The US Army's Newest Tank

Decal affiliate link: tinyurl.com/42thwzv3
As part of the US Army's efforts to modernize its forces, a new vehicle called the Mobile Protected Firepower or MPF has recently been developed. Two prototypes were in the running; a modernized M8 AGS from BAE Systems, and a new vehicle called the Griffin II from General Dynamics Land Systems. The Griffin II is based on the Ajax AFV, itself based on the ASCOD AFV. The Griffin II beat the modernized M8 AGS, in part because BAE failed to meet requirements. The MPF is designed to be a sort of light tank or self-propelled gun that will accompany infantry units into areas where heavier assets such as the M1 Abrams would be unable to go. The Army is emphatic that the MPF is not a light tank, as they don't want MPF crews to go off and pick fights with main battle tanks. We'll be taking a look at the MPF's specifications and design. Interestingly, it uses or can use some parts that were displayed on the AbramsX technology demonstrator.
Sources:
GAO-20-579 - Next Generation Combat Vehicles
Mobility, Shock, and Firepower for Light Armor-Infantry Operations by CPT S. Scott Diddams
Weapon Systems Handbook 2020-2021
ARMOR - Spring 2020
Infantry Brigade Combat Team (IBCT) Mobility, Reconnaissance, and Firepower Programs - Congressional Research Service
"Two Light Tank Prototypes Battle for the Future of Army Firepower" - Popular Mechanics
"US Army eliminates BAE Systems from ‘light tank' competition" by Ashley Roque of Jane's Information Group
Tank Ammunition - United States Army Acquisition Support Center
Mobile Protected Firepower: An Opportunity - Association of the United States Army
A look at the upcoming Mobile Protected Firepower with GDLS at MANWARCON 2022 by Sofilein ( • A look at the upcoming... )
The Army’s Mobile Protected Firepower (MPF) System - Congressional Research Service
Check the channel "About" section for the link to the creator of my profile picture.
Songs used (in order from first to last):
Command and Conquer: Generals - Various USA Themes
Halo 3: ODST - Rain (Deference for Darkness)
Sound mods:
Epic Thunder (Pre-release)
Gunner HEAT PC Crew Voices Mod (Personal, go play the game: gunnerheatpc.com/ )
Sponsor: apexpartner.app/redirect/spoo...
Second channel: / @spookstoon
Patreon: / spookston
Twitter: / spookston
Reddit: /u/spookston
Discord: See my Patreon page.
Twitch: / spookstonwt
Steam: goo.gl/BYQjC9
#warthunder​​​​​​​​​​​​ #tanks​​​​​​​​​​​​ #tankhistory #mpf

[@kiroma0]

I'm surprised to see that the MPF program actually succeeded tbh

[@aaronclair4489]

It sounds like they picked realistic and achievable vehicle specifications this time. The XM1202 was supposed to weigh 18 tons and replace the M1 Abrams. This vehicle weighs 35 tons and complements the M1 Abrams. Finally, doctrine that aligns with physics.

[@Past10Performance]

@@aaronclair4489 first rule of government is don't let silly rules like physics stop you from aggressively throwing money at problems

[@termitreter6545]

Tbf it looks like after all the failed, overambitious programs, they went with way more basic stuff and proven stuff this time. Concept and parts of the vehicle are all pretty standard stuff. Apparently the MPF is based on the Griffin 2, which is based on the ASCOD (like the Ajax LOL), uses an older 105mm cannon, Abrams turrets parts, an old and proven Diesel engine. Theres nothing bad about this, Im sure the ammo/electronics/armor/etc will be up to high western standards, but it almost feels like a semi custom, semi off the shelve combat vehicle. Gonna be interesting to see how far this vehicle goes, this is the closest to a light tank weve seen in a while. Purchasing and maintenance cost will be interesting especially, considering modern IFVs have run into the problem of being nearly as expensive as actual MBTs.

[@shatteredstar2149]

@@aaronclair4489 were they going to use our strategic reserve of vibranium or Adamantium for the Abrams replacement?

[@lector-dogmatixsicarii1537]

>General Dynamics involved Whelp, time for nepotism and propaganda on how the full packed up things are still "light" and how we totally didn't bend the rules and logics of what is a light tank. Only fumbled actual lights as desired for 50 years to have this happen. 90's and 2000's were basically foiling light procurement to shovel cash into the "do everything" billed knock-off Centauros. LMAO on the Maury results saying that pitch was a lie. Even the newest Chinesium light is just a medium tank with fancy word play because it is "lighter" than their universal heavy tank. Shortened: This is a medium tank. Call it CVS90.

