Reply to thread

Message

Thunderbolt was a United Defense thing not a U.S. Army thing. The U.S. Army lost interest in M8 in 1998. Thunderbolt tested a hybrid-electric drive (for the FCS program, no less). Lightning Bolt tested the electro-thermal chemical ETIPPS generator/capacitor bank in a modified bustle rack. The most interest the U.S. Army had in M8 after the bid failed was the driver's hatch, which was similar to the one eventually used on the FCS MGV, in all seriousness.

That itself might just be UD's common design philosophy though. The FCS tankettes owed a lot of their general layout to M8.

Stored kills also aren't really important outside of shooting ranges, honestly. MPF went with 105mm because its purpose is to act as a MGS for IBCTs. There's plenty of 105mm HEP sitting around. There's barely any AMP rounds, much less HEAT-MP, though. That's about the only reason.

Killing tanks is something it would be uniquely bad at. Tanks are why the Infantry have the TOW and Javelin.

<blockquote data-quote="Kat Tsun" data-source="post: 606920" data-attributes="member: 10036">Thunderbolt was a United Defense thing not a U.S. Army thing. The U.S. Army lost interest in M8 in 1998. Thunderbolt tested a hybrid-electric drive (for the FCS program, no less). Lightning Bolt tested the electro-thermal chemical ETIPPS generator/capacitor bank in a modified bustle rack. The most interest the U.S. Army had in M8 after the bid failed was the driver's hatch, which was similar to the one eventually used on the FCS MGV, in all seriousness.That itself might just be UD's common design philosophy though. The FCS tankettes owed a lot of their general layout to M8.Stored kills also aren't really important outside of shooting ranges, honestly. MPF went with 105mm because its purpose is to act as a MGS for IBCTs. There's plenty of 105mm HEP sitting around. There's barely any AMP rounds, much less HEAT-MP, though. That's about the only reason.Killing tanks is something it would be uniquely bad at. Tanks are why the Infantry have the TOW and Javelin.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Kat Tsun, post: 606920, member: 10036"] Thunderbolt was a United Defense thing not a U.S. Army thing. The U.S. Army lost interest in M8 in 1998. Thunderbolt tested a hybrid-electric drive (for the FCS program, no less). Lightning Bolt tested the electro-thermal chemical ETIPPS generator/capacitor bank in a modified bustle rack. The most interest the U.S. Army had in M8 after the bid failed was the driver's hatch, which was similar to the one eventually used on the FCS MGV, in all seriousness. That itself might just be UD's common design philosophy though. The FCS tankettes owed a lot of their general layout to M8. Stored kills also aren't really important outside of shooting ranges, honestly. MPF went with 105mm because its purpose is to act as a MGS for IBCTs. There's plenty of 105mm HEP sitting around. There's barely any AMP rounds, much less HEAT-MP, though. That's about the only reason. Killing tanks is something it would be uniquely bad at. Tanks are why the Infantry have the TOW and Javelin. [/QUOTE]

Verification