The GDLS team will be attending AUSA next week and I will take some questions to ask for a follow up video. Please post in this comment thread below👇

@Spookston

Жыл бұрын

What was the driving factor behind selecting the 105mm M35, and is it possible we might see a version with a 120mm cannon such as the XM360E1?

@Vince_A_Bull

Жыл бұрын

I’d like to hear more about the autoloader system and how they would make it integrate with the blast doors.

@Red_Four

Жыл бұрын

Is this only going to be assigned to light units like the 82nd, or will it also be in formations with Abrams tanks and Bradleys? If this is purely for infantry support, then what capabilities does it have that sets it apart from a Bradley that is already performing the same role?

@MDavidW100

Жыл бұрын

Love to say hello! I’m on the AUSA staff, and was a tanker for 29 years.

@gundree

Жыл бұрын

Awesome interview, good score on your part. My question would be, will the sighting system be able to see IR lasers? Drove us nuts in Iraq trying to firgure out what the dismounts were telling us to shoot. Which building or which window? Same thing for CAS. Would have made life so much easier to have everyone the same ability to see the IR lasers. (thanks, rant over)

The hardcoded CC is much appreciated. Crosstalk is difficult for me even though I’m not HOH.

@simonrooney7942

Жыл бұрын

Excellent

The mini Abrams has arrived on the field...I like it!👍🇺🇸

Pretty exciting as an Abrams Tanker to know we’ll be more usable and adaptable to more formations. MPF also brings up possibilities for folding into CAV formations as an alternative to the larger/heavier Abrams for additional direct fire support or alternatives for Guard units.

Yes!! A few minutes to learn something new while I do the research for the fiction book I'm writing, from one of my absolute favorite content makers. This is going to be very useful. I really appreciate it, Sofi. Thank you very much.

As always, fantastic info delivered by General Dynamics Land Systems about the new MPF. Great to hear the reasoning behind the purpose and the design explanation for the Abrahms "Like" turret. Thanks again Sofilein for the great info/interview.

For some reason it reminds me a lot of the British Scorpion. Only you know, big. Thanks for the video, very cool.

Interesting to see the US army finally adopting a "Light Tank" after the M551 Sheridan

Sofi , that is pretty wild to see coming out . Thankyou for the update on this . That brings alot of firepower to a Infantry unit moving through an area , that will enable them to have some serious firepower in an urban environment with narrow streets and close quarters.

Thank You for the extra effort on the subtitles.

@daguard411

Жыл бұрын

If I may add, I am a rather course guy, but when I see others trying to do a job, I try to help out........not what those guys did.

Dear Sofilein, It’s interesting to learn about the development of an AbramsX tank. Of course there’s not a lot known about this main battle tank for the next generation but what I’ve seen is coming close to the Polish light PL-01 tank concept but a lot more heavy and powerful. As far as I know the new AbramsX tank will get stealth predicates as the Polish concept tank has. Also Krauss-Maffei Wegmann the producer of the famous Leopard tank is on the way with such a development. Perhaps this might be some valuable information for you in case you didn’t know this already. Send hoe warm greetings and love from the Netherlands

Sofi , That was cool to see . Enjoyed very much the update for us old Tread Heads ...You take care and be safe in your travels . Good job Sofi 👍👍👍

So, it's not a tank because rather than being designed to fight other tanks, it's made to support infantry with firepower & armor? But isn't that *exactly* what the very first tanks were invented for?

