If you enjoyed this video why not check out one of my videos on a real world tank. You can start with the vehicle you saw from the footage at the start with this one: ua-cam.com/video/aznzPFcKt_Y/v-deo.html
Even as unconventional as the AAT is compared to real life vehicles with it's strange hull mounted launchers and rear turret, the fact that it even had a hull/turret configuration was still superior to the finnicky animalistic walkers of the Republic and beyond. It's simply just more efficient.
True for some of them but the AT-TE probably edges out above it. The turret on the top and ability to scale even vertical cliff surfaces is pretty huge.
@@ConeOfArc That's true, but the turret on the AT-TE seems to be quite the deathtrap for whoever's unlucky enough to be in it. You're so exposed it's honestly criminal. It's like being in a convertible sports car on top of a semi trailer while you're being shot at from multiple directions. Really it's kinda funny, most of the ATT's design flaws seen in the cartoons are really just that. Cartoonish oversights about how armored vehicles function. I mean come on, giant armored hatches that are both unable to latch shut AND can be opened with one hand? What's it made of, super aluminum?
It is kinda poor comparision, as AT-TE was never designed as s frontal assault/armour engaging vechicle. In it's base, AT-TE was a fire support/artilery support unit, that was able to traverse any terrain with little dificulty. Problem with it starts when it was deployed by the Republic in a role of an MBT of sorts, which it simply was never designed for. As the war went on, AT-TE was thankfuly less and less often used in such idiotic role, being replaced by TX-130 in a role of tank to tank engagements, and Juggernauts as a main breakthrew vechicles, capeble of leveling any fortifications and destroying most armoured vechicles mounted by CIS.
@@nahuelleandroarroyo the whole design of the tank looks like an oscillating turret, like how the back of the tank hangs much higher above the ground than the front. Take an aat whole and photoshop it on a chassis and you’ll see.
@@hedgehog3180 I always feel cringe when I see other people doing this, but how the fuck are you everywhere I go on UA-cam these days? I've seen you at least once a day for like 4 days straight now.
I think other main problems is really poor gun depression (as gun rotation point is just above the tank hull) makes it impossible to point a gun down without using a repulser lift to adjust the tank's angle, mixing with just how high it is... It can really put AAT in a really bad position in some situation.
As a Battlefront 2 player, I can confirm that the AAT's poor gun depression makes it easy to get onto the tank. Speeders can run circles around AATs if they don't mind ruining their paintjobs, and sappers can plant charges if the crew isn't paying attention.
If your wondering what the source of the cross section is, it's from a book called star wars: complete vehicles which covers many other cross sections and info on vehicles from most films such as the various star fighters, capital ships and even the death star if your interested, they also published books covering the vehicles featured in the sequel films.
@@matthiuskoenig3378 I am still wondering if whoever designed the base of the tank with the holes in it actually thought they should be missile tubes or rather some air-intakes.
I need more Starwars content from you in my life. In particular, I would love your take on the CIS NR-N99 Snail tank from the Techno Union, as it is a really good tank design in terms of the star wars universe
Snail tank will probably be the next one I'll cover from Star Wars. Not sure if I'll include walkers since they technically aren't tanks but I probably still will
@@pyeitme508 I'd love to do videos on that topic but it's not a super easy thing to do without being able to estimate the protection those vehicles provide. Might see if more knowledgeable star wars lore channels would be interested in helping out with that.
@@ConeOfArc A shot in the dark here, and it would require lots of measuring and some guessing. In the cross section, we see the thickness of the armor, yet we don't get solid numbers. What we could do to get the numbers is use the droids for comparison. I believe we know the depth of a B1 battle droid, so maybe if we use Pixel measurements, we could get a number. Like I said, shot in the dark. P.S. a vs. series would be awesome!
Lego makes a really neat version of this tank. I bought two and sent one to my son in Germany. Great way to make memories despite the distance when we built them together over a video chat.
I have the older clone wars AAT Lego model somewhere. Not a huge fan of the newer one they did which is pretty lame looking in my opinion but the slightly older one was an amazing model.
Aye, the 2000-ish one was a pretty good set. Made use of the old UFO parts for the shovel hull, and the cannon made of technic bits. Was a tough assembly for 10 year old me, but fun to build.
The only thing I think you missed is that the AAT has two hull-mounted guns in addition to its wing-mounted ones for anti-infantry use. It's almost never used in media, and in some media like Clone Wars they're actually removed (which is likely part of the art style, as the same tanks retain the hull guns when shown in other media).
Highly reminiscent of the dual, hull mounted, driver operated, machineguns on the M3 Lee and earliest M4 Sherman tanks, though, to my knowledge none were ever fitted to the early Shermans that mainly still had the mountings as a holdover from the Lees design work. Only a few M3 Lees actually had the machineguns mounted cause it was quickly found that they were kinda useless/detrimental cause the driver would have to move the hull around to get a proper angle to fire on infantry and this would disrupt the aiming of the turret/main gun armament. By the time they decided not to include any additional machineguns to that position (the Lee had 3 other turret/pintle mounted machineguns already) it was found to be cheaper to just weld over the holes for them on the new production hulls rather then remove them from the design entirely.
@@Kneb587 Another example are the quite odd, fixed, forward-firing machineguns mounted on the sides of on the IS-7. The centrally mounted ones are probably more useful, but you really don't want your driver to have to fiddle with being a gunner anyway, so getting rid of them makes sense in either design.
@@HellbirdIV Oh right, I'd forgotten about the IS-7. That probably actually fits as a better comparison to the AAT in overall form. All this _does_ make me wonder if the Trade Federation did like the M3 and removed the "drivers blasters" in while keeping the mountings. Since, as you stated, in some examples the mountings aren't even there.
@@matthiuskoenig3378 I'll grant you they make _more_ sense on a repulsorlift vehicle than a tracked one, but it _does_ already have those 2 blaster turrets on the sides. The problem still remains of interrupting the aim of the main armament in the turret when the driver turns the hull for any reason, made worse by the fact that the turret of the AAT is so far off center that any hull movement is going to be exaggerated. Of course this isn't taking into account whatever targeting/movement correction systems they might have in that design and the potential cost of production vs installation of various weapon systems of a fictional political entity in a galaxy far, far away. ... _Man_ i can get long winded sometimes.