[@DefinitelyNotEmma]

Considering light tanks are experiencing kind of a renaissance in the recent years, could you cover the Type-15 in a dedicated video as well? It's probably the closest equivalent to the MPF and entered service fairly recently in the mid 2010s

[@jintsuubest9331]

Basically the same thing. Goes where 99 or even 96 cannot go. Hell, it even has a similar approach to the modular armor packages. It has autoloader, bustle type with blowout panel. While we do not know much about the modern Chinese era and aps packages, I assume it at least works. Some of them was seen without the original planned more advance sensory equipment. But it can simply be they put those in storage for parade/transportation purposes. It was said Chinese has functioning amp for their 105. The crew can load the autoloader from inside of the vehicle. Think this as more a light tank version of Type 10.

[@Jake-dh9qk]

@@jintsuubest9331 Adding to that, it’s got hydropheumatic suspensions and good gun depression good.

[@theus663]

Would be cool if he also made a video of the ZTZ99 development cicle. From it's early days all the way to the 99A.

[@Phantom-bh5ru]

@@jintsuubest9331 Chinas era is equivalent to Russians. Which means they have good heavy ERA that can degrade apfsds. Most nato era are light era that is designed for heat and can’t do much to apfsds.

[@termitreter6545]

@@Phantom-bh5ru You mean Russia claims the ERA can degrade APFSDS. Also claimed the APS can shoot (and at least weaken) kinetic rounds. Somewhat dubious claims if you ask me, especially considering how primitive those ERA bricks are. Tbh, right about now its very clear we know very little about actual russian equipment capability, but it all looks pretty underwhelming.

[@sniper372]

I like the mpf it’s a decent looking tank

[@trystanexul5681]

Aesthetics over function I agree.

[@swedishgrizzly6506]

I didn't know that a mix of the Abrams and Scorpion light tank would look so good

[@voiden3338]

@@trystanexul5681 i second that

[@phipschi4255]

i honestly dont really like the hull design, but it seams to be a good tank all in all

[@luigidomenicopace1329]

Really? Its an abomination...

[@dragoneye0979]

The one good thing about 2S38 getting added is now there is a precedent for adding vehicles like this that are still in trials and have very little known about them

[@TheTeehee11111]

Unless it's russian it probably won't see the light of day in the game for a long time

[@jintsuubest9331]

We dont know about most modern vehicle anyways. Modern being the og m1.

[@naamadossantossilva4736]

@@TheTeehee11111 And if it does it will have some modifier that makes it inferior to the russian counterpart.

[@joaquincimas1707]

@@TheTeehee11111 Expect it in 2025 when the rest of the trees have a counter to it. Gaijin usual moves outside their Soviet/Russia love affair.

[@13deadghosts]

Now we need the MPF and some KF41 Variant in the game :D

[@hedgeearthridge6807]

After watching an Operations Room video on Desert Storm, I hope they do name it after Schwarzkopf! For context to anyone who doesn't know, Schwarzkopf was the General who was over Operation Desert Storm, which was amazing especially from a vehicles perspective. The Abrams killed hundreds of T-72s, the air war was ingenious and featured so many different kinds of aircraft from around the world, many new technologies were deployed, and Saddam was practically defeated in less than 5 days.

[@WaukWarrior360]

I think it should go to Westmoreland since it's the first American light tank since the M551 Sheridan. It'd make more since to give Schwarzkopf to a potential replacement for the Abrams

[@Brave_Sir_Robin]

So not the col. from Catch-22 who loved parades?? :)

[@greeninja2728]

To be fair, saddam was really weak at the time and his army was nothing more than a ghost pretending to be scary.

[@shaider1982]

​@@greeninja2728 hindsight is 20/20. During that time, there were fears that the high tech US equipment will fail and the expeirence of Iraq will overcome the Coalition.

[@greeninja2728]

@@shaider1982 Iraq fought an 8 year war against Iran in which they technically lost where a majority of their modern army was destroyed and most infrastructure destroyed. I would believe that they knew such basic information before they formed the coalition

[@crown7639]

“Think of it as a striker MGS that isn’t garbage” 😂 best line

[@jedispartancoolman]

What's wrong with the mgs

[@masaigu1]

@@jedispartancoolman 🤣🤣🤣

[@thewhiteknightman]

@@jedispartancoolman It is *EXTREMELY* top heavy, such that if you fire from the flank it will topple over. The other variants do just fine though and if you need to bust bunkers the ATGM variant has a missile type it can use for that purpose.

[@Texas_Engineer_Mike]

@@masaigu1 cringe answer

[@johnnymatias3027]

Lol. I wondered why we didn't just send all the MGS's to Ukraine considering they were intended to retire all 142 of them this year anyway but I think the cost and the drawbacks would hurt more than help given other solutions.

