Light Tanks

Wooki

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
  • more 25/30mm cal weapons in theatre
  • 25/30mm rounds can occupy 3 times the vol of 60mm rounds - more rounds in reserve. dancing a brace of 25/30mm across the corner of a building is likely to have more structural impact (degrade a broader area of building) than one single shot 60mm. Or 3 times the ROF for a given ammo volume gives greater flexibility
  • the preference anyway is to drop the sniper by using either a main gun at the ground floor corner, or DRAGON/AT4 doing same - or recently, using a thermobaric appropriately.
There aren't too many 60mm weapons in use in theatre - and prob for a reason.
right, and I am saying the 40mm is the weapon of choice over and above a 25, 30, or 35 mm, for the same reasons you cite.

The 60mm is a curiosity, as it could be an ATGM alternative for vehicles restricted by weight.

Hey GF, we finally found something we disagree slightly on. What a relief.

cheers

w
 

B.Smitty

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
LAV III had 43 US gallons, but not sure if this was retained on ASLAV.

Well of course there would be difference in fuel consumption:rolleyes:
That is 'par for the course' as they say. I'm talking overall operating costs.
The difference in fuel usage has a ripple effect all the way up the chain.

More fuel means more tankers. More tankers means more frequent support convoys. More convoys means more convoy escorts, more people tied up in convoy duties, etc.. All of which has costs.


From here http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/1003/101003nj1.htm ,

"Official Army estimates of the Stryker's cost to operate are less than $15 per mile driven, but even the highest outside estimate of about $52 per mile is less than the $69 per mile figure for the heavier, tracked M2 Bradley."

So as always, YMMV. ;)
 

B.Smitty

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
right, and I am saying the 40mm is the weapon of choice over and above a 25, 30, or 35 mm, for the same reasons you cite.
IMHO, 40mm Super Shot looks to have a winning combination - near 35mm penetration, 40mm HE volume, and only slightly larger than the 30x173mm case.

Too bad it doesn't exist in a production form yet and there doesn't appear to be a strong move in its direction.
 

Waylander

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
The Leopards need the GSRs to acquire targets outside of their own capability. The Fuchs is not expected to operate alongside Leopards though.
So what you want is the GSR on the Leopard to really make it more 'aware'.
And were do you put the radar operators into the tank?
Not to talk of the price and rise in silouette.
The GSR Fuchs is full of electronics. Also a nice problem were to fit this equipment.

In what way is the MBT more expensive then a light tank, and I really don't like calling wheeled AFVs 'light tank'. For that there is another classification, the armoured car.
The operating prices have already been postet (Thanks guys).
And for me an armored car is a Bushmaster or Dingo but not a Centauro like vehicle.

Desert Storm was not a 'classical' combined op. battle because only one side was using combined arms tactics.
And this made it not a classical combined op for the allied forces? Why?
And the Iraqis intended to perform a combined arms battle but were totally overhelmed and could so not reach their targets.

Ok, a little story

Somewhere, an insurgent army (a combination of regular army deserters, rebels, and political supporters) is manning defense lines of a position covering an approach to a regional capital.

In the capital thousands of refugees and civilians are taken hostage by the ethnic separatists who claim they will execute thousands if UN forces so much as try to assault their claimed territory.

Its night, and the guards are vigilant because they expect a convoy of UN supply trucks to approach soon with the demanded needs of the insurgent command. Indeed a large convoy had left the country's capital along the only surfaced road left undamaged.

5km away a column of white UN trucks halts on the dark highway. Suddenly the cabins and canvas cargo cavers begin to fall off the vehicles revealing AFVs. Then, the vehicles start off cross country although not a sound can be heard. They are running on their electric APUs with drivers navigating only by their night vision sights.

