Military hovertank

[Shroom Man 777]

Sure, the US military does have a couple of giant hovercraft transports, but would it be smart if they started using hover tanks? It would be fast, and could move through all sorts of terrain, and land mines wouldn't be a problem. Though it would lack armor, and a bigass 120mm gun would be impossible, due to recoil. But who needs armor if you're fast and maneuverable? And a cannon can be replaced with a missile launcher, right?

Oh sure, it'd suck in any urban battlefield, but still. And hovercrafts were cool and EXTREME in Die Another Day!

So, could it work?

[Murazor]

I have no way to assess the technical feasibility of your idea, but my gut tells me that being fast wouldn't do it that much good in the battlefield and even in an urban warfare role, I am fairly sure that RPGs and their ilk would be deadly threats for such vehicles.

[K. A. Pital]

Poor protection and no traction with poor speed, this is. Good for naval combat, but extremely bad for land combat.

[AMX]

land mines wouldn't be a problem.

Depends on the mine.
Bog-standard pressure-plate blast mines won't be a problem.
Magnetically fused shaped-charge mines will rip the thing to shreds.

And a cannon can be replaced with a missile launcher, right?

Almost, but not quite.
Rockets are expensive, and inferior against close targets.

So, could it work?

Not particularly well, I'd guess.

Poor protection and no traction with poor speed, this is.

Actually, I suspect top speed would be quite good - manouverablitity would be totally awful. (And protection, for that matter.)

[K. A. Pital]

I suspect top speed would be quite good

Not fast enough for a high-speed APC, but sucking in protection for a real tank. Essentially a huge minus with no plus.

[Broomstick]

Sounds to me like you'd wind up combining the worst features of tanks and helicopters. A "hovertank"? Hovering is the most inefficient form of flight possible, at least until we invent anti-gravity. It would be cool in a wanker sort of way, but totally stupid in the real world.

[CJvR]

Current hovercraft tech is supreemly poorly suited for armored vehicles despite the quality of beeing fast in a straight line. Carrying the weapons load is no big deal but the armor will be a killer, you will need a couple of downwards aimed jet engines to lift the 70 ton tank, add to that the likely larger volume and mass as a result of the hover conversion and you could end up on the wrong side of 100! To make matters worse it would be impossible to manouve such a beast at speeds. A hovercraft have no ground friction so the only power available to turn it is the engines, a troublesome enough proposition for lightweight racing hovercrafts infinetly worse for a massive beast. To make matters even worse it would have difficulty with terrain and threats current tanks laugh at, trenches, barbed wire, forrests, minor shrapnel etc... Anything that would deflate the aircussion. Having a high profile is definately bad for your health on the modern battlefield so a meter or two of air underneath will not be a particulary good strating point where height reduction is concerned.

[phongn]

Sure, the US military does have a couple of giant hovercraft transports, but would it be smart if they started using hover tanks? It would be fast, and could move through all sorts of terrain, and land mines wouldn't be a problem. Though it would lack armor, and a bigass 120mm gun would be impossible, due to recoil. But who needs armor if you're fast and maneuverable? And a cannon can be replaced with a missile launcher, right?

You aren't fast and maneuverable enough to avoid fire aimed in your direction and a missile launcher is much more expensive than a cannon.

[Surlethe]

With either a missile launcher or a cannon, if you don't have traction on the ground, isn't the recoil from firing going to alter your course if you're in a hovertank?

[Admiral Valdemar]

I want something like the Shagohod. You get over the traction problems by having Archimedes screws on the front, but the rest of the chassis floats.

[Elheru Aran]

With either a missile launcher or a cannon, if you don't have traction on the ground, isn't the recoil from firing going to alter your course if you're in a hovertank?

Yes. Newton's Third Law, after all...

[Keevan_Colton]

With either a missile launcher or a cannon, if you don't have traction on the ground, isn't the recoil from firing going to alter your course if you're in a hovertank?

With a missile launcher you can mitigate it by having it apply the thrust against the area behind the launcher, ie something not physically attatched to you or your wanked out hovertank...think along the lines of shoulder mounted infantry weapons, where the launcher is basically a hollow tube...it would be difficult to find a place to put such a system on a wanked out PoS, but meh...

You're right about a cannon though.

[Molyneux]

I want something like the Shagohod. You get over the traction problems by having Archimedes screws on the front, but the rest of the chassis floats.

...didn't the back of the Shagohod just drag on the ground?