@slayer8actual

11 ай бұрын

About a hundred and ten years ago the first tanks were not designed to fight other tanks either. They were designed to do exactly what they say this vehicle was designed to do - "...it's purpose is to support dismounted Soldiers who are hung up by an enemy dug into a bunker, or hiding in a building, or in some place where the small arms that an infantryman carries can't deal with the threat." Sound familiar? Like maybe the trenches and bunkers of WWI? Later on in the wars where tanks were getting heavier firepower and heavier armor, it wasn't because the bunkers were getting more dangerous, but because other nations were designing tank killers including other tanks! Tanks were developed solely to kill other tanks so they were getting bigger and bigger. No matter where tanks started, they ended up getting to the point where they were getting so big and heavy, they couldn't move worth a damn. We all know all of this so what's my point? My point is why are we developing a vehicle that is a step back over a hundred years? We've done this before and none of them worked. He actually compared it to the Sheridan?? The Sheridan sucked! The Army tried it for one war and never again. Ft Irwin had bone yards full of them that nobody else wanted. We tried giving it away to other countries and it was turned down! I can already predict what's going to happen with this: After the first few get destroyed by anti-tank systems, they will be up-armored, and up-armored and up-armored again, until they can't even move....kinda like what happened with HMMWVs and MRAPs, and any other light vehicle system we've tried. A heavily armored Abrams supported by a fast and lethal Brad. It's won wars. It works.

Well done. Wow...your sub numbers are REALLY climbing. ☮

It looks amazing, but the real question is: Does it have dedicated storage for tactical googly eyes, yes or no?

@Vince_A_Bull

Жыл бұрын

Shh that’s top secret, not even the crews are supposed to know until they are deployed

@nriqueog

Жыл бұрын

@@Vince_A_Bull Everyone knows, if they start issuing Tactical Googly Eyes (TGE's)- SHITS about to get real. ;)

Sofi; great video with great info! I'm still not sold on this thing (as I've said, we've tried this before multiple times without success), but maybe it will get figured-out this time around. Looking forward to your expert coverage at AUSA!

Now will this beauty be used by the Marines? I know they ditched their Abrams but this could be a great infantry support weapon for them.

Listening to the engineers speaking about their tank is really cool

Do those around blabbing so loud can't see Sofilein is trying to provide decent-quality interviews? They all need one or two loud "Oi! Stay silent for at least 5 minutes!" I really like these talks on modern stuff. Hope there is a possibility for some audio magician to clear out the background noises. Here is a fox for you for doing such a great job: 🦊

The role is "sturmartillerie" as essentially defined in WWII by the germann Wehrmacht. It's not a StugIII or a Sturmhaubitze, it has a turret, but the role is the same.

great stuff!!, interesting subject matter!!!, and its about time you stayed in the picture with the interview........even with your hippie hair!!

Well, if you don't want to call it a tank and have it used like one, recommend the following. 1. Call it an Assault Gun(AG). Formal name would be "Gun, Motor Carriage M..." It is a piece of rolling artillery designed to destroy strong points, machine gun nests, fortified positions etc. 2. Give it to the Field Artillery branch and assign 13 series MOS personnel to operate. Less likely to try to operate as a tank and more likely to use as artillery. See M108 self propelled howitzer. 3. Use WWII, and post war German and Russian AG doctrine and employment as a guide for training and use. 4. Assign the division MPF/AG battalion under the Dvision Artillery (DIVARTY) headquarters for maintenance and training.

@HanSolo__

Жыл бұрын

StuG. A self-propelled gun. Called a "tank destroyer." Worked as a defence tank.

Definitely want to know more!

Great info. thank you

That model is really cool 😀

@paratrooper629

Жыл бұрын

I have some 3D printed 1/87 scale of these. I still prefer BAE MPF.

My buddy was a tanker on the new light tank pretty cool stuff. Got a patch and everything.

The "Schwarzkopf" after the General is my suggestion for a name.

@paratrooper629

Жыл бұрын

Agreed. However, I recall there was an NCO who was a Tanker and was awarded the MOH during the Korean War... I do not recall his name. The Stryker was named after 2 enlisted men who awarded the MOH

Not at tank... but interesting to see how current thinking affects new designs. Looks a good mobility & firepower combination. Thanks Sofi! 🙏🙏

Bloody hell, the Infantry Tank has made a comeback but it's crossed with a Cruiser.

Really kinda curious what the final name designations will be. They should have a contest!👍

@clarkbarrett6274

Жыл бұрын

Contests would just mean you'd get Tanky McTankFace....maybe that's the name for Sofi's googly eyes mod.

