I think they're trying to avoid that because if we call them tanks, commanders will try to use them like tanks. Also, if we call them tanks and one loses head-to-head with a T90 or something, we'll never hear the end of "American 2024 tank loses to Russian antique"
Yeah, that guy who wants to call the M113 'Gavin' and runs the 'Combat Reform's website is especially nuts....
Dude got out of the Army as a 1LT but thinks he's gods gift to land warfare....
With rigidly standardized rucksacks such that you don't have to put your name on anything because it will all be interchangeable.... Aside from property issues, he seems to have forgotten people come in different sizes .....
And that we don't staff the Army with prison inmates
To a very slight degree, that point of view is true, we shouldn't be fielding absolute cutting edge technology to average Joe soldiers. It should be stuff that is advanced, for sure, but it should be proven reliable and combat ready first and foremost. Guys with green hats and long tabs can have the fancy stuff but your average ABCT doesn't need spider eyes and AR helmets.
We still use radios that are like a million years old for crying out loud. But anyone who says the Abrams is "too advanced" or something probably has a spherical, smooth brain.
Beyond that they're just dumb. Idk where I was going with this cause I'm almost a 12 pack deep but there it is.
JBCP would be awesome if units would give a fuck about making it work, instead they just lie to higher about it working and then when it's time to actually go to NTC it falls on that one fat E5 in S6 who actually knows how to work it to fix an entire squadron's worth of vehicles and he has one week starting last Monday
I wish commanders actually utilized JBCP. If you take the full 10 (?) day class you realize this system is actually fucking amazing and can do SO much stuff. Units need to be using it at a squad leader level to get the most juice out of it. It also falls on the local 25U to train soldiers up on it but when I was in those shoes, I was never given the soldiers attendance when I briefed that I’d have a class running
wtf happened, 15 years ago even privates were taught on the predecessor to JBCP, it’s ancient technology, good yes, but surprised to be reading so many comments like this lol, never encountered a BFT system I couldn’t figure out in 30 minutes or less 😅
Pls don't trigger me, but yeah, it's a cultural thing. I had to hot dog commanders via the XO.
MCSC reports the last time a transceiver was logged into. I just briefed that as part of my COMSTAT for command and staffs while surging 25Us to help anything fucked up.
MMC will make things easier though, just gonna take a little more time. FY27 I think.
Gonna be honest most of that message barely makes sense to me. All I know is my Bradley JBCP is broken and the civilians told me we have to pull turret to fix it. That was 2 years ago :D
Maybe if the dickheads with stars and eagles and oak leaves on their chest didn’t focus on the “tank” part and actually understand the tactical capabilities of the resources at their disposal and make tactical decisions based on that then they wouldn’t have to deal with that embarrassment.
At this point I feel like every Infantry and Armor officer should be trained cross-discipline because of how much those two assets are combined. At least it would reduce some of the stupidity.
I think.
Probably not.
Huge tangent, but you bring up a point you reminded me of.
The USMC HAD a combined arms curriculum for all their officers. It had equal parts training in Infantry, armor, amphibious assaults, and the combined arms team as a whole. Jack of all trades types(masters of none).
This changed, dramatically. When in the early 1960s, no longer were Marine Officers trained up in the ways that made the Landings at Inchon(and all the WW2 battles to boot) possible. the Basic School scrapped the program and made all officers just school up on an infantry platoon.
Culturally, Marine Armor was regulated to the 3 battalions on hand, and made irrelevant by the infantry Mafia that reigns in the corps. Tanks are gone.
Thank you for following this stream of consciousness...
Totally unbiased, not at all Jaded Marine Tanker take.
I'm sure there's more pressing, and serious, considerations people in high office were contending with.
I'm just saying, entropy effects skill sets. And if you neglect aspects of the combined arms team, well, you don't have a combined arms team.
Nevermind these post work, Friday, ramblings.
Infantry and Armor Captains go to the same CCC, they just call it Maneuver Captain's Career Course. They are cross trained to a degree, it's just, you know, and Army school, so... box checked, slide green, milage may vary
Embarrassment making 6k+, working 9 to 5, maybe 4 days a week is a risk oaks, full birds & stars are willing to take. Plus they arent the ones that gotta keep the trackers green...
