I'm sure that it couldn't be too top secret since its wasn't covered.
Hosted by Darren Baker
Whats this?
MAD_DUCK
Joined: March 05, 2002
KitMaker: 434 posts
Armorama: 406 posts
Posted: Sunday, September 18, 2016 - 01:05 AM UTC
A trucker friend of mine sent me these photos from a truck stop in Ohio. Never seen this before..
I'm sure that it couldn't be too top secret since its wasn't covered.
I'm sure that it couldn't be too top secret since its wasn't covered.
ArtyG37B
Joined: August 13, 2009
KitMaker: 420 posts
Armorama: 416 posts
Posted: Sunday, September 18, 2016 - 01:08 AM UTC
Honestly. it looks like a movie prop. or vismod opfor.
joepanzer
Joined: January 21, 2004
KitMaker: 803 posts
Armorama: 740 posts
Posted: Sunday, September 18, 2016 - 01:24 AM UTC
I agree. That's a toy, man
RobinNilsson
TOS Moderator
Joined: November 29, 2006
KitMaker: 6,693 posts
Armorama: 5,562 posts
Posted: Sunday, September 18, 2016 - 01:27 AM UTC
I'm betting 2 cents on movie prop.
Doesn't resemble anything useful so I would be surprised if it was a vismod/opfor. Sort of looks like a hybrid between M60 and Abrams. The roadwheels look awfully skinny to support a real tank and vsmod'ing in the US to make an Abrams or M60 doesn't make sense to me (but who knows ...)
Doesn't resemble anything useful so I would be surprised if it was a vismod/opfor. Sort of looks like a hybrid between M60 and Abrams. The roadwheels look awfully skinny to support a real tank and vsmod'ing in the US to make an Abrams or M60 doesn't make sense to me (but who knows ...)
Scarred
Joined: March 11, 2016
KitMaker: 1,792 posts
Armorama: 1,186 posts
Posted: Sunday, September 18, 2016 - 01:43 AM UTC
More upgrades to the Raytheon M60? A new Decepticon? Something to drive conspiracy theorists crazy about U.N. invasion of the Mid-West?
66fastback
Joined: June 20, 2013
KitMaker: 65 posts
Armorama: 61 posts
Posted: Sunday, September 18, 2016 - 01:45 AM UTC
.that almost looks like an APC undercarriage. can there be a M114 underneath all the (fake) add on stuff?
Nope..... to long for that since that one had only 4 road wheels where this one has 6.
interesting to figure this out though
Nope..... to long for that since that one had only 4 road wheels where this one has 6.
interesting to figure this out though
barra733
Joined: January 03, 2015
KitMaker: 282 posts
Armorama: 255 posts
Posted: Sunday, September 18, 2016 - 01:56 AM UTC
Wheels look like a British CVR(T) - possibly one of the extended chassis (6 wheels) variants. Slope of the front glacis would also support this.
BigfootV
Joined: December 24, 2005
KitMaker: 1,624 posts
Armorama: 994 posts
Posted: Sunday, September 18, 2016 - 01:59 AM UTC
Things that make you hmmm...
Raytheon M60: https://thaimilitaryandasianregion.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/1383019597_m60_tank_modernization-9.jpg
M60 Phoenix:
http://www.military-today.com/tanks/m60_phoenix.jpg
See ya in the funnies.....
Raytheon M60: https://thaimilitaryandasianregion.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/1383019597_m60_tank_modernization-9.jpg
M60 Phoenix:
http://www.military-today.com/tanks/m60_phoenix.jpg
See ya in the funnies.....
MAD_DUCK
Joined: March 05, 2002
KitMaker: 434 posts
Armorama: 406 posts
Posted: Sunday, September 18, 2016 - 02:00 AM UTC
Next to it was a Bradley that looked legit , so I didn't bother to post that. Maybe its a new airborne tank
GaryKato
Joined: December 06, 2004
KitMaker: 3,694 posts
Armorama: 2,693 posts
Posted: Sunday, September 18, 2016 - 02:00 AM UTC
I think it is an M8 Armored Gun System (or Stingray), by the high engine deck.
dhmundy
Joined: August 11, 2002
KitMaker: 41 posts
Armorama: 40 posts
Posted: Sunday, September 18, 2016 - 02:09 AM UTC
I'm with Gary on the M8 - in it's latest version - the BAE Systems Expeditionary Light Tank Air Deployable Vehicle - [url=
http://www.armyrecognition.com/united_states_army_heavy_armoured_vehicles_tank_uk/expeditionary_light_tank_bae_systems_air_deployable_vehicle_technical_data_sheet_specifications_pictures_video_12110151.html[/url]
http://www.armyrecognition.com/united_states_army_heavy_armoured_vehicles_tank_uk/expeditionary_light_tank_bae_systems_air_deployable_vehicle_technical_data_sheet_specifications_pictures_video_12110151.html[/url]
BigfootV
Joined: December 24, 2005
KitMaker: 1,624 posts
Armorama: 994 posts
Posted: Sunday, September 18, 2016 - 02:13 AM UTC
You might be correct Gary.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/14/M8-Ridgeway-AGS.gif
See ya in the funnies.....