Im supprised that the marines havnt jumped on this yet

I think a cool name for thos new piece of kit can be derived from the old jeep version of the 1980`s "MUTT" Just a thought but WOW love it!

So .... the Sheridan re-born?

Thank you for the ibformative video

Awesome :D

Thank you Sofilein et al. Excellent video. Seems like a nice commonsense solution but … does it have the boiling vessel that was finally introduced to the Abrams, half a century or so after the Centurion went into service🙂? Cheers from NZ🤭🇳🇿.

This looks exciting. Hopefully they’re in service by 2025, id like to be a crew member for one of these

It's a light tank in everything but name. Going to be funny to see how this thing will evolve over time into something else entirely.

I am old enough to remember programs like mobile protected weapon system, mobile protected gun,etc. It will have the same fate?

This tanket will probably be with the quick response mobile infantry ,probably can get three of these in heavy lift aircraft in comparison to two MBTs . we will see how good it is when it goes into combat for the first time. it might not be able to go toe to toe with a MBTS but I bet it will be good as a MBT sniper, shoot and scoot.

Nice, a light tank.

Nice. Cool video...

Are you planning on integrating any active protection APS? Although it's an Infantry Support Vehicle, will it carry or at least be capable of firing something like M900 or HEAT in case enemy Armor is encountered?

Sofi, Unfortunately the background noise is very annoying. Things I would like to know about it. 1) Since it has an forward engine, like the Makerva, does it have a rapid rear access for the crew. 2) Being it is an infantry support vehicle, like the original Sherman, what is its situational awareness? Does it have access to infantry “GoPros” so they see what they see and get directional and targeting information? Is it a hardwire and WIFI link? THX

I got to crawl around the AGS at Littlefields, this light tank program is the US Army's version of a perpetual motion machine. I am glad they dropped the air-droppable requirement as that meant no one could build one that was protected to the Army's liking. I hope this moves forward, but not holding my breath.

@joemaloney1019

Жыл бұрын

Then there is still room for a air dropable mobile gun carriage then. I imagine something similar to the Swedish StridsVagan 103 armed with the lightweight 120 mm gun the gun would be mounted directly to the carriage which as in the Strids wagon will elevate and angle using the whole carriage, equipped with a M2 50 caliber mg on the roof this mobile gun carriage would be airdroppable specifically I can see this being used with airborne troops to seize an airport and hold the airport in the defensive role until C17s arrive with the cavalry.

This looks like it is the solution to the gap in capabilities created by the new APC not having enough load capacity for a larger gun.

I bet that little thing could light up some T 72's without them even knowing...

What is this? A TANK FOR ANTS?!

@CanSurplus

Жыл бұрын

😅

At a quick glance of the turret, it looks like the Armata

So if the bustle gets hit from behind, the shells cook off. The blast door will also be perforated. Is there a secondary door that closes?

They should call it the M2 Roosevelt after Teddy Roosevelt

@paratrooper629

Жыл бұрын

I like your thinking.

Yeah I heard the soldiers liked the mgs m8 much better. They should have incorporated a 20mm into the turret or the 30mm m293 and the laser guided lahat atgm for better antitank capacity.

@paratrooper629

Жыл бұрын

The BAE M8 AGS should have been selected IMHO. Hell.... Let's get both!

*Hopefully they will write "NOT AN ACTUAL TANK" on the side, so the enemy know it's not a tank.* *It looks like a tank, therefore it will be attacked by tanks and a various range of anti-tank weapons.* *Looks like they are trying to re-invent the medium battle tank without calling it a tank.*

@marsamatruh5327

Жыл бұрын

someone needed tax money from gov and they made a story. 120,105,90 mm is part of fire team not main element anymore. we saw that thruth with two thousand tank loses in syria and ukraine . single barrel age is over , 30,50 caliber plus 20,30,40 mm configuration with proxy fuse ammo can handle modern battlefields.

