Masking armored vehicle infrared signiture (from above)?

[jason taylor]

Originally Posted by BraselC5048

I've got a "massive conventional warfare between TL 8+ major powers" setting, and one thing I'm wondering about is the practicality of (mostly) reducing the infrared visibility of a tank, at least from above. Mainly to help hide the tank from hostile aircraft and helicopters., so infrared signatures from the side are far less of a problem. The first obvious possibility is to have the exhaust from the engine (the main heat source) directed downwards or downwards and to the side or rear, instead of out the top. Air intakes for the engine (likely gas or diesel, possibility gas turbine) would be from above but on the sides, with a 90 degree turn to get to the engine compartment. Finally, the main signature would be reduced by a layer of insulation over the engine compartment. And possibly a poor-heat-conducting layer of composite as or above the top armor.

Mostly I'm wondering about the practicality of it, and how effective it would be at avoiding easy aerial IR detection, and at best reducing the hit rate of IR-guided (air launched) weapons. From ground level, simply visually seeing a big old tank wouldn't be any harder then IR detection.

It's harder then it sounds. Historically tank warfare has hinged on the difficulty of seeing. For one thing there are usually terrain wrinkles even in the desert let alone Europe(though Poland is kinda flat for Europe but not that flat). For another, tanks are cramped places hard to see in. While tank crew poking their heads out of hatches are as vulnerable to sharpshooters as anyone putting their heads up. So whether or not one puts one's head up is a nice point of tactics. One, for instance, that military historians of the Arab-Israeli wars made a comment on when the IDF started ordering every tank in a unit to have a man with a head up instead of just one man.

Having an effective IR allows the option of keeping head down more often. Furthermore the IR(and any other kind of artificial sensor) can be artificially wired into a processor as a human cannot making a different kind of intelligence possible.

Tank warfare is like the legendary old west duels that almost never took place in real life in one sense; that it hinges on getting off the first shot. Because of this, any information that can be gotten is necessary because being the first to spot is usually being the first with a chance to shoot.

[jason taylor]

Originally Posted by jason taylor

It's harder then it sounds. Historically tank warfare has hinged on the difficulty of seeing. For one thing there are usually terrain wrinkles even in the desert let alone Europe(though Poland is kinda flat for Europe but not that flat). For another, tanks are cramped places hard to see in. While tank crew poking their heads out of hatches are as vulnerable to sharpshooters as anyone putting their heads up. So whether or not one puts one's head up is a nice point of tactics. One, for instance, that military historians of the Arab-Israeli wars made a comment on when the IDF started ordering every tank in a unit to have a man with a head up instead of just one man.

Having an effective IR allows the option of keeping head down more often. Furthermore the IR(and any other kind of artificial sensor) can be artificially wired into a processor as a human cannot making a different kind of intelligence possible.

Tank warfare is like the legendary old west duels that almost never took place in real life in one sense; that it hinges on getting off the first shot. Because of this, any information that can be gotten is necessary because being the first to spot is usually being the first with a chance to shoot.

Of course what you seem to be talking about is the possibility of defending against the observations available to a space-dominant opponent using conventional means. The fact is, it never has been done before. Desert Storm and Kossovo went to the space dominant power. However Russia has for decades been developing ingenious deception methods to counter such things. They are useful enough in cold war but have not been tested in war.

Also one problem with concealing tanks from space-based observation is that conventional war will have the effects of conventional war. It may be possible to conceal weapons platforms. You can't really conceal refugees on civilian vehicles and it is easy enough by now for a trained analyst to figure out where the invasion is by triangulating the direction refugees are fleeing from. Even if they can conceal the specific platforms, it will not be enough to prevent a defending force arriving in time to bandage the penetration.