It sounds like they picked realistic and achievable vehicle specifications this time. The XM1202 was supposed to weigh 18 tons and replace the M1 Abrams. This vehicle weighs 35 tons and complements the M1 Abrams. Finally, doctrine that aligns with physics.
Tbf it looks like after all the failed, overambitious programs, they went with way more basic stuff and proven stuff this time. Concept and parts of the vehicle are all pretty standard stuff. Apparently the MPF is based on the Griffin 2, which is based on the ASCOD (like the Ajax LOL), uses an older 105mm cannon, Abrams turrets parts, an old and proven Diesel engine. Theres nothing bad about this, Im sure the ammo/electronics/armor/etc will be up to high western standards, but it almost feels like a semi custom, semi off the shelve combat vehicle. Gonna be interesting to see how far this vehicle goes, this is the closest to a light tank weve seen in a while. Purchasing and maintenance cost will be interesting especially, considering modern IFVs have run into the problem of being nearly as expensive as actual MBTs.
>General Dynamics involved Whelp, time for nepotism and propaganda on how the full packed up things are still "light" and how we totally didn't bend the rules and logics of what is a light tank. Only fumbled actual lights as desired for 50 years to have this happen. 90's and 2000's were basically foiling light procurement to shovel cash into the "do everything" billed knock-off Centauros. LMAO on the Maury results saying that pitch was a lie. Even the newest Chinesium light is just a medium tank with fancy word play because it is "lighter" than their universal heavy tank. Shortened: This is a medium tank. Call it CVS90.
Considering light tanks are experiencing kind of a renaissance in the recent years, could you cover the Type-15 in a dedicated video as well? It's probably the closest equivalent to the MPF and entered service fairly recently in the mid 2010s
Basically the same thing. Goes where 99 or even 96 cannot go. Hell, it even has a similar approach to the modular armor packages. It has autoloader, bustle type with blowout panel. While we do not know much about the modern Chinese era and aps packages, I assume it at least works. Some of them was seen without the original planned more advance sensory equipment. But it can simply be they put those in storage for parade/transportation purposes. It was said Chinese has functioning amp for their 105. The crew can load the autoloader from inside of the vehicle. Think this as more a light tank version of Type 10.
@@jintsuubest9331 Chinas era is equivalent to Russians. Which means they have good heavy ERA that can degrade apfsds. Most nato era are light era that is designed for heat and can’t do much to apfsds.
@@Phantom-bh5ru You mean Russia claims the ERA can degrade APFSDS. Also claimed the APS can shoot (and at least weaken) kinetic rounds. Somewhat dubious claims if you ask me, especially considering how primitive those ERA bricks are. Tbh, right about now its very clear we know very little about actual russian equipment capability, but it all looks pretty underwhelming.
The one good thing about 2S38 getting added is now there is a precedent for adding vehicles like this that are still in trials and have very little known about them
After watching an Operations Room video on Desert Storm, I hope they do name it after Schwarzkopf! For context to anyone who doesn't know, Schwarzkopf was the General who was over Operation Desert Storm, which was amazing especially from a vehicles perspective. The Abrams killed hundreds of T-72s, the air war was ingenious and featured so many different kinds of aircraft from around the world, many new technologies were deployed, and Saddam was practically defeated in less than 5 days.
I think it should go to Westmoreland since it's the first American light tank since the M551 Sheridan. It'd make more since to give Schwarzkopf to a potential replacement for the Abrams
@@greeninja2728 hindsight is 20/20. During that time, there were fears that the high tech US equipment will fail and the expeirence of Iraq will overcome the Coalition.
@@shaider1982 Iraq fought an 8 year war against Iran in which they technically lost where a majority of their modern army was destroyed and most infrastructure destroyed. I would believe that they knew such basic information before they formed the coalition
@@jedispartancoolman It is *EXTREMELY* top heavy, such that if you fire from the flank it will topple over. The other variants do just fine though and if you need to bust bunkers the ATGM variant has a missile type it can use for that purpose.
Lol. I wondered why we didn't just send all the MGS's to Ukraine considering they were intended to retire all 142 of them this year anyway but I think the cost and the drawbacks would hurt more than help given other solutions.
the start of the video is cool, its actually show something WT is missing, its the shockwave effect when firing a gun and dust kickin up in the air, it just looks awesome ... old WT effects were a bit more dusty looking compared to new effects which also disappear really fast
I'd quite like to see a break down of the CV90120. You mentioned it in this video and it does seem like a contemporary of the MPF idea. I'd like to hear more about it.
@@slappy8941 we don't need another 4th generation MBT but a 5th generation one with some of the features from the KF51 would be way more useful then a CV90 type tank
@@Dziuba420 nah it’s not licensing, think it’s more due to the still classified nature of the modern Abrams variants’ exact armor figures; take the SEP V1, it’s not armored with its 3rd Gen DPU armor upgrade. Probably cause it would break the game, but also because it’s exact protection capability is still not public knowledge
Now that it has been chosen, the big question for the MPF is how long it will be before Gaijin adds it to War Thunder as an event tank with all it's stats completely borked.
I think this was a smart move. You can't always peel off a section of M1 tanks to help deal with dug-in enemy infantry and the Stryker MGS had some clear deficiencies with its off road mobility and protection.
Good to hear that the XM360 could possibly go in the not-tank. I keep saying that the mpf needs a 120, even if it's a lighter shorter version, so it can fire 120AMP munitions and won't complicate logistics
The system is fine. Use 105 ammo as long as it is viable (tank duel engagement are very rare and its primary threats aren't MBTs) and they are already bought. Then switch to the bigger caliber - exactly like the M1 gun choices were made.
I find it interesting how the idea of light tanks are still around to this day even though IFV and APCS can easily fill that role. Correct me if I'm wrong but if I remember correctly Russia doesn't use light tanks anymore just the bmp used in a light tank/support role. So I'm incorrect Russia still uses light tanks I'm also shocked there's so many responses
They do. 2S25 Sprut and Sprut SD are light tanks/assault guns using basically the gun and autoloader of a T72. Also you could count the BMP3/BMD4 IFVs they still have 100mm guns to fill the light tank firepower role. Edit: also no APCs and IFV cant easily take the role of a protected gun system, you gotta remember that having a large caliber gun is still very much needed on the battlefield to deal with fortifications, entrenchments, and armored targets, which autocannons cant really do. While also providing a cheap and fast fire solution compared to having to sling 100k$+ missiles or guided bombs at everything. I think one thing we might see more though is the usage of APC/IFV chassis to mount main gun systems on, kinda like stryker MGS, Boxer 120 and CV90-120.