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/14/M8-Ridgeway-AGS.gif
See ya in the funnies.....
MAD_DUCK
Joined: March 05, 2002
KitMaker: 434 posts
Armorama: 406 posts
Posted: Sunday, September 18, 2016 - 02:15 AM UTC
Mystery solved, what through me off was the reactive armour and whatever that is covering the rear. I did find this picture http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/images/xm8.jpg
i just read that they are resurrecting the M8.
i just read that they are resurrecting the M8.
Frenchy
Joined: December 02, 2002
KitMaker: 12,719 posts
Armorama: 12,507 posts
Posted: Sunday, September 18, 2016 - 02:20 AM UTC
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPQjHLYx954
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulDLnTB__vA
Maybe the one in the original picture was back from Fort Benning Expo...
http://snafu-solomon.blogspot.fr/2016/09/baes-m-8-expeditionary-light-tank-ft.html
...or on its way to the forthcoming 2016 AUSA in Washington ?
H.P.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulDLnTB__vA
Maybe the one in the original picture was back from Fort Benning Expo...
http://snafu-solomon.blogspot.fr/2016/09/baes-m-8-expeditionary-light-tank-ft.html
...or on its way to the forthcoming 2016 AUSA in Washington ?
H.P.
Trisaw
Joined: December 24, 2002
KitMaker: 4,105 posts
Armorama: 2,492 posts
Posted: Sunday, September 18, 2016 - 04:38 AM UTC
Yes, I think it's the M8 AGS with passive armor blocks (the beefier armor option than the ERA that doesn't explode outwards).
The Army wants a light tank for their "Mobile Protected Firepower" concept and the M8 AGS is one contender. BAE supposedly did a little updating to it, but rumor is that they didn't update it a lot from the original prototype because there's no hard Army contract to do so.
It's either on its way to an US Army base to show off, or to the October Army USA (AUSA) Expo 2016 in Washington DC. The M8 AGS was shown at AUSA 2015.
The Army wants a light tank for their "Mobile Protected Firepower" concept and the M8 AGS is one contender. BAE supposedly did a little updating to it, but rumor is that they didn't update it a lot from the original prototype because there's no hard Army contract to do so.
It's either on its way to an US Army base to show off, or to the October Army USA (AUSA) Expo 2016 in Washington DC. The M8 AGS was shown at AUSA 2015.
Trisaw
Joined: December 24, 2002
KitMaker: 4,105 posts
Armorama: 2,492 posts
Posted: Friday, October 14, 2016 - 10:58 PM UTC
It is indeed the M8 Armored Gun System and it did appear at AUSA 2016 as shown in the video below.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgRxGz0M6Gk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgRxGz0M6Gk
M4A1Sherman
Joined: May 02, 2013
KitMaker: 4,403 posts
Armorama: 4,078 posts
Posted: Friday, October 14, 2016 - 11:51 PM UTC
Quoted Text
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPQjHLYx954
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulDLnTB__vA
Maybe the one in the original picture was back from Fort Benning Expo...
http://snafu-solomon.blogspot.fr/2016/09/baes-m-8-expeditionary-light-tank-ft.html
...or on its way to the forthcoming 2016 AUSA in Washington ?
H.P.
Also see "M8 Buford", on youtube... This Light Tank was meant to be a replacement for the M551 Sheridan, cancelled, and has again been resurrected, in order for the US Army to test as a "rapid-deployment, air-transportable armored vehicle". Believe it or not, C-130s are supposed to be able to carry this thing, so it can't be too awfully heavy. What has it got in the way of modern armored protection..? What will it weigh..? What kind of weaponry will it carry- Don't take what you see on youtube to be the ultimate result of this "test-vehicle". It IS still in the testing phase, so whatever it winds up as is open to question. Whether the Army actually completes testing, or even gets the funds to actually buy it, will be decided by whomever gets elected as President, and whomever controls Congress and/or the Senate...
Trisaw
Joined: December 24, 2002
KitMaker: 4,105 posts
Armorama: 2,492 posts
Posted: Saturday, October 15, 2016 - 04:36 AM UTC
There’s (now) a new technology demonstrator for the US Army’s "Mobile Protected Firepower” (MPF) light tank...General Dynamic’s "Griffin.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsD4vLLJeq4
The US Army supposedly wants a tracked vehicle for the MPF concept.