[@shadewolf0075]

I think the Schwarzkopf name should be reserved for the successor to the M1 Abrams personally

[@Leefortvna]

inb4 tom Clancy's endwar reference

[@vyros.3234]

Name won't be used because it doesn't role of the tongue well

[@slappy8941]

We don't need another MBT; I think the Swedish CV90 is the way to go.

[@shadewolf0075]

@@slappy8941 we don't need another 4th generation MBT but a 5th generation one with some of the features from the KF51 would be way more useful then a CV90 type tank

[@EvelynNdenial]

@@vyros.3234 call it the blackhead then, same thing.

[@kasualmechanic4854]

The MPF feels like somebody took a good look at the Scorpion and said: "I want that. But bigger." and the MPF was the result.

[@thetexanbuzzsaw3145]

now I canr unsee it lmao

[@MenwithHill]

They gave it a rare candy.

[@danielsnook7362]

LoL 🙂

[@andyfriederichsen]

You mean the M808 Scorpion MBT from Halo? Nah, the MPF doesn't look ridiculous and impractical enough.

[@lebowskiunderachiever3591]

@@andyfriederichsen Probably referencing the British Fv101 . I can kinda see it though the Scorpion appears to be much smaller

[@MrZelatur]

the start of the video is cool, its actually show something WT is missing, its the shockwave effect when firing a gun and dust kickin up in the air, it just looks awesome ... old WT effects were a bit more dusty looking compared to new effects which also disappear really fast

[@firefoxsimplyred]

Performance friendly, something like that will fuck with performance massively.

[@TheShreddedSnorlax]

I'd quite like to see a break down of the CV90120. You mentioned it in this video and it does seem like a contemporary of the MPF idea. I'd like to hear more about it.

[@GUIZAR-kr2cj]

Videos on thhe CV90120 and the KF41 120 would be really interesting. Modern light tanks are very interesting now adays, especially these modular ones.

[@cutegamerboy]

The ACE engines do have me excited, really want to see more H pattern engine succeed lol

[@davidty2006]

ACE engines would be good for NATO as a whole. Imagine leopard, Challenger, puma and CV 90 crews just nicking parts from the americans. Perfect.

[@crowe6961]

@@davidty2006 The Americans will, naturally, engage in Strategic Transfer of Equipment to Alternate Locations to get their shit back.

[@acedogboy8421]

@@davidty2006nah cv90s sound way better with their v8 scania motors.

[@CobraDBlade]

Now that it has been chosen, the big question for the MPF is how long it will be before Gaijin adds it to War Thunder as an event tank with all it's stats completely borked.

[@haeppchen1603]

After the 2S38, I can't wait to see the MPF getting added to the game, before it even hits proper adoption by the US army.

[@jPlanerv2]

Lol no we waited 3 years for sep so now next 3 for new top tier tank for US tech tree

[@joaquincimas1707]

@@jPlanerv2 Meanwhile Russia tree will be using space ships at that time😭😂😂😂😂

[@Dziuba420]

@@jPlanerv2 I heard that the problem with US tech tree comes from long waiting time for licenses

[@Bruh-fc7ik]

@@Dziuba420 nah it’s not licensing, think it’s more due to the still classified nature of the modern Abrams variants’ exact armor figures; take the SEP V1, it’s not armored with its 3rd Gen DPU armor upgrade. Probably cause it would break the game, but also because it’s exact protection capability is still not public knowledge

[@Dziuba420]

@@Bruh-fc7ik yeah, but almost all vehicles in wt are licensed, so naturally they can’t get a license for a classified things

[@nathanielkulick9588]

“Think of it like a Stryker MGS that isn’t garbage” daym

[@lector-dogmatixsicarii1537]

Deserved shade. We could have been rolling in the Centauro-bussy, but got this shite that also cucked our light tank program.

[@YukarisGearReviews]

I think this was a smart move. You can't always peel off a section of M1 tanks to help deal with dug-in enemy infantry and the Stryker MGS had some clear deficiencies with its off road mobility and protection.

[@exoticbreadstick8661]

considering how rarely tank on tank engagements have been happening in modern conflicts, this seems like a pretty darn good tank

[@RoseRose-nt4ju]

Coughs in Ukraine

[@morpheusgreene2704]

@@RoseRose-nt4ju coughs in psyop

[@kylemelder5118]

Don't worry, when Gaijin adds it at 10.3 it will have a 40 year old Canadian round. Then 2 years later, they'll add m900 and make it 11.3.

[@Southerly93]

Good to hear that the XM360 could possibly go in the not-tank. I keep saying that the mpf needs a 120, even if it's a lighter shorter version, so it can fire 120AMP munitions and won't complicate logistics

[@geekmechanic1473]

He states in the video if I recall that it was able to fit the xm360 which is a 120 and about half the weight of the one on the abrams.