They definitely still use light tanks. The 2S25M “Sprut” is one example. It’s hull is very similar to the BMD-4M’s, but instead of a 100mm gun/missile launcher (it only fires ATGM’s and HE as far as I know) and a co-axial 30mm, it has a completely different turret that houses a 125mm gun. Light tanks are still around, because they are a cheap and fast way to provide the infantry with direct fire support. They also can be deployed in places where MBT’s struggle to be transported to or maneuver in - like mountains or islands.
3:21 The bottom of the tank has to be armored because people have developed IEDs that penetrate the lower part of vehicles that have made soldiers get amputations, hence the thick lower armor
@@Spookston this sounds unlikely, but a remotely triggered rpg / shaped charge placed on a road to be fired once driven over might be a threat. Might make sense? Maybe not.
I love the American went from “We can’t build heavy tanks because our cranes can’t carry more than 40T” To “We can’t keep using the Abrams because it ways to much for bridges”
>Selects new light tank >Ignores 50 years of viable light tanks >Light tank weighs as much as a T-54 >As much forward useable gun depression and poor vis angle in hulldown positions as a T-54 LOL, LMAO even
I noticed that you don't really have a video talking about the Stryker performance Irl, or at least I couldn't find it, It would be nice to have a video explaining why you consider it to be such a bad vehicle. Nice video btw!
Not trying to sharpshoot, just help you out a bit :D Neutral steer is achieved by locking one track and running the opposite track forward or backward, while pivot steering involves the tracks moving in opposite directions. this is only useful as pivot steering requires the driver to bring the tank to a full hault, move the transmission selector out of D or R and into PVT, complete the maneuver, then return to D or R as situation dictates while neutral steering in either forward or reverse only requires the t-handle to be jacked all the way to one side or the other, provided speed allows for such a maneuver. hope that helps!
Your theory about the Army possibly leaning towards an autoloader bc of low recruitment numbers was a complete "Holy crap! That's a damn good point" moment.
0:54 That's so silly, it reminds me the Pershing tanks story, where they didn't wanted to equip it with a 90mm cannon because they didn't wanted the crew guys to go on and engage ennemy tanks like Panthers and Tiger.
It isn't that they are purposely underarming the MPF to force it to avoid certain fights. It just isn't designed for tank-on-tank combat, so they don't want to call it a "tank," because they don't want any crews to get it in their heads that they should be actively seeking out and engaging MBTs. It can engage an MBT if it has absolutely no choice but to do it, but that is a task better left to Javelins, Gustavs, and Abrams.
@@anonymous-ml8sl Yes the m10 might of been a TD on paper but it's field use seems to be convergent with that of the MPF. Additionally, the M10 received a bit of a mission change once the M36s and M4(76) entered use.
M10 is a better platform, lol. May as well have taking it as a spiritual concept and redesigned it as a jig tank for medium and 50 ton purposes. It's got a lot more potential.
The Scorpion - 8 tons, bit of a tankette in reality, but gets around, over 50mph, street legal The MPF - 38 tons, medium tank, 40mph, good luck parking that, boreen troll bridges hate you I am saying it aint even. America is still obeast wheezing along. Can't even pick a light tank with 50 years of good options. You can throw a 6bt in a CVR and afford to drive it, no shot.
Rumor has it. Certain units in the army had the chance to train with it. They loved it, could see and engage ITAS, vehicles and fighting positions before light infantry when through.
The fact that they went with what they did, I personally think was the wrong choice. It's a light tank that's not airdroppable and I honestly think it should feature an autoloader. IMO, autoloaders are the future.
The main problem with auto loaders are that they can go wrong, and to make them more durable they go slower then they theoretically could, so they fire atleast with Abrams usually at the same speed if not a second slower. Obviously it has the benefit of it doesn't get tired. That was all in general stuff, in this case with the light tank, its probably cause weight. And the fact that American tankers like having 4 guys. Useful for sleeping in shifts, or repairing and maintaining the tank. Not saying auto loaders can be good. (Personally with our Abrhams, a good fix if they do add auto loaders would be, to have an digitally controlled auto cannon and some ATGMs controles by a 4th crew member. This would make it weigh more, but, fuck it, it's already too heavy, as long as the suppesion can handle it, and It can go near 60mph and still accerate.
Absolute wrong choice. It's a hamstrung medium tank. Only passed rules bending because it's General Dynamics. The stupid Strykers also screwed over light procurement in the post Cold War era.
If you were to bury an rpg7 round and link it to a pressure plate it could be used as an IED. So that would be one of the reasons it would be listed in the brief.
I would love it if they called it "The Rhino" like the Spectrum Persuit Vehicle (SPV) from "The new Captain Scarlet". (A little obscure reference for any scifi fans of 60s shows).
>Create light tank with 105mm cannon >Has armor sufficient to stop light fire >Declare it isn't a tank at all I swear like I've seen something like this before. The Army is going to call it a tank destroyer, aren't they?
Call it a tracked support armored reconnaissance vehicle, or TSAR. And its designation is a direct-fire artillery platform or DAP, with mission set progression (allowing progress to infantry), egress (covering support), and Recon-support (supports forward troops) making the TSAR DAP-PER.
MPF was developed to provide fire power support to IBCTs and it will operate exclusively those units so that Abrams can be freed up to operate with armored cavalry regiments and ABCTs. What is interesting is that the Army doesn't want to call it a light tank, but the MOS that they want to designate to crew the vehicle would be called 19G Light Tank Crew Member.
MPF's look resembles the GDELS / Santa Barbara Sistemas & Elbit's Sabrah LT that won the Philippine Army Light Tank program. Specifically the tracked version. Those tanks (Both Wheeled and Tracked) might have the first batches be delivered by the yearend. That one carries a 105mm gun (either manned or unmanned. Latter is the default option for the 120mm option) made by Elbit (Turret made in cooperation with Denel), has provisions for the Iron Fist APS, and can be swapped for a 120mm if the customer chooses it. Probably a good idea for a video about MPF's Euro-Israeli relative considering some of its similarities.
As long as it's not the unmanned turret... tried it before in the 70s/80s with ttb... its where the russians got idea for armata. No situational awareness whatsoever.
Overall I like the MPF. I absolutely love the role it’s been assigned to fill. I think the 105 is fine, the armor and engine package are fine, and I think it should fit the role fine. The only source of contention I have is the 38 ton weight. It seems very heavy for its role. It certainly has tank weight for being “not a tank”. Maybe the army has future developments planned for it that make the weight necessary. I don’t know. At the moment though, 38 tons for a light infantry AT armored 105 platform seems high.
