M8 Armored Gun System

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

M8 Armored Gun System
M8-Ridgeway-AGS.gif
M8 AGS at Aberdeen Proving Ground
TypeLight tank
Place of originUnited States
Production history
DesignerFMC Corporation/United Defense LP
ManufacturerUnited Defense LP/BAE Systems
Produced1995, 2020
No. built6 AGS pilots, 12 Mobile Protected Firepower
Specifications (AGS)
Mass36,900 to 38,800 lb (16,740 to 17,600 kg) (Level I armor)
44,000 lb (19,960 kg) (Level II)
52,000 lb (23,590 kg) (Level III)
Length29 ft 1 in (8.9 m) (hull + gun),[1] 20 ft 4 in (6.2 m) (hull only)
Width8 ft 7 in (2.6 m)[1]
Height7 ft 10 in (2.4 m)[1]
Crew3 (commander, gunner, driver)
Elevation+20° / -10° (depression limited over rear arc)
ArmorWelded 5083 aluminium alloy
Main
armament
XM35 105 mm caliber soft recoil rifled gun (31 rounds)
Secondary
armament
7.62 mm coaxial M240 (4,500 rounds)
12.7 mm commander's M2 Browning (600 rounds)[2]
EngineDetroit Diesel Corporation 6V 92TA
550 hp (410 kW) at 2,400 rpm (JP-8 fuel),
580 hp (430 kW) at 2,400 rpm (diesel)
Power/weight28.3 hp/ST (23.3 kW/t) (Level I)[2]
TransmissionGeneral Electric HMPT-500-3EC[2]
SuspensionTorsion bar[2]
Ground clearance17 in (430 mm)[2]
Fuel capacity150 US gal (570 l; 120 imp gal)[2]
Operational
range
300 mi (480 km)[1]
Maximum speed Road: 45 mph (72 km/h)[1]

The M8 Armored Gun System (AGS), sometimes known as the Buford,[3] was an American light tank that was intended to replace the M551A1 Sheridan in the 82nd Airborne Division, and serve as armor support for reconnaissance assets in the 2nd Armored Cavalry Regiment (2nd ACR).

The M8 AGS began as a private venture of FMC Corporation, called the Close Combat Vehicle-Light (CCV-L), in 1983. The Army began the Armored Gun System program to develop a mobile gun platform that could be airdropped. By 1992 the program was its top-priority development program. The service selected FMC's CCV-L over competitive offers from three other teams. The service sought to purchase AGS systems to begin fielding in 1997.

The AGS was canceled in 1996 due to budgetary constraints. United Defense LP proposed the AGS for the Mobile Gun System variant of the Interim Armored Vehicle program in 2000, but lost out to the General Motors–General Dynamics LAV III, which was type classified as the Stryker M1128 Mobile Gun System; the MGS system lacked the capability to be airdropped. In 2017, the Army initiated the Mobile Protected Firepower program to acquire a light tank asset. BAE Systems offered the AGS system to meet this requirement, but it was not selected.

Development[edit]

Main article: Armored Gun System

In the 1980s, the United States Army began looking for an air-portable replacement for their M551 Sheridan light tanks. Several Army projects to update or replace the Sheridan had proved unsuccessful. After the cancelation of the Army's Mobile Protected Gun System around 1982, the Army decided to equip its light forces with the TOW missile and Mk 19 grenade launcher-armed Humvee in the interim. The MPGS program morphed into the Armored/Assault Gun System.[4]

In 1985 the Army Vice Chief of Staff approved an amended Requirement Operational Capability for the Armored Gun System. The Army Chief of Staff did not lobby for funding the program in Congress however, given its low priority. In May 1986, the Armored Family of Vehicles Task Force was given the lead on the program.[5]

In August 1987, the Office of the Secretary of Defense approved the AGS program initiative for 600 vehicles. A joint Army–Marine Corps program was explored. In December, the AGS program was dropped as the $800 million plan was considered unaffordable. Around the same time the Army Chief of Staff issued a "promissory note" to replace the Sheridan by FY1995.[5]

