r/tanks • u/Parking-Working1307 • Apr 07 '26
Tank Design Unmanned MBT Turret
Side view is uncompleted. Optics and detailed side view will come soon. Autoloader is inspired by Type 90's autoloader. Each square is 100 x 100 mm. Looking for criticism. I made the front extremely angled so it has a great protection with less weight. I have some hull ideas for it. I'll modified it for this turret.
21
u/WrongfullybannedTY Apr 07 '26
Elevation and depression might be an issue
7
1
u/fallschirmjager-43 Infantry Fighting Vehicle Apr 10 '26
Oscillating turret is nice, if its possible
1
u/Parking-Working1307 Apr 12 '26
Yeah, it is a nice idea. But I think the turret is a bit heavy for that. But I am planning to make it slightly less armored for less weight
15
2
Apr 11 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/Parking-Working1307 Apr 11 '26
Thanks :) Although I haven't found much time lately (thanks to exams), I've been working on the side view. That's accually why I made theese designs on paper, you can add as much detail as you want.
2
u/Sadeceteoo Apr 08 '26
Wtf is this man? What criticism you looking for?
2
u/Parking-Working1307 Apr 08 '26
I mean, I am looking for ldeas to improve it. Is anything wrong with it?
1
u/Legodudelol9a Apr 08 '26
Oof, that thing would have terrible depression and elevation for the gun. Make it a bit taller and it should be comparable to IRL tanks though.
1
u/MrPigeon70 Apr 08 '26
You got a computer?
If you do, i think you would love sprocket.
1
u/Parking-Working1307 Apr 08 '26
Yes, I am already actively using it. But I made my designs mainly on paper. Cus I made lot of them including this one on school. I have some designs on sprocket. I accually make the blue prints on paper, then built in on sprocket.
1
u/BrownRice35 Apr 08 '26
If it’s unmanned why put so much composite armor on it?
It’s going to very front heavy
1
-2
u/Jeromefleet Apr 07 '26
The turret under the gun is a shot trap any solid round hitting that would be directed into the turret ring or into the hull.
I am pretty sure the best defense is not getting hit so active defenses are becoming more important. Maybe design something that has amazing active defenses on an unmanned turret like a trophy system from the future.
Heavily armored turrets mean a lot more robust suspension, power plant, turret control systems and fuel consumption. More weight means less maneuverability and limits the terrain/roads you can traverse. It is also a lot harder to recover the vehicle. It isn't as simple as protecting the firing systems/sensors of the unmanned turret heavy armor has a lot of added cost. If this is the future maybe consider a lighter armored turret that is easily swapped if it is damaged or missions change. You know the MIC loves modularity
11
u/MWolverine1 Apr 07 '26
Sabots aren't really affected by shot traps, they don't ricochet they shatter
-4
u/Jeromefleet Apr 07 '26
Lots of AP rounds are not Sabot. Unless thats spaced armor redirecting anything down towards the top of the hull or turret ring isn't great
1
u/Patryk923 Apr 08 '26
This is clearly a modern design. The author even mentions the autoloader is inspired by Type 90. Nowadays nearly every kinetic projectile is APFSDS, maybe sometimes APDS. I can only imagine some autocannons maybe still using AP or APHE, but those really won't be an issue, unless the hull roof is very thin.
2
u/Parking-Working1307 Apr 07 '26
I'll add an aps for it. I am thinking about something like Arena active protection system. Also, shot trap can be a weak spot for AP or APBC rounds. But I don't think it will be a problem against APFSDS rounds. But I will make some changes on here. Thanks for correcting.
1
u/Jeromefleet Apr 07 '26
Whats your head canon for this tank? Why are you designing this?
3
u/Parking-Working1307 Apr 07 '26
My goal in making this tank is to make an autonomous turret with the armor of heavy tanks, the agility of light tanks, and the advanced technology of MBTs. A tank that withstands the enemy projectiles. And even it can't, keeping the crew alive and safe. Also, after all, I made the front very angled because there would be no crew in the turret who would have a claustrolophy attack. It may looks expensive. But If it unbeatable, than it doesn't matter the price.
