Wikipedia

MBT-80

TheFV4601 MBT-80[e]was a British experimentalthird-generationmain battle tank,designed in the late 1970s to replace theChieftaintank. It was eventually (and later controversially) cancelled in favour of theChallenger 1,itself an evolution of the Chieftain design.[4][f]

MBT-80
Automotive test rig 2 (ATR-2) at theBovington Tank MuseumVehicle Conservation Centre in 2014
TypeMain battle tank
Place of originUnited Kingdom
Service history
In serviceNever; 1989 (planned)
Production history
DesignerMilitary Vehicles and Engineering Establishment
Designed1979
ManufacturerROF Leeds(planned)
Unit cost£1,000,000Pounds Sterlingestimate (September 1978)[1]
No.built17 prototypes (ATR1 & ATR2)[a][b]
Specifications
Mass55tonnes,empty; 62 tonnes, fully loaded (crew, fuel, ammunition, armour package, etc.)
Crew4 (commander, gunner, loader, driver)
ArmourChobham
Main
armament
RARDE[c]EXP-28M1 120 mm split-block breachrifledgun[1]
Secondary
armament
RSAF7.62 mmL37A1 GPMGfitted to the commander's cupola
EngineRolls-Royce Motors,Military Engine Division CV12 TCA Condor 12-cylinder diesel
1,500 hp
Power/weight27 bhp/t
TransmissionDavid Brown Gear Industries TN-38automatic transmission
SuspensionHydropneumatic suspension(similar to the laterChallengerMBT)[d]

History

edit

By the early 1970s, there was a great disparity in the number of tanks being fielded byNATOand theWarsaw Pactin Europe.[4]TheUS Armyfielded theM60which had been designed to deal with the 100 mm gun of theT-55,but could not withstand the 115 mm gun being fielded on theT-62,let alone the newer 125 mm model of theT-64andT-72.

The same-era West German design, theLeopard 1,was very lightly armoured based on the conclusion that heavy armour had little purpose in an era ofhigh-explosive anti-tank(HEAT) weapons of rapidly improving performance. The concept was to give the tank high manoeuvrability to allow it to outmanoeuvre the slower-moving Soviet tanks and early generation missiles that were difficult to use against moving targets. This decision proved unwise as the number of Soviet tanks grew and the idea of outmanoeuvring their massed numbers seemed unworkable, while second-generation missiles made aiming at moving targets easy.

In 1963 the United States and West Germany started a joint project to develop a new tank to be used by both forces, theMBT-70.This combined the manoeuvrability of the Leopard with improved armour that would offer better protection against HEAT rounds while adding a new missile-firing gun able to engage Soviet tanks at very long range. By the late 1960s, the MBT-70 project had repeatedly overrun its development budget and the US Congress eventually cancelled it.

By this point, the only western tank able to go head-to-head with the latest Soviet types was theBritish Army'sChieftain,introduced to service in 1967. The Chieftain had heavy armour designed specifically to defeat the 115 mm, and mounted a120 mm gun,among the most powerful in the world, able to defeat even the latest Soviet armour. When the 125 mm gun was introduced by the Soviets, the "Stillbrew armour" package was added to keep the tank competitive. However, the Chieftain had a number of problems due to its rather poor engine and outdated suspension, both of which conspired to make cross-country performance rather limited.

The Germans were still looking for a tank to replace their now outdated Leopards, as well as the manyM48 Pattontanks they still had in service. The UK was looking for a more manoeuvrable design. A new joint program was formed between the UK and West Germany to develop a Future Main Battle Tank (FMBT).[1][3][5][g][h]This was expected to replace the Chieftain tanks starting in the 1980s, as well as the older West German tanks. In 1977,Frederick Mulley,thenSecretary of State for Defence,announced that, while both countries had agreed on the specifications of the joint tank, the replacement timetables diverged to such a degree that collaboration was not practicable at that time.