In September 1989, the Armored Gun System Project Manager office was established at TACOM and a marketing survey was distributed to industry. The Army formalized the Armored Gun System program in April 1990 with the issue of a new Requirement Operational Capability document.[6]

In addition to being expected to replace the Sheridan in the 3/73rd Armor of the 82nd Airborne Division,[7] it was also expected to serve as armor support for reconnaissance assets in the 2nd Armored Cavalry Regiment.[8]

FMC Corporation submitted the Close Combat Vehicle-Light to meet the AGS requirement. The CCV-L was a private venture of FMC.[9] Three other teams submitted proposals:[10]

The bids ranged from a high of $189 million for GDLS—Teledyne and a low of $92 million for Hägglunds.[11]

In June 1992, the Army selected the FMC proposal. FMC was awarded $27.7 million to begin phase 1 work, including the production of six test units. The procurement program was valued at $800 million.[9]

The Army, believing that the requirement would deter submissions, did not originally require that the AGS be air-droppable by the C-130.[12] Nevertheless, FMC's proposal claimed that it could achieve this feat. After winning the contract, FMC made several weight-saving changes to the design, including lightening the pallets, in order to meet the C-130's weight limit.[13]

In December 1993 report, the Defense Department Inspector General predicted that the AGS would be too heavy for low-velocity airdrop. The report said the AGS did not meet the Army's requirements for air mobility, and recommended delaying low-rate initial production until the airdrop requirement could be met.[14] The Army strongly refuted the Inspector General's report.[15] The Inspector General's concerns were put to rest in October 1994, when the service successfully airdropped an AGS from a C-130 at an altitude of 1300 feet.[16]

Citing cuts in procurement funding, in 1993, the Army cut its planned AGS order from 300 to 233. In 1994, the Army settled on an acquisition target of 237 vehicles.[17] Of these, 123 would go to the 2nd ACR, 58 to the 82nd, and 56 to reserves and training bases.[18] The last 169 AGS systems, to be produced from 1998 to 2002, were to be built without the weight-saving modifications of those destined for the 82nd, which was the only unit that required an airdroppable AGS system.[19]

An AGS pilot fires its main gun in 1994

Six prototypes were built under the designation XM8 AGS. The first of these was rolled out at the United Defense (created by a merger of FMC and BMY) facility in San Jose, California, in April 1994,[7] and arrived at Fort Knox in April 1995.[20] The last of these was delivered in May.[21] United Defense provided five AGS systems to the service's Operational Test Command, which put the vehicle through five months of testing at Fort Pickett. Another prototype underwent survivability testing at Aberdeen Proving Ground.[22]

In 1995, the Army explored cutting the 2nd ACR, which would reduce the Army's buy to 80 AGS for the 82nd Airborne. In May 1995, the National Guard expressed interest in procuring the AGS for the 38th Infantry Division, 35th Infantry Division and 34th Infantry Division in order to help bridge the looming capability gap should the 2nd ACR be eliminated. This proposal was rejected by the service.[23] The M8 was type-classified by the Army in late 1995[24] The Army approved production of the AGS in October. An initial production run of 26 vehicles[21] with an option for 42 more scheduled to begin in FY1997.[22] A full production decision would be reached in 1997.[2] Fielding to the 3/73 Armor would begin in 1999. All three squadrons of the 2nd ACR were to be fielded subsequently.[25]

Pre-production unit circa 1994

With the reduction in the planned buy of AGS systems due to the decision to eliminate the 2nd ACR, the program lost much of its economies of scale.[26] The Army canceled the AGS in January 1996 to free up money for other fledgling programs. The Army estimated killing the program would save the service $1 billion. The service's decision to kill the AGS was met with resistance from Congress. The Army sought to win support for its decision by the Office of the Secretary of Defense, which would ensure that the service would not have to forfeit unspent funds from the AGS.[27]

Proposed revivals[edit]

In 1998, the Senate Armed Services Committee proposed using the AGS as a surrogate vehicle to evaluate "strike force experimentation activities" in the 2nd Cavalry Regiment.[28]

