via AR
Brazil still has a fleet of 150 M41, which have been replaced for frontline units by German Leopard main battle tanks.Read it here and subscribe to AR.
The cost of the transfer for the 25 light tanks is around $150,000 and will be paid by the Brazilian government.
These M41C light tanks will be delivered to the Cavalry and Armoured Infantry units of the Army Uruguay to replace old M24 Chaffee.
The Light Tank M24 Chaffe was an American light tank used during the end of the World War II and in postwar conflicts including the Korean War and, with the French, in the War in Algeria and the First Indochina War. A total of 17 M24 Chaffe tanks are still in service with the armed forces of Uruguay.
Uruguay has also 22 M41UR armed with a 90 mm Cockerill cannon in place of the original 76mm light gun.
The M41C is a Brazilian upgrade of the standard M41 Walker Bulldog developed by United States after the World War II.
The latest version of the M41C is motorized with Brazilian build Saab-Scania DS-14A O4 eight cylinder diesel engine with modifications to the rear hull and electrical system. The transmission package is upgraded allowing the tank to run at a speed of 70 km/h. Night vision and a laser range finder is added to the gun sight. Additional spaced armour plates are added to the forward part of the hull, glacis plate and turret. Four smoke grenade dischargers were added to each side of the turret. The original 76 mm M32 gun is replaced by a 90 mm Ca 76/90 M32 BR3 gun with thermal sleeve and muzzle break made in Brazil.
The more I become familiar with some of the "old" armor, the more I wonder if simply recycling the designs with modern materials and weapons wouldn't solve some of todays issues.
A "modern" M41 built with today's hardware would be a formidable light tank.
It would be the perfect expeditionary/airborne tank and we could get that requirement off the table.
Even better?
The War Dept owned the designs so we could simply bid it out for production!
How much does it weigh? How many could you put inside a C17?
ReplyDelete24 tons so its lighter than a Double V-hull Stryker.
DeleteYes you can put an M41 inside a C17.
ReplyDeleteAs far as upgrading WWII technology for current use, it is a common "budget" solution for smaller countries. http://weapons.technology.youngester.com/2010/10/peru-300-upgraded-t-55.html
As far as crew survivability, a double V hull Stryker is a better option, at least against an IED threat. Neither design is good against modern guided anti tank missiles or artillery.
Then again, the Stryker is an infantry delivery vehicle, not a light tank.
i totally get what you're saying but should we rename light tanks to the roles that they'll play in modern warfare...infantry support vehicles? i don't see them ever being used in killing other tanks unless things have gone badly.
DeleteWhat of reviving the M8 Ridgeway Armoured Gun System? Since it has been developed and it can be customised, why not put it in production? Utilise it?
ReplyDeletea great concept that i know but didn't remember when i wrote this. i never did like the idea of add on armor. its fashionable but in the end i thought pretty much a waste. you can't add enough armor to ever make it stand up to anti-tank missiles or gunfire and if out the box it was vulnerable to small arms fire or shell splinters then perhaps it was too light.
DeleteWhat of just leaving it in the base configuration and being proof to small arms fire?
DeleteIn other words, half-on armour would be a half-measure as opposed to something properly designed to withstand ATGW and guns?
What of the Stingray 2?
I do think there is a need to keep AFV production within the USA and keeping these manufacturers alive.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stingray_light_tank#Stingray_II
This was the best modern light tank ever designed....
ReplyDeletebut alas it didn't swim
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-92_Light_Tank
A more modern version could have a common chassis IFV.
I would put forward the CVR(T) family (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combat_Vehicle_Reconnaissance_(Tracked)) the FV101 Scorpion light tank was very successful, and the family as a whole has proved very popular with export markets... plus less than 9 tonnes (or tons - whichever you prefer), hence they proved useful in the Falkland islands (where Scorpions and FV107 Scimitars were deployed).
ReplyDeletegreat for expeditionary warfare as logistically the family are similar enough to be easily supplied, and they are a family which means they can provide for most of the roles required by a expeditionary force from within that group.
excellent vehicles but the armament always seemed a bit light for the expeditionary tank role. i foresee a infantry support vehicle and a 30mm cannon or low velocity 76mm is less than i was looking for. 90mm or better a 105 is where i was going. don't need a 120 cause i don't want the crews to go out hunting enemy tanks but a 105 should be able to take care of any issue that pops up on the battlefield short of and maybe including armored warfare.
DeleteThe classic French 75mm of WWI threw a 12-14lb HE shell, a heavier throw weight than a 81mm mortar.
Deletehey USMC0802. different subject. help me understand something.
Deleteremember the incident at Nevada where the Mortar Platoon suffered a catastrophic accident due to a double feed? why was the leadership removed, yet the report says that they weren't at fault? how is that being justified.
if you can clue me in i'd appreciate it, if not i'm good.