threads saying, "FTL is impossible" or items such as that? Then I could tell everyone you're just being bitchy.

[Block]

Dude, you asked for feedback. Don't bitch if you get feedback you don't like.

Now you're just trolling. I appreciate feedback, but then, should I ruin threads saying, "FTL is impossible" or items such as that? Then I could tell everyone you're just being bitchy.

They're trying to tell you that the M60 isn't really even in National Guard Armories anymore. It wouldn't see service even in a World War, we've scrapped most of them. We've got more M1A1s +A2s than we even want to pay to maintain at this point, so it doesn't make sense to include an obsolete tank.

[ryacko]

As you may know, I can't edit posts after several minutes.

I will take this under consideration for future versions that I will post within this thread.

I read something likely outdated about the extent of M60 tanks in inventory.

[Grumman]

First question: who is doing what to start this war?

If it's a war of Russian aggression like in a few of those Cold War novels, wouldn't it make more sense to draw a line in the sand and bomb any tank crossing it, instead of risking horrendous casualties by fighting them mano a mano?

[PeZook]

Now you're just trolling. I appreciate feedback, but then, should I ruin threads saying, "FTL is impossible" or items such as that? Then I could tell everyone you're just being bitchy.

Plausibility of the scenario is an important part of a war story because it ties directly into the reader's suspension of disbelief and thus can impact all other elements, so it's a valid criticism.

Questions about the nature of the conflict are also important if people are to ascertain if a weapon system makes sense or not. You'd do well to listen instead of bitching that people "ruined" your thread.

[ryacko]

But the original post does not deal with world war three at all.

Besides, in an actual war, both sides will paint the other as aggressors.

[fgalkin]

*checks thread title*

Were you dropped on your head as a child, or are you simply trolling?

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

[Sea Skimmer]

What technology doesn't work yet?


You have no imagination. Why don't you go and ruin every thread in this forum saying, "why doesn't everyone nuke the other side?"

Actually I obviously have far more imagination then you, because I can imagine the immense, obvious problems with the complex lack of context in this thread making all commentary pointless, while you clearly cannot comprehend anything. Nor are you interested in trying which is the real problem.

[Grumman]

Besides, in an actual war, both sides will paint the other as aggressors.

I'm not asking what the propaganda says, I'm asking who is actually doing what.

[Ford Prefect]

I'm not asking what the propaganda says, I'm asking who is actually doing what.

Actually in a novel making it ambiguous could really feed into some interesting themes regarding how we view war.

Not that this is terrifically relevant to a guy post a list of future tanks but you know. Generally.

[Grumman]

I'm not asking what the propaganda says, I'm asking who is actually doing what.

Actually in a novel making it ambiguous could really feed into some interesting themes regarding how we view war.

Sure, but the author needs to have some idea what's happening even if the reader doesn't. The story doesn't have to be conclusive, but it should be consistent.

[Dr. Trainwreck]

How will the conflict start, really? Is it one of these kinds of scenarios where both sides deploy atomics and still exist afterwards for a traditional fight? Will the sides never even use nukes? It's a really important question, because both parties have launch capability, which e.g. Saddam didn't, so it's sensible they'd go for Dr. Stranglelove. Is this war going to start in eastern/central Europe like Cold War scenarios? Also, for fuck's sake, what makes you think a Russian tank can be piloted by two men, are you playing Men of War or something? If you're down to two men per tank, use a few less tanks and crew them properly.

So, there you go. Do make the effort, please, and pull a scenario out of your ass so we can comment.

[D.Turtle]

M2 Tank
Tank undergoing combat trials. Using watertight hatches and compartments, it can ford rivers up to 45 feet depths before internal flooding.

The problem with fording is not keeping the water out. The problem is getting fresh air to the engine. So the limit is how deep you can go before you can't get in fresh air, and not how deep you can go until water pressure is too high.

[Connor MacLeod]

Now you're just trolling. I appreciate feedback, but then, should I ruin threads saying, "FTL is impossible" or items such as that? Then I could tell everyone you're just being bitchy.

you just post a bunch of databoxes and then asked for comments. You didn't specify what you were looking for, what commentary would or would not be appreciated, etc. Basically no real details or clarifications or guidelines or anything to actually tell people what you were looking ofr or what you wnated to get out of this thread. Given such ambiguity, why the hell are you so upset when people take a stab at it as best as they can given the limited data?

[Dark Hellion]

Am I the only person getting a Skeets vibe from this? The same contextless parade of technology, lack of understanding of the complexities of reality, same trollish response to all criticisms?

Can a mod please check for this?

[Irbis]

Also, for fuck's sake, what makes you think a Russian tank can be piloted by two men, are you playing Men of War or something? If you're down to two men per tank, use a few less tanks and crew them properly.

Because, you know, men trained for one position can effortlessly swap to another, say from gunner to driver, no problems. Just like in computer game.

Russians experimented with a lot of reduced crew designs, tanks without loader and helicopters without gunner already. I saw Russian tank design with 2-3 men crew entirely in the hull, turret being compact, automated one housing only ammunition and loading mechanism, it isn't that implausible.

[PeZook]

The OP indicated this is unusual and forced by circumstances, not how the tank was designed in the first place.

[Irbis]

The OP indicated this is unusual and forced by circumstances, not how the tank was designed in the first place.

Ah. I assumed '2 crew' was only the newer models.

Well, yeah, as presented, this exercise is stupid and basically yet another badly written case of 'MURICA STRONG'. Except, poorly done as after two new generation of tanks last M60 should have ended up in scrap yards decades ago. Or, at best in military of Zanzibar or whatever country is graveyard of rusted hulks in the future.

Also, isn't the 'Schwarzkopf' name concept stolen from People's General?