The Next Generation Combat Vehicle (NGCV) needs to be smarter and leaner than the Abrams tank and Bradley fighting vehicle— and completely reimagined, said Maj. Gen. Eric Wesley, who commands the Army’s Maneuver Center of Excellence and Fort Benning, Georgia.
The Army plans to have a blueprint for its successor to the M1A2 Abrams Main Battle Tank and Bradley Fighting Vehicle by 2022.
While the shape of the vehicle remains undecided, Wesley said it’s clear it needs new ways of defending itself, including active protection systems and new weapons — all with the goal of lightening the load and increasing maneuverability.
The Army’s current tanks weigh nearly 80 tons, Wesley said, up from roughly 65 when fielding began.
“We cannot afford to take another plate of steel and put it on the front,” he said. “We cannot afford to increase the weight of the Abrams, because it’s no longer mobile. You can’t get it across key roads and bridges; you can’t truck with it. Just adding passive armor is no longer sufficient.”
Active protection systems, which the Army is working to add in modular form to its existing vehicles, would allow the NGCV to operate lighter by creating a force field of sorts to defend against incoming fire before it makes contact.
“Active protection … allows you to lower the weight and increase the protection of the vehicle by destroying rounds before they can penetrate the vehicle,” Wesley said.
Another weight-saving measure that may appear on the NGCV? Laser weapons.
Brian Wang is a Futurist Thought Leader and a popular Science blogger with 1 million readers per month. His blog Nextbigfuture.com is ranked #1 Science News Blog. It covers many disruptive technology and trends including Space, Robotics, Artificial Intelligence, Medicine, Anti-aging Biotechnology, and Nanotechnology.
Known for identifying cutting edge technologies, he is currently a Co-Founder of a startup and fundraiser for high potential early-stage companies. He is the Head of Research for Allocations for deep technology investments and an Angel Investor at Space Angels.
A frequent speaker at corporations, he has been a TEDx speaker, a Singularity University speaker and guest at numerous interviews for radio and podcasts. He is open to public speaking and advising engagements.
‘Lighter’ armor on tanks. Yea, there won’t be any tankers regretting that decision, right? If they can make lighter armor that will stop rounds as effectively as current chobham, I’m all for it. But going for lighter if it is NOT as effective, is trading lives to save fuel.
Yes, active protection systems are great, but no active protection system current or imagined is going to stop a kinetic penetrator, and if the active systems get good enough to stop most missiles, you can bet high odds kinetic weapons will see a resurgence. By all means, deploy active protection systems, but do not do so at the expense of armor.
” but no active protection system current or imagined is going to stop a kinetic penetrator”
Afghanit says hi.
” If they can make lighter armor that will stop rounds as effectively as current chobham”
Chobham is basically one of the simplest variants of composite armor.Not something good.
And yes,you can make lighter armor that will stop(or destroy)rounds better than older composites.
“But going for lighter if it is NOT as effective, is trading lives to save fuel.”
Speed and size contribute to protection,too.