Sure, the Army hopes for a light, lethal, and survivable tank. Good luck with that. But the Marines have a similar delusion over replacing the amphibious assault vehicle (AAV).
All the Marines want for their AAV replacement is a vehicle that carries lots of Marines quickly from far off shore (so the Navy ships will be less vulnerable to shore-based anti-ship weapons) and then race inland, keeping up with Marine Abrams tanks, without suffering catastrophic hits that kill all those Marines jammed in the fighting vehicle.
Is that all?
Oh, and don't cost too much, thank you very much.
Look, I hate the idea of a large capacity boat hauling around troops inland.
And I know that I'm just a simple, ground kind of guy, but is it really out of bounds to suggest that the Marines have a ship-to-shore vehicle and also a separate fighting vehicle for the inland fight?
Because the Marines have been trying for an awful long time to get the single vehicle idea to work. I sincerely doubt that building the wonder amphibious assault vehicle will work any better than building the wonder tank.
About Me
- Brian J. Dunn
- I live and write in Ann Arbor, Michigan. University of Michigan AB and MA from Eastern Michigan University. One term in the Michigan Army National Guard. Former American history instructor and retired nonpartisan research analyst. I write on Blogger and Substack. Various military and private journals have published my occasional articles on military subjects. See "My Published Works" on the TDR web version or under the mobile version drop-down menu for citations and links.