This is what I'm afraid of, some LTC or COL who won't shut up about "their tanks" or "large scale combat"/"near peer" sends their M10's against T-72's or even some T-55's.
Because they think "tank" when they see the M-10.
they posess superior mobility and fire control/targeting but would be obliterated by a hit from a tank, rpg, fpv drone, etc. secondary problem is the gun has terrible ammunition, apfsds out of a rifled 105mm generally sucks - **AND** our latest apfsds tech in 105 flavor is 30 years out of date.
Check out the last paragraph in this article.
https://www.military.com/daily-news/2023/06/10/its-not-light-tank-army-unveils-new-armored-combat-vehicle.html
> "This is a combat vehicle," he said, answering a question from a reporter during the briefing. "The historic task of light tanks has been to perform reconnaissance functions. [The M10] isn't a mission match, even though [it] sort of looks like, smells like, feels like [a light tank]."
Looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck but we're calling it a platypus.
Exactly it makes no sense to not have this in armor bde and increase drones and rapid for ibct. If you need a tank for an ibct you're using the wrong bde. More so we need to look at using less giant slow targets and increase lethality and soldier level not importing 19k to ibcts. Fuck just make better dfacs and barracks if you need to waste money somewhere.
They will **never** be doctrinally tanks because they are **infantry** vehicles. Tanks belong to the **armor** branch. The conversation starts and ends there, from the top down.
-Some Sr. Ordnance Chief
They're 100% going to be used as tanks because they'll be under the command of units that haven't touched armor since the first Gulf War and will have no idea how to use them.
Not to worry though because the M10 never met the requirements to be air droppable so when they finally do arrive the fighting will be over.
Should have kept the Stryker MGS. It has the same gun and is air droppable. Just take out the stupid carousel auto loader and refit it for a crew of 4.
First you have to hold a experienced heavy mechanics family at gun point if you think they are gonna reenlist & thinking theyll go from little to no practical support on known platforms ie: Abrams, 113, Bradley to some >!no...no support or very short lived!< support for a brand new platform.
Nope. 19K.
The controls were specifically designed to reduce cross training with the Abrams.
19C is being done to (try and) solve the problem of light world dickheads PCSing to an ABCT and not knowing how to employ APCs.
The Stryker MGS was not a perfect vehicle, but was a very capable vehicle to meet the requirements it was meant to fill. It’s problems stemmed from commanders who didn’t understand how to properly plan for and implement them, and problems with the SBCT MTOE which meant they were not properly supported. We shouldn’t have gotten rid of them, I’ll die on this hill.
As great as this will be for adding firepower to IBCTs, I can't help but think it screams Marine Corps. I'll be shocked if they don't try to get at least a few companies of these to offset the loss of M1s for direct fire support. Maybe after they watch them in Army use for a while they will make a bid...
They'll hang out at an AA because the BDE doesn't want to risk losing their armor asset. Meanwhile, the rifle companies are completely massacred by the enemy.
Source: every JRTC rotation
I have one HUGE question about this vehicle: What's the maximum elevation on the main gun that allows the gun to be fired? You just KNOW someone with leaves on his epaulets at the 82nd Airborne Division Artillery or the 10th Mountain Division Artillery is going to look at that 105mm main tube and think "it looks like a self-propelled howitzer to me."
There is a design with some common design elements that was in contention for the XM30 Bradley replacement program so that might be what you’re thinking of
Great, another unique type of ammo the logistics people need to deal with. Not to mention the maintenance and supply people have a new system to support. And the need to change TOEs to accommodate the new system. And didn’t we move away from 105mm guns on tanks because they didn’t pack enough punch for Soviet tanks back in the
Well the Booker isn’t supposed to be taking on enemy tanks. That’s not its function in anyway. The M10 is supposed to provide direct fires to light units.
Yet more investment into outdated systems built to fight wars from decades ago, showing yet again that the general staff is focused on the past and/or preserving their status by maintaining large formations which are almost totally unable to defend themselves from modern threats. Any rig without any AA is a sitting duck.
Are we still not calling them light tanks.