[Shroom Man 777]

Fine, fine. How about on, say, a desert battlefield? Would a hovercraft, unarmored, be a good fast-attack weapon? Like, dart towards an unsuspecting guys, fire a shitload of missiles, and then run away?

And what's a magnetically fused shaped charge warhead? A mine that has a metal detector instead of a pressure thing?

[Elheru Aran]

You know that big ol' rubber skirt those hovercrafts have? Unless you armour it-- adding much more weight-- it's easily punctured. You end up with a hovercraft that doesn't hover. Real helpful.

Oh, yes, and it's VERY noisy. The people you're trying to hit may be 'unsuspecting', but get inside a km and they won't be.

[Sea Skimmer]

Sure, the US military does have a couple of giant hovercraft transports, but would it be smart if they started using hover tanks? It would be fast, and could move through all sorts of terrain

Hovercraft cannot climb 60% gradients, which is a basic standard for tanks, some can do better, few can do worse. They also cannot hold themselfs on a 40 degree side slope, which is also a pretty basic standard for tank mobility. So you'd have great mobility on flat wet terrian, and you'd just come to a halt at hills, berms and enemy trenches.

and land mines wouldn't be a problem.

A mine with a tilt rod or magnetic fuse sure would be.

Though it would lack armor, and a bigass 120mm gun would be impossible, due to recoil. But who needs armor if you're fast and maneuverable?

We have missiles fired off the shoulder which can shoot down supersonic jet fighters, nothing a hovercraft can do is going to matter one bit. Hovercraft have HUGE turning circles you know, and acceleration is not always that good.

And a cannon can be replaced with a missile launcher, right?

If all you want to do is destroy enemy tanks at long range, sure. But the mission of a tank has always included killing things other then tanks, and targets other then enemy tanks are far more common.

Oh sure, it'd suck in any urban battlefield, but still. And hovercrafts were cool and EXTREME in Die Another Day!

So, could it work?

No it is an awful idea. You want something that’s fast, agile, cool and armed with anti tank missiles? Buy an attack helicopter! They beats the crap out of a hovercraft in every way.

[Shroom Man 777]

Fancy kevlarish uber future materials might help. And noise cancellation tech.

Aw, goddamn it, can't I have my fancy hovercraft-riding techno-barbarians?!

Besides, the noise thing can also apply to helicopters.

[Shroom Man 777]

Aw, fine. The way I see it, aside from the ability to cross water and not get blown up by pressure sensitive mines, my hovercraft idea is no different from a TOW-armed Humvee. But noiser, more expensive and complicated. Damn.

[Sea Skimmer]

Poor protection and no traction with poor speed, this is. Good for naval combat, but extremely bad for land combat.

Even for naval combat (as opposed to amphibious transport), it would really make more sense to just buy a WIG aircraft, or a conventional airplane or helicopter. Alternatively, just buy a surface effect ship, or a normal missile corvette for that matter, or buy a real navy. Mother Russia has already fielded suitable systems like this in the form of the Lun Ekranoplan and Project 1239 Sivuch SES corvette. Both of them had some flaws, but given enough money great improvements could be made.

The only place I think hovercraft might have some military value is on an inland river/delta system. The US military used a handful of hovercraft as patrol craft in Vietnam, but its hard to draw conclusions from there operations since they did realtivly little. They also used engines and other technology which is quite outdated and less capabul then what could be built today.

[Elheru Aran]

If you want hovering craft in a future setting, just give them repulsorlifts.

Of course, if you're writing hard SF, just go with a militarized SUV like the Humvee... really, it's pretty practical all things considered, and it's definitely got the cheap angle going for it.

[Shroom Man 777]

I want something noisy, like a hoverfan. Which, I think, is really, really cool. Screw practicality, I'm going Die Another Day. Without Deathray Norks.

[Elheru Aran]

Hope you don't mind when the green, still wet-behind-the-ears LT JG does a RPG spam on you...

[Shroom Man 777]

LT JG? And well, too bad for the technobarbarians :p

[K. A. Pital]

The only place I think hovercraft might have some military value is on an inland river/delta system.

Uh, yes.

I've seen a handful of them at a military installation in Leningrad. They are actively used in the Gulf of Finland - it's a rather small aquatoria, filled with man-made structures like dams and forts all over it.

[Elheru Aran]

LT JG? And well, too bad for the technobarbarians :p

LT JG = Lt., junior grade. It's a Naval rank, equivalent to First Lt in the ground-pounders.