In the Starfighter games, these tanks demonstrate a remarkable flexibility in gun elevation, able to aim almost straight up and behind them and firing on aircraft without becoming unbalanced.
A consideration on the height- blasters don't arc, so the main (and secondary) armaments are line of sight weapons. In this situation, height is range.
The only variant you missed was the HAG; It was similar to the defoliator but it’s cannon was off to the side and it fired standard artillery shells. The vehicle is purely in legends and was used from the invasion of naboo to the end of the clone wars. It shows up in Galactic battlegrounds and Clone Wars (2002 game).
Considering every system on board requires power I wouldn't bother being concerned about the lack of view ports, by the time the lack of them are a concern you're already buggered.
A consideration that merits some attention is the recovery of disabled/ broken down units. With a conventional tracked suspension, you just fasten on some tow cables, put the drive train in neutral, and the vehicle will just roll along as it is pulled. How do you tow an AAT that cannot propel itself?
Given the setting, you would probably recover it using a repulsor-lift aircraft. Dropships and gunships that can carry heavy armoured vehicles are common in Star Wars. Picking up a tank with a helicopter just isn't an option in the real world, but that would be the go-to recovery method if it was.
I have always loved the AAT ever since I was a kid. It really was the first tank in a Star Wars movie. Not a walker or ship, but a honest to God tank. I love the wing cannons, the turret, the shape. It honestly needs a Mk.II version. Replace the frankly useless missiles in the shovel with forward facing shield generators in order to give it a far increased survivability, put a stronger gun on to make up for the loss of AP missiles, replace the hull mounted blasters with a coaxial blaster, place the turret more forward on the hull for better gun depression, give the wing cannons ball mounts in order to allow a far greater firing arc, and put a proper gunner in the turret so the commander can focus on his job. As well as things you mentioned like vision blocks, proper locks and seals on the hatches to avoid boarding actions.
I'm not sure the immunity to mines is plausible. Repulsorlift is not flight, it pushes downwards against planetary gravity - presumably with a force equal to the vehicle's mass. So it would set off pressure-triggered mines. Also, other forms of sensor could be used to trigger mines. It is true that the AAT's distance from the surface would allow the force of simple mines to dissipate before striking it, but a simple bounding mine adaption could overcome that. A penetration of the lower hull, filled as it is with ammo, could be disastrous.
Finally, my army gets the attention it deserves! The AAT despite its common appearances throughout Clone Wars media never really felt properly appreciated. It really does a good job covering as many bases as possible with its armaments for a general-purpose MBT-style vehicle! Its design vulnerabilities are honestly not too hard to turn a blind eye to within the context of suspension of disbelief, especially since the tradeoff is a very distinct silhouette. Thanks for taking a dive into sci-fi with this video!
to be fair, if the AAT suffered power loss, it would be stuck on the ground and unable to fight anyways so I dont think a lack of view ports is that much a problem for that reason
@@Tuck-Shop yeah the hatches are plenty big enough for an easy escape but they should have locking latches. Tho TBH the whole thing should just be one big robot
Nice work. Here's a few things that i picked up. 1. Repulsion does not actually "fly" the AAT it work kind like a track and shares the vehicle weight on covered surface. So it would not been able to hover over water when it sometimes sank in swamp areas of galaxy. 2. AAT bottom was so large partly on that repulsion reason. It had huge weight because it was heavily armored using quite cheap metal armor (same that B1 has made off) whitout expensive or high tec alloys. Armor was still quite durable. Also huge shovel in bottom made AAT hard to use in narrow spases. 3. I remember seeing in some episodes that at least in drivers hacht did had a lock wheel but i don't ever call droids using it... So this may be my memory's mistake. 4. In some earlier AAT's had two blasters in fix possitions in hull. Those two later missing B1 where there to use those. When blasters were removed then also B1's. 5. AAT did had quite good gun and firecontrol systems when we see in phantom menace it shot one starfighter down when they were leaving the hangar. This also implies that gun elevation was good if main gun was used on limited anti-air use. Also speaking of gun, clone war's era AAT had bigger gun than the original. It can be seen due to larger mucle brake in end of the barrol. 6. Those large rocket's in shovel part could be used indirrect firesupport role when the hole tank flip's backwards. Also the loading mecanism those tubes was to lift the hole upper struckture off the shovel. This also made easy to transport AAT in three parts, turret being the third, and then be assembled near front lines. Usually in lucerhulck bevore been droppeb on planet. Not native in english so sorry for mistakes.
If i recall, the reason for reduced crew from 4 to 2 was because they turned the tank itself into a droid, and the 2 B1s were required to both maintain and work most of the internals
Of the various sci-fi tank designs out there, this is one of the best. Although it is a bit high, it presents a small target profile to the enemy and it's primary and secondary weaponry is logically laid out - even if those "wing-mounted" positions for the close defense weapons are strictly inferior to a straightforward coaxial mount. It's main flaw is that it's the main battle tank for the bad guys, so it's inevitable fate is to be destroyed in some laughably implausible bit of heroic action.
As a US Army veteran with five years in an armor battalion, the first thing that stood out to me was in addition to the lack of viewports, it has generally poor close in visibility and no real good close in weapon system for the side and rear arcs. It doesn't even have the Gunner or driver's pintle mounted guns that modern tanks would have to deal with close in infantry or something down and behind you.
Wow, love this video about a Fake Star Wars tank! I didn't know much about the AAT until now. Please do a future vid on the Snail Droid Tank and Hailfire Droid
the hover tech is even extremely useful in regular terrain. all terrains are effectively roads, so it and its repulsorlift support vehicles are less restricted than true ground vehicles which all suffer reduced speed offroad.
I was waiting for you to play the clip from Phantom Menace when the Naboo forces destroy a tank with a speeder armed with a heavy blaster cannon. KABOOM!
While the height of the vehicle would be a problem, in a way it also could also give it an advantage in the wildly varied terrian, allowing it to pop its turret over obsticals and such while the ammunition remains low and less likely to be hit.
The episode 1 artbook has a fair amount of alternative designs if you decide to cover stuff like the MTT or Droideka's some really cool stuff B-1 could have looked very different.
I would like to correct one thing. Sensor jamming in star wars is pretty much constant as its a widespread and widely used tech and thus countermeasures to it are widespread so they are fully justified in only using sensors as due to how used the factions are to it the tech has made devices that are more then reasonably functional despite it.