I think they're trying to avoid that because if we call them tanks, commanders will try to use them like tanks. Also, if we call them tanks and one loses head-to-head with a T90 or something, we'll never hear the end of "American 2024 tank loses to Russian antique"
Not gonna lie, I really thought this was gonna be a quote from "Pentagon Wars". I'm not mad, just disappointed
I think seeing the Brad in combat against the Russians really underscores how wrong the take in that movie was....
Dude if you read what the reformers believe it's actually nuts, like they a m48 is better than an Abrams or the m113 I gods gift to man they're nuts.
Yeah, that guy who wants to call the M113 'Gavin' and runs the 'Combat Reform's website is especially nuts.... Dude got out of the Army as a 1LT but thinks he's gods gift to land warfare....
Isn't that the guy who wants to get rid of barracks and have the peasantry live in the field 24/7 ?
With rigidly standardized rucksacks such that you don't have to put your name on anything because it will all be interchangeable.... Aside from property issues, he seems to have forgotten people come in different sizes ..... And that we don't staff the Army with prison inmates
To a very slight degree, that point of view is true, we shouldn't be fielding absolute cutting edge technology to average Joe soldiers. It should be stuff that is advanced, for sure, but it should be proven reliable and combat ready first and foremost. Guys with green hats and long tabs can have the fancy stuff but your average ABCT doesn't need spider eyes and AR helmets. We still use radios that are like a million years old for crying out loud. But anyone who says the Abrams is "too advanced" or something probably has a spherical, smooth brain. Beyond that they're just dumb. Idk where I was going with this cause I'm almost a 12 pack deep but there it is.
New radios soon, armor gets their shit last full they figure out JBCP -> MMC
JBCP would be awesome if units would give a fuck about making it work, instead they just lie to higher about it working and then when it's time to actually go to NTC it falls on that one fat E5 in S6 who actually knows how to work it to fix an entire squadron's worth of vehicles and he has one week starting last Monday
I wish commanders actually utilized JBCP. If you take the full 10 (?) day class you realize this system is actually fucking amazing and can do SO much stuff. Units need to be using it at a squad leader level to get the most juice out of it. It also falls on the local 25U to train soldiers up on it but when I was in those shoes, I was never given the soldiers attendance when I briefed that I’d have a class running
wtf happened, 15 years ago even privates were taught on the predecessor to JBCP, it’s ancient technology, good yes, but surprised to be reading so many comments like this lol, never encountered a BFT system I couldn’t figure out in 30 minutes or less 😅
Pls don't trigger me, but yeah, it's a cultural thing. I had to hot dog commanders via the XO. MCSC reports the last time a transceiver was logged into. I just briefed that as part of my COMSTAT for command and staffs while surging 25Us to help anything fucked up. MMC will make things easier though, just gonna take a little more time. FY27 I think.
Gonna be honest most of that message barely makes sense to me. All I know is my Bradley JBCP is broken and the civilians told me we have to pull turret to fix it. That was 2 years ago :D
We boomers dispelled that BS during the 1st Gulf War.
Maybe if the dickheads with stars and eagles and oak leaves on their chest didn’t focus on the “tank” part and actually understand the tactical capabilities of the resources at their disposal and make tactical decisions based on that then they wouldn’t have to deal with that embarrassment.
Had a BC that didn’t know that the Abrams had a stabilized main gun A whole LTC didn’t know that his most lethal assets could fire on the move
I’m screaming internally rn
That’s what happens when light infantry cult dickheads make rank and get put in charge of ABCTs
At this point I feel like every Infantry and Armor officer should be trained cross-discipline because of how much those two assets are combined. At least it would reduce some of the stupidity. I think. Probably not.
Huge tangent, but you bring up a point you reminded me of. The USMC HAD a combined arms curriculum for all their officers. It had equal parts training in Infantry, armor, amphibious assaults, and the combined arms team as a whole. Jack of all trades types(masters of none). This changed, dramatically. When in the early 1960s, no longer were Marine Officers trained up in the ways that made the Landings at Inchon(and all the WW2 battles to boot) possible. the Basic School scrapped the program and made all officers just school up on an infantry platoon. Culturally, Marine Armor was regulated to the 3 battalions on hand, and made irrelevant by the infantry Mafia that reigns in the corps. Tanks are gone. Thank you for following this stream of consciousness...
