PLA Next Generation Main Battle Tank

[The Observer]

There is a little halo around the helmet, that’s the tell.

While the head tracking tech is indeed decades old, the bigger question with such a design would be the turning rate of a whole turret.

Head tracking only makes sense if you could seamlessly sync the gun to the head movements of the user. Any meaningful lag and you loose the lion share of the point of such a system as you loose the fluid human instinctive response and you also lose precious time as your gunners head is stuck needing to keep looking at just the target as he waits for the turret to catch up. How expensive would it be to make such a massive, armoured turret be able to move as fast as a human head?

Head tracking is currently only used on fighter aircraft and attack helicopters, where split seconds can be life and death. Sure, split seconds can also be life and death for armour crews, but nothing like as frequently as for pilots. Add in the vast cost difference in needing to sync a 20-30mm auto cannon verse a whole armoured turret and it’s not hard to see that the cost of implementing such a system could eclipse any benefits.

Another reason head tracking is unlikely to be use is that it would simply be a sub-optimal solution with the tools already available.

Rather than needing to sync the turret to the users head, it would be far more efficient, economical and effective to have the user designate targets using his headset, the turret can then automatically turn and point weapons at the mark, while the commander is freed to look for the next target instead of being stuck on the last one while waiting for the turret to pan. It’s nothing revolutionary, just a slight refresh of the old hunter-killer system from decades ago.

If there is head tracking, having the RWS be synced to the helmet would make infinitely more sense than the whole turret.

We're talking about the CITV+RWS combo being synced to the helmet, not the whole turret with the big gun.

The question is whether the video was generated by AI or not.

 

[plawolf]

We're talking about the CITV+RWS combo being synced to the helmet, not the whole turret with the big gun.

The question is whether the video was generated by AI or not.

The video I seen at least had the whole turret synced, which didn’t make sense. Commander sight and RWS wouldn’t have any technical challenges. The only question would be if the costs of implementing it is justified.

 

[The Observer]

The video I seen at least had the whole turret synced, which didn’t make sense.

Sorry, which whole turret? The entire YT short only shows the CITV+RWS combo being synced to the helmet.

Commander sight and RWS wouldn’t have any technical challenges. The only question would be if the costs of implementing it is justified.

I agree with this part, but some members have suggested that the video is AI generated. I just want a confirmation on whether it's AI generated or not, and if anyone think it's AI generated the reason why.

 

[SanWenYu]

We're talking about the CITV+RWS combo being synced to the helmet, not the whole turret with the big gun.

The question is whether the video was generated by AI or not.

I think it is fake.

For one, given that the parade organizers have been trying to not spoil the show, why was this tank commander allowed to show off such feature, if indeed exists, to random bystanders during a rehearsal? I'd imagine all the guns are required to be locked at the certain angles of elevation for uniformity in the parade, rehearsals included.

Secondly, how would such feature work in battle fields when the tank commander will have to sit down with his hatch closed most of time? That clip showed some rather dramatic head movements which are unlikely to be practical in confined space. If it was to shoot at multiple adversary drones coming from different directions, it would be quite time consuming for each target, and tiring for the commander's neck, too. A better approach IMO would be to track eyeballs to reduce head movements.

 

[The Observer]

I think it is fake.

For one, given that the parade organizers have been trying to not spoil the show, why was this tank commander allowed to show off such feature, if indeed exists, to random bystanders during a rehearsal? I'd imagine all the guns are required to be locked at the certain angles of elevation for uniformity in the parade, rehearsals included.

This is definitely a good reason. While the ability has existed in other platforms for a long time before, I suppose they're unlikely to test in in such a crowded (camera dense) environment to random bystanders.

If it was to shoot at multiple adversary drones coming from different directions, it would be quite time consuming for each target, and tiring for the commander's neck, too. A better approach IMO would be to track eyeballs to reduce head movements.

Hmmm, considering they already have the APS radar, I think depending on the detection ranges they can modify & integrate the good old SPAAG software into the platform.

That way when the radars detects unidentified flying objects, the SPAAG software highlights the targets in the BMS. Then the commander can use his (presumably) touchscreen terminal to select the target, slewing CITV+RWS combo for visual & FLIR target ID. If hostile then just pull the trigger.

 

[AssassinsMace]

Using it for the machine gun turret is probably secondary to having situational awareness. If I were trying to deceive people, it would be in precise sync with the direction of the visor so why bother if it’s not?

 

[kyanges]

Haven’t we already seen what the left side of the RWS looks like, and it looks nothing like what this AI generated? Like it not only generated some truly baffling geometry, but it also sized it up quite a bit too.

 

[Heliox]

There is a little halo around the helmet, that’s the tell.

While the head tracking tech is indeed decades old, the bigger question with such a design would be the turning rate of a whole turret.

Head tracking only makes sense if you could seamlessly sync the gun to the head movements of the user. Any meaningful lag and you loose the lion share of the point of such a system as you loose the fluid human instinctive response and you also lose precious time as your gunners head is stuck needing to keep looking at just the target as he waits for the turret to catch up. How expensive would it be to make such a massive, armoured turret be able to move as fast as a human head?

Head tracking is currently only used on fighter aircraft and attack helicopters, where split seconds can be life and death. Sure, split seconds can also be life and death for armour crews, but nothing like as frequently as for pilots. Add in the vast cost difference in needing to sync a 20-30mm auto cannon verse a whole armoured turret and it’s not hard to see that the cost of implementing such a system could eclipse any benefits.

Another reason head tracking is unlikely to be use is that it would simply be a sub-optimal solution with the tools already available.

Rather than needing to sync the turret to the users head, it would be far more efficient, economical and effective to have the user designate targets using his headset, the turret can then automatically turn and point weapons at the mark, while the commander is freed to look for the next target instead of being stuck on the last one while waiting for the turret to pan. It’s nothing revolutionary, just a slight refresh of the old hunter-killer system from decades ago.

If there is head tracking, having the RWS be synced to the helmet would make infinitely more sense than the whole turret.

Don't quite see what the problem is.

Current MBT CITV implementation allows commander-gunner override. Which means that HMS to CITV and/or Gun Sync is simply a toggle setting. Likewise, it is not too hard to consider a HMS synced to CITV or RWS or Main Gun or any combo really(?) via toggle settings.

wrt Main gun turret rotation lag. A aim point separate from actual gun laying reticle is a common interface issue we see even in video games - it's not that hard to get used to. Likewise, in current MBT with CITV and hunter-killer arrangements, it would be common for the commander CITV to be sighted off-bore and then override the gun controls and wait for the gun to slew around.

Personally, I'm curious on how else the HMS is actually tied into enabling the crew to handle more task beyond just simple sight to gun syncing (which already happens with current non-HMS gun sights). Specifically, does the hands-free aspect of a HMS actually free up the crew to handle other task simultaneously and competently or is this just tech for the sake of tech?

 

[BasilicaLew]

Here’s the difference between noise level of the 201 and the 99A. I’m sure it’s louder in person. It seems like you get more of a mechanical raspberry from the 99A.

sounds like a turbine, due to the sound it makes while approaching, you can hear it when the tank infront of it passes more clearly.

 

[Rina]

It's hard to imagine so much discussion about AI-generated videos.It is apparently generated from these images.

Self-explanatory.