The cancellation of the MBT-70 had led the US to begin the development of its own design, theXM1.Prototypes arrived in 1976 with production slated for the late 1970s. Using the UK's new Chobham armour, it was emerging as a potent design. When carefully examined by the British Army, a number of issues became apparent. Notable was the 105 mm gun, which did not have the power to defeat the latest Soviet designs at long range, the preferred action for British tankers. Moreover, the armour package had been designed to defeat either the 115 mm firingarmour-piercing fin-stabilized discarding sabot(APFSDS) or 125 mm firinghigh-explosive anti-tank(HEAT) rounds, but could not stop the 125 mm firing APFSDS at reasonable range.

Despite this, the desire to replace the Chieftain with a more mobile design remained, and there was some consideration given to importing XM1 hulls and turrets and then fitting them out with British-made components such as engine, transmission, and the 120 mm gun from the Chieftain on a domestic production line to produce a new tank.[3]Reports on the XM1 were not favourable though.

Ultimately the UK instead officially began development of the MBT-80 in September 1978.[i]

This new project would build on work already carried out by theMilitary Vehicles and Engineering Establishment(MVEE) as far back as 1968, when they had produced a tank prototype with an external (unmanned)turret.[3][j]This was followed in 1978 by another tank prototype fitted withChobham armour.This later prototype was based on the Chieftain design, and had the designationFV4211.[2][3]

Design

edit
Drawing of the ATR-2 test rig for Shir and MBT-80

The MBT-80 was designed to counter all current and future armoured threats from theEastern Bloc,combining a rifled gun, advanced composite armour and increased mobility onto one platform. Other design features included the use of aDavid Brown Gear IndustriesTN-38 transmission,aSperry/Vickersstabilised panoramic sight for use by the tank commander, and an advancedvetronicssuite incorporatingFerranti F100-Lmicroprocessors.[3]The MBT-80 would have also been the first operational British tank to have a crew compartment with a full environmental system; i.e. able to provide bothheating, ventilation, and air conditioningfor the crew.[k][l]

Armament

edit

The main armament of the MBT-80 was to be a 120 mm rifled gun, the EXP-28M1, similar in some respects to the main guns found on theChieftainand later theChallenger 1andChallenger 2main battle tanks, but a new design of its own. It was an advanced development of theRoyal Ordnance L11A5tank gun, designed by theRoyal Armament Research and Development Establishment(RARDE), with a split-block breach mechanism.[1]It was one of the first tank guns to use anElectro Slag Refined Steel(ESRS) barrel. This new barrel was intended to greatly increase the fatigue life of British 120mm tank guns. The technology had been cleared for use by new tank gun designs in 1976.[3]

Thefire-control system(FCS) would access and process relevant target, environment, and gun status data from various internal and external sensors including laser rangefinders and thermal imagers, to help the main gun hit targets accurately and consistently under more adverse conditions: "First shot, first kill". Major components of the FCS included the Fire Control Computer which was the 'brains' of the FCS, the Gun Control Equipment, and the STAMPLAR sight (see below), all of which were connected together by a fully digitaldatabus.[1][3]The FCS was also designed withbuilt-in self-testdiagnostics. The commander and gunner had duplicate turret/main gun controls, so either of them could aim and fire the main gun. Ammunition for the EXP-28M1 would have includedarmour-piercing fin-stabilized discarding sabot(APFSDS, APDS-T),high-explosive anti-tank(HEAT),high-explosive squash head(HESH), andsmoke-white phosphorusrounds.[m]

Secondary armament would have included a 7.62 mmL37A1 General Purpose Machine Gunmounted on the commander'scupola,which could be aimed and fired from within the tank.[1][3]L2A1 "ball" and L5A1 tracerrounds would have been among the ammunition available for this weapon.

