One could argue none and that the lighter MBT's such as this design and the similar AMX-40 simply provide less armor protection. While all tanks make compromises over mobility, firepower, and protection there does seem to be a consensus over minimum levels of MBT protection as evidenced by the lack of interest in designs like the MK7 and AMX-40.
It's also worth noting that the trend for armored units is that they keep getting heavier due in no small part to every supporting truck getting some level of armor protection. Add in the trend toward heavier IFV's (protection) and artillery (SP 155/39 being replaced with 155/52) and how much a tank weighs is far less significant in terms of the total weight of an armored brigade.
While I'd argue there's a very important role for medium weight forces there does seem to be a general consensus around the world on the MBT and thus such forces either use MBT's or other vehicles. Both the medium and light tank seems to have died off for various reasons. If anything I'd argue we need actually do need a light tank for airborne and light forces.
there is a whole lot of fighting that is gonna be done before you reach conventional warfare. BAE is looking at the light tank concept and Airborne and Marines are always looking for lighter vehicles. this so called trend that you're talking about is being resisted on every front.
the JLTV was almost dropped by the Marines because it was too heavy. the Army once talked about a 70 ton apc and then backed off that.
heavy is out, light is coming back. mobility is the key to protection....in iraq and afghanistan the forces of all allied nations were road bound. that's why you see heavy trucks gaining favor, but the LAV-25 which is light performed well because it was able to move cross country away from the roads and ieds.
Heavy is most certainly not out. Just because Europe is continuing to disarm doesn't mean the law of combined arms got repealed. Even in Europe while they're going to have less armored units the ones that remain will be heavier. Almost every vehicle in an armored brigade is increasing in size and weight.
Infantry carriers of all types continue to get heavier. A decade ago light forces were using unarmored trucks, medium weight forces had very few armored vehicles and almost universally towed artillery, and armored forces were in fact mostly composed of soft skinned trucks. All this is gone.
Nations around the world continue to field higher proportions of armored forces such as China, India, South Korea, etc., that utilize heavier vehicles. Where Israel some years ago relied heavily on the M113 they've now mostly switched to using infantry carriers modified from old tanks as well as brand new 60 ton heavy infantry carriers.
"Mobility is the key to protection" can be true and can be false as it's conditions dependent. There are few brigade sized formations with more mobility than a modern heavy armored brigade.
Looking at light tanks for the Airborne has been going on for decades. The US Army continues to do nothing. The M551 was retired without replacement with the cancellation of the M8. The M8 actually weighed almost the exact same as the last US Army light tank which was the M41 whose design began in 1947.
The trend I'm talking about is the weight of the units continuing to go up which is certainly not going away. While I agree that JLTV is in fact too heavy for the Corp are you sure the Corp dropped it? I thought the Humvee recap program was cancelled and both the Army and Marines are stuck with JLTV now? Did the Army really talk 70 tons for an APC? I seem to remember GCV being an IFV in the 40 to 60 ton range?
The insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan are both the norm for what the US military has had to do the past 100 or so years and the most likely future conflict; however, it's not remotely our worst case scenario and not how we structure the Army in response. The Army must be the nations insurance for a serious ground war.
Besides Iraq and Afghanistan it's worth looking how Russia has responded to it's recent conflicts in central Asia and Israel vs both Hamas and Hezbollah. The response of both is to continue fielding more heavily armored units including infantry carriers based on tank chassis. The US Army after Iraq 91 and 2003 within it's lesson learned reports indicated they needed more armored combat engineers which is exactly what Israel discovered and fielded independently. We had to get the armor D9 kits from them for Iraq when the US Army finally grew up and admitted the D7's were simply too small.
Heavy isn't only not out but the definition of light to include vehicles, not to mention armored vehicles, indicates how far we've come from what light used to mean. Light used to mean leg mobile and/or partly motorized. Today it often means motorized and partly light armored. Many units called light are actually medium weight forces.
By what metric is light coming back? What units are being changed from heavy or medium to light? Is the US Army gaining a single light maneuver unit or doing something to make these units lighter?
