The twin-gun tank sounds more like an Anti-Air platform than a bombardment platform. Maybe a pair of quick-firing high-velocity guns in a turret with a high traverse.

Outside of applications involving enemy aircraft, it'd make a pretty mean fire support vehicle against ground forces.

Well, in that case:

Having guided missiles that are always launched vertically, cruise missile style, on a tank as its main armament is a rather silly proposition. Especially if the launcher is on a turret, which would offer no advantage whatsoever if the missiles are launched upwards and then self-correct anyway. While there are some tanks with turret-mounted missile launchers, they fire missiles that are launched almost horizontal in a direct-fire role specifically because they're intended to self-correct as little as possible. Plus the whole point of a tank is that you have an armoured box to keep you safe from small arms and somewhat protected from heavier ordinance on the front lines. A vertical launch missile system is, almost by definition, not a front line weapon, it's artillery. Putting it on a tank both limits the effectiveness of the system (because the requirement to maintain armour necessarily reduces the number of launchers it can fit) and wastes a perfectly good front-line hull on something that is inherently not a front-line task.

As for a twin gun turret: Excellent idea for a 'suppressive fire' or AA type role where the volume of ordinance is more important than the strength of individual hits. Practically useless against other tanks (because real tanks don't have hitpoints. Any hit that doesn't penetrate something might as well not have been a hit at all,) though a high-explosive load could damage an opposing tank's optics and tracks if they're insufficiently hardened. Very heavy twin guns in a 'tank destroyer' role are, as others have mentioned, nearly guaranteed to be less effective than just putting a much larger single gun in the same space. Especially when you keep in mind that the major limiting factor for gun size in a tank isn't the size of the barrel, but the size of the loading mechanism and breech and the room required for the gunner and loader and whatnot inside the turret. If the gunner has to sight two different guns and the loader has to move between two different guns to load both of them, a twin gun turret is going to fire far, far less shells than if you simply put a single version of that gun in there.

Of course, while the Anti-Air tank is useless against other tanks, other tanks are useless against aircraft, so the circle of life is complete.

I suppose we could mount a basic SAM system on the roof of an M1 Abrams but it's not going to hold up in a tank fight.

Here's something fun. High Tech Melee weapons! What would you go for?

Me? I'd go for a pile-bunker on a mech or power armor. Nothing says industrial grit like a explosion powered spike.

Collapsible mono-sword is an old favorite of mine. Specifically because the entire thing is inert and doesn't show up on metal detectors or x-rays. No real scent to it either if you keep it clean. Perfect for an assassin or perhaps a body guard.

Well after a coin toss between the Power rope dart and the cosmic macuahuitl, I'd say rope dart and bring on the Epic Flail!

edited 25th Apr '17 8:25:34 AM by CenturyEye

A plasma bayonet. Use it to cut enemy vehicles open or burn through their armor.

Plasma tends to be a power hungry monster even if you can cut through damned near anything with it.

Vertically launched missiles as tank main armament: If I'm not mistaken the FV438's Swingfire missiles were launched in a similar manner. However, that is a missile based tank destroyer. And nobody's really pushed for missiles as the main armament of an MBT since the M60A2 program.

SAMs on MBTs: The North Koreans put twin Chinese MANPADS on a Pokpung-ho, so there's that. I wonder how you're supposed to use that under armor.

Sci-fi melee weapons:

Dragon's Tooth Sword.

My personal favriote for scifi melee weapons, power armor.

Why needs fancy swords and hammers when you can just rip the doors off a car by grapling it. >.>

Plus it doesn't take up any extra space since you were probaly wearing it for defence any way.

Get ready for some power fisting!

x-posting from the military thread -posting as an example of a special units Terminal High Altitude Area Defense:

The photo in the article is for the THAAD command post truck. When I was a 14J, I worked on the PATRIOT version of that truck.

The first trucks were a photo op: two launchers. The rest of the battery arrived: the radar is 5 trailers (3 pieces and 2 power plant units), the fire control vans, the command post truck and all the logistical trucks (varies).

Fun fact - air defense units have their own cooks. Usually an infantry, military police or armor units have all the cooks in the headquarters unit. Since air defence units can be far from the "home" HQ battery, they get their own cooks.

THAAD is unique that the medics, mechanics (including the rare mechanic warrant officer) and fuelers are all assigned to the battery. Total strength is about ~100 soldiers.

Having a large, powered(electrically or chemically) melee weapon raises the question of why you're not carrying another gun instead.

In a distant-future setting of mine, I was thinking that lasers are the usual backup weapons, for when you have power to spare but no projectiles. There are environments that severely limit their range, though, as well as anti-laser defenses that wouldn't do much to an actual physical object. The usual melee weapons, which are of very limited use, are bayonets and daggers;

Two-pronged bayonets are found on some railguns, as direct extensions of their rails. As such they can send a powerful shock to the target, allowing them to be effective in some cases where the thrust by itself wouldn't be; If the shock doesn't reach the target's internal systems, it can make the immediate area touched by the bayonet explode. Compared to lasers, adding a bayonet to a railgun(assuming it's rugged enough) is only a small addition of weight and bulk, and its superconducting contacts deliver energy more efficiently(either technically or also practically).

Daggers are usually unsharpened and very pointy. Since all professional soldiers are cyborgized to adapt them to their job, their strength and speed are considerable; When those are put behind a dagger, it's more comparable to a jackhammer than to the melee weapons of old. Still a far cry from contemporary guns, but it's small, and concentrates kinetic energy much better than a fist.

We're not looking into reasons for why. We're working under Aperture Science Logic here, just what is your preferred choice in melee weaponry?

How would orbital bombardment change strategy?

In that case, I want a giant spring-loaded fist.

Why spring loaded? Make it rocket loaded!

A very powerful torch. Think of it as a sword-length flamethrower.

A rocket-loaded fist? What is this, Robot Jox?

Or Pacific Rim, or Mazinger, or any number of super robot stuff.

Hey, I'm sticking with the pile-bunker.

For sheer theatricality, a smaller attack robot, kept in an armored pod on the arm, which can crawl onto the enemy and do all sorts of mayhem if I get close enough to lay a hand on him.

Did someone mention small robots?

You really love that thing

What can I say? It's just so damn cute.