Protection

edit

The MBT-80 was going to be protected mainly by the recently developedChobham armour,[n][o][p]first fielded on the American M1 Abrams.[3][5]The armour would have provided greater resistance against high explosive anti-tank (HEAT) rounds and kinetic energy penetrators. Thanks to the use of Chobham armour, it was anticipated that much greater use could be made of high grade aluminium alloy in the construction of thehull(the turret was steel) than in prior tank designs, helping to keep down the overall weight of the tank and therefore improve mobility and associated logistics, not to mention transportation of the tank to where it would be needed.[1][3]The tank would also have had among other protection features a fullactiveNBC defences,something that was becoming more common on military vehicles being designed and/or introduced in the late 1970s and early 1980s.[3]This included both advanced NBC sensors and radiation/electromagnetic interference(includingelectromagnetic pulse) shielding to help protect the crew and vehicle systems.[q]An extensiveelectronic warfaresystem including a dedicatedelectronic counter-countermeasureability was also to be included. This system would have incorporated variouscountermeasuresagainst such threats as arocket-propelled grenade(RPG) oranti-tank guided missile(ATGM), 1st through 3rd generation.

As athermal signaturemanagement measure,the exhaust gases from theRolls-RoyceCV12 TCA Condor engine would have been mixed with cooling air before being discharged outside the tank. This feature was also used on theVickers Valiant MBT.[3]

Mounted on the sides of the turret would have been two L8A1 six-barrelled 66 mmsmokegrenade dischargers, the same British system was used as theM250 grenade launchersfound on early models of theM1 Abrams.[3]

Mobility

edit

The MBT-80 was to have a longer range, more mobility, and greater speed than prior tanks.[2]Two options were considered; theHoneywell AGT1500gas turbine engine used by the United States's prototype XM1 Abrams tank, producing 1,500 hp, and a modified,turbochargedversion of the Rolls-Royce CV12 diesel engine, also producing 1,500 hp. The CV12 was eventually picked, mainly because the AGT1500 would need substantial modification of the tank to suit the transmission that came with the engine, which had been specially designed for the XM1. The higher fuel use of the gas turbine engine was also a factor in choosing the diesel engine. The CV12 was expected to be produced at Rolls-Royce's Shrewsbury plant.[3]

Sensors

edit

Known sensors included:

  • Sperry/Vickers stabilised sight for tank commander – Daytime sight only with ×1–10 magnification.[1]
  • PANTILI (Panoramic, Thermal Imager, Laser Integrated Sight) – 360 degree rotating thermal imager fitted with a (CO2)laser rangefinder.Accessible to both commander & gunner. Similar in concept to thehunter-killersight found on the later Challenger 2 tank.[1]
  • Two axis stabilised monocular gunners sight incorporating a laser rangefinder and muzzle reference system, magnification ×2–3 and ×10.[r]Backup telescope with ×8 magnification also provided.[1]
  • Driver's thermal imager – possibly theBarr & StroudIR18TVFSbut this is unconfirmed.[1]The IR18 was later used as part of the Challenger 1's TOGS (Thermal Observation and Gunnery Sight) system.
  • STAMPLAR (Sight, Thermal, Armoured, Periscope, LAser Rangefinder) – Part of the fire control system. Directly tied into the Fire Control Computer via a digital databus.[1]
  • Roof-mounted infra-red detector – Part of the NBC defence suite, it could detect airbornechemical weaponagents and radioactivenuclear fallout.Later available as an option on theChieftain 900tank.[3]

Versions and variants

edit

Among the projected vehicles based on the MBT-80 chassis were aself-propelled anti-aircraft weapon(gun: SPAAG) using the turret of theFlakpanzer Gepard,anarmoured vehicle-launched bridge(AVLB), and anarmoured recovery vehicle(ARV). None of these had progressed beyond the concept stage at the time of the programme's unexpected cancellation.