An insurgent guard peeres into the dark thinking he heard something. Suddenly right in front of him, a large shape appears and he is run down before he can so much as utter a scream. Firing erupts from dozens of cannons and MGs. The camp is overrun in minutes, and shell-shoked rebels are gathered in the dark by UN soldiers. They were not able to even switch on their radios to warn the regional capital that can be seen from the newly captured position.

A generator truck appears from the dark, and IFV drivers commence hooking up their vehicles to juice up the battery packs. In an hour they will be in the town, and it will be another silent assault.
A nice scenario and I stated earlier that against low tech light armed enemies light vehicles have their advantages.
But it does not really fit into the scenario I wanted to know exampled for from you.
You just cannot expect to always face some low tech insurgents, irregulars, whatsoever.
If you do that you suddenly face a heavy formation during bad weather (No air cover) which wipes you out in short time.
For example during the '03 OIF a Iraqi division tried to advance through a sandstorm and learly managed to close in undetected. They were finally tracked close to the US forces. The US forces managed to swing their lines to the new direction and let the Iraqis face a line of steel.
You would really be in deep shit if this occures to your light unit and such occasions are the reason for the US Army leadership saying that heavy forces are still needed an that for example ops like both gulf wars wouldnt't have been that successfull.
There are enough countries out there which operate heavy forces and are going to use them. You have to destroy them before you enter the insurgent/guerilla style of warfare.

As to your scenario. You think that the "fire of dozens cannons and MGs" is not seen or heard during the night? You said the capital can be seen from the position. Have you ever seen how far you can hear and see heavy fire during the night?
And why should you do this? If this is just a low tech guerilla force you throw two 2000lbs LGBs onto them and finish the job.

But I agree as before that light vehicles are enough for such an operation. But these are not the only operations you have to prepare for.
 

Manfred

New Member
Since the vulnerability of the M-1 has been brought up here, there is something that I have been wonderig about for a long time.

There is a large, angled gap between the turret and the hull, anyone who has seen one knows what I mean. this would seem to be the perfect shot-trap, where an H.E. or a HESH round from even a 90mm could pop the turret off.

Or am I missing something here?
 

eckherl

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Since the vulnerability of the M-1 has been brought up here, there is something that I have been wonderig about for a long time.

There is a large, angled gap between the turret and the hull, anyone who has seen one knows what I mean. this would seem to be the perfect shot-trap, where an H.E. or a HESH round from even a 90mm could pop the turret off.

Or am I missing something here?
Any tank that is out there is vulnerable, it is not that easy to pop a turret off of a M1 series tank due to where the ammunition is stored. the one in Iraq was blown off by a pretty big IED, any known tank that is out there would not of survived such a large explosion that was located underneath the vehicle. Most turret pop offs are due to onboard ammunition hits.
 

Waylander

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
And hitting such a weakpoint while the Abrams is attacking and moving or defending and in a hull down position is also more art than anything else.
 

FutureTank

Banned Member
Do you mean external to the mounting (ie outside the armour) or external to the weapon? Can you provide a photo of what you mean?
I'll have a look in my image library, but I have seen them on some of the Russian remote turrets, and external feeds are used for autocannon and grenade launchers. I think I laso saw one on an Italian design.
 

eckherl

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
And hitting such a weakpoint while the Abrams is attacking and moving or defending and in a hull down position is also more art than anything else.
Did you see the one in Iraq that was hit by the IED, I was shocked.:(
 

Waylander

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
Jup, I saw the photo.
But what can you do against some 152mm artillery rounds being buried under the street and blown under your ass?
No vehicle in the world is going to save you there.

In the end the loss statistics for Abrams crews facing IEDs and RPG ambushes are excellent compared to other vehicles in US service.
 

eckherl

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Jup, I saw the photo.
But what can you do against some 152mm artillery rounds being buried under the street and blown under your ass?
No vehicle in the world is going to save you there.

In the end the loss statistics for Abrams crews facing IEDs and RPG ambushes are excellent compared to other vehicles in US service.
You would think with some of the technology that is out there that we would be able to find more of these devices before they do damage.
 