The M8 AGS won the “light tank” competition while the Stryker MGS was the loser. However, politics and other factors put the MGS into production while the AGS was cancelled.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsD4vLLJeq4
The US Army supposedly wants a tracked vehicle for the MPF concept.
The M8 AGS won the “light tank” competition while the Stryker MGS was the loser. However, politics and other factors put the MGS into production while the AGS was cancelled.
tankmodeler
#417
Joined: March 01, 2004
KitMaker: 3,123 posts
Armorama: 2,539 posts
Posted: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 - 01:34 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Believe it or not, C-130s are supposed to be able to carry this thing, so it can't be too awfully heavy.
The base vehicle is under 23 tons. At that weight it is protected against, I think, 23mm fire over most of the frontal arc and HMG over the rest.
Quoted Text
What has it got in the way of modern armored protection..?
There were three protection levels (if'n I remember correctly) and the top level was those large blocks of high end passive armour. Not Abrams level of protection, but apparently not at all bad.
Quoted Text
What will it weigh..?
23t base up to, I think it was around 40-45 with the Level III protection kit.
Quoted Text
What kind of weaponry will it carry-
It was the M68/L7 105mm in possibly a low recoil form.
Quoted Text
Don't take what you see on youtube to be the ultimate result of this "test-vehicle". It IS still in the testing phase, so whatever it winds up as is open to question. Whether the Army actually completes testing, or even gets the funds to actually buy it, will be decided by whomever gets elected as President, and whomever controls Congress and/or the Senate...
And that is a fact, fer sure.
Paul
tankmodeler
#417
Joined: March 01, 2004
KitMaker: 3,123 posts
Armorama: 2,539 posts
Posted: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 - 01:43 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Believe it or not, C-130s are supposed to be able to carry this thing, so it can't be too awfully heavy.
Bare vehicle was under 23t
Quoted Text
What has it got in the way of modern armored protection..?
There were 3 protection levels, bare vehicle plus add on kits. The first was proof against something like 23mm over the frontal arc and HMGs elsewhere. Level III protection was not as good as an MBT, but supposedly pretty good.
Quoted Text
What will it weigh..?
23t Level 1, about 40-45t level III
Quoted Text
What kind of weaponry will it carry
M68/L7 105mm, maybe in a reduced recoil form.
Paul
TopSmith
Joined: August 09, 2002
KitMaker: 1,742 posts
Armorama: 1,658 posts
Posted: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 - 12:04 PM UTC
Hummm... I think the stryker with the 105 would be a good contender or the Italian centauro. I don't know if the M8 is any tougher.
HeavyArty
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,694 posts
Armorama: 13,742 posts
Posted: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 - 05:50 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Hummm... I think the stryker with the 105 would be a good contender or the Italian centauro. I don't know if the M8 is any tougher.
It is the old debate of tracks vs. wheels. The US Army has generally preferred tracks for their superior mobility, but it is hard to make a tracked vehicle light enough to be air-transportable and still be effective to do what it is designed for. We will see what happens in the long run.
Cantstopbuyingkits
Joined: January 28, 2015
KitMaker: 2,099 posts
Armorama: 1,920 posts
Posted: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 - 06:52 PM UTC
Why not build 6-12ton tankettes like the Germans are already doing with the Wiesel?
HeavyArty
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,694 posts
Armorama: 13,742 posts
Posted: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 - 07:48 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Why not build 6-12ton tankettes like the Germans are already doing with the Wiesel?
Because they do not meet the needs that the US Army is looking for. The idea is to have a light/medium tank, with a minimum 105mm gun, to support light/airborne forces with the capability (armor, firepower, and mobility) to take on light armor/anti-armor and provide armor support for the infantry. The Wiesel and other light tankette vehicles do not meet that requirement.
In the past, this role was filled by the M551 Sheridan and (later) a company of M1A1 tanks assigned to the 82nd Airborne. The M551 was old technology that has been phased out and the Abrams were too heavy to be air-transportable to meet the needs of the Airborne. The latest version (M8?) AGS is the next prototype to vie for this role. Like I said, we will see what is selected.
SEDimmick
Joined: March 15, 2002
KitMaker: 1,745 posts
Armorama: 1,483 posts
Posted: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 - 08:11 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Hummm... I think the stryker with the 105 would be a good contender or the Italian centauro. I don't know if the M8 is any tougher.
The MGS was dropped after about 142 units produced...it wasn't as successful as the Army would like.
Its now looking at a light tracked vehicle again...if it can afford it. The M8 was cancelled due to funding issues in the mid-1990s...mostly because of the Bosnian Peacekeeping operations from what I understand.
 |
WEB HOSTING BY
Copyright ©2021 Armorama and Kitmaker Network, a subsidiary of Silver Star Enterprises
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.