One could argue none and that the lighter MBT's such as this design and the similar AMX-40 simply provide less armor protection. While all tanks make compromises over mobility, firepower, and protection there does seem to be a consensus over minimum levels of MBT protection as evidenced by the lack of interest in designs like the MK7 and AMX-40.
ReplyDeleteIt's also worth noting that the trend for armored units is that they keep getting heavier due in no small part to every supporting truck getting some level of armor protection. Add in the trend toward heavier IFV's (protection) and artillery (SP 155/39 being replaced with 155/52) and how much a tank weighs is far less significant in terms of the total weight of an armored brigade.
While I'd argue there's a very important role for medium weight forces there does seem to be a general consensus around the world on the MBT and thus such forces either use MBT's or other vehicles. Both the medium and light tank seems to have died off for various reasons. If anything I'd argue we need actually do need a light tank for airborne and light forces.
there is a whole lot of fighting that is gonna be done before you reach conventional warfare. BAE is looking at the light tank concept and Airborne and Marines are always looking for lighter vehicles. this so called trend that you're talking about is being resisted on every front.
ReplyDeletethe JLTV was almost dropped by the Marines because it was too heavy. the Army once talked about a 70 ton apc and then backed off that.
heavy is out, light is coming back. mobility is the key to protection....in iraq and afghanistan the forces of all allied nations were road bound. that's why you see heavy trucks gaining favor, but the LAV-25 which is light performed well because it was able to move cross country away from the roads and ieds.
Heavy is most certainly not out. Just because Europe is continuing to disarm doesn't mean the law of combined arms got repealed. Even in Europe while they're going to have less armored units the ones that remain will be heavier. Almost every vehicle in an armored brigade is increasing in size and weight.
ReplyDeleteInfantry carriers of all types continue to get heavier. A decade ago light forces were using unarmored trucks, medium weight forces had very few armored vehicles and almost universally towed artillery, and armored forces were in fact mostly composed of soft skinned trucks. All this is gone.
Nations around the world continue to field higher proportions of armored forces such as China, India, South Korea, etc., that utilize heavier vehicles. Where Israel some years ago relied heavily on the M113 they've now mostly switched to using infantry carriers modified from old tanks as well as brand new 60 ton heavy infantry carriers.
"Mobility is the key to protection" can be true and can be false as it's conditions dependent. There are few brigade sized formations with more mobility than a modern heavy armored brigade.
Looking at light tanks for the Airborne has been going on for decades. The US Army continues to do nothing. The M551 was retired without replacement with the cancellation of the M8. The M8 actually weighed almost the exact same as the last US Army light tank which was the M41 whose design began in 1947.
The trend I'm talking about is the weight of the units continuing to go up which is certainly not going away. While I agree that JLTV is in fact too heavy for the Corp are you sure the Corp dropped it? I thought the Humvee recap program was cancelled and both the Army and Marines are stuck with JLTV now? Did the Army really talk 70 tons for an APC? I seem to remember GCV being an IFV in the 40 to 60 ton range?
The insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan are both the norm for what the US military has had to do the past 100 or so years and the most likely future conflict; however, it's not remotely our worst case scenario and not how we structure the Army in response. The Army must be the nations insurance for a serious ground war.
Besides Iraq and Afghanistan it's worth looking how Russia has responded to it's recent conflicts in central Asia and Israel vs both Hamas and Hezbollah. The response of both is to continue fielding more heavily armored units including infantry carriers based on tank chassis. The US Army after Iraq 91 and 2003 within it's lesson learned reports indicated they needed more armored combat engineers which is exactly what Israel discovered and fielded independently. We had to get the armor D9 kits from them for Iraq when the US Army finally grew up and admitted the D7's were simply too small.
Heavy isn't only not out but the definition of light to include vehicles, not to mention armored vehicles, indicates how far we've come from what light used to mean. Light used to mean leg mobile and/or partly motorized. Today it often means motorized and partly light armored. Many units called light are actually medium weight forces.
By what metric is light coming back? What units are being changed from heavy or medium to light? Is the US Army gaining a single light maneuver unit or doing something to make these units lighter?