The U.S. Army Is Searching for a New Light Tank

War is Boring ^ | November 13, 2017 | Sebastien Roblin

[zot]

Thanks for your post #31.

[TADSLOS]

Why does the Army want to field another set of target markers?

[Cobra64]

Yeah, and when is the last time we needed 20,000 tanks? The Atmy keeps buying these things, and then park them in a California boneyard.

[BroJoeK]

Cobra64: "Yeah, and when is the last time we needed 20,000 tanks?"

Here are those numbers built:

1. ◾Bradley Fighting Vehicle – 6,724[1]
   
2. ◾Stryker 4,466[2]
   
3. ◾M113 armored personnel carrier – ~80,000 built, 6,000 in service.[3][4]
   
4. ◾LAV-25 – (light armored vehicle) 870[5]
   
5. ◾Assault Amphibious Vehicle 1,311
   

That makes the total in service around 20,000.
Only the M113 was built in much larger quantities, now mostly replaced.

I totally sympathize with the Army's desires for a lighter, more mobile & capable vehicle and, it turns out, there may be new technologies in both guns & armor that could make that possible.

Cobra64: "The Atmy keeps buying these things, and then park them in a California boneyard."

Nothing lasts forever:

[Cobra64]

You cite the numbers built. Just where are these 20,000 tanks in service? I have a dozen spare batteries in a drawer... they are not powering anything, thus, they are not in service.

[BroJoeK]

I also have a dozen spare batteries in a drawer, along with spare light bulbs & other such.
They are very useful when the need arises.

Think about it.

[Cobra64]

When is the last time we had US tanks in action on a battle field?

[BroJoeK]

“When is the last time we had US tanks in action on a battle field?”

*******************

Depends on your definition of “tanks”.
We here are talking about “light tanks” which can include most anything, tracked or wheeled, less than 60 tons.

You yourself posted a helpful list of such light tanks, from which I’ve made now a number of posts.
So I’d say, and be sure you’d agree, that such vehicles are required in virtually every US military operation, right?

[Cobra64]

Yup. I say we buy another 20,000 tanks. Makes me feel all warm and fuzzy. 😄

[BroJoeK]

Cobra: " I say we buy another 20,000 tanks.
Makes me feel all warm and fuzzy."

I myself was never a tanker, instead mostly served a few miles behind front lines.
But one of my daughters married a tanker and for his sake, and hers, I'd want to be d*mn certain our guys have the best equipment possible.
So even if the ideal "light tank" may be a contradiction in terms, we still need to do the best we can for our guys.

[rmlew]

There was an active decision not to put a high velocity 76mm cannon on the Sherman in 1943. The 76mm gun wasn’t deemed ready and it’s high explosive shells were not as effective as those of the shorter-barreled 75mm on the Sherman. This policy was reconsidered in light of Tigers in Tunisia and Italy and in January 1944, Shermans with the 76mm gun were produced, but not in high numbers, as was the M18 Hellcat, a tank destroyer. The other issue, is taht the Army doctrine was to have out thin-0skinned and fast tank destroyers take on tanks.

[Lee Enfield]

Isn’t the Centuro an 8x8?

[FreedomPoster]

Father of a good friend growing up was a West Point Armor Branch O-6 (bird colonel) with 2-3 Vietnam tours. This in the mid-70s. He *hated* the Sheridan. There were still some of them around at Fort Knox in that era, more in Germany in the Fulda Gap.