The m3 Bradley is 30 tons so its not unreasonable for a vehicle with more armor and a larger fire power to be 10tons heavier and as spookson said its probably just to make crews hesitant to attack mbts rather then heading straight for the enemy
Don't like the rear turret for the standard light tank role. And it definitely is too fat. In real speak by weight, it's a medium tank. And yes, they will over-stuff even more weight on it. This is definitely another cockup in a long lineage of light tank procurement cockups and missed golden eggs. A set of challenges to build three new tanks- tankette, light tank, and medium cruiser -would have been a much more economically profitable and spread venture yielding things that make sense instead of a medium with "light" stenciled on it. It's basically the knock-off Centauro (LAV) debacle all over again.
@@OneOddFellow "Modern" has become so bastardized as a misnomer for the "newest is best" lie pushed to have progress for the sake of itself, and then not reflecting on anything because it rigidly equates "old" to "lesser" or "useless". Really fallacious mindset related to the pitfalls of trendy consumerism and hubris. Honesty admits modern armies are kind of run like shit, by the crème of the bureaucratic sewer rats. I would suggest reading up on the term and thought behind it. We haven't updated the profile for the idea despite dancing around it by other terms. For the same weight class and use as "light" MPF is impressed into, we can set up a much more sound base tank to the weight allocation than pretending to be something else for kickbacks. A modern cruiser is a lean setup. Your competition is Chinese -not medium- Type15 "light tank" and Russian vaporware "lights" / cold war mediums with a side of huge ass obese -targets- cars. A design based on a completely reshaped Crusader/Cromwell/Comet/T-34 etc with the last several decades of lessons would be extremely competitive if not dominant over the others in its exploitive utility.
I can’t help but I feel remembered at the Sherman‘s. Lightweight tank, mass produced, easily shipped around. Atm it’s just too expensive to be a viable LBT.
Do you think you could do a video talking about the Ajax, and what the acceptance of the Griffin means for that program? Apparently they use the same chassis, but the Ajax has been in dire straights for a while now due to serious issues. Could the production of a vehicle that uses so many of the same components 'save' that program in Britain? And what could the fielding of this new vehicle mean for cross-platform maintenance and such in Europe?
I wouldn't put much faith in MPF saving its "cousin" vehicle. Most of Ajax's problems stem from the piss-poor construction of their hulls, rather than general component issues (although there have been a few, BAE had some problems mounting the 40mm, etc. Most of that has been resolved, though IIRC). MPF could be absolutely wonderful, and the British Army may still have to can Ajax. It's a programme mired in mismanagement and failure, so unless General Dynamics can find a way to stop those vehicles from rattling their contents into a smoothie of blood and electronics, without doing a fresh production run, then the MoD may just cut their losses.
Those things are gonna take SO many MBT shots if they ever get used in an actual wartime scenario. It may have a different classification on paper, but out in the field any sort of tanker's gonna look at that, see a giant box with tracks and a giant turret and immediately go "That's a tank."
The LAV III and VI isn't garbage by any stretch of the imagination. They are light airborne transportable and drop rated to give airbourne units a significantly increased fire power FAST. They are also significantly less in cost to damage potential ratio than heavy armour.
Great video. It's about time they got off the dime and outfitted Rapid-D forces with something other than promises. >~< by-the-by "Pivot steer" is when one track is halted and the other turns the vehicle to pivot on that one halted track. "Neutral steer" is when the transmission allows the tracks to turn in opposite directions and the vehicle turns with-in its own length. ^~^
Neutral and pivot steer are not the same thing. Pivot steer means one track moves while the pivot point of the vehicle is on the non-moving track. Neutral steer means both tracks move in different directions and the pivot point is the center of the hull. While they may seem the same thing in a video game, they are very different in the alleys of Baghdad.
my good man i must say fantastic work on your videos always well written, clear, simple and too the point but alas they barely cover the length of time it takes to drink my tea ! any chance we could get some longer story time with spookston ? just because we enjoy watching/ listening to you.....fuck me i got less and less British as i went on ...fuck it Simmonds get me a big hat ! i wish to yehaw
The MPF reminds me of the Sabrah Light tank which is being ordered by the Philippine Army from Elbit System interestingly they both used the chasis from the ASCOD tracked armoured fighting vehile (AFV) by General Dynamic Land System I honestly won't be surprised to see the MPF or whatever name it gets deployed in the Philippines during joint excercise considering the limitations of the infrastructure here to support the M1 Abrams.
This sounds like the Sherman II Electric Boogaloo to me. Infantry support - check. Smaller gun - check. Ability to engage tanks with preference for tank destroyer - check.
Well, here's to hoping that the MPF doesn't face any major setbacks and General Dynamics actually builds the thing correctly. It sounds like a phenomenal vehicle, one that could really be useful to the US given the increasingly costly and niche direction MBTs seem to be going in, so I do want it to succeed. And despite it coming across like a big drawback, I think it's right to move away from air-droppable armoured vehicles, given that weight is only going to stack up with all the protective systems required to keep pace with ever-advancing weapons. Being able to roll straight out of an aircraft and be practically ready to go is really good, especially if USAF can be flexible with what constitutes an "airfield"...
The XM8 actually weighed a reasonable amount for a light as well, even with the roblox bricks. The Stingray 2 honestly had the best dressed look and most missed out on shape to play with.
"somehow I doubt that RPGs are going to be fired at the MPF from below." There was actually an incident in Iraq where a Challenger 2 was damaged by an Iraqi RPG-29 from underneath, dug in and rigged up as a sort of improvised anti-tank mine. It maimed one crewman and injured the rest. The requirement for RPG protection from the bottom might be a result of that incident.
I really hate it the M8 Beuford won the competion back in the 90's and fullfilled all the requirements the United states restarted the competition and did everything possible to hamper BAE systems so they couldnt compete on round 2 and then basically gave the contract the general dynamics just pure corruption and you end up with sub standard product the tank just sceeams minimum viable product that general dynamics came up with
We had options as well stemming way back. -The spooksmobile -RDFLT -Teledyne AGS (but that's honestly more of a TD/Assault Gun platform) -Stingray 1 and 2 (2 being the most promising looking) -M8 (of course which got thrown out with the bath water the first time for ill-fated Stryker nepotism) -Sheridan mod (conventional gun and stingray turret) -MB3 (inserted as an example of how much potential the Bulldog still had)
As an Air Force guy, hearing that the Army is adopting something called "MPF" makes me giggle with anticipation. Expect delays, Army... expect hours of delays. Call ahead to make an appointment!