An AGS rolls off a C-130 for a platform performance demonstration at Fort Knox circa December 1999

United Defense LP proposed the AGS for the Mobile Gun System variant of the Interim Armored Vehicle program in 2000.[29] United Defense provided an AGS armored in level 1 and 2 for a platform performance demonstration from December 1999 to January 2000.[30] The AGS lost out to a variant of the General Motors LAV III, which was type classified as the Stryker M1128 Mobile Gun System.[31] The Government Accounting Office denied UDLP's protest of the award in April 2001.[32]

In March 2004, at the 82nd Airborne Division's request, the Army approved the transfer of four production vehicles from United Defense's facility in Pennsylvania, to the 82nd's 17th Cavalry Squad at Fort Bragg in North Carolina. However, in June 2004, this plan was put on hold while the Army determined whether the Mobile Gun System could meet the 82nd's requirements.[33] An air-drop test of a Stryker weighted to simulate the load of the MGS was conducted in August. Around the same time, the Army identified issues with the air-worthiness of the MGS, among the heavier of the Stryker family. Still more pervasive problems persisted with the autoloader.[34] In January 2005, the Army said it had ruled out fielding the AGS, saying the system lacked spare parts that would be required to maintain the vehicle for any significant length of time. The Army doubled down on its commitment to fielding the MGS, which it said it could begin fielding in summer 2006.[35]

United Defense sought overseas customers, without success. In 1996, United Defense was planning on shipping an AGS prototype to Taiwan.[36] In 1996, they had partnered with FMC Nurol to offer the AGS to the Turkish Land Forces, which was seeking a main battle tank.[36][37] By 1998, Canada, Germany, Malaysia and Singapore had expressed interest in the tank.[37]

In 2015, the U.S. Army articulated a requirement for a Mobile Protected Firepower system to replace the Mobile Gun System.[38] In 2017, the Army formalized its requirements with a request for proposals. The MPF was defined as an air-transportable light tank to assist infantry brigades in forced entry operations. The Army sought to buy 504 MPF systems. Requirements called for a tracked vehicle armed with a 105 mm or 120 mm caliber cannon, which would not need to be air-droppable. BAE Systems (which bought United Defense in 2005) entered a modernized AGS into the MPF competition. In 2018, the Army selected bids from GDLS and BAE to build 12 prototypes each.[39] BAE began delivering the vehicles to the Army in December 2020.[40] In February 2022, BAE was eliminated from the competition due to noncompliance issues, leaving the General Dynamics Griffin as the only MPF entry.[41]

Design[edit]

The basic hull of the AGS is made of welded 5083 aluminium alloy, with a modular armoring system that allows the vehicle to be equipped according to requirements.[1] Aluminum was chosen instead of steel in order to reduce the weight of the vehicle. The weight limit requirement for the vehicle was driven by the airdrop requirement.[3]

Protection[edit]

An AGS with level 3 armor

Modular armor levels:

  • The Level I (basic) armor package consisted of ceramic armor tiles[13] and protected the vehicle against small-arms fire and shell splinters. It was designed for the rapid deployment role and could be airdropped from a C-130. All-up weight was 39,800 lb (18,100 kg).[1]
  • The Level II armor package consisted of additional plates of titanium, hardened steel and expanded metal.[13] At an all-up weight of 44,270 lb (20,081 kg), Level II-armored AGS could still be carried by C-130, but could not be air-dropped.[1]
  • Level III armor consisted of bolt-on armor boxes, and is designed for contingency operations and provides protection against light handheld anti-tank weapons. Level III-armored AGS systems cannot be carried by C-130. All-up weight is 52,000 lb (24,000 kg).[1]

The crew is compartmentalized from the ammunition magazine by a firewall. An NBC overpressure system is equipped[42] (a requirement for radiation hardening was omitted).[43]

Mobility[edit]