[@Southerly93]

@@geekmechanic1473 I am aware, that was just poor phrasing on my part. Fixed now

[@geekmechanic1473]

@@Southerly93 ah alright no problem

[@majo3488]

The system is fine. Use 105 ammo as long as it is viable (tank duel engagement are very rare and its primary threats aren't MBTs) and they are already bought. Then switch to the bigger caliber - exactly like the M1 gun choices were made.

[@elongated_musket6353]

I read somewhere that the 120 caused too much recoil and was too heavy during the prototype stages, but I guess they fixed that now.

[@thealmightytigor5308]

I find it interesting how the idea of light tanks are still around to this day even though IFV and APCS can easily fill that role. Correct me if I'm wrong but if I remember correctly Russia doesn't use light tanks anymore just the bmp used in a light tank/support role. So I'm incorrect Russia still uses light tanks I'm also shocked there's so many responses

[@desertfalcon1539]

there's also the 2S25/M Sprut although it's in production and not in service

[@Yung_pindakaas]

They do. 2S25 Sprut and Sprut SD are light tanks/assault guns using basically the gun and autoloader of a T72. Also you could count the BMP3/BMD4 IFVs they still have 100mm guns to fill the light tank firepower role. Edit: also no APCs and IFV cant easily take the role of a protected gun system, you gotta remember that having a large caliber gun is still very much needed on the battlefield to deal with fortifications, entrenchments, and armored targets, which autocannons cant really do. While also providing a cheap and fast fire solution compared to having to sling 100k$+ missiles or guided bombs at everything. I think one thing we might see more though is the usage of APC/IFV chassis to mount main gun systems on, kinda like stryker MGS, Boxer 120 and CV90-120.

[@Cris-xy2gi]

They definitely still use light tanks. The 2S25M “Sprut” is one example. It’s hull is very similar to the BMD-4M’s, but instead of a 100mm gun/missile launcher (it only fires ATGM’s and HE as far as I know) and a co-axial 30mm, it has a completely different turret that houses a 125mm gun. Light tanks are still around, because they are a cheap and fast way to provide the infantry with direct fire support. They also can be deployed in places where MBT’s struggle to be transported to or maneuver in - like mountains or islands.

[@joshuamueller3206]

There is the 2S25 Sprut, but it is used by the Airborne Forces, not the regular Ground Forces.

[@DefinitelyNotEmma]

The Sprut, ZTQ-15 and to a degree the Typw-16 can be considered light tanks

[@zeghetti595]

3:21 The bottom of the tank has to be armored because people have developed IEDs that penetrate the lower part of vehicles that have made soldiers get amputations, hence the thick lower armor

[@Spookston]

Yes, as I mentioned. That doesn't explain the RPG requirement.

[@zeghetti595]

@@Spookston Mice are being Armed with RPG, better safe than sorry

[@tubopanderson8106]

@@Spookston perhaps they meant ieds with efp's built into them?

[@thespacemanfil4921]

@@Spookston this sounds unlikely, but a remotely triggered rpg / shaped charge placed on a road to be fired once driven over might be a threat. Might make sense? Maybe not.

[@irinashidou9524]

I love the American went from “We can’t build heavy tanks because our cranes can’t carry more than 40T” To “We can’t keep using the Abrams because it ways to much for bridges”

[@lector-dogmatixsicarii1537]

>Selects new light tank >Ignores 50 years of viable light tanks >Light tank weighs as much as a T-54 >As much forward useable gun depression and poor vis angle in hulldown positions as a T-54 LOL, LMAO even

[@prathyushareddy9404]

@@lector-dogmatixsicarii1537 At this point USA should just copy the T-54 ltwt tank from WoTB

[@fictionindianspaceprogram-222]

​@@prathyushareddy9404lol

[@paul.facciolo6985]

it took america like 70 years to figure out if they wanted a light tank

[@Aetius_of_Astora]

Pretty cool looking tank. It's interesting seeing actual new vehicles after the extremely long period of just upgrading cold war era ones.

[@Brunboi]

Love that you mentioned which transmission the MPF is getting! I actually helped design and implement part of the assembly line for the 3040MX

[@okanieba267]

I noticed that you don't really have a video talking about the Stryker performance Irl, or at least I couldn't find it, It would be nice to have a video explaining why you consider it to be such a bad vehicle. Nice video btw!

[@obo7707]

Excellent , concise , informative video. Wow. Thank you

[@virgilio6349]

The British after decades of using Scorpions and Scimitars: "Took you long enough mate"

[@lector-dogmatixsicarii1537]

The Scorpion - 8 tons, bit of a tankette in reality, but gets around, over 50mph, street legal The MPF - 38 tons, medium tank, 40mph, good luck parking that, boreen troll bridges hate you I am saying it aint even. America is still obeast wheezing along. Can't even pick a light tank with 50 years of good options. You can throw a 6bt in a CVR and afford to drive it, no shot.