>Five decades of delays already >Three to four of them with legitimate contenders completely ready >Fast Forward to now >Some of us have died waiting >Get the wrong product anyway >Thunderous applause . 1984 >F this . J-out >Stop-lossed BRUUUUUUUUH. The VA has a better mortality rate.
at this time stampt 4:08, I almost think it was 2 tons lighter than Type 10 until I realize, MPF is a light armoured combat vehicle while Type 10 is an MBT.
Given the escalation we have seen in the global climate recently, I would be very surprised if it ends up getting cancelled. The M8 AGS was cancelled after the Soviet Union fell.
Us miltary, has been getting many new toys. Many of which is related to Ukraine, some extent afganistan, and some have been in the works for while. The f35 is starting to get in wide production. A few back we got m19 sig pistole, Army just adopted, X250 SAW, and the XM5 service rifle(the scar was supposed to replace m4 too, but army has already put an order in for 120,000) XM5 seems to be exactly what soldiers have been asking for in a rifle. Marines in 2019 got the hk416...basically just high quality, m4, but marines normally use army hand me downs. Abrahams was getting an update in like January. Aegis is getting more operational.
Oh yah I know this Is infantry stuff, but marine course increased its trading by like a month and half, so its 7.5 months now because the Army increased its training from 11 weeks to 22 weeks which is like 5.5 months, which was cause Ukraine war happen.
I'm surprised to see that the MPF program actually succeeded tbh
It sounds like they picked realistic and achievable vehicle specifications this time. The XM1202 was supposed to weigh 18 tons and replace the M1 Abrams. This vehicle weighs 35 tons and complements the M1 Abrams. Finally, doctrine that aligns with physics.
@@aaronclair4489 first rule of government is don't let silly rules like physics stop you from aggressively throwing money at problems
Tbf it looks like after all the failed, overambitious programs, they went with way more basic stuff and proven stuff this time. Concept and parts of the vehicle are all pretty standard stuff.
Apparently the MPF is based on the Griffin 2, which is based on the ASCOD (like the Ajax LOL), uses an older 105mm cannon, Abrams turrets parts, an old and proven Diesel engine. Theres nothing bad about this, Im sure the ammo/electronics/armor/etc will be up to high western standards, but it almost feels like a semi custom, semi off the shelve combat vehicle.
Gonna be interesting to see how far this vehicle goes, this is the closest to a light tank weve seen in a while. Purchasing and maintenance cost will be interesting especially, considering modern IFVs have run into the problem of being nearly as expensive as actual MBTs.
@@aaronclair4489 were they going to use our strategic reserve of vibranium or Adamantium for the Abrams replacement?
>General Dynamics involved
Whelp, time for nepotism and propaganda on how the full packed up things are still "light" and how we totally didn't bend the rules and logics of what is a light tank. Only fumbled actual lights as desired for 50 years to have this happen. 90's and 2000's were basically foiling light procurement to shovel cash into the "do everything" billed knock-off Centauros. LMAO on the Maury results saying that pitch was a lie.
Even the newest Chinesium light is just a medium tank with fancy word play because it is "lighter" than their universal heavy tank.
Shortened: This is a medium tank.
Call it CVS90.
Considering light tanks are experiencing kind of a renaissance in the recent years, could you cover the Type-15 in a dedicated video as well? It's probably the closest equivalent to the MPF and entered service fairly recently in the mid 2010s
Basically the same thing. Goes where 99 or even 96 cannot go.
Hell, it even has a similar approach to the modular armor packages.
It has autoloader, bustle type with blowout panel.
While we do not know much about the modern Chinese era and aps packages, I assume it at least works.
Some of them was seen without the original planned more advance sensory equipment. But it can simply be they put those in storage for parade/transportation purposes.
It was said Chinese has functioning amp for their 105.
The crew can load the autoloader from inside of the vehicle.
Think this as more a light tank version of Type 10.
@@jintsuubest9331 Adding to that, it’s got hydropheumatic suspensions and good gun depression good.
Would be cool if he also made a video of the ZTZ99 development cicle. From it's early days all the way to the 99A.
@@jintsuubest9331 Chinas era is equivalent to Russians. Which means they have good heavy ERA that can degrade apfsds. Most nato era are light era that is designed for heat and can’t do much to apfsds.
@@Phantom-bh5ru You mean Russia claims the ERA can degrade APFSDS. Also claimed the APS can shoot (and at least weaken) kinetic rounds. Somewhat dubious claims if you ask me, especially considering how primitive those ERA bricks are.
Tbh, right about now its very clear we know very little about actual russian equipment capability, but it all looks pretty underwhelming.
The one good thing about 2S38 getting added is now there is a precedent for adding vehicles like this that are still in trials and have very little known about them
Unless it's russian it probably won't see the light of day in the game for a long time
We dont know about most modern vehicle anyways. Modern being the og m1.
@@TheTeehee11111 And if it does it will have some modifier that makes it inferior to the russian counterpart.
@@TheTeehee11111 Expect it in 2025 when the rest of the trees have a counter to it.
Gaijin usual moves outside their Soviet/Russia love affair.
Now we need the MPF and some KF41 Variant in the game :D
I like the mpf it’s a decent looking tank
Aesthetics over function I agree.
I didn't know that a mix of the Abrams and Scorpion light tank would look so good
@@trystanexul5681 i second that
i honestly dont really like the hull design, but it seams to be a good tank all in all
Really? Its an abomination...
After watching an Operations Room video on Desert Storm, I hope they do name it after Schwarzkopf! For context to anyone who doesn't know, Schwarzkopf was the General who was over Operation Desert Storm, which was amazing especially from a vehicles perspective. The Abrams killed hundreds of T-72s, the air war was ingenious and featured so many different kinds of aircraft from around the world, many new technologies were deployed, and Saddam was practically defeated in less than 5 days.
I think it should go to Westmoreland since it's the first American light tank since the M551 Sheridan.
It'd make more since to give Schwarzkopf to a potential replacement for the Abrams
So not the col. from Catch-22 who loved parades?? :)
To be fair, saddam was really weak at the time and his army was nothing more than a ghost pretending to be scary.
@@greeninja2728 hindsight is 20/20. During that time, there were fears that the high tech US equipment will fail and the expeirence of Iraq will overcome the Coalition.
