The Panther tank is kinda, sorta, back

[Thumpalumpacus]

Below the face of the turret looks like the perfect shot trap.

This was my first thought too. And that turret is goddamned huge.

 

[EwenS]

The British should have kept their Aircraft Carrier Alliance program. They could be making carriers for half the West by the 2030s.

Look who, outside the USA, is building carriers, or carrier like ships, today. China, India, Japan, Korea. They all have their own established shipbuilding industries to support and, in the case of the first two, much cheaper labour cost. France pulled out of a joint venture with Britain to provide the French Navy with a new carrier.

Anyway, while ACA was responsible for the build of the QE class, they didn't design it. History of their development here. Such a build consortium was required because no one U.K. shipyard was capable of building ships that big. They were the largest warships ever constructed for the RN.

Development of the Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carrier – a design history | Navy Lookout

www.navylookout.com

Late last year BAe Systems set up a Japanese corporation with a view to working with Japan on new Defence projects. One of those is believed to be for a new carrier for the JMSDF, a ship larger than their latest Izumo class multi purpose destroyers. Therein lies the future, using our technical knowhow to assist others.

BAE Systems Eager to Share Aircraft Carrier Know-How with Japan - Naval News

On October 12, 2021, BAE Systems held a press conference for the Japanese media, where they announced the establishment of a local corporation in Japan. The establishment of this corporation is expected to take place by the end of this year or early next year. The press conference focused for...

www.navalnews.com

Izumo-class destroyer - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[EwenS]

This was my first thought too. And that turret is goddamned huge.

If recent western tank design is anything to go by, the large rear turret bustle probably contains the full ammo load as it is safer for the crew if the tank gets hit. In Leo 2 only part was in the bustle with the rest in the hull.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

If recent western tank design is anything to go by, the large rear turret bustle probably contains the full ammo load as it is safer for the crew if the tank gets hit. In Leo 2 only part was in the bustle with the rest in the hull.

Right, that wasn't a criticism, just an observation. The war in Ukraine is certainly showing the hazards (once more!) of stowing the ammo inside the hull (or in the case of the T-72, the turret-column).

The Abrams has blowout panels designed to funnel ammo spark-ups in the bustle out the back for this reason.

 

[Denniss]

Count Zeppelin and Peter Strasser were notable for the German Airship service, which is why the carriers bore their names.

Carrier B was never named, just Carrier A as Graf Zeppelin

 

[GrauGeist]

Carrier B was never named, just Carrier A as Graf Zeppelin

Because flugzeugträger "A" was christened and launched (8 December 1938) and flugzeugträger "B" was never launched, therefore never christened (named).
On paper, flugzeugträger "B" was intended to be the Peter Strasser.

 

[SaparotRob]

As long as we're off thread, you think a reactivated Essex would be as effective as a theoretically operational Admiral of the Russian Fleet Kusnetsov? I was looking at the war's effect on arm sales in another thread. I was wondering if India would be better off with one instead of a Russian design. And I'm bored.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

As long as we're off thread, you think a reactivated Essex would be as effective as a theoretically operational Admiral of the Russian Fleet Kusnetsov? I was looking at the war's effect on arm sales in another thread. I was wondering if India would be better off with one instead of a Russian design. And I'm bored.

That actually would make an interesting thread/discussion. Why don't you start one?

 

[GrauGeist]

As long as we're off thread, you think a reactivated Essex would be as effective as a theoretically operational Admiral of the Russian Fleet Kusnetsov? I was looking at the war's effect on arm sales in another thread. I was wondering if India would be better off with one instead of a Russian design. And I'm bored.

They're making their own (look up INS Vikrant).

 

[SaparotRob]

Yeah. I remembered that as I was posting a new thread. Guess I needed a Buick emblem in my face.

 

[GrauGeist]

Guess I needed a Buick emblem in my face.

You really don't, trust me on this...

 

[SaparotRob]

OMG.

 

[GTX]

Back to the KF51 Panther, here is the brochure on it with detailed info include crew layout and new specialist position:

 

[WARSPITER]

Back to the KF51 Panther, here is the brochure on it with detailed info include crew layout and new specialist position:

Well, it looks like this one doesn't have the design flaws of the original of the same name. The outside integration and control seems F-35ish
which would mean less of these tanks could take on a lot more.

 

[Wild_Bill_Kelso]

Looks badass, I hope it has enhanced drone protection

 

[Glider]

With those lines up front, perhaps "Tiger" would have been a better fit?

Whatever the name, it looks a whole lot better than the Russian K14 which looks like a big target with its own shot traps.
T-14 Armata Main Battle Tank

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Whatever the name, it looks a whole lot better than the Russian K14 which looks like a big target with its own shot traps.
T-14 Armata Main Battle Tank

That turret looks very 1943.

 

[Wild_Bill_Kelso]

I don't think they had fire and forget ATGM or hovering drones then though

 

[GrauGeist]

They did have airborne cannon and bazooka/panzerfaust equipped aircraft, though.

 

[SaparotRob]

The latest episode of Ed Nash's Military Matters is on the new Panther. I t also has bit on IAI's new autonomous tank program as well.