@SlavicCelery

Жыл бұрын

Yeah, it's a medium battle tank. It's also a tank that is roughly the weight of a T-72 model. You want something for conventional war, it may not be the best option. But, if you're primarily going against insurgencies.... with modern spotting/drone arms. That thing will bring more firepower to the frontline than a Bradley. It's also a more quickly shipped unit for quick redeployments around the globe. 105mm is still no joke. Also, as much as I've seen tanks getting knocked out in droves. I've also seen a lot of combat footage on both sides showing tanks suppression effects being used to deadly deadly results. But that requires good combined arms. Including enough drone/artillery to keep the potential larger ATGM teams at bay. Or, they get used a lot as a direct arty support. Honestly, I think that point is missed a lot by people. The tanks sitting close to the front line putting rounds downrange faster than calling in distant artillery.

@clarkbarrett6274

Жыл бұрын

IBCTs are used in places in the world to hold a line or make an entry. It's pretty rare that they would be sent against threats with tanks. The 82nd in Desert Storm is the notable exception. They were trip wire forces to deter until the ABCT type units could get there. (Schwarzkopf called them speed bumps). Still they probably would have appreciated MPF too.

@01Laffey

Жыл бұрын

​@@clarkbarrett6274 The enemy can also decide where it employs it's (proper) tanks. Should MPF be searching out and actively trying to fight MBTs? No! Could it encounter them anyway? It absolutely can happen. And in that eventuality MPF should be able to contribute to the IBCT fighting against armor, rather than twiddle their thumbs and saying "They aren't a tank" since the 105mm gun won't do much to any frontal armor that has been upgraded since the mid-80s

@clarkbarrett6274

Жыл бұрын

@@01Laffey The Army has the option to upgun to the 120mm if they so desire. The MPF can accommodate at the cost of higher weight. (Aside: If you're watching the news you'll see one of our main opponents appears to be a paper tiger. I'd venture 105s will do a number on those tanks too). The reason they chose not to already is because it's not aligned with the IBCT mission. Most of the world has very few, if any tanks, and those who do don't have comparable capabilities to even the MPF. IBCTs aren't generally going to be sent to places where they will have to oppose tanks. You don't bring a knife to a gunfight. If they have to pull tripwire duty they'll ensure they have adequate backup in aviation etc. until heavier forces can arrive. Regardless, they'll be much happier to have the MPF then not. In that situation or others.

Love this, any chance of the ABRAMS-X in the future

Thanks for subtitle

Maybe this is a dumb idea ..but. Maybe plate things where the enemy tends to see as a perfect hit .. with Teflon or nonstick pan coating like the inside of a skillet ..it could increase the chances of survival by increasing chances of the enemy round glancing off the armor because the bullet wasn't sharp enough couldn't get that initial"dig in" so it just bounces like shooting ice at an angle making a dent instead

Looks like a better option than the M1128 Stryker variant. It'll be interesting to see what comes of it.

@SlavicCelery

Жыл бұрын

It also looks like a vehicle to get marketed as a replacement for the smaller sized tanks/Infantry support vehicles. Heck, even a MBT for somewhere like South America or South East Asia. Diesel engine, marketed lighter weight for transport and bridges/cranes/etc.

@paratrooper629

Жыл бұрын

M1128 was retired this year after 15 years service in the US Army. 330 were planned but the Army quietly cancelled after acquiring 142.

@paratrooper629

Жыл бұрын

I wonder what will happen with the M1128s. Scrapped? Perhaps given as Military aid? Fiji actually has 8 infantry brigades. Iirc to are active duty. 1 brigade does peacekeeping mission in the Sinai. m1128 might fit in with that army. Thoughts? Thanks!

@verdebusterAP

Жыл бұрын

The MGS was great idea but poorly designed As for the MPF The West has received T-72B3, T-80BVMs and T-90s and now a T-90M from Ukraine So first the 125mm gun and ammo will be tested against Western armor which will either drive new upgrades or a new tank design depending on how well the armor performs Second the West in turn will test its 120mm rounds against the T-72B3, T-80BVMs,and T-90/ T-90M armor Ironically this will make or break the 130mm program depending on how well 120mm rounds perform The amount of testing that West will do will determine the future of many programs

So a tracked stryker ags that maybe wont be as bad?

