Slapdragon Posted January 30, 2001 Share Posted January 30, 2001 London Sunday Times January 28, 2001 Army May Get Plastic Tanks Plastic tanks, once the playthings of schoolboy generals, could soon be issued to the British Army, writes Emily Milich. The Advanced Composite Armoured Vehicle Platform (ACAVP) has passed its field trials and is being studied by Ministry of Defence officials. The vehicle, Europe's first plastic tank, is almost invisible to radar. It is also lighter, faster and easier to transport by helicopter than heavy steel tanks. The ACAVP, built by Vickers and the Defence Evaluation Research Agency, will now be studied by ministry testers in a "scientific environment". The tank's weight of about 24 tons is 10 tons lighter than that of a similar-sized steel Warrior fighting vehicle. The ACAVP can therefore be flown rapidly to war zones and is more mobile across countryside at up to 50mph. The plastic body makes it more difficult for radar to detect and cuts its fuel consumption in battle, thus reducing the need for supporting fuel tankers. Plastic will be much easier than steel to repair on the battlefield and the makers claim that the tank's epoxy resin and glass-fibre hull is as shell-resistant as its metal equivalent. Christopher Foss, an armoured warfare expert at Jane's Defence Weekly, said: "It's safer for the crew because you don't have metal fragments flying about if the vehicle is hit." Europe and America want smaller, faster vehicles to replace the huge tanks built for possible war with the Soviet Union in the 1970s and 1980s. The ACAVP is one of several projects being worked on, some with the American military. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gaffertape Posted January 30, 2001 Share Posted January 30, 2001 It strikes me that shards of hardened plastic would be just as dangerous to the crew as bits of metal, but I'm sure the experts have looked into that. Anything's better than the magnesium plates on the Bradley, right? GAFF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruno Weiss Posted January 30, 2001 Share Posted January 30, 2001 Not a bad idea I guess, but I can tell them from experience to be careful as to how they store them, else the barrels get bent. ------------------ "Gentlemen, you may be sure that of the three courses open to the enemy, he will always choose the fourth." -Field Marshal Count Helmuth von Moltke, (1848-1916) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pvt.Tom Posted January 30, 2001 Share Posted January 30, 2001 How many countries use radar to detect tanks? You can see them and hear them from miles away how important is the invisible to radar thing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Heidman Posted January 30, 2001 Share Posted January 30, 2001 Originally posted by gaffertape: It strikes me that shards of hardened plastic would be just as dangerous to the crew as bits of metal, but I'm sure the experts have looked into that. Anything's better than the magnesium plates on the Bradley, right? GAFF I would guess that the plastic would be designed so that if it fails to deflect the round it would "melt" rather than shatter. I wonder what the claim that it is as "shell-resistant as its metal equivalent." actually means. Is a "stealthy" tank really that important? Most AT weapons (even missiles) are either infrared or visually targetted. Very few use radar. Jeff Heidman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sten Posted January 30, 2001 Share Posted January 30, 2001 Plastic shards may well be as dangerous as metal ones, but I sure wouldn't want to be the medic taking care of one of those crewmembers. Shrapnel surgery with shrapnels that don't show up on x-ray you, is _not_ an enjoyable experience. Gruesome. Sten Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gen. Sosaboski Posted January 30, 2001 Share Posted January 30, 2001 Nothing resists the 30mm on the A-10s (GAU-8A). No thanks, I'd take my chances in an M-1A1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted January 30, 2001 Author Share Posted January 30, 2001 Originally posted by Gen. Sosaboski: Nothing resists the 30mm on the A-10s (GAU-8A). No thanks, I'd take my chances in an M-1A1. 30mm DU shoots through an M-1A1 anyway -- all attack and no defense, even with the new Uranium armor updates on the A2. The "plastic tank" (actually epoxy resin) would be just as dead, but have a lower heat signiture, be smalle, faster, and stealthy to beam riders. Epoxy hulls do not fragment but vaporize when overmatched, leading to nothing that will fly around the hull. When a shell does not penetrate any spalls are minor becuase their weight is low compared to their cross section. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juardis Posted January 30, 2001 Share Posted January 30, 2001 I could see a huge problem in the bitter cold when plastic becomes brittle. I can see it now. One AK-47 burst and it splits right down the middle exposing the crew to the elements. Very bad for morale if that happens ------------------ Jeff Abbott Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vergeltungswaffe Posted January 30, 2001 Share Posted January 30, 2001 Originally posted by Pvt.Tom: How many countries use radar to detect tanks? You can see them and hear them from miles away how important is the invisible to radar thing? I don't know how often US/NATO opponents would be able to field the technology, but the J-8 JSTARS was the single most important asset in the destruction of Iraqi ground forces as it painted a radar picture of all the vehicles on the ground and their movement. This enabled target taskers to put aircraft on the targets and helped the ground assault to know the main areas of resistance. So to answer your question, radar is very important in modern ground combat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terence Posted January 30, 2001 Share Posted January 30, 2001 Another amazing development from the UK. First Chobham armor, err... armour, now this. Why are the British so good at tank armor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted January 30, 2001 Author Share Posted January 30, 2001 Originally posted by Terence: Another amazing development from the UK. First Chobham armor, err... armour, now this. Why are the British so good at tank armor. I think it is the whole teeth thing. If you had teeth like a Brit, you would not want to leave the house at all, and could spend time developing all that armor and the like. Note how white they all look. Now Scots and Irish have good teeth, which is why you never hear of great tank armor coming out of those countries, while the US merely scours the country for people with bad teeth to assign to R&D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Robertson Posted January 30, 2001 Share Posted January 30, 2001 I see no reason why materials other than steel, should be used in the construction of tanks. After all we now have infantry helmets which are made of reinforces nylon which are stronger than their steel predessors, but light enough to wear all day. I think that with the increasing cost and sophistication of warfare we are going to get tanks which are the technical equivalent of fighters jets on the ground. This will mean that we can afford to use more exotic materials in them. Steel is basically used in most applications because it is cheap and easy to make. It's properties are in fact nothing special wood for example is much strong than steel of equivalent weight. Carbon fibre is in a different league with the same strength as a hardened steel but 1/5 the weight. As for radar sensors sysytems like Jstar and ASTOR are used to pick up things like armour advances. Plastic vehicles would not show up nearly as much. Also on vehicles like MBT's the armour would still be composities but they would be mounted on plastic or carbon fiber frames. If we change the turret for an unmanned version and move the crew into the hull, and then make the vehicle entirely out of composites and titanium there in no reason why we can't half the weight of a MBT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L.Tankersley Posted January 30, 2001 Share Posted January 30, 2001 Originally posted by Pvt.Tom: How many countries use radar to detect tanks? You can see them and hear them from miles away how important is the invisible to radar thing? The US does, for one. It's not so important (now, at any rate) in a tactical engagement, but it is very significant behind the FLOT. Think "identifying targets for arty/aircraft" and "determining enemy plans/intentions." Edit - I missed Vergeltungswaffe's post above. I know various NATO nations were investigating helicopter-based "lightweight JSTARS" type platforms a while back. ------------------ Leland J. Tankersley [This message has been edited by L.Tankersley (edited 01-30-2001).] [This message has been edited by L.Tankersley (edited 01-30-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Head Mahone Posted January 30, 2001 Share Posted January 30, 2001 Originally posted by Terence: Another amazing development from the UK. First Chobham armor, err... armour, now this. Why are the British so good at tank armor. The Brits were the first to put tanks on the battlefield. Hell, maybe its in their blood. -Head ------------------ "No man ever won a war by dieing for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country." -General George S. Patton, Jr. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted January 30, 2001 Share Posted January 30, 2001 I'm sorry I'm such a visual guy but... is there a picture any where that we can look at? I'm having a very hard time imgineing a olive drab green/grey plastic tank? any web pics you can show us or direct us to? or is the whole thing TOP secret how does a plastic tank fire its main weapon? is it made out of plastic too? about about the ammo? Plastic? what in the tank is not plastic? the engine? I'm a little confused about this? (mostly because I just can't picture it) thanks -tom w Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgdpzr Posted January 30, 2001 Share Posted January 30, 2001 Actually, this isn't that unusual. I got a bunch of plastic tanks sitting in a case at home. They are only 1/35 the size of real tanks, but they are made of plastic (except for the photoetched stuff and other assorted metal squiggly bits.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted January 30, 2001 Author Share Posted January 30, 2001 Originally posted by aka_tom_w: I'm sorry I'm such a visual guy but... is there a picture any where that we can look at? I'm having a very hard time imgineing a olive drab green/grey plastic tank? any web pics you can show us or direct us to? or is the whole thing TOP secret how does a plastic tank fire its main weapon? is it made out of plastic too? about about the ammo? Plastic? what in the tank is not plastic? the engine? I'm a little confused about this? (mostly because I just can't picture it) thanks -tom w No, it is a design and a bunch of test bed vehicles. Some items are not made from steel and cannon be made from epoxy or carbon resins, so parts will be steel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Måkjager Posted January 30, 2001 Share Posted January 30, 2001 I remember browsing a magazing " Military Modelcraft International" last year which had as photo of the test vehicle... looked a bit like a cross between the Warrior IFV and FV 432 APC. The article went on to say that the benefits of the plastic armour vs aluminum armour was an increase protection level of between 8% to 15% for the same thickness level of the Aluminum plate, reduced wieght of vehicle , increased speed , or the option of adding more plastic armour and increased levels of protection without a noticable increase in the overall weight. There was also an article in the Sunday Times 2 years ago reporting the same technology and their ( Alvis/ DERA )experimental research in providing the vehicle with a "boost pack" to allow it to jump anti tank obstacles....i know it sounds Jame's Bondish . It will be interesting to see if this armour technology appears in the US Army 's FCS . Regards Måkjager ------------------ Once an Ubërcabbage Always an Ubërcabbage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted January 30, 2001 Share Posted January 30, 2001 That is a great idea! And if/when they get damaged, they can be fixed with a few Lego bricks! Spectacular! And just think what it means to camoflage! If you add no pigment to plastic, then it is totally transparent, plus the crew has a perfect visibility to outside! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Polar Posted January 30, 2001 Share Posted January 30, 2001 I finally found a picture of it! Quite retro! Joe ------------------ "I had no shoes and I cried, then I met a man who had no socks." - Fred Mertz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Måkjager Posted January 30, 2001 Share Posted January 30, 2001 Tom i have just emailed you a pix of the ACAVP vehicle that i found Can ye host it so as the other interested lads can have a gander ? Regards Måkjager ------------------ Once an Ubërcabbage Always an Ubërcabbage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted January 30, 2001 Share Posted January 30, 2001 Originally posted by Måkjager: Tom i have just emailed you a pix of the ACAVP vehicle that i found Can ye host it so as the other interested lads can have a gander ? Regards Måkjager no problem my pleasure thanks for the pic so this is the "plastic tank" ?? thanks -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 01-30-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted January 30, 2001 Author Share Posted January 30, 2001 Originally posted by aka_tom_w: no problem my pleasure thanks for the pic so this is the "plastic tank" ?? thanks -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 01-30-2001).] But remember that this is a test bed -- and the end product will be a MBT armed with a modern cannon and a range of APCs. Note the flat wall test vehicle has no stealth characteristic on it yet EXCEPT for its composites. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gen. Sosaboski Posted January 31, 2001 Share Posted January 31, 2001 I know DU penetrates M1 armor, but I'd just feel better in it anyway. Stealth technology doesn't have an impact when an A-10 or AH-64 rolls in on target, I don't think it's too much of an improvement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts