[texas booster]

The Buford’s lightweight hull, made of fire-prone aluminum, can be upgraded with modular armor. In three hours, an M8 crew can add an additional three tons of appliqué armor that will shield the vehicle from “armor piercing small arms and small cannons.” Then the Level III armor variant, girded with blocky bricks of explosive-reactive armor, maxes weight at 24.5 tons.

My brother was in armored cavalry, and he HATES anything made of aluminum in a war fighting vehicle.

Technology has changed but the laws of physics don't move often.

1. Is there a reason that the Army is looking to field a 105mm gun in a self defined “light tank”? Is it the ready availability of munitions, or is there a 90mm gun that would suffice? Even if the 90mm is "obsolete".

2. Whatever happened to making things from Steel? There are several new versions that are strong but light.

3. Please don't design a Light Tank, expect to up-armor it to survive modern battlefield missiles, then complain that it is not as survivable as an M1.

If the idea is to design a vehicle that can survive heavy machine gun fire, but also be airlifted and fight at altitude, then you have your design envelope.

Stop trying to build with unobtainium to have the perfect weapon.

[Spktyr]

The 105mm is still a NATO standard gun; our M1s stationed in Korea still mount the 105mm as a weight saving measure combined with the older armor pack as Korean bridges will not support the weight of the all up 120mm armed M1A2.

Steel alloys suitable for armor have not gotten any lighter.

As for your last point, that’s been the problem with the Army since WW2.