tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post9111883217300412949..comments2024-03-29T12:15:13.832+01:00Comments on Defence and Freedom: The difference between a MBT and an assault gunUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-11894365294075513962016-09-14T05:58:50.853+02:002016-09-14T05:58:50.853+02:00There's a post in the pipeline that covers thi...There's a post in the pipeline that covers this (partially).S Ohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03359796414832859686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-2728839479915964412016-09-13T20:04:08.711+02:002016-09-13T20:04:08.711+02:00The effect on the enemy of the specific preference...The effect on the enemy of the specific preference of tank use is rightly pointed out and perhaps the most important take-away.<br /><br />Considering dedicated assault guns I think it's important to point out that with technological developments, tactical trends, infrastructure restraints and army sizes the various trade-offs also shift. Engines, transmissions and suspension for example are less of a constraining factor then a hundred years ago making the trade-off between armor and mobility smaller. Smaller AFV fleets also should force less specialized vehicles of which only a couple might have to be integrated and supported.<br /><br /><br />Firn<br /><br /> <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-71252155386434173962016-09-13T19:50:36.744+02:002016-09-13T19:50:36.744+02:00This pretty much fits my take on MBT and assault g...This pretty much fits my take on MBT and assault guns and the definition is useful although I would add rapidly or quickly in front of advancing to underline the difference in speed. <br /><br />Depending on the circumstances even a very light 4x4 as the famous Panhard AML could both be used as an assault gun or battle 'car'. Indeed similar design still are fighting mostly in the former role as we speak, see the first link below...<br /><br />Perhaps it is useful to add the other tactical dimension as armoured reconnaissance vehicle. So we have that role and mentality also sorted out. <br /><br />Firn<br /><br />1. (http://www.analisidifesa.it/2016/09/libia-haftar-riconquista-con-un-blitz-i-terminal-petroliferi/)<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-2721367400664395552016-09-12T23:01:14.601+02:002016-09-12T23:01:14.601+02:00I think MBTs do just fine in direct infantry suppo...I think MBTs do just fine in direct infantry support, they have the firepower and protection.<br /><br />Yet countries whose army doesn't get mobile mechanised warfare right anyway could stick with cheaper tanks that are good enough for the infantry tank/assault gun role. You can really do with 90 mm for fire support, at most 105 mm. You do not need APFSDS-proof glacis and turret front, and no sophisticated commander's independent thermal viewer. A simple dozer blade is more useful than a high end CITV for infantry support.S Ohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03359796414832859686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-42536913849822902572016-09-12T22:34:03.494+02:002016-09-12T22:34:03.494+02:00From this perspective, is it worth designing and m...From this perspective, is it worth designing and manufacturing dedicated assault guns, or should a military use its budget to just buy more MBTs that can be used as assault guns? That way spare parts and maintenance would be shared and there would be some economy of scale.<br /><br />MichaelAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-71093180148193557682016-09-12T20:10:35.465+02:002016-09-12T20:10:35.465+02:00What would a purpose built modern assault gun look...What would a purpose built modern assault gun look in your opinion? Does it have to differ substantially from the MBT? I've been thinking about MTLB with improved frontal armor and CMI 90/105mm turret. Cheap and MOTS.TehFinnnoreply@blogger.com