this post was submitted on 14 Dec 2025
20 points (95.5% liked)
guns
2707 readers
55 users here now
Rules (Under review):
-
- NO BUYING, SELLING OR TRADING of guns or accessories. Take that to Reddit and /r/GunAccessoriesForSale or Armslist.com
-
- Censor all personally identifiable information in posts including serial numbers on firearms.
-
- Any post or comment advocating illegal action will be removed and the poster warned. A second infraction will result in a ban.
-
- Unironically suggesting the SKS as a usable rifle in the 21st Century when there are things like the AK and AR that cost only a bit more might result in a ban, it depends on how we feel.
-
- Discussion of hunting is acceptable but please put "CW: hunting" in post titles. Debating the ethicality of hunting is also fine, but keep it civil and don't derail other people's threads.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Well the problem is clearly the giant autocannon they slapped on the top of it. That tends to make things heavier. In the longer video they show one with a full main tank gun on top which is silly as fuck. Just assign a tank with the team then.
The trouble is that modern Abramses weight like 67 tonnes, which is getting them into Tiger II territory. Their strategic mobility isn't very good, and their logistical costs are really high due to the amount of fuel they burn as well as the maintenance of such complex machines. Sometimes (or in fact, very often) you just need a mobile somewhat-armored cannon to lob HE shells at bunkers and the like, and all the bells and whistles of a modern Western MBT just aren't necessary (and if fact, become counter-productive due to all the extra weight and complexity), so several militaries have been looking into lighter vehicles focused more on infantry support.
The Stryker MGS is one of the worse ones, since the chassis just really wasn't designed for all that weight, but the base idea of a wheeled fire-support vehicle isn't completely stupid, and there have been more successful examples. There've also been developments into fire support vehicles based on tracked IFV chassis - the US itself had such a program, which of course got cancelled shortly after adoption
Now, the proper solution to this problem is to just not make your tanks the fucking Tiger II, and keep them to a reasonable weight and cost, like the Russians have done, but y'know, can't have that. (although tbf, Russia also fields the BMP-3 as an IFV armed with a 100mm cannon, so they kind of already have that fire support capability in vehicles lighter than tanks baked in)