It actually pretty good to make a video about this future fake tanks, not a lot of channel make it, and also i would like to see the Scorpion tank from Halo
What about the TX-130, AT-TE, AT-RT, or the AT-AT? I would love to see some more Star Wars content from you and I really enjoyed this video! Keep up the good work!
Modern thermal sights, long range missile launchers, and APFSDS/HEATFS rounds would mulch armored columns of the AAT, the best use of it would be mountainous terrain where a traditional tank would be all but useless, providing armored support for infantry.
The AAT is either the WW2 equivalent of the M4 Sherman, or the post-War Soviet T-54. The closet thing to this from another series, is the HALO covenant Tank.
Missile launcher ports have NO armoured door, so it would be easy to fire into the missle tube and explode the missile before it has launched. Igniting ALL the ammo in that lower section.
Battlefront 1 was so underrated for the ps2, well balanced teams and maps. it had free online multilayer. IN 2004! I remember at the time you either bought call of Duty "the big red one" or battlefront and I feel like not many people went with battlefront, but I promise them they missed out big time having bought both
that kind of hover tech would revolutionice arctic and desert exploration, or even marshlands and other stuff like that where conventional vehicles would get bogged down
I love the AAT, it's design makes it fit its role of being something to sell to people lol. Using ammo specifically designed for it and having space for organic crew means you can make alot of money selling these as well as there parts and ammo.
Most modern AT mines are magnetically fused, pressure doesn't have much if anything to do with that, combine that with an EFP and a knowledge that the weakest part of most tank armor is the bottom and that the ammo for it is stored there, this tank would be very vulnerable to ATEFP mines
Mines are probably still a very real problem. Even though pure contact mines are used typically on earth in the 20th and 21st centuries may be relatively useless (though who knows, the repulsor plates may well exert a real downward force strong enough to trigger a detonation) it's probably safe to assume, given the large scale use of the technology in the Empire and beyond, that mines specifically designed to trigger on being passed over by repulsors would be in place. Furthermore, the high design combined with the tank having a very large and heavy overhang to the rear seems to me to be problematic to say the least, especially on slopes where the rear shifted center of gravity may well cause the vehicle to simply topple over, effectively limiting its use to level ground or downward slopes. The very low placement of much of the weaponry seriously limits the use of that weaponry, making employment of the tank in defilade impossible, further increasing its vulnerability to enemy fire which is already seriously high due to its high profile. Overall it seems to be a vehicle that despite its theoretical advantages of massive firepower combined with good visibility (due to its height) and excellent ground clearance due to its repulsor plates is in reality far from optimal. A lower design with the weapons closer to the top and the center of gravity better distributed towards the center of the repulsor fields would certainly be far more effective in actual combat.
On the topic of repulsorlifts, we know they exert some force but it's not significant, as Qui-Gon Jinn and Jar Jar Binks lay down flat underneath an MTT as it passes over them - and the MTT is a much, MUCH larger and heavier repulsorvehicle than the AAT - with the only effect being what seems to be powerful wind close to the ground. So repulsorvehicles would most definitely be too light on the ground to trigger physical switches on anti-tank mines, but it's likely that the Star Wars galaxy has other types of trigger that work against repulsorvehicles, like magnetic sensors.
The only tinny thing who bother me it's the aat don't had a coax blaster/ fast firing weapon, but this drawback was somehow mitigated with the laser weapons on the side of the hull.
Id love to see him cover some of the Warhammer tanks, especially ones such as the new Kratos Heavy Tank or some of the Baneblade chassis Super-Heavy Tanks. Or hell maybe even some of the crawling tanks of AdMech or spooky tanks of the Necron… Please do so one day if you could. Love your videos.
Nice work on expanding your tank range. Now for my suggestion for a fictional (somewhat) "alien" tank... Only from the future. The tanks used in Killzone. I've played the original trilogy (and have the footage to show for it) and in the original game, I've managed to destroy both Helghast tanks and APCs with only hand grenades. You need at least three to take them down but it's doable. I've done it many times...
I like the idea of hypothetical "VS" series. If possible, I would like to submit "Systems Alliance M35 MAKO IFV" versus another IFV :) I would classivy the Mako more as an IFV than an APC due to to its reduced carry capacity, but highly capable armament.
The thing about the AAT is that it's immediately better designed than most other "tanks" in Star Wars, since it actually has a turret compared to something like the TX-130.
Hmmm, might as well take a look at the Maghariba Guard Tactical Armoured Gear (TAG) from the tabletop skirmish game Infinity by Corvus Belli. The Haqqislamite heavyweight, either in its original 'Spider Tank' configuration, or the updated Scorpion appearance. Just a neat pseudo-tank I've always had a soft spot for
Great video! Glad to see you're expanding your range on this subject line. Please keep it up! As to this particular subject? Nah, it really doesn't make much sense. But then, that was never the point. It's in the Star Wars universe so the only criteria that matters is that the thing looks "cool" and looks "different" and especially that it be easily identifiable on screen. Just like the choice of the X-Wings and TIE Fighters were to help keep things clear as to who the good guys versus the bad guys were and also to visually help remind the audiences that "these things are not of this Earth" the designs of the Star Wars ground vehicles followed the same criteria. Functionality? Rationality? Practicality? Meh. None of that matters. The AAT just had to look "different" than the "tanks" we have today and be easily recognizable as "the bad guys." First off, those missile launchers. On paper, the AAT packs a huge punch with those missiles. But the launchers are placed down at the very bottom of the vehicle. This, where they're almost always going to face with physical obstructions to the being launched. It means the AATs can't use their primary heavy weapon system from a hull down firing position. They'd more than likely hit any bush or berm or rocks in front of them - or take out their own troops around them - when fired before those missiles could do anything to the enemy. It makes far more sense to place such launchers at about the highest point on the vehicle to ensure their clear firing arcs. But, the creative types who created the AAT decided that just wouldn't look as cool so no such rationality was allowed. Then there's the crewing of the vehicle. Specifically, why? This thing is a "droid tank" and supposed to be an unmanned weapons system that requires not human - or other living beings - to operate it. Fair enough - so why then does it have to be "manned" by a bunch of droids to run it? That's a huge waste of internal volume. That means the AAT is bigger and heavier and more expensive than otherwise. Instead of requiring four entire battle droids in order for the tank to function why not have that all built into the tank from the get go? Just whatever "battle droid CPU package" was required for each function instead of requiring the full-up battle droids themselves. Perhaps have them be like plug-in units within the AAT's weapons system control module. The more such "battle droid CPU packages" you install in your AAT (up to four) the more capable the tank becomes in battle as a dedicated CPU can handle each individual weapon system with more dedicated processing power for targeting and fire control. That sort of set up would greatly reduce the internal volume required for the vehicle thus reducing its height, it's profile, and allowing for better armor or more weapons loadout for the otherwise same weight and cost. Instead, as it's Star Wars, the things had to be run by as many comic relief battle droids as it could in order to be useful in the stories. Contrast these things with how the "Terminator" movies handle their "droid tanks." In the Star Wars films, the battle droids and their vehicles were little more than annoyances and just provided plot opportunities for the Jedi heroes to show their Jedi hero prowess in defeating.