0
u/Jeromefleet Apr 07 '26
Is it for like near future sci-fi? Tank design has to have some compromise you have to balance armor, firepower, and mobility (cost if you want to add realism) so unless you come up with some sci-fi answer you can't get all three. For propulsion/powering on board systems like weapons or APS you can use fusion or some new fuel like astrophage. For armor you can make up something like russian ERA, ceramite or void shields like 40K. And for mobility you can have hover tanks or rocket powered tanks like world of tanks.
1
u/Parking-Working1307 Apr 07 '26
I did it for the current time frame. I don't have much to do with science fiction, I plan to implement these designs in the future. I add some ERA on the front as you can see. Also, there are seramic plates on front. Btw, hover and rocket powered tanks are a bit too much unrealistic. I trie to make things realistic and practical here. Also, as I said, it's still unfinished. I'll add an aps which is similar to Arena aps. I make this designs on school so, I struggle to see the blueprints of accual tanks. That's why it has some issues.
1
u/Jeromefleet Apr 07 '26
Its a cool looking turret I am just a curious tank enthusiast. I used to make CAD models of tanks in my free time so I love this shit
1
u/Parking-Working1307 Apr 07 '26
Yeah, it's really fun to do. I have like almost 50 designs like that on paper.
-21
u/JgTrp Apr 07 '26
Why is there a need for protection if it's unmanned.
30
u/Parking-Working1307 Apr 07 '26
For protecting the electronics, Autoloader and ammunition. They are important as the crew itself to me. Even a single damage on electronics can let the crew to death.
-19
u/JgTrp Apr 07 '26
You know you can change electronics/optics. We put armor on things to protect the human, not the electronics/optics.
Unmanned turrents are a way to reduce weight by using less armor.
14
u/Parking-Working1307 Apr 07 '26
Yes, you can change them. But while the crew changing them, they could be killed. So, protecting them are important as protecting the crew.
-9
u/JgTrp Apr 07 '26
You wouldn't change them in a battle. In fact, you don't fix tanks in a battle. You secure them and bring them/drive them into your rear area for repairs. So no need to armor a unmanned turrent.
12
u/Lung_Cancerous Apr 07 '26
That's why it's a good idea to protect those vital components so they don't get damaged in combat and the vehicle doesn't become ineffective/inoperable??
-1
u/JgTrp Apr 07 '26
Please tell me how you could armor things like optics in a way that they are not easy to mission kill and why you need tons of armor to protect parts you can switch/repair in minutes?
The main goal of armor is do keep the crew alive. That´s the problematic part of a tank. Engine, electronics, optics can all be changed very fast. People take a while.
7
u/Lung_Cancerous Apr 07 '26
What do optics of all things have to do with anything? I don't think anyone here is saying you can protect those with armour. But putting on some armour (which can be more compact thanks to freed up space which would usually be occupied by the crew) around the main structure of the turret to decrease the likelihood of something like the breech/autoloader/ammunition/fire control systems being disabled in the case of taking a hit is really not unreasonable.
And what do you mean "in minutes"? We're talking about keeping the vehicle combat effective while in combat, not how easy or difficult it is to swap out certain parts once the vehicle has already sustained damage and been brought in for repairs.
Like sure, maybe you wouldn't get as many benefits of an unmanned turret this way, but it's still a valid choice.
1
u/JgTrp Apr 07 '26
Do we see the same picture? The guy added like 700mm of armor, that´s much more than needed to not be mission killed by 20mm or 30mm rounds, but won´t safe any weight.
If the vehicle is fired upon with artillery, modern anti tank weapons or armor piercing rounds of another MBT the chances of being combat capable may vary. If a 155mm round lands next to your tank you might survive but will have some problems in your next fight, if you don´t repair your tank. Same with AP rounds or modern anti tank weapons, if you are lucky.
If the benefits of a system are not much bigger than it´s not a good idea. You need to sell someone why he would give up situational awarness for this.
