yes dear Pioneer,
Paratroopers have always struggled to buy vehicles capable of providing supporting fire for airborne infantry, but light enough to fly in existing transport airplanes. Locust, Harry Hopkins, Sheridan, Scorpion, Wiesel, etc. have all been valiant attempts, but none could carry enough armour to face main battle tanks. In the initial stages, they only need to out-gun light infantry, but American politicians fear that sending paratroopers with anything less than MBT will lose them votes ... er .... lose the battle ... lose American soldiers' lives.
It takes weeks or months to move enough MBTs - to the far side of the planet - to ensure victory in the first battle.
Reducing vehicle cross-section by removing equipment is problematical. Unbolting side armour is a minor inconvenience until it cathces up a few days later. Rolling onto a target without a turret is a no-go ... er ... stupid ... only suggested by logistics officers who have never fought on a hot DZ.
Sadly, only the USAF and Russian Air Force can afford transport airplanes large enough to carry MBTs.
Let's compare cargo compartment cross-sections.
C-130 108" high X 120" wide
C-5A 172" 228"
C-17 124 206
KC-90 120 132
A-400 157 262
Judging by the larger cargo compartment cross-sections, it appears that every new cargo plane tries to accommodate vehicles bigger than C-130 Hercules. While many air forces would like huge C-5s or Antonovs, they struggle to afford cargo planes that can carry a single MBT at a time.