From how it performs in Battlefront, I'd say it needs a smaller "caliber" blaster as well for anti infantry use. The two it does have are very difficult to aim since they're so far apart and their firerate leaves a lot to be desired. That goes doubly so since Jedi are consistently a massive threat to all CIS military endeavours but let's not get to how the Galaxy at large seems to have forgotten how to make projectile firearms. (That one time Mandalore did it should've set a precedent on how to fight force users.)
Great Video, I've always loved Star Wars military vehicles. The only semblance of a nitpick I have is saying that it was designed by Baktoid Armor Factories instead of Baktoid Armor Workshop. Still a wonderful video nonetheless! Keep on rolling!
Atunshei: Well Billy Yank here we are AGAIN IN ANOTHER ROUND OF CHECKMATE LINCONITES! Wasn't the Clone Wars about States Rights to Own Droids? Atunshei: NO! IT'S OVER JOHNNY REB! I HAVE THE HIGH GROUND!
I’ve always wondered why it needed to by piloted by droids. I just thought it’ll make more sense to have it pilot itself as though it was a droid tank instead of a tank made for droids. Resources is wasted on making internal spaces and compartments just to house droid crew etc.
Probably so the thing could use the droids as parallel processors. It's a lot more efficient computing wise to run dedicated systems than have a single system run everything.
@@Dr.LightMarker5613 While that is a decent solution I do think having the crew as separate droids simplifies production. Since you can just grab any standard issue battle droid and plop them into the thing . Without the need to manufacture separate components. And as we've seen the average battle droid can function on a minimal level without its head. Indicating at least some of its processing power is spread throughout its chassis.
You forgot to mention that there are two anti-personnel blaster cannons mounted along the sides of the fuselage near the driver’s hatch. Also, IIRC some of the power systems are completely exposed in the back/underneath the turret mounting. Also, from what I recall from playing the original two Star Wars Battlefront video games (as well as just looking the tank) the main gun doesn’t have effective gun depression in the forward arc One thing people constantly misunderstand regarding prices in Star Wars is that the credits used are close to the equivalent of the U.S. dollar back in the 1940’s. For example, the listed price for an Imperial I class Star Destroyer is 150 million credits. Compare that to the IRL Iowa class battleship which came in at $110 million
id love to see some comparisons between in universe or other series tanks my favourites are ones made by the halo series, but i still love any of this fictional brief reviews on fictional tanks
If you enjoyed this video why not check out one of my videos on a real world tank. You can start with the vehicle you saw from the footage at the start with this one: ua-cam.com/video/aznzPFcKt_Y/v-deo.html
Cool!
So what if it crosses water? Marshy ground? Deep mud? Quicksand?
@@seriousmaran9414 it won't sink because it just floats over it
Can you do one with the rebels t4-b heavy tank?
@@Gencrossbones my point being it is more able to cross difficult terrain than any other "tank" in the Star Wars franchise.
What really sealed the AAT's fate was the Republic's development of Polymer Laminated Overlay Turadium (PLOT) armor.
That is genius pun
Even as unconventional as the AAT is compared to real life vehicles with it's strange hull mounted launchers and rear turret, the fact that it even had a hull/turret configuration was still superior to the finnicky animalistic walkers of the Republic and beyond. It's simply just more efficient.
True for some of them but the AT-TE probably edges out above it. The turret on the top and ability to scale even vertical cliff surfaces is pretty huge.
@@ConeOfArc That's true, but the turret on the AT-TE seems to be quite the deathtrap for whoever's unlucky enough to be in it. You're so exposed it's honestly criminal. It's like being in a convertible sports car on top of a semi trailer while you're being shot at from multiple directions.
Really it's kinda funny, most of the ATT's design flaws seen in the cartoons are really just that. Cartoonish oversights about how armored vehicles function. I mean come on, giant armored hatches that are both unable to latch shut AND can be opened with one hand? What's it made of, super aluminum?
Good point, however, walkers look cooler
@@soopespeed that is true, but the AT-TE would look better with a more conventional turret up top
It is kinda poor comparision, as AT-TE was never designed as s frontal assault/armour engaging vechicle. In it's base, AT-TE was a fire support/artilery support unit, that was able to traverse any terrain with little dificulty. Problem with it starts when it was deployed by the Republic in a role of an MBT of sorts, which it simply was never designed for. As the war went on, AT-TE was thankfuly less and less often used in such idiotic role, being replaced by TX-130 in a role of tank to tank engagements, and Juggernauts as a main breakthrew vechicles, capeble of leveling any fortifications and destroying most armoured vechicles mounted by CIS.
6:53 The TX-130 Saber-class Fighter Tank right there could be a good one to do for the series.
Fun fact: this tank was based off the turret designs of French oscillating turrets like the amx-13 and amx-50
How? The AAT has a one man turret that only oscillates the gun breach/cannon
@@nahuelleandroarroyo the whole design of the tank looks like an oscillating turret, like how the back of the tank hangs much higher above the ground than the front. Take an aat whole and photoshop it on a chassis and you’ll see.
If France had hover technology they'd probably produce something similar.
@@hedgehog3180 I always feel cringe when I see other people doing this, but how the fuck are you everywhere I go on UA-cam these days? I've seen you at least once a day for like 4 days straight now.
I think other main problems is really poor gun depression (as gun rotation point is just above the tank hull) makes it impossible to point a gun down without using a repulser lift to adjust the tank's angle, mixing with just how high it is... It can really put AAT in a really bad position in some situation.
As a Battlefront 2 player, I can confirm that the AAT's poor gun depression makes it easy to get onto the tank.