[@Thenotsofamousone]

The first US light tank in ages? awesome! going to be interesting to se how this develops over time. and yea Rino would be a awesome name for it xD

[@randymeredith]

Another outstanding bit of research. Well done.

[@noobiplays8539]

I enjoy these types of videos , they're one of the main reasons I subd . Thanks 👍

[@Spookston]

Glad you like them

[@loganwc99]

Rumor has it. Certain units in the army had the chance to train with it. They loved it, could see and engage ITAS, vehicles and fighting positions before light infantry when through.

[@wawaweewa9159]

If you could frankenstien a tank in WT, what would parts would you take for a light tank, it'd be cool if there was such a game mode

[@QuentinousX13]

0:54 That's so silly, it reminds me the Pershing tanks story, where they didn't wanted to equip it with a 90mm cannon because they didn't wanted the crew guys to go on and engage ennemy tanks like Panthers and Tiger.

[@alpacaofthemountain8760]

Wait didn't they say that it can have a 120? 5:33

[@thewhiteknightman]

*C I T A T I O N N E E D E D*

[@VX300]

It isn't that they are purposely underarming the MPF to force it to avoid certain fights. It just isn't designed for tank-on-tank combat, so they don't want to call it a "tank," because they don't want any crews to get it in their heads that they should be actively seeking out and engaging MBTs. It can engage an MBT if it has absolutely no choice but to do it, but that is a task better left to Javelins, Gustavs, and Abrams.

[@Mrdark7199]

Should name it the wolverine II to pay homage to the m10 GMC. MPF seems to fill a similar mission.

[@Mrdark7199]

@@anonymous-ml8sl Yes the m10 might of been a TD on paper but it's field use seems to be convergent with that of the MPF. Additionally, the M10 received a bit of a mission change once the M36s and M4(76) entered use.

[@lector-dogmatixsicarii1537]

M10 is a better platform, lol. May as well have taking it as a spiritual concept and redesigned it as a jig tank for medium and 50 ton purposes. It's got a lot more potential.

[@fire_drake12.arc.24]

Would be cool if you could make an overview of the other tanks that didnt make the cut if possible; would be neat to know what else we couldve had

[@elitely6748]

A new Spookston video nice. As others have the said the mpf does look nice honestly.

[@michaelhowell2326]

Your theory about the Army possibly leaning towards an autoloader bc of low recruitment numbers was a complete "Holy crap! That's a damn good point" moment.

[@amentco8445]

not sure how it's going to help if you also have less engineers.

[@demanischaffer]

@@amentco8445 Less tankers needed, can get more people in as tank mechanics

[@maplemike8496]

have you made a video about ugv`s? i think a video about the future battlefield would be awesome as well

[@mr.bamboozle3053]

The centauros predecessor the Centuaro II (2) is amazing and I would love to see your opinion on it!

[@AstroSlamacow]

You should consider doing a video on the lovely T114, such a fun ride!

[@Spookston]

I've been playing it a lot recently, it'll definitely get a video sometime

[@pershing3346]

I would love it if they called it "The Rhino" like the Spectrum Persuit Vehicle (SPV) from "The new Captain Scarlet". (A little obscure reference for any scifi fans of 60s shows).

[@mill2712]

To me the rhino would be a throwback to a playable tank in an old N64 game (Or PS1) called battletanx global assault.

[@williamfoster4268]

That protrusion is to keep people in the turret sticking out from being cut in half, WW2 motorcycles had something like it too.

[@michaelcowling9928]

I love the music selection from Command and Conquer: Generals

[@savagedabs8536]

That's a sharp looking tank and I can't wait to see it in action

[@CannonmangamingYT]

What about doing a MPF vs Stryker Vs Boxer comparison? I think it would be quite interesting. Great work thus far, keep it up : )

[@kilianklaiber6367]

I second that. I would really like to know the pros and cons. How much better are tracked vehicles offroad vs. a boxer in the real world?

[@wagahagwa6978]

i have my complete love for the mpf, proud of its success ❤️

[@fuge74]

Call it a tracked support armored reconnaissance vehicle, or TSAR. And its designation is a direct-fire artillery platform or DAP, with mission set progression (allowing progress to infantry), egress (covering support), and Recon-support (supports forward troops) making the TSAR DAP-PER.

[@joshe1246]

"A styker MGS that isnt garabage" oml I started crying

[@holdorf333]

Not trying to sharpshoot, just help you out a bit :D Neutral steer is achieved by locking one track and running the opposite track forward or backward, while pivot steering involves the tracks moving in opposite directions. this is only useful as pivot steering requires the driver to bring the tank to a full hault, move the transmission selector out of D or R and into PVT, complete the maneuver, then return to D or R as situation dictates while neutral steering in either forward or reverse only requires the t-handle to be jacked all the way to one side or the other, provided speed allows for such a maneuver. hope that helps!