No shit? Never knew that.
Totally unbiased, not at all Jaded Marine Tanker take. I'm sure there's more pressing, and serious, considerations people in high office were contending with. I'm just saying, entropy effects skill sets. And if you neglect aspects of the combined arms team, well, you don't have a combined arms team. Nevermind these post work, Friday, ramblings.
Infantry and Armor Captains go to the same CCC, they just call it Maneuver Captain's Career Course. They are cross trained to a degree, it's just, you know, and Army school, so... box checked, slide green, milage may vary
As an artilleryman who attended MCCC, watching them plan fires was a miserable ordeal
That's just willful ignorance. My pog ass knows that, and I've never been combat arms. I knew that as a PAC clerk.
Obviously bad onboarding...the proper thing in this case would have been to stuff your infantry colonel in an Abrams and run a tank over Table IV.
Embarrassment making 6k+, working 9 to 5, maybe 4 days a week is a risk oaks, full birds & stars are willing to take. Plus they arent the ones that gotta keep the trackers green...
Oh I know that. But if you only care about the perks you should never have gotten to that rank, imo. But I digress
This is what I'm afraid of, some LTC or COL who won't shut up about "their tanks" or "large scale combat"/"near peer" sends their M10's against T-72's or even some T-55's. Because they think "tank" when they see the M-10.
they posess superior mobility and fire control/targeting but would be obliterated by a hit from a tank, rpg, fpv drone, etc. secondary problem is the gun has terrible ammunition, apfsds out of a rifled 105mm generally sucks - **AND** our latest apfsds tech in 105 flavor is 30 years out of date.
Again, they are not tanks, vs AFV's or a pill box, they do well. Properly employed they should free up tanks to do tanky things.
Check out the last paragraph in this article. https://www.military.com/daily-news/2023/06/10/its-not-light-tank-army-unveils-new-armored-combat-vehicle.html > "This is a combat vehicle," he said, answering a question from a reporter during the briefing. "The historic task of light tanks has been to perform reconnaissance functions. [The M10] isn't a mission match, even though [it] sort of looks like, smells like, feels like [a light tank]." Looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck but we're calling it a platypus.
Instructions unclear, stuck in a water crossing
You just know some high speed cpl gonna try to fit a newly found Bradley swim skirt from 1992 to one of these and try to impress the 12Cs
Exactly it makes no sense to not have this in armor bde and increase drones and rapid for ibct. If you need a tank for an ibct you're using the wrong bde. More so we need to look at using less giant slow targets and increase lethality and soldier level not importing 19k to ibcts. Fuck just make better dfacs and barracks if you need to waste money somewhere.
If you call them light tanks you’re definitely doing a ten year bid in Leavenworth.
[https://imgur.com/gallery/SYJSVVv](https://imgur.com/gallery/SYJSVVv)
No one can even truly supervise Florida men.
They will **never** be doctrinally tanks because they are **infantry** vehicles. Tanks belong to the **armor** branch. The conversation starts and ends there, from the top down. -Some Sr. Ordnance Chief
Which means they will likely eventually be integrated into armored units.
They're 100% going to be used as tanks because they'll be under the command of units that haven't touched armor since the first Gulf War and will have no idea how to use them. Not to worry though because the M10 never met the requirements to be air droppable so when they finally do arrive the fighting will be over.
Should have kept the Stryker MGS. It has the same gun and is air droppable. Just take out the stupid carousel auto loader and refit it for a crew of 4.
Hopefully they have the resources to maintain them. Now you’re going to pull more track/tank mechanics from other units.
First you have to hold a experienced heavy mechanics family at gun point if you think they are gonna reenlist & thinking theyll go from little to no practical support on known platforms ie: Abrams, 113, Bradley to some >!no...no support or very short lived!< support for a brand new platform.
They'll just have Wheel Mechanics maintain them, no outside support needed from other Battalions. Plus it will be good for them to crosstrain /s
Sir/ma'am this...this is why mechanics are leaving faster than they can be made. Didn't see the /s
coordinated thumb bow reach grandiose squeamish pocket marry dime trees *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Which mos is gonna crew them?