Speeders can run circles around AATs if they don't mind ruining their paintjobs, and sappers can plant charges if the crew isn't paying attention.
i don't see the gun depression issue, as you say it can just adjust the tank's angle.
This is really only a problem in the forward direction and it that case the tank could use its plow guns.
Never really thought about it in such detail, and that blueprint of seeing its insides looks incredible (didnt even know about the missiles lol)
If your wondering what the source of the cross section is, it's from a book called star wars: complete vehicles which covers many other cross sections and info on vehicles from most films such as the various star fighters, capital ships and even the death star if your interested, they also published books covering the vehicles featured in the sequel films.
@@cmsIGauffahrgestellPanzerkampf thank you very much
@@peracality7648 the missiles are shown in episode 1 though, and even a few clone wars episodes.
@@matthiuskoenig3378 I am still wondering if whoever designed the base of the tank with the holes in it actually thought they should be missile tubes or rather some air-intakes.
I need more Starwars content from you in my life. In particular, I would love your take on the CIS NR-N99 Snail tank from the Techno Union, as it is a really good tank design in terms of the star wars universe
Snail tank will probably be the next one I'll cover from Star Wars. Not sure if I'll include walkers since they technically aren't tanks but I probably still will
@@ConeOfArc As well as how Earth's various armored vehicles fair against their Star Wars counterparts?
@@pyeitme508 I'd love to do videos on that topic but it's not a super easy thing to do without being able to estimate the protection those vehicles provide. Might see if more knowledgeable star wars lore channels would be interested in helping out with that.
The Hail Fire Droid is also another Droid that is very interesting!
@@ConeOfArc A shot in the dark here, and it would require lots of measuring and some guessing. In the cross section, we see the thickness of the armor, yet we don't get solid numbers. What we could do to get the numbers is use the droids for comparison. I believe we know the depth of a B1 battle droid, so maybe if we use Pixel measurements, we could get a number. Like I said, shot in the dark. P.S. a vs. series would be awesome!
Lego makes a really neat version of this tank. I bought two and sent one to my son in Germany. Great way to make memories despite the distance when we built them together over a video chat.
That's very wholesome
I have the older clone wars AAT Lego model somewhere. Not a huge fan of the newer one they did which is pretty lame looking in my opinion but the slightly older one was an amazing model.
Aye, the 2000-ish one was a pretty good set. Made use of the old UFO parts for the shovel hull, and the cannon made of technic bits. Was a tough assembly for 10 year old me, but fun to build.
The only thing I think you missed is that the AAT has two hull-mounted guns in addition to its wing-mounted ones for anti-infantry use. It's almost never used in media, and in some media like Clone Wars they're actually removed (which is likely part of the art style, as the same tanks retain the hull guns when shown in other media).
Highly reminiscent of the dual, hull mounted, driver operated, machineguns on the M3 Lee and earliest M4 Sherman tanks, though, to my knowledge none were ever fitted to the early Shermans that mainly still had the mountings as a holdover from the Lees design work.
Only a few M3 Lees actually had the machineguns mounted cause it was quickly found that they were kinda useless/detrimental cause the driver would have to move the hull around to get a proper angle to fire on infantry and this would disrupt the aiming of the turret/main gun armament.
By the time they decided not to include any additional machineguns to that position (the Lee had 3 other turret/pintle mounted machineguns already) it was found to be cheaper to just weld over the holes for them on the new production hulls rather then remove them from the design entirely.
@@Kneb587 Another example are the quite odd, fixed, forward-firing machineguns mounted on the sides of on the IS-7.
The centrally mounted ones are probably more useful, but you really don't want your driver to have to fiddle with being a gunner anyway, so getting rid of them makes sense in either design.
@@HellbirdIV Oh right, I'd forgotten about the IS-7. That probably actually fits as a better comparison to the AAT in overall form.
All this _does_ make me wonder if the Trade Federation did like the M3 and removed the "drivers blasters" in while keeping the mountings. Since, as you stated, in some examples the mountings aren't even there.
@@Kneb587 they make more sense on a repulsorlift vehicle than on tracked vehicles.
@@matthiuskoenig3378 I'll grant you they make _more_ sense on a repulsorlift vehicle than a tracked one, but it _does_ already have those 2 blaster turrets on the sides.
The problem still remains of interrupting the aim of the main armament in the turret when the driver turns the hull for any reason, made worse by the fact that the turret of the AAT is so far off center that any hull movement is going to be exaggerated.
Of course this isn't taking into account whatever targeting/movement correction systems they might have in that design and the potential cost of production vs installation of various weapon systems of a fictional political entity in a galaxy far, far away.
... _Man_ i can get long winded sometimes.
In the Starfighter games, these tanks demonstrate a remarkable flexibility in gun elevation, able to aim almost straight up and behind them and firing on aircraft without becoming unbalanced.
Always liked the AAT, it's an unapologetic moving wall of sheer firepower.
Right, it's more of an assault vehicle than a main battle tank
So one thing to note: the AAT was originally meant to be used by living sentient crew. But the Trade Federation used battle droids instead as crew.
I'd love a vs series between fake tanks. Imagine a Baneblade going up against the P.1000 Ratte or the AAT vs a Scorpion from Halo
Baneblade beats ratte
Baneblade would stop, the mechanicus would be too busy drooling over the other designs
Ratte on future mega heavy gang violence would be HILARIOUS.
A consideration on the height- blasters don't arc, so the main (and secondary) armaments are line of sight weapons.
In this situation, height is range.
Love it Cone! I really do enjoy this series you have going about fake tanks! Keep-it-up my friend! You should maybe do the TIE Crawler some time!
"...sensor jamming" With these being crewed by droids, I would think that any jamming would affect them as well.
No, B1's after the Phantom Menace are all autonomous. They are basically robotic human soldiers, except cheaper.
Btw this probably counts as an anphibious tank because I remember you could "drive" above the water in Star Wars: Battlefront
0:40 Truly the most badass tank in Star Wars. Anchored to asteroids for ambush, can climb upside-down, the thing is just plain awesome.
