Buttoned up = closed hatches, no heads poking out ?
Situational awareness only through sights and view-ports?

Suggested improvement: Protected cameras giving all round vision and the images combined to a 360 degree view shown in a visor in front of the commanders and/or gunners eyes. When the operator turns his/her head the image changes to always show the actual viewing direction. The cameras should be kept small and simple so that plenty of spares can be carried. They also have to be replaceable from the inside (open the lever/lid, pull out the camera, plug in the new one, close the lever/lid, contacts integrated in the socket to avoid loose cables).
Put on the visor, turn your head and get a virtual "head outside the hatch" experience. With more visors allocated to each vehicle it would be possible to have more pairs of eyeballs checking the surroundings.
The visors should not be used for shooting the gun since that would make the cameras too complicated (read expensive).
An infrared capability could be included (same level of capability as night vision goggles).

The programmable airburst capability is frightening. Hugely effective, get the range right and clean out everything behind a wall et.c.

My two cents.
/ Robin

That all well and good with the cameras till technology let you down, either though normal use, environment or other factors.

Quoted Text

---

That all well and good with the cameras till technology let you down, either though normal use, environment or other factors.

---

Agreed. Unlike the F-35, armored vehicles are known to get covered with stuff called "mud" and "dust". Not sure how well cameras work in those situations.

May not be prudent to have to stop and climb out of your vehicle with paper towels and windex during combat to clean off your camera and view ports.

I guess this is the direction: https://www.defensenews.com/industry/techwatch/2017/07/06/israel-to-enter-era-of-closed-hatch-combat-see-through-tanks/

The issue I see is there is no redundancy for when technology fails, cause it will happen at some point. With no cupola and vision ports you don't have a back up (even limited) and will be forced to expose yourself even more to see what's around you. You will have a very expensive paper weight at that point.

Quoted Text

---

The issue I see is there is no redundancy for when technology fails, cause it will happen at some point. With no cupola and vision ports you don't have a back up (even limited) and will be forced to expose yourself even more to see what's around you. You will have a very expensive paper weight at that point.

---

True. Very true

Any technology can fail. Autoloaders, sighting systems, ballistics computers, gas turbines, diesel engines, track links, welds, detonators, automatic rifles. Even a simple item like a club can fail if the handle breaks.

This is the big challenge with all kind of technical systems (the hinge to the door on my kitchen oven failed yesterday). The trick is redundancy and/or procedures for how to handle the problems. German Pz.Kpfw V could also be considered expensive paperweights since they had a lot of engine and transmission problems in the beginning

On the other hand, the tiny camera in my mobile phone hasn't failed yet and it is nearly ten years old (yes, I know, I have a very old mobile phone, my kids think it is embarrasing ...)

/ Robin

Seems that failing systems is best cured by improving the privates
or maybe trying to get better recruits to start with

Goes to show how vital it is to keep your privates in order ...

/ Robin