Interesting development/proposal I just came across:
P.S. do we have a timeframe for this article GTX?
Thank you for the clarification GTX!P.S. do we have a timeframe for this article GTX?
It was from Jane's Armor and Artillery 1985-1986
P.S. do we have a timeframe for this article GTX?
It was from Jane's Armor and Artillery 1985-1986
They made a bunch of prototypes with the ARES 75mm, what you've got there is one of the later models of Rapid Deployment Force Light Tank (RDF-LT). AAI offered it to the Marines for what they were calling the Mobile Protected Weapons System, which went nowhere. Various other versions include the High Mobile Agility testbed (HIMAG-B), the High Survivability Test Vehicle Light (HSTV-L), and a rather neat concept called the Elevated Kinetic Energy/RDF-LT Stage 2 that featured an articulated gun mount to fire from behind cover or sharply inclined hull-down positions.They actually built a light tank with that gun on it--at least as a prototype
View attachment 663086
Also had the Combined Arms Team / Lightweight Combat Vehicle (CAT/LCV). Which was an SHORAD version with Proxy fuse shells and Stringers.They made a bunch of prototypes with the ARES 75mm, what you've got there is one of the later models of Rapid Deployment Force Light Tank (RDF-LT). AAI offered it to the Marines for what they were calling the Mobile Protected Weapons System, which went nowhere. Various other versions include the High Mobile Agility testbed (HIMAG-B), the High Survivability Test Vehicle Light (HSTV-L), and a rather neat concept called the Elevated Kinetic Energy/RDF-LT Stage 2 that featured an articulated gun mount to fire from behind cover or sharply inclined hull-down positions.They actually built a light tank with that gun on it--at least as a prototype
View attachment 663086
HIMAG-B
View attachment 677930
HSTV-L
View attachment 677932
ELKE
View attachment 677931
Hm...was there ever a conventional HE shell developed for the XM274? I'd imagine in a SHORAD configuration the rate of fire and ammo stowage would be much less than ideal, though if it scores a hit that 75mm prox round is going to do some major damage compared to an M163 or even a Bofors.Also had the Combined Arms Team / Lightweight Combat Vehicle (CAT/LCV). Which was an SHORAD version with Proxy fuse shells and Stringers.They made a bunch of prototypes with the ARES 75mm, what you've got there is one of the later models of Rapid Deployment Force Light Tank (RDF-LT). AAI offered it to the Marines for what they were calling the Mobile Protected Weapons System, which went nowhere. Various other versions include the High Mobile Agility testbed (HIMAG-B), the High Survivability Test Vehicle Light (HSTV-L), and a rather neat concept called the Elevated Kinetic Energy/RDF-LT Stage 2 that featured an articulated gun mount to fire from behind cover or sharply inclined hull-down positions.They actually built a light tank with that gun on it--at least as a prototype
View attachment 663086
HIMAG-B
View attachment 677930
HSTV-L
View attachment 677932
ELKE
View attachment 677931
Also had the Standard AP shells so you can smack tanks around as well.
Basically the revival of the WWII assault gun. I've been thinking the same thing for a while now, there's definitely an unfilled niche for something with more firepower/armor than an IFV but less expensive and maintenance-heavy than an MBT for the type of low-intensity insurgency that most modern wars have become. The closest thing I can think of is the old Centurion AVRE and its American cousin the M728 with their massive 165mm demolition guns.Besides the idea of a light tank I personally like the idea of a well-armored fire support vehicle on an MBT hull that would work in conjunction of the MBTs and IFVs of an armored formation. Would be suitable against a lot of different targets.
That's an entirely seansible position to take during the '80s for sure but I think these days there might be more utility for such a vehicle. An air-bursting 75mm HE shell could rapidly suppress an ATGM team that gets spotted for example or take out a medium sized drone that might be hunting for artillery targets. If necessary it could carry some ATGMs for use against heavy armor or ones with thermobaric or blast-fragmentation warheads for dealing with bunkers or structures.I faintly recall there was more heat in the 75mm vs 76mm discussion in magazines than the actual demand for these guns. Very high ROF compared to MBT 105's at the time, but punched too low. Too slow ROF compared to SPAAG developments. They already had highly mobile recoilless 76' and 105 vehicle options for the identified support niches. And the different chassis pushed for it were better suited to carry grenade launchers.
The ARES gun had antitank performance close to that of the contemporary 105mm with APFSDS (see the doc Bruno Anthony posted). The problem was that the 105mm was already seen as running out of steam vs. future threats (ARES was tested circa 1975; Leopard II entered service with 120mm gun in 1979).I faintly recall there was more heat in the 75mm vs 76mm discussion in magazines than the actual demand for these guns. Very high ROF compared to MBT 105's at the time, but punched too low. Too slow ROF compared to SPAAG developments. They already had highly mobile recoilless 76' and 105 vehicle options for the identified support niches. And the different chassis pushed for it were better suited to carry grenade launchers.
You know that the ARES 75mm fired at 60 rounds per minute, right? That's pretty respectable for a large caliber AA gun!I faintly recall there was more heat in the 75mm vs 76mm discussion in magazines than the actual demand for these guns. Very high ROF compared to MBT 105's at the time, but punched too low. Too slow ROF compared to SPAAG developments. They already had highly mobile recoilless 76' and 105 vehicle options for the identified support niches. And the different chassis pushed for it were better suited to carry grenade launchers.
That's misleading because its a burst rate. It does not hold 60 rounds ready to fire.You know that the ARES 75mm fired at 60 rounds per minute, right? That's pretty respectable for a large caliber AA gun!
Held 18 in the ready rack, IIRC.That's misleading because its a burst rate. It does not hold 60 rounds ready to fire.