Military Review

The US Army abandons the "wheeled tank" Stryker M1128 Mobile Gun System with a 105-mm cannon

74

The US Army has finally abandoned the use of "wheeled tanks"М1128 Mobile Gun Systems, created on the basis of the Stryker armored personnel carrier. The reason is constant problems with the gun and automatic loader.


M1128 MGS (Mobile Gun System) - Stryker armored personnel carrier with an installed uninhabited turret with a 105-mm M68A1 rifled cannon equipped with an automatic loader with 18 rounds. As an auxiliary weapons this "wheeled tank" used a coaxial M2HB machine gun and smoke grenade launchers.

Currently, a decision has been made to write off all M1128 Mobile Gun Systems due to problems with the outdated gun and automatic loader. Another reason for this is the lack of mine protection, the car has a flat bottom, unable to protect the crew from mines and IEDs. The final decommissioning of the Stryker armored personnel carrier with the 105-mm cannon is scheduled for the end of 2022.

Instead of the Stryker MGS, the US Army intends to use the Stryker MCWS armored personnel carrier with a 30-mm cannon (Medium Caliber Weapons System) and the CROWS-J DUM with Javelin missiles. In addition, in the near future, at least as stated in the command of the US Army, the Ground Forces will adopt a new light tank, which is being developed by General Dynamics Land Systems and BAE Systems.

The Stryker is a family of wheeled armored combat vehicles designed and manufactured by the American company General Dynamics Land Systems. Stryker armored personnel carriers entered service with the American army in 2003. The combat vehicle can accommodate twelve people, including three crew members. On the basis of Stryker, the M1128 Mobile Gun System wheeled tank, the M1129 Mortar Carrier mobile mortar and more than a dozen other types of combat, engineering and auxiliary vehicles were created.
74 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. credo
    credo 13 May 2021 13: 52
    +4
    The US Army has finally abandoned the operation of the "wheeled tanks" M1128 Mobile Gun Systems, created on the basis of the Stryker armored personnel carrier. The reason is the constant problems with the gun and automatic loader.
    It seems to me that such problems are fixable without abandoning exploitation, and the true reasons for the failure lie in something else.
    1. Graz
      Graz 13 May 2021 14: 00
      +7
      I can swing
      there may be problems with accuracy, if the first shot still hits somewhere, then after it the car shakes in all directions, so the next shot flies already where God sent
      I saw a video of shooting on YouTube of this machine, for such an art weapon there is a small width at the chassis, while the tower is probably too heavy for this machine
      1. Doliva63
        Doliva63 13 May 2021 15: 20
        +2
        Quote: Graz
        I can swing
        there may be problems with accuracy, if the first shot still hits somewhere, then after it the car shakes in all directions, so the next shot flies already where God sent
        I saw a video of shooting on YouTube of this machine, for such an art weapon there is a small width at the chassis, while the tower is probably too heavy for this machine

        Yes, just a tank on rubber wheels is not a real tank laughing And for ACS / SAO 105 mm with grooves - about nothing. request
        1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
          Sergey Aleksandrovich 13 May 2021 16: 31
          0
          Such a strange tank, even an unexpected meeting with the BTR-60 can end sadly for it.
          1. Doliva63
            Doliva63 13 May 2021 17: 10
            +3
            Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
            Such a strange tank, even an unexpected meeting with the BTR-60 can end sadly for it.

            I even imagined ... an BTR-60 battalion reconnaissance tank jumps out at the position of such a tank, slammed its slippery muzzle against the armor, and on the retreat a grenade launcher with an RPG-7 got out onto the armor and buried everyone inside. laughing But how it would be in life, I don't know.
            1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
              Sergey Aleksandrovich 13 May 2021 17: 19
              0
              Why climb out, this wheeled tank is unlikely to withstand a line from KPVT from half a kilometer. recourse
              And if the BTR-60 fails, then the BTR-82A will have to be rolled out against it, it will not leave, for sure. wassat
              1. bayard
                bayard 13 May 2021 20: 05
                +1
                They also want to try on a tower from the Octopus for our Boomerang, but it has 125 mm. Maybe now they will change their minds - they say the "partners" have already refused.
                1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
                  Sergey Aleksandrovich 13 May 2021 20: 31
                  0
                  This is nonsense, a powerful cannon takes time to reload, but small-caliber automatic cannons do not, besides, their turret rotates faster. And it turns out that the name is a tank, but in fact a target for enemy light vehicles.
                  1. bayard
                    bayard 13 May 2021 20: 36
                    +1
                    The Octopus has a very reliable autoloader. The same as on the T-72, T-90. The wheeled tank is planned to reinforce light units, to move quickly on highways, but not instead of conventional armored personnel carriers.
                    1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
                      Sergey Aleksandrovich 13 May 2021 20: 45
                      0
                      Octopus is a landing vehicle for the Airborne Forces. There they make sacrifices for the sake of increasing mobility. And if you create a "pepelats" for ordinary land operations for direct fire, then it must withstand the fire of small-caliber cannons for at least a few seconds and shoot until its sight is broken. It seems that this particular vehicle is rather weak for combined arms combat, and too heavy for landing.
                      1. bayard
                        bayard 13 May 2021 21: 10
                        +1
                        Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                        And if you create a "pepelats"

                        Personally, I do not create anything like that, but I know about the desire to create a whole line of machines based on Boomerang. Including a light tank.
                        It will not be difficult to attach a turret to it, the armor of the Boomerang is powerful, the vehicle is quite heavy - 30 mm in the forehead. should keep. And the tank gun will reach its opponents from a greater distance. And since this is a wheeled tank, they want a tank, so they see tasks for it.
                      2. Sergey Aleksandrovich
                        Sergey Aleksandrovich 14 May 2021 13: 08
                        +1
                        We would like to, we would. So far, even the Octopus hasn't advanced too much.
                      3. bayard
                        bayard 14 May 2021 15: 31
                        +1
                        If there were a foreign customer, several options would have been riveted. And myself - not in a hurry.
                        And this is me without humor - for our army, such equipment is needed in the second and third priority. And we already have enough tanks.
                        The question of technical feasibility. From a purely technical point of view, this is possible without any particular problems - all the components are in stock, worked out and tested, and some are in serial production.
                      4. Sergey Aleksandrovich
                        Sergey Aleksandrovich 14 May 2021 15: 41
                        +2
                        It would be technically possible and without any special problems, there would already be a ready-made sample with at least the same gun as the "Phlox", which looks very doubtful. The very concept of an almost defenseless machine, only for direct fire, at a limited angle of elevation of the barrel and a sector of fire, is so-so idea.
                      5. bayard
                        bayard 14 May 2021 17: 16
                        +1
                        Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                        It would be technically possible and without any special problems, there would already be a ready-made sample

                        Nobody ordered it.
                        Now (recently) only discussed the possibility of creating a whole line of armored vehicles based on "Boomerang. The" Boomerang "platform itself is finishing testing and fine-tuning.
                        And do not confuse such a platform (Boomerang) with a conventional armored personnel carrier (60/70/80), this is a completely different class of equipment. First of all, in terms of security.
                        This is a heavy wheeled vehicle with a high degree of security.
                        Dmitry Medvedev ordered it (as well as "Kurganets-25" and "Armata"), and thank him.
                        And now the funds have been spent, the equipment is presented.
                        "Kurganets-25" has already been recognized (albeit tacitly) completely useless (price, dimensions). There are also a lot of questions about "Armata" and from 125 mm. a cannon, it is redundant and suboptimal. Therefore, they are in no hurry with its purchases.
        2. uav80
          uav80 14 May 2021 08: 54
          +1
          Not on the "boomerang" but rather on the BTR-90, the program was called "Sprut-K" ..
          1. bayard
            bayard 14 May 2021 15: 27
            0
            The whole question is in the demand for this technique for us. On the Central Asian direction, for a quick maneuver / transfer to the theater on their own and off the road, they would be quite in place. In low-intensity conflicts, for fast transport on highways. For the protection of rear facilities and counter-guerrilla operations.
            Such a machine will also have export potential - no one will offer a light, and even more so a wheeled tank with SUCH cannon.
      2. Doliva63
        Doliva63 13 May 2021 20: 59
        +2
        Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
        Why climb out, this wheeled tank is unlikely to withstand a line from KPVT from half a kilometer. recourse
        And if the BTR-60 fails, then the BTR-82A will have to be rolled out against it, it will not leave, for sure. wassat

        Well, this is not a tank, you must agree.
      3. Intruder
        Intruder 15 May 2021 11: 20
        0
        Why climb out, this wheeled tank is unlikely to withstand a line from KPVT from half a kilometer.
        if in a frontal projection, and then buries itself behind the folds of the terrain, then it will go on to carry out a combat mission, with a smile on the lips of its AFV commander laughing Rooikat type:

        Characteristics of body armor: anti-bullet, anti-fragmentation and anti-mine;
        Hull forehead: protected from 23 mm. shells;
        Hull side: protected from 7,62 mm armor-piercing bullets.;
        Hull feed: protected from 7,62 mm armor-piercing bullets.;
        Bottom - mine protection, IED;
        Tower forehead: protected from 23 mm. shells;
        Turret side: protected from 7,62 mm armor-piercing bullets.;
        Tower feed: protected from 7,62 mm armor-piercing bullets.;


        Or, retrofit kit - Centauro:
        The hull and turret of the wheeled tank destroyer are all-welded, made of armor steel with a thickness of 8 mm. From above to the armored hull and the turret, panels of ceramic armor with a thickness of up to 38 mm are attached to the armored hull and the turret. Together, this protects the crew from the fire of the main types of small arms and shell fragments. The frontal projection of the vehicle is protected from armor-piercing projectiles of automatic cannons with a caliber of up to 20 mm, the rest of the projections are protected from 12,7 mm bullets. By the way, a similar package of domestic development for the BTR-80 provides protection against 14,5-mm BZT and BZT-44M bullets from a range of 30 m.
        1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
          Sergey Aleksandrovich 15 May 2021 21: 39
          0
          That is, in theory, it will withstand a line from the KPVT head-on, but will not hold it in the side, even with additional protection. In practice, the resistance of the KPVT armor has not been tested.
          1. OgnennyiKotik
            OgnennyiKotik 15 May 2021 21: 53
            +1
            The striker holds 14,5 in a circle, 30 mm sub-caliber (there are no such on 2a42) in the forehead. In Iraq and Afghanistan against the small arms and cannon, he showed himself very well, in real conditions.
            After the experience of Afghanistan, mine action capabilities were seriously strengthened. Moreover, according to the LAV-H program (2011), they modernized almost all Strikers in combat units, now they are upgrading to the level of Stryker-A1 (2017)

            LAV-H (revamp 2011) includes the following changes:
            Stryker with the introduction of an improved semi-active suspension, modifications that reshape the hull into a shallow V-shaped structure for protection against improvised explosive devices (IEDs). Also included are additional armor for the sides, redesigned hatches to minimize gaps in the armor, explosion-absorbing, mine-proof seats, non-combustible tires, an upgrade to a remote weapon station that allows fire on the move, increased power generation by 500 amps, a new solid-state power distribution system and a data bus. and improvements to vehicle and powertrain systems to support a quarter of the vehicle's gross vehicle weight.

            Since 2017, the Stryker-A1 has been a plus to what was in the modernization of the LAV-H:
            installed a new combat module with a 30-mm cannon, a 450 hp engine, a 910 ampere alternator and an internal digital network. Compared to the previous version of the armored personnel carrier, the armor of the hull has been reinforced.
            1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
              Sergey Aleksandrovich 15 May 2021 22: 13
              0
              And then the ZUBR-8 and 11 shells are what if not sub-caliber for 2A42 and 2A72? And it's not just about the Striker, but with the 105 mm cannon.
              What is a small cannon? Does it hold the hit of cumulative ammunition from the most popular Chinese recoilless gun? Or somewhere the enemy fired at him from 30 mm automatic cannons? Or someone managed to roll out a ZU-23-2 against him?
              1. Intruder
                Intruder 16 May 2021 01: 04
                0
                Or did someone manage to roll out a ZU-23-2 against him?
                what's wrong with him !? The SU-25 will easily withstand a direct hit by armor-piercing (and even BZT) 23 mm ammunition, into its armored capsule, and will continue its flight, just like the American warthog and Cobra, with the Apache !!!
              2. Intruder
                Intruder 16 May 2021 01: 08
                0
                Does it hold the hit of cumulative ammunition from the most popular Chinese recoilless gun?
                Well, this is another ammunition, or not !? lol We're not talking about the use of all sorts of there - shock cores and up to a heap ... tactical SBS ??? stop The conversation was only about KPVT and its striking characteristics for, only: 14,5 mm., Caliber !?
              3. OgnennyiKotik
                OgnennyiKotik 16 May 2021 01: 38
                +1
                Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                ZUBR-8 and 11 is that if not sub-caliber for 2A42 and 2A72?

                Are they in the army? When were they purchased?
                Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                Striker, namely with a 105 mm cannon.

                The armor is maximum there, there is only a V-shaped bottom.
                Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                Or somewhere the enemy fired at him from 30 mm automatic cannons? Or did someone manage to roll out a ZU-23-2 against him?

                I am writing in Iraq and Afghanistan came under fire from these cannons, the result of the crew and the landing is alive. I will say more, he confidently holds the RPG-7.
                https://pogoblog.typepad.com/pogo/2005/06/tell_all_the_tr.html
              4. Sergey Aleksandrovich
                Sergey Aleksandrovich 16 May 2021 20: 17
                0
                Holds RPG-7 confidently? Are you sure you understand what it is?
        2. Intruder
          Intruder 16 May 2021 01: 01
          0
          That is, in theory, it will withstand a line from the KPVT head-on, but will not hold it in the side, even with additional protection. In practice, the resistance of the KPVT armor has not been tested.
          well why, it was checked, but yak yes , it is on these models ... - up to 38 mm. ceramics in the frontal, simple! There are also composite segments in frontline and army aviation, it has been used for a long time, on attack aircraft and attack helicopters, and there it is up to 30 mm, but it is expensive to hang it on all sorts of armored cars in the South African Republic and in Europe ..., just specifically for these machines were not hung on the sides and stern, and only ... hi
  • Bradley
    Bradley 13 May 2021 19: 04
    +2
    The striker holds 14.5mm in the forehead, and with additional armor it is already in a circle, and in the forehead it is 30mm. So such a meeting for the BTR-60 will end badly.
    1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
      Sergey Aleksandrovich 13 May 2021 19: 08
      0
      Is this for sure or an advertisement? And then, maybe this particular Stryker is not supposed to have additional armor, and he will have to compete with the BTR-60 in what his mother gave birth.
      1. Bradley
        Bradley 13 May 2021 19: 12
        +1
        Is this for sure or an advertisement?

        Advertising GDLS.
    2. Graz
      Graz 13 May 2021 19: 24
      0
      the fact that the 30 mm wheel is holding this bullshit, except perhaps the Jewish eitan
      1. Bradley
        Bradley 13 May 2021 19: 28
        +1
        the fact that the 30 mm wheel is holding this bullshit, except perhaps the Jewish eitan

        Why bullshit? With modules MEXAS keeps.
        1. Graz
          Graz 14 May 2021 04: 12
          +2
          modern shells how does our br-11 hold? or western telescopic feathered which 140 mm of homogeneous armor piercing holds? if not, then do not write figs then or specify that the old Soviet shots to 30 mm guns
          1. OgnennyiKotik
            OgnennyiKotik 16 May 2021 01: 19
            0
            Quote: Graz
            is our br-11 holding? or western telescopic feathered which 140 mm of homogeneous armor piercing holds?

            Yes, their armor was created for these shells.
          2. Bradley
            Bradley 17 May 2021 12: 38
            0
            modern shells how does our br-11 hold? or western telescopic feathered which 140 mm of homogeneous armor piercing holds? if not, then do not write figs then or specify that the old Soviet shots to 30 mm guns

            Have you tried this set of armor?
    3. Intruder
      Intruder 16 May 2021 01: 17
      0
      The striker holds 14.5mm in the forehead, and with additional armor already in a circle, and in the forehead 30mm
      Well, if, after short bursts, not a machine gunner's hand, namely from KPVT, will demolish all attachments from the tower and hull, damage the sighting and "panorama", break the disks with rubber on the side axle shafts, then he is guaranteed to fight until the crew is evacuated from subsequent repair at the base, will not be able to !!! winked
      1. OgnennyiKotik
        OgnennyiKotik 16 May 2021 01: 19
        +3
        The main thing is that people will remain alive, the piece of iron is either repaired or written off. Don't give a damn about her.
        1. Intruder
          Intruder 16 May 2021 01: 23
          0
          The main thing is that people will remain alive, the piece of iron is either repaired or written off. Don't give a damn about her
          For relatives and friends, it is possible and do not care ... But for the economy, planning of operations where they are used, it is no longer very good, the budget is not rubber, so that such equipment can be used in mass consumption, namely for ambushes with KPVT cheap and rusty since those years ...?
      2. Bradley
        Bradley 17 May 2021 12: 41
        +1
        Well, if after short bursts, not the hand of a ... machine gunner, namely from KPVT, will demolish all attachments from the tower and hull, damage the sighting and "panorama", break the disks with rubber on the side axle shafts, then he is guaranteed to fight until the crew is evacuated from subsequent repair at the base, will not be able to !!! winked


        For relatives and friends, it is possible and do not care ... But for the economy, planning of operations where they are used, it is no longer very good, the budget is not rubber, so that such equipment can be used in mass consumption, namely for ambushes with KPVT cheap and rusty since those years ...?

        Then the same applies to all protected machines. Boomerangs can also be cut down from an ambush all attachments. But this is not a reason to continue riding the BTR-80?
        1. Intruder
          Intruder 17 May 2021 13: 04
          +1
          Boomerangs can also be cut down from an ambush by all attachments.
          and even T-80 and T-90, they will cut everything off the towers and in a fairly short time, how much local armor protection is there in equivalent on the hulls of the outer complexes scattered over the armor of the tower !? Yes, not a reason, but you should not overestimate the possibilities, for the whole of Ivanovskaya, otherwise the very first Spike will break off in the bud, or a successful line from the CPV, with a flying show on harp, or wheel disks from SPG-9 !!!
  • knn54
    knn54 13 May 2021 17: 24
    0
    Ammunition-TOTAL 18 shells.
    Interestingly, and the other-who "shoved".
    1. IL-18
      IL-18 13 May 2021 18: 25
      0
      Shove Ukraine
    2. Intruder
      Intruder 16 May 2021 01: 34
      0
      Interestingly, and the other-who "shoved".
      Anyone who can pay "shekels", or does not have such equipment in the proper amount at home, but wants to become an operator of this type of weapon very much ... yes
  • atakan
    atakan 14 May 2021 02: 29
    +2
    This is in the heading, - Clean! smile
    The whole story of this Stryker model is like a long expensive anegdote.
  • Intruder
    Intruder 15 May 2021 11: 09
    0
    for such an art weapon, the chassis width is small, while the tower may be too heavy for this vehicle
    well, the South Africans did have a pretty good light machine, in 1994 a version of the Rooikat 105 was developed, with a rifled 105-mm Denel GT7 cannon, and there was nothing to stabilize the gun for battle, even with main tanks, such as: M48, T-54, T-55 and T-62! Plus, and many versions to develop, to a heap on the same chassis: although the modification - Rooikat 76 (76 mm. Gun caliber), the most massive production version; Rooikat ZA-35 SPAA; Rooikat SAM; Rooikat 35 / ZT-3! Now they are in storage, in South Africa: up to 126 units.
  • OgnennyiKotik
    OgnennyiKotik 13 May 2021 14: 07
    +5
    Quote: credo
    and the true reasons for refusal lie elsewhere.

    Rather, the reasons voiced are close to reality. Therefore, the M1128 is the only serial armored vehicle in the world with a tank gun in an unmanned turret.
  • Seba
    Seba 13 May 2021 16: 17
    +1
    It is believed that due to insufficient mine protection, in contrast to the modernized strikers with a w-shaped bottom. The cannon doesn't seem to be on them.
    1. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik 13 May 2021 16: 52
      +2
      This is also there, when installing the V-shaped bottom there is not enough space for the AZ. The M1128 was therefore not upgraded. Here the whole complex of reasons worked.
  • Cat Alexandrovich
    Cat Alexandrovich 14 May 2021 10: 50
    -3
    Have you decided to give it to Ukraine?
  • tralflot1832
    tralflot1832 13 May 2021 14: 09
    +1
    They would have installed the cannon of the battleship. There are also restrictions for the pneumatic chassis. Probably the Indians were developing on the basis of Bollywood films. The money has already been eaten and drunk.
    1. Vladimir_2U
      Vladimir_2U 13 May 2021 16: 50
      +2
      Quote: tralflot1832
      They would have installed the battleship's cannon.
      It was just that the Americans could not get into a wheeled tank, unlike the Italians (Centauro) and the French (AMX-10RC).
  • Aleksandr97
    Aleksandr97 13 May 2021 15: 55
    +5
    It is necessary, as on the "Abrams", instead of an automatic loader, to put the correct African American on a side chair fellow
    1. Alf
      Alf 13 May 2021 17: 43
      +3
      Quote: Aleksandr97
      It is necessary, as on the "Abrams", instead of an automatic loader, to put the correct African American on a side chair fellow

      Try it, they will be dragged into the courts, because the life of a black person matters, and in war they can kill.
    2. Intruder
      Intruder 16 May 2021 01: 36
      +1
      instead of an automatic loader, put the correct African American on a side chair
      with a rainbow tattoo on a black neck and three letters "B ... M ..." on the phalanges of his right hand !? laughing
  • impostor
    impostor 13 May 2021 17: 08
    0
    Where will it be interesting to write off? Surely not where the Islands are?
  • bk0010
    bk0010 13 May 2021 17: 20
    0
    Fools! As far as I understand, there are no plans to use light brigades in battle?
    1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
      Sergey Aleksandrovich 13 May 2021 18: 29
      0
      This tank will be good in battle, unable to withstand the light BTR-82A. What other fight with such a technique?
      1. bk0010
        bk0010 13 May 2021 18: 30
        +2
        Fighting without a gun is completely sad, and in the light brigades they only have Strikers.
        1. OgnennyiKotik
          OgnennyiKotik 13 May 2021 18: 34
          +4
          Not. They have 3 types of brigades:
          Tank or heavy - Abrams and Bradley
          Motorized or Striker - respectively on strikers
          Light - there are SUVs like Humvees and MRAPs.

          Especially for light brigades, a new "light" tank is being created (in what place it is light though it is not clear).
          1. Intruder
            Intruder 16 May 2021 01: 49
            0
            in what place it is light though it is not clear) tank.
            well, the black guys in the carriages can always tell ... where it is easy, well, it's not for sure ... good
        2. Sergey Aleksandrovich
          Sergey Aleksandrovich 13 May 2021 18: 35
          0
          It depends on whom to fight against. If against a deliberately weakened enemy or partisans, he may do well. But if the dinosaur is unable to withstand an automatic 30-mm cannon, he has nothing to do against a serious opponent.
          1. bk0010
            bk0010 13 May 2021 18: 36
            +1
            Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
            But if the dinosaur is unable to withstand an automatic 30-mm cannon, he has nothing to do against a serious opponent.
            Bunker than pick? Or bury the trenches?
            1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
              Sergey Aleksandrovich 13 May 2021 18: 39
              0
              This is not serious, even the BMP-3 will cope better with such tasks.
              1. bk0010
                bk0010 13 May 2021 18: 41
                +1
                Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                This is not serious, even the BMP-3 will cope better with such tasks.
                They don't have BMP-3s, only Strikers - that's all. Seriously. What is not on the Strikers will not be in battle. Or it is necessary to involve heavy brigades, but why then these?
                1. Intruder
                  Intruder 16 May 2021 01: 48
                  0
                  They have no BMP-3
                  And Bradley of all versions (M2A3 Bradley II and M2A3 Bradley), plus NATO partners: Boxer, FENNEK 2, WARAN and others ... carriers of evil Teftonians and Britons ... wassat
                  1. bk0010
                    bk0010 16 May 2021 11: 59
                    0
                    Quote: Intruder
                    And Bradley all sorts of versions
                    They have Bradley. But these brigades are only on the Strikers. That's what they loaded on the Stryker's chassis, it will be, nothing more.
        3. Intruder
          Intruder 16 May 2021 01: 40
          0
          It's completely sad to fight without a gun
          Why is it sad, there is also an ATGM, as well as all sorts of loitering ammunition already now, in a crew of two people, and they are dragging ... even on themselves !? And light brigades, for that and light ... there are quite enough armored vehicles, such as: Striker and all other small fry, not for a tank regiment or brigade, they should go head-on!? ... lol
    2. infantryman2020
      infantryman2020 14 May 2021 14: 03
      +1
      Tracked "light" tanks are now planned for "light" (infantry) BBGs. By the company on the BBG.
  • Bradley
    Bradley 13 May 2021 19: 01
    -1
    The US Army abandons the "wheeled tank" Stryker M1128 Mobile Gun System with a 105-mm cannon

    And where will he go to take the device for himself? The most thing to go to work.
    1. Intruder
      Intruder 16 May 2021 01: 50
      0
      It's the most to go to work.
      Especially overtake and cut in the stream of cars ...!? wink
  • garri-lin
    garri-lin 13 May 2021 20: 29
    +2
    Initially the most controversial papelac in the entire family. But it could have been implemented more logically. Lower the turret lower. And the tool is simpler.
  • uav80
    uav80 14 May 2021 08: 51
    +2
    Apparently not in vain, back in the 70s in the USSR, they abandoned the further development of the Sting-S program (armored personnel carrier with an 85 mm gun), although the same French quite successfully used their AMX-10RC.
    1. Intruder
      Intruder 16 May 2021 01: 53
      0
      Apparently not in vain, back in the 70s in the USSR, they abandoned the further development of the Sting-S program (armored personnel carrier with an 85 mm gun)
      Rather in vain than not ...! Sting-S, a good machine, only very much ... of a specific application simply, clearly went beyond the doctrines of that era and in the Soviet Union ... that's why they pushed back until better times, like many projects in gloomy mailboxes then!
  • Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 16 May 2021 09: 33
    +1
    It seems to me that even our 2nd generation Korenet will be more useful than an anti-tank gun. Kornet has 150mm and a large set of ammunition, including HE ...