@@shaider1982 Iraq fought an 8 year war against Iran in which they technically lost where a majority of their modern army was destroyed and most infrastructure destroyed. I would believe that they knew such basic information before they formed the coalition
“Think of it as a striker MGS that isn’t garbage” 😂 best line
What's wrong with the mgs
@@jedispartancoolman 🤣🤣🤣
@@jedispartancoolman It is *EXTREMELY* top heavy, such that if you fire from the flank it will topple over. The other variants do just fine though and if you need to bust bunkers the ATGM variant has a missile type it can use for that purpose.
@@masaigu1 cringe answer
Lol. I wondered why we didn't just send all the MGS's to Ukraine considering they were intended to retire all 142 of them this year anyway but I think the cost and the drawbacks would hurt more than help given other solutions.
the start of the video is cool, its actually show something WT is missing, its the shockwave effect when firing a gun and dust kickin up in the air, it just looks awesome ... old WT effects were a bit more dusty looking compared to new effects which also disappear really fast
Performance friendly, something like that will fuck with performance massively.
The MPF feels like somebody took a good look at the Scorpion and said: "I want that. But bigger." and the MPF was the result.
now I canr unsee it lmao
They gave it a rare candy.
LoL 🙂
You mean the M808 Scorpion MBT from Halo? Nah, the MPF doesn't look ridiculous and impractical enough.
@@andyfriederichsen Probably referencing the British Fv101 . I can kinda see it though the Scorpion appears to be much smaller
I'd quite like to see a break down of the CV90120. You mentioned it in this video and it does seem like a contemporary of the MPF idea. I'd like to hear more about it.
Videos on thhe CV90120 and the KF41 120 would be really interesting. Modern light tanks are very interesting now adays, especially these modular ones.
I think the Schwarzkopf name should be reserved for the successor to the M1 Abrams personally
inb4 tom Clancy's endwar reference
Name won't be used because it doesn't role of the tongue well
We don't need another MBT; I think the Swedish CV90 is the way to go.
@@slappy8941 we don't need another 4th generation MBT but a 5th generation one with some of the features from the KF51 would be way more useful then a CV90 type tank
@@vyros.3234 call it the blackhead then, same thing.
The ACE engines do have me excited, really want to see more H pattern engine succeed lol
ACE engines would be good for NATO as a whole.
Imagine leopard, Challenger, puma and CV 90 crews just nicking parts from the americans.
Perfect.
@@davidty2006 The Americans will, naturally, engage in Strategic Transfer of Equipment to Alternate Locations to get their shit back.
@@davidty2006nah cv90s sound way better with their v8 scania motors.
After the 2S38, I can't wait to see the MPF getting added to the game, before it even hits proper adoption by the US army.
Lol no we waited 3 years for sep so now next 3 for new top tier tank for US tech tree
@@jPlanerv2
Meanwhile Russia tree will be using space ships at that time😭😂😂😂😂
@@jPlanerv2 I heard that the problem with US tech tree comes from long waiting time for licenses
@@Dziuba420 nah it’s not licensing, think it’s more due to the still classified nature of the modern Abrams variants’ exact armor figures; take the SEP V1, it’s not armored with its 3rd Gen DPU armor upgrade. Probably cause it would break the game, but also because it’s exact protection capability is still not public knowledge
@@Bruh-fc7ik yeah, but almost all vehicles in wt are licensed, so naturally they can’t get a license for a classified things
Now that it has been chosen, the big question for the MPF is how long it will be before Gaijin adds it to War Thunder as an event tank with all it's stats completely borked.
I think this was a smart move. You can't always peel off a section of M1 tanks to help deal with dug-in enemy infantry and the Stryker MGS had some clear deficiencies with its off road mobility and protection.
Good to hear that the XM360 could possibly go in the not-tank. I keep saying that the mpf needs a 120, even if it's a lighter shorter version, so it can fire 120AMP munitions and won't complicate logistics
He states in the video if I recall that it was able to fit the xm360 which is a 120 and about half the weight of the one on the abrams.
@@geekmechanic1473 I am aware, that was just poor phrasing on my part. Fixed now
@@Southerly93 ah alright no problem
The system is fine.
Use 105 ammo as long as it is viable (tank duel engagement are very rare and its primary threats aren't MBTs) and they are already bought.
Then switch to the bigger caliber - exactly like the M1 gun choices were made.
I read somewhere that the 120 caused too much recoil and was too heavy during the prototype stages, but I guess they fixed that now.
I find it interesting how the idea of light tanks are still around to this day even though IFV and APCS can easily fill that role. Correct me if I'm wrong but if I remember correctly Russia doesn't use light tanks anymore just the bmp used in a light tank/support role. So I'm incorrect Russia still uses light tanks I'm also shocked there's so many responses
there's also the 2S25/M Sprut although it's in production and not in service
They do. 2S25 Sprut and Sprut SD are light tanks/assault guns using basically the gun and autoloader of a T72. Also you could count the BMP3/BMD4 IFVs they still have 100mm guns to fill the light tank firepower role.
Edit: also no APCs and IFV cant easily take the role of a protected gun system, you gotta remember that having a large caliber gun is still very much needed on the battlefield to deal with fortifications, entrenchments, and armored targets, which autocannons cant really do. While also providing a cheap and fast fire solution compared to having to sling 100k$+ missiles or guided bombs at everything.
I think one thing we might see more though is the usage of APC/IFV chassis to mount main gun systems on, kinda like stryker MGS, Boxer 120 and CV90-120.
They definitely still use light tanks. The 2S25M “Sprut” is one example. It’s hull is very similar to the BMD-4M’s, but instead of a 100mm gun/missile launcher (it only fires ATGM’s and HE as far as I know) and a co-axial 30mm, it has a completely different turret that houses a 125mm gun.
Light tanks are still around, because they are a cheap and fast way to provide the infantry with direct fire support. They also can be deployed in places where MBT’s struggle to be transported to or maneuver in - like mountains or islands.
There is the 2S25 Sprut, but it is used by the Airborne Forces, not the regular Ground Forces.
The Sprut, ZTQ-15 and to a degree the Typw-16 can be considered light tanks
“Think of it like a Stryker MGS that isn’t garbage” daym
Deserved shade. We could have been rolling in the Centauro-bussy, but got this shite that also cucked our light tank program.
Pretty cool looking tank.
It's interesting seeing actual new vehicles after the extremely long period of just upgrading cold war era ones.
considering how rarely tank on tank engagements have been happening in modern conflicts, this seems like a pretty darn good tank
Coughs in Ukraine
@@RoseRose-nt4ju coughs in psyop
Don't worry, when Gaijin adds it at 10.3 it will have a 40 year old Canadian round. Then 2 years later, they'll add m900 and make it 11.3.