Cancellation

edit

In the aftermath of theIranian Revolution,all orders for weapons from the United Kingdom were cancelled, including those for Shir 2 tanks. The British defence industry was heavily reliant on the Iranian market, forcing the government to cut the number of workers atROF Leeds.At this same time, the government was looking into how they could still retain the skill and capacity at Leeds that would be needed to produce the next generation of main battle tanks. Despite attempts to put the tank into production as quickly as possible, it would not be until the mid-1980s that the MBT-80 would be ready for production even if development was drastically accelerated. In addition, there were increasing worries that Soviet tank technology was advancing at such a rate that new designs, such as theT-80,reportedly about to enter service would obsolete extant front line British MBTs far sooner than predicted formerly.[2][3]Ultimately, the entire programme was cancelled in favour of theChallenger,which had been developed from the Shir 2 as a private venture,[s]and would be in theory available for service by 1983 to replace the Chieftain tanks instead.[t]

With its adoption as an official programme, the Challenger was also known for a time as theMBT-85.[u]However, various research elements of the MBT-80 programme were continued to develop and mature advanced technology for the next generation of British MBTs to enter service in the early 1990s, the design of which was to be provided by the newMBT-95programme, launched in late 1982.[2][3]In the event though, the MBT-95[v]was superseded by the Challenger 2 programme in 1987[w]in part due to financial and political considerations and partly due to the unexpectedly poor performance of the original Challenger in early trials, exercises and the like[x]which seemed to indicate an urgent need for a replacement tank in the near term, and not just to replace the remaining Chieftains as originally planned. However, the Challenger 2 was not officially chosen as theBritish Army's new tank until late 1991, by which time the Challenger 1's problems had been resolved, with it having racked up an excellent operational record in theGulf War.[2]

The MBT-80 was planned for development to be completed in 1987 and production by 1989.[2]By 1989 the Challenger tank at the same point in time, despite having been in production for nearly seven years and officially in service for over four of those, was widely considered to be still not fully operational.[y]

Surviving vehicles

edit

Twotest rigswere built to test the various systems that would be used in the planned MBT-80. The first, Automotive Test Rig 1 (ATR1), had a hull assembled fromShir 2prototypes derived from theChieftain,removable blocks of armour that either contained Chobham or steel designed to imitate it, and a dummy tank gun. It could also move under its own propulsion. ATR1 fell into the hands of a private collector but is currently in bad condition. The second rig, ATR2, was designed to test the ability to weldaluminiumandsteeltank hulls together to reduce weight. It also had a different turret design from the ATR1 and possesses advanced sights that were state-of-the-art at the time of construction. ATR2 is currently displayed in the Vehicle Conservation Centre of theBovington Tank MuseuminDorset.[5]