Power is provided by a Detroit Diesel 6V-92TA 6-cylinder multifuel diesel engine developing 550 hp at 2400 rpm.[44][1] This had 65% commonality with that of the Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical Truck (HEMTT).[1] The AGS's power-to-weight ratio was greater than the M1A1 Abrams. The top speed is governor-limited to 45 miles per hour. The fuel capacity is 150 gallons, giving the AGS a projected range of 300 miles. The General Electric HMPT-500 transmission is also used by the Bradley Fighting Vehicle.[45] Mounted on two tracks, the powerpack slides out for maintenance, and can be run while it sits on the tracks at the rear of the vehicle.[46] An auxiliary power unit was considered, but ultimately omitted from the final design to save weight.[47]

The Army required two variants of the AGS. One capable of the low-velocity airdrop from the C-17 Globemaster III (intended for the 82nd Airborne),[19] and a heavier variant with roll-on/roll-off capability from the C-5 Galaxy, C-17, C-141 Starlifter and C-130 Hercules.[43] In 1990, the Army had demoted the requirement for LAPES (low-altitude parachute-extraction system) from a required capability to a desired one.[48] After winning the AGS contract, FMC further whittled down the weight of the AGS in order make the tank light enough for low-velocity airdrop from a C-130.[13]

Level II and III armor packages can be airdropped separately from the AGS and installed in the field in under three hours.[13] All versions are air-transportable by C-130, C-141, C-17 and C-5 (one, two, three and five systems respectively).[49] For low-velocity airdrop, up to 10 rounds of 105 mm ammunition can be carried in ready capacity.[50]

A 1993 TRADOC study called for modifying 53 HEMTTs as Contingency Force Recovery Vehicles to assist with recovering the AGS.[51]

Firepower[edit]

Autoloader diagram

The AGS is armed with the Watervliet Arsenal XM35 rifled autoloading 105 mm caliber soft-recoil tank gun with an M240 7.62 mm caliber machine gun mounted coaxially.[2] The XM35 was about 1,800 lb (816 kg) lighter than the M68 used on the M60 tank.[13] The XM35 fires all NATO standard 105 mm ammunition in inventory.[42] The XM35 has a rate of fire of approximately 12 rounds per minute, with a ready capacity of 21 rounds and 9 more in hull stowage.[52] The Computing Devices Canada fire-control system is the same used in the Challenger 2.[1] The gun is fully stabilized. Gun depression is −10 degrees, except where limited over the rear arc.[1]

The CCVL was originally armed with an M68A1, and held 19 ready rounds plus 24 in storage[53]

The autoloader is fed by a rotating 21-round magazine. The gunner selects the type of ammunition to be fired and the computer rotates the magazine to select the correct round accordingly. After firing, the gun returns to zero degrees elevation. The autoloader extracts the spent shell casing from the breech, then ejects it out of the turret through the same port used to load the autoloader. Once the autoloader has loaded the next round, the gun returns to the elevation of the last target. If the autoloader is disabled, the crew can load the AGS at a rate of three rounds per minute.[54]

A Browning M2 12.7 mm (.50) caliber heavy machine gun is mounted in a manually operated pintle on the commander's hatch. Other possible weapons were a M240 7.62 mm caliber machine gun or an MK 19 40 mm grenade launcher.[42] Two eight-barrel smoke grenade launchers were also mounted.[1]

The CCVL specified a commander's independent thermal viewer, but was later eliminated to save weight.[52][47]

Miscellany[edit]

The AGS has a 1553 data bus.[47]

Comparison of tanks[edit]