[@popinmo]

do a video on the sturmtiger since it got added to war thunder its a neat tank

[@rifqitaqiuddin]

the backgound music just pull me back to childhood. dang i li=ove C&C General.

[@CONxNOR]

Would you consider doing a video on what features you think the army should adopt from the Abrams X?

[@coldcoffee89]

As long as it's not the unmanned turret... tried it before in the 70s/80s with ttb... its where the russians got idea for armata. No situational awareness whatsoever.

[@reymar2035]

MPF's look resembles the GDELS / Santa Barbara Sistemas & Elbit's Sabrah LT that won the Philippine Army Light Tank program. Specifically the tracked version. Those tanks (Both Wheeled and Tracked) might have the first batches be delivered by the yearend. That one carries a 105mm gun (either manned or unmanned. Latter is the default option for the 120mm option) made by Elbit (Turret made in cooperation with Denel), has provisions for the Iron Fist APS, and can be swapped for a 120mm if the customer chooses it. Probably a good idea for a video about MPF's Euro-Israeli relative considering some of its similarities.

[@ditzydoo4378]

Great video. It's about time they got off the dime and outfitted Rapid-D forces with something other than promises. >~< by-the-by "Pivot steer" is when one track is halted and the other turns the vehicle to pivot on that one halted track. "Neutral steer" is when the transmission allows the tracks to turn in opposite directions and the vehicle turns with-in its own length. ^~^

[@SpardaSon21]

>Create light tank with 105mm cannon >Has armor sufficient to stop light fire >Declare it isn't a tank at all I swear like I've seen something like this before. The Army is going to call it a tank destroyer, aren't they?

[@derpcade]

I thought you were talking about the MPT from Foxhole for a second, got excited.

[@stephensmith4598]

If you were to bury an rpg7 round and link it to a pressure plate it could be used as an IED. So that would be one of the reasons it would be listed in the brief.

[@alexis_ianf]

The MPF reminds me of the Sabrah Light tank which is being ordered by the Philippine Army from Elbit System interestingly they both used the chasis from the ASCOD tracked armoured fighting vehile (AFV) by General Dynamic Land System I honestly won't be surprised to see the MPF or whatever name it gets deployed in the Philippines during joint excercise considering the limitations of the infrastructure here to support the M1 Abrams.

[@randomexcessmemories4452]

The MPF looks like it is shaping up to be a great addition to the US military. I am excited to see where it leads!

[@LaputanMachad]

Clearly the most important feature of this thing is how nice it looks

[@scotttill3847]

Could you do a video on the Tanque Argentino Mediano (TAM)? I would be very interested in its development!

[@T-34]

crazy how KZbin tried today to make me watch the vid you made 7 months ago and you uploaded about it again today

[@MikeBison_]

Do you think you could do a video talking about the Ajax, and what the acceptance of the Griffin means for that program? Apparently they use the same chassis, but the Ajax has been in dire straights for a while now due to serious issues. Could the production of a vehicle that uses so many of the same components 'save' that program in Britain? And what could the fielding of this new vehicle mean for cross-platform maintenance and such in Europe?

[@86pp73]

I wouldn't put much faith in MPF saving its "cousin" vehicle. Most of Ajax's problems stem from the piss-poor construction of their hulls, rather than general component issues (although there have been a few, BAE had some problems mounting the 40mm, etc. Most of that has been resolved, though IIRC). MPF could be absolutely wonderful, and the British Army may still have to can Ajax. It's a programme mired in mismanagement and failure, so unless General Dynamics can find a way to stop those vehicles from rattling their contents into a smoothie of blood and electronics, without doing a fresh production run, then the MoD may just cut their losses.

[@masaigu1]

@@86pp73 i still cant wrap my head around the fact that they didnt just go with the CV90 30 years ago....

[@noahdelo]

cant wait to see it next patch

[@peterprovenzano9039]

“Think of it as a Stryker MGS, that is not garbage “ Best way of describing the MGS and hopefully the MPF

[@xmlash234]

It looks nice, but I really liked the M8 AGS better

[@LexieAssassin]

The fact that they went with what they did, I personally think was the wrong choice. It's a light tank that's not airdroppable and I honestly think it should feature an autoloader. IMO, autoloaders are the future.