3:21 The bottom of the tank has to be armored because people have developed IEDs that penetrate the lower part of vehicles that have made soldiers get amputations, hence the thick lower armor
Yes, as I mentioned. That doesn't explain the RPG requirement.
@@Spookston Mice are being Armed with RPG, better safe than sorry
@@Spookston perhaps they meant ieds with efp's built into them?
@@Spookston this sounds unlikely, but a remotely triggered rpg / shaped charge placed on a road to be fired once driven over might be a threat. Might make sense? Maybe not.
I love the American went from “We can’t build heavy tanks because our cranes can’t carry more than 40T”
To
“We can’t keep using the Abrams because it ways to much for bridges”
>Selects new light tank
>Ignores 50 years of viable light tanks
>Light tank weighs as much as a T-54
>As much forward useable gun depression and poor vis angle in hulldown positions as a T-54
LOL, LMAO even
@@lector-dogmatixsicarii1537 At this point USA should just copy the T-54 ltwt tank from WoTB
@@Frenchdefense9404lol
I noticed that you don't really have a video talking about the Stryker performance Irl, or at least I couldn't find it, It would be nice to have a video explaining why you consider it to be such a bad vehicle. Nice video btw!
The first US light tank in ages? awesome! going to be interesting to se how this develops over time. and yea Rino would be a awesome name for it xD
Not trying to sharpshoot, just help you out a bit :D Neutral steer is achieved by locking one track and running the opposite track forward or backward, while pivot steering involves the tracks moving in opposite directions. this is only useful as pivot steering requires the driver to bring the tank to a full hault, move the transmission selector out of D or R and into PVT, complete the maneuver, then return to D or R as situation dictates while neutral steering in either forward or reverse only requires the t-handle to be jacked all the way to one side or the other, provided speed allows for such a maneuver. hope that helps!
Your theory about the Army possibly leaning towards an autoloader bc of low recruitment numbers was a complete "Holy crap! That's a damn good point" moment.
not sure how it's going to help if you also have less engineers.
@@amentco8445 Less tankers needed, can get more people in as tank mechanics
0:54 That's so silly, it reminds me the Pershing tanks story, where they didn't wanted to equip it with a 90mm cannon because they didn't wanted the crew guys to go on and engage ennemy tanks like Panthers and Tiger.
Wait didn't they say that it can have a 120? 5:33
*C I T A T I O N N E E D E D*
It isn't that they are purposely underarming the MPF to force it to avoid certain fights. It just isn't designed for tank-on-tank combat, so they don't want to call it a "tank," because they don't want any crews to get it in their heads that they should be actively seeking out and engaging MBTs. It can engage an MBT if it has absolutely no choice but to do it, but that is a task better left to Javelins, Gustavs, and Abrams.
Should name it the wolverine II to pay homage to the m10 GMC. MPF seems to fill a similar mission.
@@anonymous-ml8sl Yes the m10 might of been a TD on paper but it's field use seems to be convergent with that of the MPF. Additionally, the M10 received a bit of a mission change once the M36s and M4(76) entered use.
M10 is a better platform, lol. May as well have taking it as a spiritual concept and redesigned it as a jig tank for medium and 50 ton purposes. It's got a lot more potential.
The British after decades of using Scorpions and Scimitars: "Took you long enough mate"
The Scorpion - 8 tons, bit of a tankette in reality, but gets around, over 50mph, street legal
The MPF - 38 tons, medium tank, 40mph, good luck parking that, boreen troll bridges hate you
I am saying it aint even. America is still obeast wheezing along. Can't even pick a light tank with 50 years of good options. You can throw a 6bt in a CVR and afford to drive it, no shot.
If you could frankenstien a tank in WT, what would parts would you take for a light tank, it'd be cool if there was such a game mode
Rumor has it. Certain units in the army had the chance to train with it. They loved it, could see and engage ITAS, vehicles and fighting positions before light infantry when through.
That protrusion is to keep people in the turret sticking out from being cut in half, WW2 motorcycles had something like it too.
Love that you mentioned which transmission the MPF is getting! I actually helped design and implement part of the assembly line for the 3040MX
The fact that they went with what they did, I personally think was the wrong choice. It's a light tank that's not airdroppable and I honestly think it should feature an autoloader. IMO, autoloaders are the future.
The main problem with auto loaders are that they can go wrong, and to make them more durable they go slower then they theoretically could, so they fire atleast with Abrams usually at the same speed if not a second slower.
Obviously it has the benefit of it doesn't get tired.
That was all in general stuff, in this case with the light tank, its probably cause weight.
And the fact that American tankers like having 4 guys. Useful for sleeping in shifts, or repairing and maintaining the tank.
Not saying auto loaders can be good.
(Personally with our Abrhams, a good fix if they do add auto loaders would be, to have an digitally controlled auto cannon and some ATGMs controles by a 4th crew member. This would make it weigh more, but, fuck it, it's already too heavy, as long as the suppesion can handle it, and It can go near 60mph and still accerate.
Absolute wrong choice. It's a hamstrung medium tank. Only passed rules bending because it's General Dynamics. The stupid Strykers also screwed over light procurement in the post Cold War era.
If you were to bury an rpg7 round and link it to a pressure plate it could be used as an IED. So that would be one of the reasons it would be listed in the brief.
I would love it if they called it "The Rhino" like the Spectrum Persuit Vehicle (SPV) from "The new Captain Scarlet".
(A little obscure reference for any scifi fans of 60s shows).
To me the rhino would be a throwback to a playable tank in an old N64 game (Or PS1) called battletanx global assault.
"A styker MGS that isnt garabage" oml I started crying
“Think of it as a Stryker MGS, that is not garbage “
Best way of describing the MGS and hopefully the MPF
You should consider doing a video on the lovely T114, such a fun ride!
I've been playing it a lot recently, it'll definitely get a video sometime
do a video on the sturmtiger since it got added to war thunder its a neat tank
>Create light tank with 105mm cannon
>Has armor sufficient to stop light fire
>Declare it isn't a tank at all
I swear like I've seen something like this before. The Army is going to call it a tank destroyer, aren't they?
It’s now called the M10 Booker
Call it a tracked support armored reconnaissance vehicle, or TSAR. And its designation is a direct-fire artillery platform or DAP, with mission set progression (allowing progress to infantry), egress (covering support), and Recon-support (supports forward troops) making the TSAR DAP-PER.
finally the locust returns
It looks nice, but I really liked the M8 AGS better
Oh wow, what a nice and capable LIGHT TANK.