M8 AGS[2] M551A1 Sheridan (TTS)[55] M1A1 Abrams[56]
Hull Length 242 to 247 in (6.1 to 6.3 m) 248 in (6.3 m) 312 in (7.9 m)
Width 104 in (2.6 m) 110 in (2.8 m) 144 in (3.7 m)
Height 100 to 101 in (2.5 to 2.6 m) 116 in (2.9 m) 114 in (2.9 m)
Ground Clearance 15 to 17 in (38.1 to 43.2 cm) 19 in (48.3 cm)
Top speed 45 mph (72 km/h) 43 mph (69 km/h) 41.5 mph (67 km/h)
Fording 40 in (1.0 m) Floats 48 in (1.2 m) (w/o kit)
Max Grade 60 percent
Max Trench 7 ft (2.1 m) 8 ft (2.4 m) 9 ft (2.7 m)
Max Wall 32 in (0.8 m) 33 in (0.8 m) 49 in (1.2 m)
Range 300 mi (480 km) 350 mi (560 km) 289 mi (465 km)
Power 550 hp (410 kW) at 2400 rpm 300 hp (220 kW) at 2800 rpm 1,500 hp (1,100 kW) at 3000 rpm
Power-to-Weight Ratio 28.3 to 21.2 hp/ST (23.3 to 17.4 kW/t) 17.9 hp/ST (14.7 kW/t) 23.1 hp/ST (19.0 kW/t)
Torque 1,446 lb⋅ft (1,960 N⋅m) at 1500 615 lb⋅ft (830 N⋅m) at 2100 rpm 3,934 lb⋅ft (5,330 N⋅m) at 1000 rpm
Weight, Combat Loaded 36,900 to 52,000 lb (16,740 to 23,590 kg) 33,600 lb (15,240 kg) 130,000 lb (58,970 kg)
Ground Pressure 9.1 to 12.2 psi (63 to 84 kPa) 6.9 psi (48 kPa) 14.4 psi (99 kPa)
Main Armament XM35 105 mm rifled M81E1 rifled 152 mm gun/launcher 120 mm M256 smoothbore
Elevation +20° / −10° +19.5° / −8° +20° / −10°
Traverse Rate 8.5 seconds/360° 10 seconds/360° 9 seconds/360°
Elevation Rate 11°/second 4°/second 25°/second
Main Gun Ammo 30 (21 ready) 29 (including 9 missiles) 40
Firing Rate 12rds/minute 4rds/minute 6rds/minute
Crew 3 (commander, gunner, driver) 4 (commander, gunner, loader, driver)
Protection 5083 aluminium alloy hull, armor arrays reinforced turret 7039 aluminium alloy hull, Rolled homogeneous steel turret Rolled homogenous steel, with armor arrays turret and hull

Variants[edit]

LOSAT system circa 1996
  • M8 Thunderbolt / AGS 120

A single technology demonstrator built by United Defense and demonstrated in 2003, incorporating a 120mm smoothbore cannon fitted with an autoloader.[57]

In 1994, Loral Vought Systems was awarded a contract to integrate LOSAT on to an M8 AGS hull.

  • Mobile Protected Firepower variant

BAE Systems entered an updated variant of the M8 in the U.S. Army Mobile Protected Firepower program.[58][59]

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Miller, David Maxwell Owens (2000). The Illustrated Directory of Tanks of the World. London: Salamander. pp. 478–480. ISBN 1840651768. Retrieved March 7, 2022.
  2. ^ a b c d e f g h i Hunnicutt 1995, p. 310.
  3. ^ a b Miller, Stephen W. (March 2016). "Light Vehicles With Big Punch". Military Technology. Moench Publishing Group.
  4. ^ Freeman 1991, p. 12-14.
  5. ^ a b Freeman 1991, p. 14.
  6. ^ Freeman 1991, p. 15.
  7. ^ a b Hunnicutt 1995, p. 183.
  8. ^ Edwards III, Major O.T. (January 1995). "TRADOC System Manager For Abrams and the AGS Comments on "Assault Gun Battalion 96"" (PDF). Armor (January–March 1995): 49. Retrieved March 23, 2022.
  9. ^ a b "FMC Selected to Build Armored Gun System: Army's AGS to Feature All-Welded Aluminum Hull, Detroit Diesel Engine". Inside the Pentagon. Vol. 8, no. 24. Inside Washington Publishers. June 11, 1992. p. 13. JSTOR 43988110. Retrieved January 23, 2022.
  10. ^ "The Contenders: Four Teams Compete for Armored Gun System Contract". Inside the Pentagon. Vol. 8, no. 11. Inside Washington Publishers. March 12, 1992. p. 12. JSTOR 43987850. Retrieved January 23, 2022.
  11. ^ Hunnicutt 1995, p. 182.
  12. ^ "Army's AGS Will Be Based on Existing Platform, 'Air-Droppable' From C-17". Inside the Pentagon. Vol. 7, no. 15. Inside Washington Publishers. April 11, 1991. JSTOR 43987017. Retrieved January 24, 2022.
  13. ^ a b c d e f "Armored Gun System Loses Weight to Be Deployed by C-130". Inside the Pentagon. No. Vol. 9, No. 31. Inside Washington Publishers. August 5, 1993. Retrieved January 27, 2022.
  14. ^ "Transportability of Major Weapon and Support Systems" (PDF). DoD Office of the Inspector General. December 27, 1993. Retrieved January 15, 2020.
  15. ^ Dupont, Daniel G. (January 31, 1994). "Army Refutes DoD IG Claim That AGS Airdrop Mission May Be Ignored". Inside the Army. Inside Washington Publishers. pp. 1, 17–18. Retrieved January 27, 2022.
  16. ^ "Army Successfully Drops Armored Gun System From C-130 at Yuma". Inside the Army. No. Vol. 6, No. 43. Inside Washington Publishers. October 24, 1994. pp. 6–7. Retrieved January 25, 2022.
  17. ^ Dupont, Daniel G. (November 15, 1993). "SADARM, MLRS Slipped: Army's POM Shows Planned Buy of Armored Gun Systems Is Cut by 77". Inside the Army. No. Vol. 5, No. 46. Inside Washington Publishers. pp. 1, 17–19. Retrieved January 27, 2022.
  18. ^ "82nd Airborne to Be Equipped in FY-97: Program Overhaul Accelerates AGS Production Schedule by Two Years". Inside the Army. No. Vol. 6, No. 33. Inside Washington Publishers. August 15, 1994. pp. 6–7. Retrieved January 25, 2022.
  19. ^ a b "Decker Lauds 'Model of Streamlined Acquisition': Six-Year Armored Gun System Cost-Cutting Plan Could Save $490 Million". Inside the Army. No. Vol. 7, No. 50. Inside Washington Publishers. December 18, 1995. pp. 3–4. Retrieved January 27, 2022.
  20. ^ Eagles, Cynthia (May 1, 1995). "This Gun for Hire: Prototype of Weapon Reaches Fort Knox". The Courier Journal. Retrieved January 15, 2020.
  21. ^ a b Zaloga 2009, p. 46.
  22. ^ a b "Armored Gun System Completes Early User Tests, Clearing Way for LRIP". Inside the Army. No. Vol. 7, No. 31. Inside Washington Publishers. August 7, 1995. p. 3. Retrieved January 25, 2022.
  23. ^ Sherman, Jason (September 25, 1995). "National Guard Expressing Interest in System: Army Considering Reducing or Terminating Armored Gun System Purchase". Inside the Army. Vol. 7, no. 38. pp. 1, 8–9. JSTOR 43978524. Retrieved January 23, 2022.
  24. ^ "M8 LAV". Janes.com. Archived from the original on March 23, 2006.
  25. ^ Preston 2004, p. 12-14.
  26. ^ Zaloga 2009, p. 30.
  27. ^ Sherman, Jason (February 12, 1996). "Service Still Seeking OSD Support: Army's Decision to Terminate AGS Meets Stiff Resistance on Capitol Hill". Inside the Army. Vol. 8, no. 6. Inside Washington Publishers. pp. 1, 9–10. JSTOR 43982648. Retrieved January 24, 2022.