One of my first complicated Lego sets was on of these. No idea what happened to it, coolest thing I had as a kid
I love how you showcase the tank's hardship against infantry throughout the whole video :)
The only variant you missed was the HAG;
It was similar to the defoliator but it’s cannon was off to the side and it fired standard artillery shells. The vehicle is purely in legends and was used from the invasion of naboo to the end of the clone wars. It shows up in Galactic battlegrounds and Clone Wars (2002 game).
it would be my dream if mark felton did a video like this on april first in his style
really didn't expect Star Wars content from Cone but man I sure now want more :D
Never thought I'd see this tank here, amazing content as always!
Hopefully we'll see the Republic's own hover tank in the future, the TX-225 and how the Empire further developed the design into the 2-M Hover Tank.
Considering every system on board requires power I wouldn't bother being concerned about the lack of view ports, by the time the lack of them are a concern you're already buggered.
A consideration that merits some attention is the recovery of disabled/ broken down units. With a conventional tracked suspension, you just fasten on some tow cables, put the drive train in neutral, and the vehicle will just roll along as it is pulled. How do you tow an AAT that cannot propel itself?
Given the setting, you would probably recover it using a repulsor-lift aircraft. Dropships and gunships that can carry heavy armoured vehicles are common in Star Wars. Picking up a tank with a helicopter just isn't an option in the real world, but that would be the go-to recovery method if it was.
I have always loved the AAT ever since I was a kid. It really was the first tank in a Star Wars movie. Not a walker or ship, but a honest to God tank. I love the wing cannons, the turret, the shape.
It honestly needs a Mk.II version. Replace the frankly useless missiles in the shovel with forward facing shield generators in order to give it a far increased survivability, put a stronger gun on to make up for the loss of AP missiles, replace the hull mounted blasters with a coaxial blaster, place the turret more forward on the hull for better gun depression, give the wing cannons ball mounts in order to allow a far greater firing arc, and put a proper gunner in the turret so the commander can focus on his job. As well as things you mentioned like vision blocks, proper locks and seals on the hatches to avoid boarding actions.
I'm not sure the immunity to mines is plausible. Repulsorlift is not flight, it pushes downwards against planetary gravity - presumably with a force equal to the vehicle's mass. So it would set off pressure-triggered mines. Also, other forms of sensor could be used to trigger mines.
It is true that the AAT's distance from the surface would allow the force of simple mines to dissipate before striking it, but a simple bounding mine adaption could overcome that.
A penetration of the lower hull, filled as it is with ammo, could be disastrous.
Finally, my army gets the attention it deserves! The AAT despite its common appearances throughout Clone Wars media never really felt properly appreciated. It really does a good job covering as many bases as possible with its armaments for a general-purpose MBT-style vehicle!
Its design vulnerabilities are honestly not too hard to turn a blind eye to within the context of suspension of disbelief, especially since the tradeoff is a very distinct silhouette. Thanks for taking a dive into sci-fi with this video!
Always digged the design, cool vid, thank you!
There is an imperial version in grey and with additional armor known as the Imperial Assault Tank.
In the movies and clone wars, it’s shown with its commander hatch open most of the time giving them a sense of what’s out there
to be fair, if the AAT suffered power loss, it would be stuck on the ground and unable to fight anyways so I dont think a lack of view ports is that much a problem for that reason
The easy open hatches would allow an easy exit of the vehicle in tha scenario too
@@Tuck-Shop yeah the hatches are plenty big enough for an easy escape but they should have locking latches. Tho TBH the whole thing should just be one big robot
you could have used the model from battlefront 2 2017, but you chose to use the 2005 battlefront 2. RESPECT hope next week going to be the AT-TE
I don't actually own the newer battlefront on PC at the moment. Plus I figured the older one did just a good a job of showing it in action
@@ConeOfArc Thanks for reminding me how much time I spent playing the old Battlefront 2. What a great game!
Nice work.
Here's a few things that i picked up.
1. Repulsion does not actually "fly" the AAT it work kind like a track and shares the vehicle weight on covered surface. So it would not been able to hover over water when it sometimes sank in swamp areas of galaxy. 2. AAT bottom was so large partly on that repulsion reason. It had huge weight because it was heavily armored using quite cheap metal armor (same that B1 has made off) whitout expensive or high tec alloys. Armor was still quite durable. Also huge shovel in bottom made AAT hard to use in narrow spases.
3. I remember seeing in some episodes that at least in drivers hacht did had a lock wheel but i don't ever call droids using it... So this may be my memory's mistake.
4. In some earlier AAT's had two blasters in fix possitions in hull. Those two later missing B1 where there to use those. When blasters were removed then also B1's.
5. AAT did had quite good gun and firecontrol systems when we see in phantom menace it shot one starfighter down when they were leaving the hangar. This also implies that gun elevation was good if main gun was used on limited anti-air use. Also speaking of gun, clone war's era AAT had bigger gun than the original. It can be seen due to larger mucle brake in end of the barrol.
6. Those large rocket's in shovel part could be used indirrect firesupport role when the hole tank flip's backwards. Also the loading mecanism those tubes was to lift the hole upper struckture off the shovel. This also made easy to transport AAT in three parts, turret being the third, and then be assembled near front lines. Usually in lucerhulck bevore been droppeb on planet.
Not native in english so sorry for mistakes.
If i recall, the reason for reduced crew from 4 to 2 was because they turned the tank itself into a droid, and the 2 B1s were required to both maintain and work most of the internals
Definitely one of the best tank designs in Star Wars. Way more practical than the walkers.
Of the various sci-fi tank designs out there, this is one of the best. Although it is a bit high, it presents a small target profile to the enemy and it's primary and secondary weaponry is logically laid out - even if those "wing-mounted" positions for the close defense weapons are strictly inferior to a straightforward coaxial mount. It's main flaw is that it's the main battle tank for the bad guys, so it's inevitable fate is to be destroyed in some laughably implausible bit of heroic action.
I love it the sci-fi breakdown is very entertaining.
This reminds of concept arts by Vlad Mojaev on how Star Wars vehicle in modern world would look like.
I love the fact that you used the best Star Wars game to ever be produced Star Wars Battle Front 2 to get cinematic shots
As a US Army veteran with five years in an armor battalion, the first thing that stood out to me was in addition to the lack of viewports, it has generally poor close in visibility and no real good close in weapon system for the side and rear arcs. It doesn't even have the Gunner or driver's pintle mounted guns that modern tanks would have to deal with close in infantry or something down and behind you.
Using the good Battlefronts as background footage. Fantastic!