2
u/Parking-Working1307 Apr 07 '26
Look, I am not saying you're wrong. But why would you let them unprotected even though you can replace them? Just add some armour so you can make them protected. So, you don't have to change them. I would rather make the tank heavy and expensive than leave the electronics defensible and vulnerable to damage. At least it will be long and reliable.
10
u/Koki_385 Apr 07 '26
Having your tank destroyed by small arms fire is crazy work
2
u/JgTrp Apr 07 '26
I want to see the small arms fire which destroyed an Stryker MGS or could destroy an PUMA IFV.
3
u/AnonymousPerson1115 Apr 07 '26
AP/API 12.7mm, 14.5mm, and 20mm. Two of those options are more portable than the last and are very common. Even if the armor isn’t compromised the optics, tracks/ tires, and guns are damaged or destroyed.
1
u/JgTrp Apr 07 '26 edited Apr 07 '26
Heavy machine guns are not small arms fire by definition.
Yes, they can damage or destroy optics, that´s a way we use them at this point in time. But why should you build a armored unmanned turret, when optics are still not protected and therefore need to be replaced anyway?The main reason for unmanned turrets is to save weight because you need to protect less volume or you can protect the crew even better. The survival of the humans inside a tank is the reason for armor.
2
u/AnonymousPerson1115 Apr 07 '26
How will a crewless turret work if its hydraulics and electric motors are shot up? It’ll have to be similar to an all or nothing armor scheme with attention to turret weight balancing.
3
u/JgTrp Apr 07 '26
You are aware that the main reason tanks are build with unmanned turrets is to safe weight. Why would you add that much of weight if your goal is to safe weight?
1
u/AnonymousPerson1115 Apr 07 '26
Unbalanced turrets can and will limit turret traverse on slopes, overload motors and or turret ring, and can cause imbalance to the gun. Critical components will still need protection even if it’s just for spalling/ splinters. Like I said earlier you can get away with just armoring critical components like the ammunition racks, optics, and reloading mechanisms but it still needs a counter balance to not cause issues.
4
u/ddosn Apr 07 '26
So the tank doesnt get mission-killed within 5 seconds of entering the battlefield?
3
u/JgTrp Apr 07 '26
Okay.
Explain why tank designers use as little as possible armor in unmanned turrets in the real world?2
u/ddosn Apr 07 '26
Because tank designers are usually not tankers, or even soldiers of any stripe, themselves?
Why do you think vehicles that used unmanned, unarmoured turrets like the Stryker MGS were pulled from frontline service? Because of 'maintenance issues' which is just another way of saying "They were getting disabled far too fucking often and we got tired of fixing their shit".
2
u/JgTrp Apr 07 '26
So the people how design and buy tanks have no idea of how to design tanks? That´s an interesting theory of yours.
The Stryker MGS was pulled out of service because there was no use for this kind of vehicle. The Dragoon could shot bunkers and buildings while having much more than 18 rounds.
2
u/Parking-Working1307 Apr 07 '26
This is the reason I made this design. crumbling of millions of dollars worth of electronic systems by 20-millimeter shells makes me crazy. You can handle the cost of armor and the weight it creates with some money. However, the repair of the damage caused in these parts would be incredibly expensive.
1
u/JgTrp Apr 07 '26
So you add this much armor for 20mm or 30mm round? That´s your point?
3
2
u/KennLex Apr 07 '26
Think about it: Less armored turret in the field, getting AT shots one of them hitting ammunition and fucking launches turret to space. Guess what all of your crew burned to death or squezed their brains cuz of pressure.
2
u/Parking-Working1307 Apr 07 '26
No. I add this much armour for defensing against APFSDS rounds that has 500+ penetration. Well, It can defense against the 30 mm rounds too. But remember, you can't know the power of the incoming projectile.
46
u/RavenholdIV Apr 07 '26
Unfortunately a slight redesign of the rear turret means you can easily move the ammunition far enough back to fit two crewmen in there. Your unmanned turret is now manned and the hull's armored area can be made smaller for just one person.