this post was submitted on 16 Oct 2025
30 points (100.0% liked)
NonCredibleDefense
305 readers
172 users here now
Militaria shitposting central! Post memes, tasteless jokes, and sexual cravings for military equipment and/or nuclear self-destruction!
Rules:
- Posts must abide by Piefed.social terms and conditions
- No racism or other bigotry allowed.
- Obviously nothing illegal.
If you see these please report them.
Related communities:
!forgottenweapons@lemmy.world
For the other, slightly less political NCD, !noncredibledefense@sh.itjust.works
founded 3 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Been wondering what the hell happened to that thing's design and requisition path.
I know it was supposed to replace the troublesome Stryker MGS that has been decommissioned for a while. Feels like we have problems making truly "light" vehicles now because everything has to save the crew from a direct IED detonation, and survive at least 14.5mm fire 360 degrees, and have modern fire suppression and spall protection, and have climate control, and have a full sensor and optics suite, and in this case carry a fuckoff 105mm gun, and and and...
...but it still has to be light enough to not fuck up roads and bridges and have a C17 be able to carry three of them. The design goals are at odds. In this case they ended up with a very heavy vehicle for its class. Crew survivability is an excellent thing, but you can't expect to make a light vehicle without compromise.
That all sounds very doable, assuming you only need 50km of range and no people inside.
Where is our everything vehicle that does everything and has no weaknesses