I see this being used to quickly deploy and react. It’s lighter and faster. More easily air transported. It requires less fuel. Its intent is to support infantry. The Abrams can be too cumbersome at times; too heavy for many bridges and culverts. It’s got it’s place on the battlefield. I think this light tank does too.

💪

If this tank could be exported it might be an amazing option for Taiwan (Taiwan has a lot of hilly and narrow terrain). Three questions: could it be upgraded to have a bit more armor to fill a light-tank role while still being distinct from an Abrams tank or would it end up turning into the same thing? if it is equipped with an APS does this offer protection against 105mm shots? Does its current Armor offer protection against 30mm rounds from other IFV it might come up against?

So if the Stryker MGS was meant to do the exact same thing (also cheaper and easier to transport) and the Army divested it for lack of mission why/how is this new vehicle different?

@jeffcaird6801

Жыл бұрын

Tracks. Yep, that’s it, just tracks. And one more guy.

There is only 1 question that needs answered: can Chieftain fit in it?

I’m kind of sad that I’m no longer in, I would really have loved to crew something like this.

Is there any interest in it from the marine corp?

@paratrooper629

Жыл бұрын

Hopefully when CMC Berger retires this summer. Worst CMC in USMC history. It is as if the has been trying to destroy the USMC.

Name it the Ridgeway. U.S. tanks are named after military people, right? That Matthew Ridgway guy did a lot, right?

@paratrooper629

Жыл бұрын

The Stryker was named after 2 enlisted men awarded the MOH . An NCO tanker was awarded the MOH during Korea. Name it after him. I hold the highest respect and regard for Ridgeway. Had the honor of speaking with briefly @ 35 years ago.

🤜🤛

Shorter hull than the Abrams, looks fast.

A couple odd questions: It's an Infantry-support vehicle but doesn't carry infantry (e.g. - a Bradley). I'm not understanding the capabilities here vs. a Striker - The Army stated it needed something "new" because the M1 series couldn't, "pass through narrow passageways alongside dismounted infantry, cross certain bridges or drop from an airplane." 1) the "narrow passageways" is dubious and extremely situational, at best 2) there's a thing called 'Route Recon' and 'Bridge classification' that has dealt with bridges and avenues of attack. Stop adding tons of weight to the M1. and 3) the MPF *cannot* be dropped from an aircraft. Thus, and again, I don't see the need for the vehicle other than "wanting something cool that can't take an ATGM hit, can't carry infantry, and removes one of the three tenants of armored warfare: Armor." Assign Strikers to Infantry Brigades and save several dozen-million dollars.

@steveaustin2686

Жыл бұрын

This isn't really for armored or Styker brigades. Its for light infantry, to have a firepower support that is more easily moved than armor.

@jeffcaird6801

Жыл бұрын

Good question. This is heavier than a Bradley and less protected. It does what the MGS did, just with tracks rather than wheels.

@mcb4067

Жыл бұрын

@@jeffcaird6801 is it less protected than a Bradley? i thought it was more

@jeffcaird6801

Жыл бұрын

@@mcb4067 No. No reactive armor suite or APS. Though that could be added eventually.

Do you soon post the video of your visit at the workplace from Master Milo? Or don't you?

So will these be manned by 19K’s or 11 series soldiers with an ASI or some kind of MOS modified. Also, will these by an extra company to an existing battalion? Or will it be stand alone MPF battalions or squadrons that will be requested for support by an infantry battalion.

@barryrobinson1041

Жыл бұрын

19K will man it and they will be in stand alone battalions. In fact 11 series MOS is getting away from crewing vehicles, Armor branch is taking over the M2 Bradley with a new MOS 19C. infantry will still ride in back

@MagnusUS1776

Жыл бұрын

@@barryrobinson1041 makes sense. An ASI or MOS modifier could lead to a lack in proficiency as soldiers try and maintain their main MOS with their ASI.