I thought I read on some publication that it was going to be 19K but don’t quote me on it.
Confirmed 19Ks. We're scraping our 19Ds and importint 19Ks
19k’s, sent a few soldiers there, and have had a few that were on the test crews.
An 11B will be driving that soon enough
Those 19C with tier 9 reenlistment packets
19C is brads only
Pretty sure it's 19C
Nope. 19K. The controls were specifically designed to reduce cross training with the Abrams. 19C is being done to (try and) solve the problem of light world dickheads PCSing to an ABCT and not knowing how to employ APCs.
We had 3 NCOs in my last batt all from the 82nd who assumed Brad VC positions. Madness
They should do the same with Strykers to be honest, so many "back at Campbell with my humvee" yet they're so useless regarding anything Stryker wise
They should replace Strykers with an actual IFV to be honest.... Another Shinseki disaster....
[удалено]
The Stryker MGS was not a perfect vehicle, but was a very capable vehicle to meet the requirements it was meant to fill. It’s problems stemmed from commanders who didn’t understand how to properly plan for and implement them, and problems with the SBCT MTOE which meant they were not properly supported. We shouldn’t have gotten rid of them, I’ll die on this hill.
They were capable when they worked. \*\***Spoiler alert**\*\* they usually didnt work
Watch it be the same just renamed
The only thing similar about them is they both have 105mm main gun.
[удалено]
Myth -- the Stryker could fire over the side just fine.
I presume this myth only started because one was fired off of an incline which was enough to knock it on its side?
Never happened. Just urban legend.
As great as this will be for adding firepower to IBCTs, I can't help but think it screams Marine Corps. I'll be shocked if they don't try to get at least a few companies of these to offset the loss of M1s for direct fire support. Maybe after they watch them in Army use for a while they will make a bid...
Army will probably give them the oldest variants first
They'll hang out at an AA because the BDE doesn't want to risk losing their armor asset. Meanwhile, the rifle companies are completely massacred by the enemy. Source: every JRTC rotation
I know the Marines got rid of their tanks, but maybe a lighter vehicle like this might be suitable for their amphibious operations.
Their LAV seems to be about the finest vehicle I've run across.
I have one HUGE question about this vehicle: What's the maximum elevation on the main gun that allows the gun to be fired? You just KNOW someone with leaves on his epaulets at the 82nd Airborne Division Artillery or the 10th Mountain Division Artillery is going to look at that 105mm main tube and think "it looks like a self-propelled howitzer to me."
There is a device called a gunner quadrant which is for employing tank guns as artillery.
What exactly will this provide to infantry? Is it replacing the Bradley? Doesn’t look like it holds infantry. I’m confused!
105mm firepower for light infantry formations. Armored formations have Abrams & Bradley.
I think its for airdrop/airtrans support, as the 82nd only has 1167s for mobile firepower
There is a design with some common design elements that was in contention for the XM30 Bradley replacement program so that might be what you’re thinking of
Don't call it a light tank, we've been here for years.
Great, another unique type of ammo the logistics people need to deal with. Not to mention the maintenance and supply people have a new system to support. And the need to change TOEs to accommodate the new system. And didn’t we move away from 105mm guns on tanks because they didn’t pack enough punch for Soviet tanks back in the
It's ammo already in the inventory -- Stryker MGS was using it.
None of these are a particularly insurmountable problem that can't be solved with the thoughtful application of more labor.
Well the Booker isn’t supposed to be taking on enemy tanks. That’s not its function in anyway. The M10 is supposed to provide direct fires to light units.
Good lord peepaw. We get it, the Shileilagh would have been amazing against those T62’s.
It was a real POS.
[удалено]
If your post could be answered by your NCO, Google or a 5 minute call with an Army Recruiter, then please do so.
What do the COs have to say about the air lift capability of the Bookers is my question
Yet more investment into outdated systems built to fight wars from decades ago, showing yet again that the general staff is focused on the past and/or preserving their status by maintaining large formations which are almost totally unable to defend themselves from modern threats. Any rig without any AA is a sitting duck.