[@swampdonkey1567]

The main problem with auto loaders are that they can go wrong, and to make them more durable they go slower then they theoretically could, so they fire atleast with Abrams usually at the same speed if not a second slower. Obviously it has the benefit of it doesn't get tired. That was all in general stuff, in this case with the light tank, its probably cause weight. And the fact that American tankers like having 4 guys. Useful for sleeping in shifts, or repairing and maintaining the tank. Not saying auto loaders can be good. (Personally with our Abrhams, a good fix if they do add auto loaders would be, to have an digitally controlled auto cannon and some ATGMs controles by a 4th crew member. This would make it weigh more, but, fuck it, it's already too heavy, as long as the suppesion can handle it, and It can go near 60mph and still accerate.

[@lector-dogmatixsicarii1537]

Absolute wrong choice. It's a hamstrung medium tank. Only passed rules bending because it's General Dynamics. The stupid Strykers also screwed over light procurement in the post Cold War era.

[@jr_0620]

Could you do a video about the new Rheinmetall KF-51 panther tank?

[@pastormiketwoable]

Being an ex-heavy cav man the MPF could make for great heavy support, now all we need is a good scout vehicle

[@aquajay]

Now this, is a cool looking machine

[@kronanthekonqueror2979]

Come for the tank info, stay for the tank info and C&C Generals music 🎶😁

[@leelime9857]

my good man i must say fantastic work on your videos always well written, clear, simple and too the point but alas they barely cover the length of time it takes to drink my tea ! any chance we could get some longer story time with spookston ? just because we enjoy watching/ listening to you.....fuck me i got less and less British as i went on ...fuck it Simmonds get me a big hat ! i wish to yehaw

[@Ob1sdarkside]

I like it, looks pretty good and sounds like it has good performance

[@dnorrish117]

i know they say it's not supposed to take on tanks, but put some ATGM's on that bad boy and you got a tank killer

[@danielsnook7362]

Or just mount switchblade 600 lunch tubes

[@Cmoth040]

Randomly found the channel due to an interest in military hardware. Subscribe to the channel because if the Halo 3: ODST theme played in the outro. Well met, sir.

[@RaeSyngKane]

Overall I like the MPF. I absolutely love the role it’s been assigned to fill. I think the 105 is fine, the armor and engine package are fine, and I think it should fit the role fine. The only source of contention I have is the 38 ton weight. It seems very heavy for its role. It certainly has tank weight for being “not a tank”. Maybe the army has future developments planned for it that make the weight necessary. I don’t know. At the moment though, 38 tons for a light infantry AT armored 105 platform seems high.

[@sethneall5705]

The m3 Bradley is 30 tons so its not unreasonable for a vehicle with more armor and a larger fire power to be 10tons heavier and as spookson said its probably just to make crews hesitant to attack mbts rather then heading straight for the enemy

[@coldcoffee89]

Also I believe 38 is the max weight with the optional armor packages (era) mounted. Not for sure on that one tho

[@lector-dogmatixsicarii1537]

Don't like the rear turret for the standard light tank role. And it definitely is too fat. In real speak by weight, it's a medium tank. And yes, they will over-stuff even more weight on it. This is definitely another cockup in a long lineage of light tank procurement cockups and missed golden eggs. A set of challenges to build three new tanks- tankette, light tank, and medium cruiser -would have been a much more economically profitable and spread venture yielding things that make sense instead of a medium with "light" stenciled on it. It's basically the knock-off Centauro (LAV) debacle all over again.

[@OneOddFellow]

@@lector-dogmatixsicarii1537 Right. Because WW2 British tank doctrine is obviously the superior choice for the modern army.

[@lector-dogmatixsicarii1537]

​@@OneOddFellow "Modern" has become so bastardized as a misnomer for the "newest is best" lie pushed to have progress for the sake of itself, and then not reflecting on anything because it rigidly equates "old" to "lesser" or "useless". Really fallacious mindset related to the pitfalls of trendy consumerism and hubris. Honesty admits modern armies are kind of run like shit, by the crème of the bureaucratic sewer rats. I would suggest reading up on the term and thought behind it. We haven't updated the profile for the idea despite dancing around it by other terms. For the same weight class and use as "light" MPF is impressed into, we can set up a much more sound base tank to the weight allocation than pretending to be something else for kickbacks. A modern cruiser is a lean setup. Your competition is Chinese -not medium- Type15 "light tank" and Russian vaporware "lights" / cold war mediums with a side of huge ass obese -targets- cars. A design based on a completely reshaped Crusader/Cromwell/Comet/T-34 etc with the last several decades of lessons would be extremely competitive if not dominant over the others in its exploitive utility.

[@Red_Four]

MPF was developed to provide fire power support to IBCTs and it will operate exclusively those units so that Abrams can be freed up to operate with armored cavalry regiments and ABCTs. What is interesting is that the Army doesn't want to call it a light tank, but the MOS that they want to designate to crew the vehicle would be called 19G Light Tank Crew Member.

