So, I was arguing with Grizzlei a while back about the Scorpion's design. There's a common criticism that two crewmen are woefully inadequate to man a tank. Grizzlei made a good point when she said that the separate roles of driver, gunner, and commander are absolutely integral to the operation of a tank in a warzone, and you can't force those roles onto fewer tankers without overworking them. I said that automation would let the tank itself take care of most of the duties, and maybe the crew could be reduced to just a commander and a gunner.

Well, the Russians are going to give it a try. At their annual Giant Missile Parade this Saturday, they're going to unveil the Armata-14 tank, their first new MBT since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Most news outlets like CNN are reporting that the Armata-14 will have a two-man crew, with just a driver and a gunner. Most outlets are going with this number, which indicates that the Russians spend a lot of time bragging about it.

Others (Like the BBC) report that two men can operate the Armata, but the actual crew size will be three. Which sounds a little more plausible, and it wouldn't be the first time that the Russians have oversold their hardware.

A tank is a machine, machines break. I work in a factory, and I know just how finicky automation can be. If something breaks on an Armata during a war, three soldiers are going to have a much, much harder time keeping it running than the four crewmen in a comparatively simple (maybe) Abrams tank.

Given another 500 years of tech development, though, and maybe automating it down to two crewmen won't be such a bad idea after all. If a tank breaks down, a Pelican can return it to the depot faster than a full-sized crew can repair it, if they could repair it. And in the kind of war the UNSC is fighting, maybe main battle tanks are considered to be disposable?