@barryrobinson1041

Жыл бұрын

@@MagnusUS1776 that was the idea, Armor Branch learned their lesson and don't want to repeat the mistakes of the Stryker MGS manning and training profiency

Guess the VDV wished they had these in Hostomel

@HanSolo__

Жыл бұрын

Nah. They are so lame that all their stuff has to arrive on wheels. They could simply benefit from 60t MBT support but some folk high up there in the general command wanted all their vehicles to be air-drop-able.

Sounds like a lot of marketing hype double speak, using words connected with generalized military nomenclature, so hopefully _it will_ work better than the Ajax's suspension (and lightweight hull resonances) doesn't - i.e: making the crew sick from moving vehicular resonances and a flexible structure not absorbing those resonating perturbations.

MPF griffin ii

Where will they build this?

I wanna dress up my airsoft truck to look like one of these things

Huge deal right now given the context so both the US Army and Ukraine very lucky to have something new from the ground up #lessons_learned as are any USA Allies but so far production delays as everyone suddenly gets greedy apparently

Knowing America, they'll name the Tank M1 Godly Sherman, or M1 Patton..... just to really annoy everyone. Technically if they're not considering it part of the light tank line at this time, it should be M1.

As someone who's only slept on, and got yelled at on the Abrams i feel conflicted. Anyways I think I can save the army some money. Just like when I was in the army there's a bunch of emotionally challenged people telling me how much better the brad is so.. And just wanted to correct Don, none of the armies names they come up for armor are cool . They tried that with the striker and failed miserably. All the cool names are reserved for anything that fly's apparently. But the army has taught us names are stupid, more acronyms and numbers please. Well cool light tank, high mobility tank (whatever), just add a Bluetooth to the rear hand set and let's go. And a drone.

Reckon they'd sell me one? looks neat!

so literally a tank…

Is this the Griffin?

@paratrooper629

Жыл бұрын

Yep. Wrong choice IMHO.

If it is an Infantry direct fire support weapon, why is it fitted with a 120mm gun?

@paratrooper629

Жыл бұрын

My guess is to be able to carry more rounds. Might also be so as to not give folks the idea for it to try to slug it out with enemy MBTs.

So it's a light tank :D even though they dont like the term

KZread go home you're drunk! Start showing me all of my subscriptions again.

Hard to hear from all noise in background

not sure this is really needed by dismounted troops? why have a light tank when troops could have their AIFV be their support vehicle if their AIFV had a good gun to deal with the kind if targets they encounter in a battle other than tanks. just make a more capable AIFV and expand it's firepower abilities and forget the light tank idea? good segment though thanks sofie!

Great video, as usual! It looks like it will be armed with a 105mm main gun, like the very first M1 Abrams had, before they upgraded to 120mm. Hopefully the deployed version will have an anti-projectile system like the Israeli "trophy", after seeing how effective ATGMs are in Ukraine. Also they need something to quickly detect and either jam or destroy drones. Lastly, I hope they increased the armor on the top of the turret, since a lot of weapons now explode over the top of the turret, or go from a level flight to a top attack.

eso es un pizarro español con cañon general dinamics compro a santa barbara sistemas la empresa que fabricaba los ascod pizarro de este modelo derivan este y el ajax ingles

What a cool friggin lady!

Cool video. Shame about the sound though.

It seems very versatile but its way to expensive I heard its almost 2x as much $ as an Abrahams

oh look! it's a "Babrahms"😁 lol

I learning nothing, my English is very bad. Only German and Swabian 😊😁😂

So when it faces an enemy tank , the crew should inform the enemy tank that they can’t fight cause the Army says it’s not supposed to engage enemy tanks . 🤦🏻‍♂️

Feather tank

A man is still loading....

I would call this the Ent, in honor of the hard hitting tree people that brought the Hobbits to Isengard. It's the Excellent New Tank, ENT ;)

So it’s a light tank but not officially a light tank

@HanSolo__

Жыл бұрын

I'm sure in real life it will become both.

Abrams looks much more impressive. But as a light tank this one looks not that bad