Overview:
This is my long overdue list of what I would consider ideal expeditionary/infantry support tanks. Expeditionary is self explanatory. The ease of transport...whether by air, sea, rail, truck or self deployment (in the proper tactical/strategic environment). Infantry support is the ability of the squad, platoon or company commander to communicate with the armor crew and for them to be able to put down the types of fires that will facilitate the accomplishment of the objective.
Desired characteristics:
Mobility - As far as mobility is concerned, I'm agnostic when it comes to the wheels versus tracks debate. I will state at the outset however that the US Army has found that their Stryker Infantry Carrier Vehicles DO NOT have the same level of mobility as their tracked counterparts. Having said that, wheels do provide some advantages. Lower maintenance and operating costs. Ability to travel at high speed over roadways used by civilian vehicles etc...
Firepower - This is an old fashioned infantry support tank. Heavy armor will be engaged by attached infantry using TOW, Javelin, artillery (at extended range preferably using both cannon, precision shells and MLRS) and finally with rotary/fixed wing aircraft.
Weight - Putting a weight limit on this vehicle is essential for it to fulfill its expeditionary role. We are sacrificing armor for speed and firepower. This will not be a frontline vehicle but will be deployed just behind it. Supporting infantry in the assault and the defense, blasting fortifications, engaging enemy IFVs...those are the tasks. But to do that it has to be there. 40 tons is the max weight limit that the USAF will waive to do LAPPES or a heavy air drop (NOTE: this vehicle if pursued would be used by both the USMC and 82nd Airborne so being airborne capable is a must....additionally I could even MARSOC and Army Rangers to clamor for it once it enters service).
My selections.
The list is five to one. It could be expanded but that would just cloud the issue. Additionally the self imposed weight limit of 40 tons rules out purpose built tanks currently in service. That leaves us with Infantry Fighting Vehicles that mount weapons of between 75mm to 120mm. It should also be noted that the concept will probably be pushed more by budgets than operational necessity. With manufacturers offering turrets that mount large caliber guns that can be mounted on IFVs currently in service, it will be too tempting to standardize combat fleets to one vehicle that fulfills a variety of roles.
Number 5. Textron Commando Select w/90mm Turret
Number 4. Japanese Maneuver Combat Vehicle
Number 3. Polish PL-01
Number 2. B1 Centauro
Number 1. CV90-120
You could argue against any of these choices...But the overall trend is clear. IFV based infantry support tanks are the wave of the future. I personally feel that the trend is based more on budgets and the desire to standardize on one vehicle that fulfills a variety of roles, thereby reducing operating and training costs more than any operational need.
This is my long overdue list of what I would consider ideal expeditionary/infantry support tanks. Expeditionary is self explanatory. The ease of transport...whether by air, sea, rail, truck or self deployment (in the proper tactical/strategic environment). Infantry support is the ability of the squad, platoon or company commander to communicate with the armor crew and for them to be able to put down the types of fires that will facilitate the accomplishment of the objective.
Desired characteristics:
Mobility - As far as mobility is concerned, I'm agnostic when it comes to the wheels versus tracks debate. I will state at the outset however that the US Army has found that their Stryker Infantry Carrier Vehicles DO NOT have the same level of mobility as their tracked counterparts. Having said that, wheels do provide some advantages. Lower maintenance and operating costs. Ability to travel at high speed over roadways used by civilian vehicles etc...
Firepower - This is an old fashioned infantry support tank. Heavy armor will be engaged by attached infantry using TOW, Javelin, artillery (at extended range preferably using both cannon, precision shells and MLRS) and finally with rotary/fixed wing aircraft.
Weight - Putting a weight limit on this vehicle is essential for it to fulfill its expeditionary role. We are sacrificing armor for speed and firepower. This will not be a frontline vehicle but will be deployed just behind it. Supporting infantry in the assault and the defense, blasting fortifications, engaging enemy IFVs...those are the tasks. But to do that it has to be there. 40 tons is the max weight limit that the USAF will waive to do LAPPES or a heavy air drop (NOTE: this vehicle if pursued would be used by both the USMC and 82nd Airborne so being airborne capable is a must....additionally I could even MARSOC and Army Rangers to clamor for it once it enters service).
My selections.
The list is five to one. It could be expanded but that would just cloud the issue. Additionally the self imposed weight limit of 40 tons rules out purpose built tanks currently in service. That leaves us with Infantry Fighting Vehicles that mount weapons of between 75mm to 120mm. It should also be noted that the concept will probably be pushed more by budgets than operational necessity. With manufacturers offering turrets that mount large caliber guns that can be mounted on IFVs currently in service, it will be too tempting to standardize combat fleets to one vehicle that fulfills a variety of roles.
Number 5. Textron Commando Select w/90mm Turret
Number 4. Japanese Maneuver Combat Vehicle
Number 3. Polish PL-01
Number 2. B1 Centauro
Number 1. CV90-120
You could argue against any of these choices...But the overall trend is clear. IFV based infantry support tanks are the wave of the future. I personally feel that the trend is based more on budgets and the desire to standardize on one vehicle that fulfills a variety of roles, thereby reducing operating and training costs more than any operational need.