Actually, it weighs more than a T-55. How would they fare against each other?
it took america like 70 years to figure out if they wanted a light tank
Why is the army allergic to the term "light tank"?
I enjoy these types of videos , they're one of the main reasons I subd . Thanks 👍
Glad you like them
“Designed to be rolled off a C17 at a secured airfield”
*Army glances nervously at Ranger Regiment*
i know they say it's not supposed to take on tanks, but put some ATGM's on that bad boy and you got a tank killer
Or just mount switchblade 600 lunch tubes
A new Spookston video nice. As others have the said the mpf does look nice honestly.
Being an ex-heavy cav man the MPF could make for great heavy support, now all we need is a good scout vehicle
The centauros predecessor the Centuaro II (2) is amazing and I would love to see your opinion on it!
MPF was developed to provide fire power support to IBCTs and it will operate exclusively those units so that Abrams can be freed up to operate with armored cavalry regiments and ABCTs. What is interesting is that the Army doesn't want to call it a light tank, but the MOS that they want to designate to crew the vehicle would be called 19G Light Tank Crew Member.
MPF's look resembles the GDELS / Santa Barbara Sistemas & Elbit's Sabrah LT that won the Philippine Army Light Tank program. Specifically the tracked version. Those tanks (Both Wheeled and Tracked) might have the first batches be delivered by the yearend.
That one carries a 105mm gun (either manned or unmanned. Latter is the default option for the 120mm option) made by Elbit (Turret made in cooperation with Denel), has provisions for the Iron Fist APS, and can be swapped for a 120mm if the customer chooses it.
Probably a good idea for a video about MPF's Euro-Israeli relative considering some of its similarities.
Would you consider doing a video on what features you think the army should adopt from the Abrams X?
As long as it's not the unmanned turret... tried it before in the 70s/80s with ttb... its where the russians got idea for armata. No situational awareness whatsoever.
Clearly the most important feature of this thing is how nice it looks
have you made a video about ugv`s? i think a video about the future battlefield would be awesome as well
I thought you were talking about the MPT from Foxhole for a second, got excited.
Would be cool if you could make an overview of the other tanks that didnt make the cut if possible; would be neat to know what else we couldve had
Overall I like the MPF. I absolutely love the role it’s been assigned to fill. I think the 105 is fine, the armor and engine package are fine, and I think it should fit the role fine. The only source of contention I have is the 38 ton weight. It seems very heavy for its role. It certainly has tank weight for being “not a tank”.
Maybe the army has future developments planned for it that make the weight necessary. I don’t know. At the moment though, 38 tons for a light infantry AT armored 105 platform seems high.
The m3 Bradley is 30 tons so its not unreasonable for a vehicle with more armor and a larger fire power to be 10tons heavier and as spookson said its probably just to make crews hesitant to attack mbts rather then heading straight for the enemy
Also I believe 38 is the max weight with the optional armor packages (era) mounted. Not for sure on that one tho
Don't like the rear turret for the standard light tank role. And it definitely is too fat. In real speak by weight, it's a medium tank. And yes, they will over-stuff even more weight on it. This is definitely another cockup in a long lineage of light tank procurement cockups and missed golden eggs. A set of challenges to build three new tanks- tankette, light tank, and medium cruiser -would have been a much more economically profitable and spread venture yielding things that make sense instead of a medium with "light" stenciled on it. It's basically the knock-off Centauro (LAV) debacle all over again.
@@lector-dogmatixsicarii1537 Right. Because WW2 British tank doctrine is obviously the superior choice for the modern army.
@@OneOddFellow "Modern" has become so bastardized as a misnomer for the "newest is best" lie pushed to have progress for the sake of itself, and then not reflecting on anything because it rigidly equates "old" to "lesser" or "useless". Really fallacious mindset related to the pitfalls of trendy consumerism and hubris.
Honesty admits modern armies are kind of run like shit, by the crème of the bureaucratic sewer rats.
I would suggest reading up on the term and thought behind it. We haven't updated the profile for the idea despite dancing around it by other terms. For the same weight class and use as "light" MPF is impressed into, we can set up a much more sound base tank to the weight allocation than pretending to be something else for kickbacks.
A modern cruiser is a lean setup.
Your competition is Chinese -not medium- Type15 "light tank" and Russian vaporware "lights" / cold war mediums with a side of huge ass obese -targets- cars.
A design based on a completely reshaped Crusader/Cromwell/Comet/T-34 etc with the last several decades of lessons would be extremely competitive if not dominant over the others in its exploitive utility.
I love the music selection from Command and Conquer: Generals
What about doing a MPF vs Stryker Vs Boxer comparison? I think it would be quite interesting. Great work thus far, keep it up : )
I second that. I would really like to know the pros and cons. How much better are tracked vehicles offroad vs. a boxer in the real world?
I can’t help but I feel remembered at the Sherman‘s. Lightweight tank, mass produced, easily shipped around. Atm it’s just too expensive to be a viable LBT.
I got the same feeling
crazy how UA-cam tried today to make me watch the vid you made 7 months ago and you uploaded about it again today
Do you think you could do a video talking about the Ajax, and what the acceptance of the Griffin means for that program? Apparently they use the same chassis, but the Ajax has been in dire straights for a while now due to serious issues. Could the production of a vehicle that uses so many of the same components 'save' that program in Britain? And what could the fielding of this new vehicle mean for cross-platform maintenance and such in Europe?
I wouldn't put much faith in MPF saving its "cousin" vehicle. Most of Ajax's problems stem from the piss-poor construction of their hulls, rather than general component issues (although there have been a few, BAE had some problems mounting the 40mm, etc. Most of that has been resolved, though IIRC). MPF could be absolutely wonderful, and the British Army may still have to can Ajax. It's a programme mired in mismanagement and failure, so unless General Dynamics can find a way to stop those vehicles from rattling their contents into a smoothie of blood and electronics, without doing a fresh production run, then the MoD may just cut their losses.
@@86pp73 i still cant wrap my head around the fact that they didnt just go with the CV90 30 years ago....
Those things are gonna take SO many MBT shots if they ever get used in an actual wartime scenario. It may have a different classification on paper, but out in the field any sort of tanker's gonna look at that, see a giant box with tracks and a giant turret and immediately go "That's a tank."
the backgound music just pull me back to childhood. dang i li=ove C&C General.
Just get the German KF 120 Lynx. It already has the 120 L44 gun with its excellent multipurpose round..
Another outstanding bit of research. Well done.
The MPF looks like it is shaping up to be a great addition to the US military. I am excited to see where it leads!
