What does the 120mm cannon bring to the table. EXTREME shock. It can kill tanks and devastate enemy in "most" built up areas. Where does it lack? Stowable kills and is outdistanced by the new/enduring threats on the battlefield. Anti-tank missiles can many times equal or outdistance the 120mm. Drones allow even greater standoff distances. In my mind the new hotness will be the 50mm cannon. Its useful against any current and projected IFV. Even the 25mm has been show capable of destroying threat armor if the crew is skilled. Additionally the 50mm is often paired with anti-tank missiles and if the turret is properly setup it can also serve as an adhoc anti-air weapon.
Lastly by design the turret, whether manned or RWS is gonna be lighter allowing it to fit better with amphibious operations and even aid in land mobility.
All of the above and more is why I think ... YES! The USMC needs a light tank to support our infantry. YES! We should wait for the US Army to field the 50mm cannon in this role.
Oh and before I go on. I agree with Compass Points on the need but want it going in a different direction. A reader wants the CV90-120. I want an up armored CV-90 but armed with the 50mm cannon. He picked the right vehicle (later dismissed it for cost) but picked the wrong cannon to go on it.
No comments :
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.