Wow, love this video about a Fake Star Wars tank! I didn't know much about the AAT until now. Please do a future vid on the Snail Droid Tank and Hailfire Droid
the hover tech is even extremely useful in regular terrain. all terrains are effectively roads, so it and its repulsorlift support vehicles are less restricted than true ground vehicles which all suffer reduced speed offroad.
I was waiting for you to play the clip from Phantom Menace when the Naboo forces destroy a tank with a speeder armed with a heavy blaster cannon. KABOOM!
While the height of the vehicle would be a problem, in a way it also could also give it an advantage in the wildly varied terrian, allowing it to pop its turret over obsticals and such while the ammunition remains low and less likely to be hit.
The episode 1 artbook has a fair amount of alternative designs if you decide to cover stuff like the MTT or Droideka's some really cool stuff B-1 could have looked very different.
Mines may still be effective , if the repulsor lift exerts force on the surface, it may be a sufficient amount of force to trigger a AT mine.
What about the Type 61 and the M61A5 tank used by the earth federation in mobile suit gundam during the OYW.
It's most near earth comparison is bmpt in terms of weaponary.
The CIS version moved the hull mounted blasters to double up on the arma and amoothed out the hull below the hatch, removing the cooling vent.
When you said VS series... It immidiately made me think of Starcraft Siegetank.
I would like to correct one thing. Sensor jamming in star wars is pretty much constant as its a widespread and widely used tech and thus countermeasures to it are widespread so they are fully justified in only using sensors as due to how used the factions are to it the tech has made devices that are more then reasonably functional despite it.
It actually pretty good to make a video about this future fake tanks, not a lot of channel make it, and also i would like to see the Scorpion tank from Halo
God tier channel, subbed.
The AAT was always one of my favorite designs.
What about the TX-130, AT-TE, AT-RT, or the AT-AT? I would love to see some more Star Wars content from you and I really enjoyed this video! Keep up the good work!
Modern thermal sights, long range missile launchers, and APFSDS/HEATFS rounds would mulch armored columns of the AAT, the best use of it would be mountainous terrain where a traditional tank would be all but useless, providing armored support for infantry.
There's additional models in the extended lore including artillery and SPAA versions
The AAT is either the WW2 equivalent of the M4 Sherman, or the post-War Soviet T-54. The closet thing to this from another series, is the HALO covenant Tank.
Never think I’d ever hear done talking about Star Wars but I welcome it
Missile launcher ports have NO armoured door, so it would be easy to fire into the missle tube and explode the missile before it has launched. Igniting ALL the ammo in that lower section.
Battlefront 1 was so underrated for the ps2, well balanced teams and maps. it had free online multilayer. IN 2004! I remember at the time you either bought call of Duty "the big red one" or battlefront and I feel like not many people went with battlefront, but I promise them they missed out big time having bought both
that kind of hover tech would revolutionice arctic and desert exploration, or even marshlands and other stuff like that where conventional vehicles would get bogged down
I love the AAT, it's design makes it fit its role of being something to sell to people lol. Using ammo specifically designed for it and having space for organic crew means you can make alot of money selling these as well as there parts and ammo.
I am now interested in the "Magrider" from Planetside 2.
Most modern AT mines are magnetically fused, pressure doesn't have much if anything to do with that, combine that with an EFP and a knowledge that the weakest part of most tank armor is the bottom and that the ammo for it is stored there, this tank would be very vulnerable to ATEFP mines
One decent repulsorlift triggered mine and those magazines go kaboom real good.
High silhouette, near vertical hull sides and shot trap between the turret and hull.
Mines are probably still a very real problem. Even though pure contact mines are used typically on earth in the 20th and 21st centuries may be relatively useless (though who knows, the repulsor plates may well exert a real downward force strong enough to trigger a detonation) it's probably safe to assume, given the large scale use of the technology in the Empire and beyond, that mines specifically designed to trigger on being passed over by repulsors would be in place.
Furthermore, the high design combined with the tank having a very large and heavy overhang to the rear seems to me to be problematic to say the least, especially on slopes where the rear shifted center of gravity may well cause the vehicle to simply topple over, effectively limiting its use to level ground or downward slopes.
The very low placement of much of the weaponry seriously limits the use of that weaponry, making employment of the tank in defilade impossible, further increasing its vulnerability to enemy fire which is already seriously high due to its high profile.
Overall it seems to be a vehicle that despite its theoretical advantages of massive firepower combined with good visibility (due to its height) and excellent ground clearance due to its repulsor plates is in reality far from optimal.
A lower design with the weapons closer to the top and the center of gravity better distributed towards the center of the repulsor fields would certainly be far more effective in actual combat.
On the topic of repulsorlifts, we know they exert some force but it's not significant, as Qui-Gon Jinn and Jar Jar Binks lay down flat underneath an MTT as it passes over them - and the MTT is a much, MUCH larger and heavier repulsorvehicle than the AAT - with the only effect being what seems to be powerful wind close to the ground.
So repulsorvehicles would most definitely be too light on the ground to trigger physical switches on anti-tank mines, but it's likely that the Star Wars galaxy has other types of trigger that work against repulsorvehicles, like magnetic sensors.
The only tinny thing who bother me it's the aat don't had a coax blaster/ fast firing weapon, but this drawback was somehow mitigated with the laser weapons on the side of the hull.
You should to the Imperial
AT-DP for Fake Tank Friday (if the AT-DP is considered a tank)
Id love to see him cover some of the Warhammer tanks, especially ones such as the new Kratos Heavy Tank or some of the Baneblade chassis Super-Heavy Tanks. Or hell maybe even some of the crawling tanks of AdMech or spooky tanks of the Necron… Please do so one day if you could. Love your videos.
Nice work on expanding your tank range. Now for my suggestion for a fictional (somewhat) "alien" tank... Only from the future.
The tanks used in Killzone.
I've played the original trilogy (and have the footage to show for it) and in the original game, I've managed to destroy both Helghast tanks and APCs with only hand grenades. You need at least three to take them down but it's doable. I've done it many times...
The Soviet Mammoth Tank from Red Alert Command and Conquer would be a fun vid to see.
I like the idea of hypothetical "VS" series.
If possible, I would like to submit "Systems Alliance M35 MAKO IFV" versus another IFV :) I would classivy the Mako more as an IFV than an APC due to to its reduced carry capacity, but highly capable armament.
The thing about the AAT is that it's immediately better designed than most other "tanks" in Star Wars, since it actually has a turret compared to something like the TX-130.