The LAV III and VI isn't garbage by any stretch of the imagination. They are light airborne transportable and drop rated to give airbourne units a significantly increased fire power FAST. They are also significantly less in cost to damage potential ratio than heavy armour.
That's a sharp looking tank and I can't wait to see it in action
Great video. It's about time they got off the dime and outfitted Rapid-D forces with something other than promises. >~< by-the-by "Pivot steer" is when one track is halted and the other turns the vehicle to pivot on that one halted track. "Neutral steer" is when the transmission allows the tracks to turn in opposite directions and the vehicle turns with-in its own length. ^~^
Could you do a video about the new Rheinmetall KF-51 panther tank?
Do you think Gaijin will add it because if they can add something that hasn’t passed state trials then they could add anything
Neutral and pivot steer are not the same thing. Pivot steer means one track moves while the pivot point of the vehicle is on the non-moving track. Neutral steer means both tracks move in different directions and the pivot point is the center of the hull. While they may seem the same thing in a video game, they are very different in the alleys of Baghdad.
my good man i must say fantastic work on your videos always well written, clear, simple and too the point but alas they barely cover the length of time it takes to drink my tea ! any chance we could get some longer story time with spookston ? just because we enjoy watching/ listening to you.....fuck me i got less and less British as i went on ...fuck it Simmonds get me a big hat ! i wish to yehaw
i have my complete love for the mpf, proud of its success ❤️
Excellent , concise , informative video. Wow. Thank you
Could you do a video on the Tanque Argentino Mediano (TAM)? I would be very interested in its development!
Now we need the AT-TE to wrap things up.
The MPF reminds me of the Sabrah Light tank which is being ordered by the Philippine Army from Elbit System interestingly they both used the chasis from the ASCOD tracked armoured fighting vehile (AFV) by General Dynamic Land System I honestly won't be surprised to see the MPF or whatever name it gets deployed in the Philippines during joint excercise considering the limitations of the infrastructure here to support the M1 Abrams.
This sounds like the Sherman II Electric Boogaloo to me. Infantry support - check. Smaller gun - check. Ability to engage tanks with preference for tank destroyer - check.
Well, here's to hoping that the MPF doesn't face any major setbacks and General Dynamics actually builds the thing correctly. It sounds like a phenomenal vehicle, one that could really be useful to the US given the increasingly costly and niche direction MBTs seem to be going in, so I do want it to succeed. And despite it coming across like a big drawback, I think it's right to move away from air-droppable armoured vehicles, given that weight is only going to stack up with all the protective systems required to keep pace with ever-advancing weapons. Being able to roll straight out of an aircraft and be practically ready to go is really good, especially if USAF can be flexible with what constitutes an "airfield"...
Come for the tank info, stay for the tank info and C&C Generals music 🎶😁
I wish they would have used the XM-8 with a turret swap. The XM-8 to me, seemed like it had more potential and versatility with armor packages.
The XM8 actually weighed a reasonable amount for a light as well, even with the roblox bricks. The Stingray 2 honestly had the best dressed look and most missed out on shape to play with.
"somehow I doubt that RPGs are going to be fired at the MPF from below." There was actually an incident in Iraq where a Challenger 2 was damaged by an Iraqi RPG-29 from underneath, dug in and rigged up as a sort of improvised anti-tank mine. It maimed one crewman and injured the rest. The requirement for RPG protection from the bottom might be a result of that incident.
Eventually, it should have a 120mm. But other than that? Perfect.
I worked on MPF(Mobility protected firepower) its supposed to be 30% lighter than the Abrams
I really hate it
the M8 Beuford won the competion back in the 90's and fullfilled all the requirements
the United states restarted the competition and did everything possible to hamper BAE systems so they couldnt compete on round 2
and then basically gave the contract the general dynamics
just pure corruption and you end up with sub standard product
the tank just sceeams minimum viable product that general dynamics came up with
We had options as well stemming way back.
-The spooksmobile
-RDFLT
-Teledyne AGS (but that's honestly more of a TD/Assault Gun platform)
-Stingray 1 and 2 (2 being the most promising looking)
-M8 (of course which got thrown out with the bath water the first time for ill-fated Stryker nepotism)
-Sheridan mod (conventional gun and stingray turret)
-MB3 (inserted as an example of how much potential the Bulldog still had)
Idk why but I was excepting this thing to look like a door stop with a 105 glued to it
As an Air Force guy, hearing that the Army is adopting something called "MPF" makes me giggle with anticipation. Expect delays, Army... expect hours of delays. Call ahead to make an appointment!
>Five decades of delays already
>Three to four of them with legitimate contenders completely ready
>Fast Forward to now
>Some of us have died waiting
>Get the wrong product anyway
>Thunderous applause . 1984
>F this . J-out
>Stop-lossed
BRUUUUUUUUH. The VA has a better mortality rate.
at this time stampt 4:08, I almost think it was 2 tons lighter than Type 10 until I realize, MPF is a light armoured combat vehicle while Type 10 is an MBT.
The M8 looks way cooler. I honestly hate rear turret designs. Except for IFVs their supposed to look like that.
Rear turrets should only exist so with specific purpose. On a standard light like this, it's a handicap few seem to understand.
Will it have an ATGM? Would it benefit from one?
Are we sure it will still be produced? Are we sure it won’t be like every other light tank and get canceled last minute?
Given the escalation we have seen in the global climate recently, I would be very surprised if it ends up getting cancelled. The M8 AGS was cancelled after the Soviet Union fell.
Us miltary, has been getting many new toys. Many of which is related to Ukraine, some extent afganistan, and some have been in the works for while.
The f35 is starting to get in wide production.
A few back we got m19 sig pistole,
Army just adopted, X250 SAW, and the XM5 service rifle(the scar was supposed to replace m4 too, but army has already put an order in for 120,000) XM5 seems to be exactly what soldiers have been asking for in a rifle.
Marines in 2019 got the hk416...basically just high quality, m4, but marines normally use army hand me downs.
Abrahams was getting an update in like January.
Aegis is getting more operational.
Oh yah I know this Is infantry stuff, but marine course increased its trading by like a month and half, so its 7.5 months now because the Army increased its training from 11 weeks to 22 weeks which is like 5.5 months, which was cause Ukraine war happen.
Any thoughts on the new sturmtiger?
I think Gaijin is scraping the barrel as far as new content goes
@@Spookston make a video about it surely like was it even a real tank?
It’s not even a tank.
I’m calling it now: this “lightweight vehicle” is gonna garner a poor reputation