[@justabitround3603]

Idk why but I was excepting this thing to look like a door stop with a 105 glued to it

[@tanc0hd175]

There is some directional heat mines that shoot up at what ever target, By using a magnetic or seismic fuse.

[@Ianwrym]

Those things are gonna take SO many MBT shots if they ever get used in an actual wartime scenario. It may have a different classification on paper, but out in the field any sort of tanker's gonna look at that, see a giant box with tracks and a giant turret and immediately go "That's a tank."

[@darrylnilsen6570]

I've been armor from M48, M60, M1, M1A1 and I like it.

[@WAJK2030]

I can’t help but I feel remembered at the Sherman‘s. Lightweight tank, mass produced, easily shipped around. Atm it’s just too expensive to be a viable LBT.

[@alpacaofthemountain8760]

I got the same feeling

[@goliver9991]

Ah a nice 9.3 to fill the gap

[@shadowofbrazil]

Id say it could be a long time before we see it in game. but with the 2S38, idk. But itll probably be a long while tbh. talk about the LAV-25. i really wish Gajin would add it

[@MarcelLeonReal]

hey Spookston, i havent played war thunder since 2021, your videos started popping up in my rec again, and i have been considering going back into it, is it worth it, or should i just wait till a big update or something

[@ViktoriousDead]

“Designed to be rolled off a C17 at a secured airfield” *Army glances nervously at Ranger Regiment*

[@sir_jerryplayz1542]

Any thoughts on the new sturmtiger?

[@Spookston]

I think Gaijin is scraping the barrel as far as new content goes

[@sir_jerryplayz1542]

@@Spookston make a video about it surely like was it even a real tank?

[@The_Hampter_Aviator]

I was on the bus to school today in the morning and saw one of these on a truck bed lol

[@sageg58]

cant wait for this to be the next event vehicle, xm8 v3

[@cryptosporidium1375]

Now we need the AT-TE to wrap things up.

[@pyeitme508]

Amazing 🤩

[@turgeon1235]

Do you think Gaijin will add it because if they can add something that hasn’t passed state trials then they could add anything

[@serdarcam99]

I would like to see your opinions about new German KF51 Black Panther design by Rheinmetal. They intended to make this tank for import purposes and it looks cool on outside but i would like to hear your opinions about it

[@HNNLUND]

The is6 is a is4 with a hard to hit weakspot at 7.0

[@blank557]

The gap under the gun mantel between the turret and the chassis looks like a shot trap to me. A RPG or tank shell hits there, and its "Hasta la vista" to the gun turret.

[@Polomac100]

Hello, will you make a review of the franco-german EMBT that was revealed a few months back ?

[@code0335]

at this time stampt 4:08, I almost think it was 2 tons lighter than Type 10 until I realize, MPF is a light armoured combat vehicle while Type 10 is an MBT.

[@scottyj8112]

A video on your thoughts which would have been better, GD's chosen MPF platform or BAE's Prototype if they had delivered it on time. Also maybe another video on your thoughts of the Ajax/Scout SV?

[@Spookston]

I have a personal bias towards the M8, but the more I learn about the GD MPF the more I appreciate it.

[@stinopharan5528]

There are pros for the BAE "M8", in a -C-17, it can carry 3, is lighter than GD's -Already have an autoloader -Easy repair removable engine block -Have already tested normal 120mm gun -can use 120mm ETC gun -optional armor package

[@stinopharan5528]

Also the BAE offer, this can be transported 2 in C-130. This is a very true air transportable support vehicle. To this day, C-130s are still tje backbone of US military transport.

[@crocidile90]

I think the M8 would be an excellent Marine corps LT. They got rid of there Abrams (giving them to Army) and if we are gonna have a Pacific front (we are if China goes full cope and seethe when economy fails) and really light stuff will work wonders for beach invasions and will make shipping them far easier.

[@lector-dogmatixsicarii1537]

I am super M8 biased considering how many options we have had for an actual solid light tank decades ago instead of some goofy CV/Abbot that weighs as much as a medium. I am saying I can take the Cromwell/Comet design and revamp it new to be much more effective keeping pace with wheeled vehicles and break throughs. Having a 120 or 105 isn't needed with how good a fast deploying long barrel 75 and 90 can be in support for this role. Why didn't they just specify for a cruiser medium tank instead of playing nepotism for decades? It would not have been hard to take an XM1 and scale it back to 30-40 tons. The range on that thing would be absolutely stellar if they kept a scaled fuel stowage.

[@andrewwilbraham6875]

Neutral and pivot steer are not the same thing. Pivot steer means one track moves while the pivot point of the vehicle is on the non-moving track. Neutral steer means both tracks move in different directions and the pivot point is the center of the hull. While they may seem the same thing in a video game, they are very different in the alleys of Baghdad.

[@Fabio-ib3ie]

Please review the IT 1