Waylander

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
How do you want to find them?
Burried in the street with all the crap lying around there you are not going to see them.
And when they are using cables or some kind of pressure system and no radio transmission for the explosion jamming also doesn't work.

There is enough material available in Iraq and with some imagination you can build really bad traps of all kinds.

If I remember my combat engineer basics introduction and how easy really pervert ideas came to our minds ad what they teached us... :(
 

FutureTank

Banned Member
And hitting such a weakpoint while the Abrams is attacking and moving or defending and in a hull down position is also more art than anything else.
Targeting the tracks of tanks was a tactic used by AT atrillery in WW2, and it worked.
The tanks are not always zipping around at 60km/h as you well know :)
I think targeting tank tracks in hull down position is more of a miracle then art, so why say it :confused:

My point is that infantry armed with a suitably sized weapon such as proposed by Wooki can quite comfortably snipe at tank tracks. Indeed the Australian Army snipers are trained to do jus tthat I think with the 12.7mm rifle, which is the same weapon calibre used in WW2 AT rifles.

It seems people discussing tanks always forget the little blokes ;)
 

FutureTank

Banned Member
You would think with some of the technology that is out there that we would be able to find more of these devices before they do damage.
If this was a conventional combat environment, there would have been route recon done, and US engineers have plenty of equipment to make a route safe for armour.
Does anyone know if this was a command detonated weapon intended for high publicity target?
 

Waylander

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
With .50s?
For what? Giving the tankers a good laugh before they throw a HE at them? .50s are not going to do any serious harm to MBT tracks.

And I talked about the weakpoint mentioned by Manfred.

Targeting the tracks is ok when it comes to closer engagements.

And no tankers do not forget the poor guys running around in the woods.
I have been targeted often enough by good skilled Milan and Panzerfaust tank hunter teams.
Unfortunately for them they were often enough one shot wonders, spotted before being able to fire, being overrun or pounded into the ground by artillery.
And they often enough tend to forget that an immobilized tanks may be seriously wounded but is still dangerous.
That is satisfying the most when you wipe out the tank hunter team which immobilized you just seconds before.

What I really hated were mines.
Those shitty mines are just damm hard to spott when advancing and often enough tank hunter teams go for not initially killed but immobilized and confused tanks like wolf packs for a wounded deer.
 

Manfred

New Member
You are definitly right about attacks from underneath, they are murder for any tank ever built.

Case in point; right after the first Gulf War, I was escorting a squad of engineers, making the rounds demolishing abandoned Iraqi tanks. They were very efficient, but by the end of the day they had too much primed explosives to return to base. We had to get rid of it, and only one tank was left. They put about 30 Kilos of C-4 and other goodies under the rear end of a T-55, a cratering charge on top, and we all ran for it.

After the explosion, we were treated to an amazing sight. The tank had flipped over in place, lengthwise. The engine was sitting on the berm, right side up, as if it had been placed there with a crane. The Turret was over a dozen meters away, to the front, ball-bearings scattered everywhere. I still have a few of those.

It made me think of the Japanese in WW2, burying topdedoes and waiting for a Sherman to roll over it. :nutkick
 

Waylander

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
Engineers are definitely crazy!
I never knew any combat engineer who not mutated into a fire loving sem-terrorist when given enough explosives and no definite mission. :D
 

eckherl

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
How do you want to find them?
Burried in the street with all the crap lying around there you are not going to see them.
And when they are using cables or some kind of pressure system and no radio transmission for the explosion jamming also doesn't work.

There is enough material available in Iraq and with some imagination you can build really bad traps of all kinds.

If I remember my combat engineer basics introduction and how easy really pervert ideas came to our minds ad what they teached us... :(
Granted - you would not be able to find all of them, but a couple of Russian 152`s you would think could be detected with some type of detector, yes mechanical ambushes can be very nasty on a attacking force.:)
 
Top