Hmmm, might as well take a look at the Maghariba Guard Tactical Armoured Gear (TAG) from the tabletop skirmish game Infinity by Corvus Belli. The Haqqislamite heavyweight, either in its original 'Spider Tank' configuration, or the updated Scorpion appearance. Just a neat pseudo-tank I've always had a soft spot for
The AAT cannot be any good if Jar Jar can take one out!
There is also an artillery version known as the HAG-M. But it only appeared in older videogames.
Great video! Glad to see you're expanding your range on this subject line. Please keep it up!
As to this particular subject? Nah, it really doesn't make much sense. But then, that was never the point. It's in the Star Wars universe so the only criteria that matters is that the thing looks "cool" and looks "different" and especially that it be easily identifiable on screen. Just like the choice of the X-Wings and TIE Fighters were to help keep things clear as to who the good guys versus the bad guys were and also to visually help remind the audiences that "these things are not of this Earth" the designs of the Star Wars ground vehicles followed the same criteria.
Functionality? Rationality? Practicality? Meh. None of that matters. The AAT just had to look "different" than the "tanks" we have today and be easily recognizable as "the bad guys."
First off, those missile launchers. On paper, the AAT packs a huge punch with those missiles. But the launchers are placed down at the very bottom of the vehicle. This, where they're almost always going to face with physical obstructions to the being launched. It means the AATs can't use their primary heavy weapon system from a hull down firing position. They'd more than likely hit any bush or berm or rocks in front of them - or take out their own troops around them - when fired before those missiles could do anything to the enemy. It makes far more sense to place such launchers at about the highest point on the vehicle to ensure their clear firing arcs. But, the creative types who created the AAT decided that just wouldn't look as cool so no such rationality was allowed.
Then there's the crewing of the vehicle. Specifically, why? This thing is a "droid tank" and supposed to be an unmanned weapons system that requires not human - or other living beings - to operate it. Fair enough - so why then does it have to be "manned" by a bunch of droids to run it? That's a huge waste of internal volume. That means the AAT is bigger and heavier and more expensive than otherwise. Instead of requiring four entire battle droids in order for the tank to function why not have that all built into the tank from the get go? Just whatever "battle droid CPU package" was required for each function instead of requiring the full-up battle droids themselves. Perhaps have them be like plug-in units within the AAT's weapons system control module. The more such "battle droid CPU packages" you install in your AAT (up to four) the more capable the tank becomes in battle as a dedicated CPU can handle each individual weapon system with more dedicated processing power for targeting and fire control.
That sort of set up would greatly reduce the internal volume required for the vehicle thus reducing its height, it's profile, and allowing for better armor or more weapons loadout for the otherwise same weight and cost.
Instead, as it's Star Wars, the things had to be run by as many comic relief battle droids as it could in order to be useful in the stories. Contrast these things with how the "Terminator" movies handle their "droid tanks."
In the Star Wars films, the battle droids and their vehicles were little more than annoyances and just provided plot opportunities for the Jedi heroes to show their Jedi hero prowess in defeating.
I would like to hear about the super tank.
im working on some concept art for the Armored Snow Speeder (it has the best acronym)
From how it performs in Battlefront, I'd say it needs a smaller "caliber" blaster as well for anti infantry use. The two it does have are very difficult to aim since they're so far apart and their firerate leaves a lot to be desired.
That goes doubly so since Jedi are consistently a massive threat to all CIS military endeavours but let's not get to how the Galaxy at large seems to have forgotten how to make projectile firearms. (That one time Mandalore did it should've set a precedent on how to fight force users.)
Great Video, I've always loved Star Wars military vehicles. The only semblance of a nitpick I have is saying that it was designed by Baktoid Armor Factories instead of Baktoid Armor Workshop. Still a wonderful video nonetheless! Keep on rolling!
Atunshei: Well Billy Yank here we are AGAIN IN ANOTHER ROUND OF CHECKMATE LINCONITES! Wasn't the Clone Wars about States Rights to Own Droids? Atunshei: NO! IT'S OVER JOHNNY REB! I HAVE THE HIGH GROUND!
I like to think that with the engines switched off it just falls over on its back
My favorite tank in the SW universe in all honesty.
I’ve always wondered why it needed to by piloted by droids. I just thought it’ll make more sense to have it pilot itself as though it was a droid tank instead of a tank made for droids. Resources is wasted on making internal spaces and compartments just to house droid crew etc.
Probably so the thing could use the droids as parallel processors. It's a lot more efficient computing wise to run dedicated systems than have a single system run everything.
@@clothar23 So just hardwire Droid brains into it, best of both.
@@Dr.LightMarker5613 While that is a decent solution I do think having the crew as separate droids simplifies production.
Since you can just grab any standard issue battle droid and plop them into the thing . Without the need to manufacture separate components.
And as we've seen the average battle droid can function on a minimal level without its head. Indicating at least some of its processing power is spread throughout its chassis.
You should do the Mammoth Tank from the Command & Conquer series. One of my favourite fictional tanks from one of my favourite franchises.
Mines would still be a threat as proximity mines that detect disturbances in the magnetic field, similar to naval mines, could be developed and used.
You forgot to mention that there are two anti-personnel blaster cannons mounted along the sides of the fuselage near the driver’s hatch. Also, IIRC some of the power systems are completely exposed in the back/underneath the turret mounting. Also, from what I recall from playing the original two Star Wars Battlefront video games (as well as just looking the tank) the main gun doesn’t have effective gun depression in the forward arc
One thing people constantly misunderstand regarding prices in Star Wars is that the credits used are close to the equivalent of the U.S. dollar back in the 1940’s. For example, the listed price for an Imperial I class Star Destroyer is 150 million credits. Compare that to the IRL Iowa class battleship which came in at $110 million
The blaster cannons on the sides of the hull are a legends thing I guess.
I put the aat up against the Merkava in Arma 3 and the Merkava was victorious.
Based Merkava
Yep cause Merkava better!
well sensor jamming would likely disable the droids too so theres that
id love to see some comparisons between in universe or other series tanks
my favourites are ones made by the halo series, but i still love any of this fictional brief reviews on fictional tanks
I just think its hilarious that they have a robot piloted by robots, especially considering numerous other Droid vehicles are entirely autonomous.
I would love to hear your take on Keith Laumers sentient Bolo tanks.