RegularJoe@lemmy.world to News@lemmy.world · 1 day agoThe Army made a tank it doesn’t need and can’t use. Now it’s figuring out what to do with it.www.defenseone.comexternal-linkmessage-square39linkfedilinkarrow-up1136arrow-down13
arrow-up1133arrow-down1external-linkThe Army made a tank it doesn’t need and can’t use. Now it’s figuring out what to do with it.www.defenseone.comRegularJoe@lemmy.world to News@lemmy.world · 1 day agomessage-square39linkfedilink
minus-squareiopq@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up55arrow-down1·1 day agoSend it to Ukraine, we’ll figure it out from there
minus-squareCarmakazi@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up18·1 day agoLikely worse armor than MBTs, a worse gun than MBTs. It was designed for combined arms, which we aren’t seeing a lot of anymore. Probably quite vulnerable to FPVs. I don’t think they’d want them.
minus-squareGeobloke@lemm.eelinkfedilinkarrow-up2·21 hours agoOn the other hand Bradley’s are doing quite well, so maybe a heavier Bradley would work well
minus-squareexu@feditown.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up24arrow-down3·1 day agoHaving a tank is better than not having one
minus-squarecatloaf@lemm.eelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up16·1 day agoIt is if it’s a sitting duck of a deathtrap.
minus-square52fighters@lemmy.sdf.orglinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up13·1 day agoWorse case scenario, park them in urban areas that Russia might invade and use them as fixed cannons.
minus-squareknightly the Sneptaur@pawb.sociallinkfedilinkarrow-up5·1 day agoThey might make useful roadblocks, I suppose.
minus-squareTheMightyCat@lemm.eelinkfedilinkarrow-up10·1 day agoWith T-55s and T-62s still being used in this conflict I think this proves exu’s point. A vehicle that can protect against small arms fire while lobbing 105mm HE shells is still very useful for infantry fire support.
minus-squareArtyom@lemm.eelinkfedilinkarrow-up1arrow-down1·20 hours agoHmb while I figure out how to lift it with a drone…
Send it to Ukraine, we’ll figure it out from there
Likely worse armor than MBTs, a worse gun than MBTs. It was designed for combined arms, which we aren’t seeing a lot of anymore. Probably quite vulnerable to FPVs. I don’t think they’d want them.
On the other hand Bradley’s are doing quite well, so maybe a heavier Bradley would work well
Having a tank is better than not having one
It is if it’s a sitting duck of a deathtrap.
Worse case scenario, park them in urban areas that Russia might invade and use them as fixed cannons.
They might make useful roadblocks, I suppose.
With T-55s and T-62s still being used in this conflict I think this proves exu’s point.
A vehicle that can protect against small arms fire while lobbing 105mm HE shells is still very useful for infantry fire support.
Hmb while I figure out how to lift it with a drone…