See also

edit

Notes

edit
  1. ^Nine dedicated prototypes were scheduled to be delivered during the period April - October 1983.[2]
  2. ^Projected initial production run was 1,102 units, enough to replace all the Chieftain MBTs in front line service with the ten British Army tank regiments (8 Type A / 2 Type B) then equipped with them on a one to one basis.[3]
  3. ^Series productionwould have been handled by theRoyal Ordnance Factories
  4. ^Ahydrogasbased system developed by the MVEE in co-operation with Laser Engineering Ltd. (later became Air-Log Limited).
  5. ^Referred to in some contemporary documents as MBT/80, possibly to help differentiate it from the earlier FMBT.
  6. ^An error exists in the source of the inline citation here. 1983 was theplannedentry into service of the Challenger tank, but it did not enter even limited service with the British Army until late 1984.
  7. ^The design process of which was partly influenced, as would the later MBT-80, by a British study titled 'AFV for the 80's', in particular Stage 2, which dealt with the requirements for MBTs.[2]
  8. ^Ironically, this project was also semi-officially known as the MBT-80.
  9. ^In December 1978, during the project definition phase of the programme, it was proposed that the service name of the tank when it entered service would beGladiator.[1]
  10. ^The COMRES 75, based on aCometchassis and mounting a 3.3 inch (83.8mm) tank gun withautoloader.[2]
  11. ^In the event, it would not be until the Challenger 2 tank was introduced that British tank crews would be able to enjoy the benefits of such a system.
  12. ^While at least some members of theCVR (T)family including theScorpionandScimitarlight tanks had an optional air conditioning system, it was apparently only ever procured by the various export customers.
  13. ^A 120 mm APERS-T (Beehive anti-personnel round) was seemingly considered for development by the British.[citation needed]
  14. ^In this case a first generation Chobham armour matrix reportedly using Carborundum (silicon carbide) anddepleted uraniumas some of its components. Carborundum had also been used in the preceding MBT-70 tank, albeit not as part of a Chobham armour matrix.
  15. ^The Challenger 1 and 2 (initially in the case of the latter) were equipped with the second generation Chobham armour codenamed "Dorchester". If the MBT-80 had been continued, it is certain that it would have received this upgrade instead, likely prior to or early on in its initial production run.
  16. ^Chobham armour in general has been described by some sources as effectively being a form ofnon-explosive reactive armor(NERA).
  17. ^The tank's Chobham armour would have given excellent protection on its own against most radiation threats, including near misses by standard tactical nuclear weapons. It would have been less effective against battlefieldenhanced radiation weaponsthat had begun to enter Soviet service, due to the interaction of such weapons with the depleted uranium component of the armour.
  18. ^May also have had alow lightability, but this is unconfirmed.
  19. ^Though the Challenger programme also shared a common ancestor with the original Shir in the form of theChieftain 5/2(FV4211) project of the early 1970s. Although called Chieftain for the purposes of security designation, the Chieftain 5/2 was a new design incorporating Chobham (then named "Burlington" ) armour, along with some elements of the extant Chieftain tank design to help speed development. The Chieftain 5/2 was also known by the nickname 'Aluminium Chieftain'.[2][5]
  20. ^In practice though, it would not be until late 1984 that the British Army, in the form of theRoyal Tank Regiment,would receive its first Challengers. Even then it was not remotely a mature or indeed fully operational design, enduring in service numerous embarrassing and often expensive shortcomings and failures that persisted right up tothe eve of battle in the Gulf War of 1991.Despite the first of an initial batch of 237 Challengers being completed on the production line at ROF Leeds in March of 1983,[3]none were judged immediately ready for delivery to operational units that year.
  21. ^This designation had apparently been used on and off since 1969 for a number of different studies and projects.
  22. ^At the time it was set aside in favor of the Challenger 2, MBT-95 had evolved into MVEE's highly promising Evolutionary National Tank concept. This had a three man crew and was armed with a 140mm cannon fed by a carousel autoloader.[2]
  23. ^A competition (the Chieftain Replacement Programme) was held, with the competing designs being the Challenger 2 (given the interim name 'Improved Challenger'), the Abrams, theLeclerc,and theLeopard 2.However the outcome was never really in any doubt, despite some strong internal opposition to continued procurement of the Challenger series.
  24. ^Such as the poor showing at the1987 Canadian Army Trophy
  25. ^This not only had already resulted in the initiation in 1988 of the Challenger Replacement Programme [Staff Requirement (Land) 4026[2]] but would also result in the interim in a number of ongoing remediation/upgrade efforts such as the CHARM gun/shell upgrade programme and the Gulf War era Jericho I & II crash programmes.

References

edit
  1. ^abcdefghijklm"MBT-80 British German".Secret Projects Forum.22 September 2006.Retrieved12 March2017.
  2. ^abcdefghijklSuttie, William (2 March 2015).The Tank Factory: British Military Vehicle Development and the Chobham Establishment.The History Press.ISBN9780750963510.
  3. ^abcdefghijklmnopqrsFoss, Christopher F. (1983).Jane's Main Battle Tanks.United Kingdom:Jane's Publishing Company Limited.ISBN0-7106-0277-4.
  4. ^ab"MBT-80".Global Security.
  5. ^abcd"The British MBT80 Project".TankNutDave.com.
edit
Wikimedia Commons has media related toFV4601 MBT-80.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MBT-80&oldid=1240363206"