Magic Factory

[Weaver]

Chinese company by the looks of it, anyway this has just become a whiff-in-a-box, hasn't it?



Currently in stock at Jadlam.

[Mossie]

Seems to be a theme with ASCOD developments. Although the British Army just keep plugging on with Ajax.

[Weaver]

Seems to be a theme with ASCOD developments. Although the British Army just keep plugging on with Ajax.

Indeed, although there was nothing apparently wrong with the M10: it was cancelled by a change of policy. That's the second time the US Army has got almost all the way to adopting a new "light tank"* and then abandoned it at the last minute. The last one was the M8 Buford in the 1990s.

There doesn't seem to be much wrong with the basic ASCOD either.

*Officially the M10 was a "fire support vehicle" and DEFINITELY NOT a light tank, although many cynics, including myself, were 100% sure that anything that looks like a light tank will be used like a light tank sooner or later.

[zenrat]

How do the two roles, "fire support vehicle" and "light tank", differ?

[Old Wombat]

How do the two roles, "fire support vehicle" and "light tank", differ?

In part - Armour; A FSV generally doesn't have much thicker armour than an APC (the M10's was angled better), while a Light Tank has armour more capable of withstanding hits from, at least, light AT weapons/shells.

But, also, & mostly, doctrine/use; a FSV is used to support infantry by providing direct fire support (it's in the name), either using HE/SAP against bunkers, HE Frag/Cannister Shot against troop formations &, maybe, HEAT/HESH against armour (but they DO NOT want to get in a shooting match with a real tank);

While a Light Tank is generally used for scouting & reconnaissance at the fringes of the main action (a bit like the cavalry of old - in fact many light tank units are ex-cavalry units) but Light Tanks are, generally, of little to no use on the modern battlefield, as MBTs are almost as fast these days, are much better armoured & carry a much bigger gun (so the Light Tank can't run away if it runs into any) & man-portable AT weapons are quite capable of incapacitating a MBT, if not destroying it, so a Light Tank doesn't stand a chance.

In real terms, on the modern battlefield, a Light Tank is just a way of getting the crew killed as quickly & expensively as possible.

Helicopters, ICVs &, most recently, drones have assumed the roles once conducted by Light Tanks.

The M10 was a product of "fighting the last war" in forward planning. Such a vehicle would have had some use in anti-insurgency operations, such as in Iraq or Afghanistan, but none against a peer or near-peer opponent.

[Weaver]

Light tanks can also form a route escort, flank covering or delaying force more easily because they're in independent recce units, rather than tied to the infantry units they'd be trying to escort/cover.

A point in the M10's favour was that it was easier to deploy quickly around the world (M551 Sheridans were the first US armour to get to Saudi Arabia in 1990).

However the points are well-made: IFVs can indeed do all that without needing another vehicle type, manned recce ground vehicles are either unfeasibly big (see Ajax...) or horribly vulnerable these days, and everything from satellites to FPV drones+"jeeps" can do much of the recce work. Essentially the M10 was a Stryker 105mm for the light infantry brigades.

[Gondor]

I bought one of those at Telford last year. The intent was to build it for the Project Cancelled Display.

[zenrat]

Thanks for the explanation.