  28. ^ Dupont, Daniel G. (May 18, 1998). "Armored Gun System May Get (Limited) New Life". Inside the Army. Vol. 10, no. 19. Inside Washington Publishers. JSTOR 43981282. Retrieved January 23, 2022.
  29. ^ Burger, Kim (October 9, 2000). "IAV Source Selection May Come This Week: Chosen Vehicle Less Important Than New Concept, Observers Say". Inside the Army. Vol. 12, no. 40. Inside Washington Publishers. pp. 7–9. JSTOR 43985072. Retrieved January 23, 2022.
  30. ^ Hunnicutt, Richard Pearce (2002). "The LAV Program". Armored Car: A History of American Wheeled Combat Vehicles. Brattleboro, Vermont: Echo Point Books & Media. p. 295. ISBN 978-1-62654-155-9.
  31. ^ "M8 Armored Gun System - Archived 3/2004". www.forecastinternational.com. Forecast International. Retrieved March 28, 2019.
  32. ^ Winograd, Erin Q. (May 7, 2001). "GAO Releases Redacted Decision: UDLP Won't Pursue Further Action to Overturn Army's IAV Decision". Inside the Army. Vol. 13, no. 18. Inside Washington Publishers. JSTOR 43985396. Retrieved January 23, 2022.
  33. ^ "GDLS given $500,000 to pursue air-drop test: Army to Delay Armored Gun System Delivery Until MGS Tests Complete". Inside Defense - Inside the Army. Vol. 16, no. 23. June 7, 2004. JSTOR 24822615. Retrieved January 23, 2022.
  34. ^ "Cody: Answer Could Lie Outside Army: Army Re-evaluates Airborne Division's Request for AGS-like Platform". Inside Defense - Inside the Army. Vol. 16, no. 44. November 1, 2004. JSTOR 24821748. Retrieved January 23, 2022.
  35. ^ "Rep. Hayes Dissatisfied With Response to Query on AGS: Army Still Backing Stryker MGS to Fill Year-Old Request for Firepower". Inside Defense -Inside the Army. Vol. 17, no. 6. February 14, 2005. JSTOR 24823120. Retrieved January 23, 2022.
  36. ^ a b "Turkey, Taiwan Scheduled for Vehicle Demos: Foreign Interest in AGS Remains Firm Despite Army Termination Decision". Inside the Army. Inside Washington Publishers. March 4, 1996. pp. 1, 14–15. JSTOR 43982669. Retrieved January 24, 2022.
  37. ^ a b Cahlink, George (February 16, 1998). "Army May Help Company's Cause: United Defense Markets Armored Gun System to Turkey, Other Nations". Inside the Army. Vol. 10, no. 6. Inside Washington Publishers. p. 3. JSTOR 43982835. Retrieved January 24, 2022.
  38. ^ Sprenger, Sebastian (August 17, 2015). "'Mobile Protected Firepower' weapon sought: Service Begins Tipping Its Hand On Combat Vehicle Modernization Strategy". Inside the Army. No. Vol. 27, No. 32. Inside Washington Publishers. pp. 1, 10–11. Retrieved February 26, 2022.
  39. ^ Tressel, Ashley (December 24, 2018). "BAE, General Dynamics move forward in MPF competition". Inside the Army. No. Vol. 30, No. 51. Inside Washington Publishers. pp. 1, 4–5. Retrieved February 26, 2022.
  40. ^ Sterenfeld, Ethan (December 16, 2020). "BAE starting to deliver MPF prototypes". Inside Defense. Inside Washington Publishers. Retrieved March 23, 2022.
  41. ^ "US Army eliminates BAE Systems from 'light tank' competition". Janes Information Services. March 2, 2022. Archived from the original on March 6, 2022.
  42. ^ a b c Nagl 1992, p. 28.
  43. ^ a b Richard, Lardner (March 2, 1992). "Service Emphasizes Lighter Forces: in New World, Armored Gun System Ranks as Army's Top Procurement Priority". Inside the Pentagon. Vol. 8, no. 11. Inside Washington Publishers. pp. 1, 11–13. JSTOR 43987842. Retrieved January 23, 2022.
  44. ^ "M8 AGS light armoured gun system tank technical data sheet specifications pictures video 11910152". www.armyrecognition.com. Retrieved October 17, 2018.
  45. ^ Nagl 1992, p. 28-29.
  46. ^ Nagl 1992, p. 29.
  47. ^ a b c Moler, Colonel Charles F. (July 1994). "The TRADOC System Manager for the AGS Comments on "The AGS in Low-Intensity Conflict"" (PDF). Armor (July–September 1994). Retrieved March 23, 2022.
  48. ^ Freeman 1991, p. 17.
  49. ^ Preston 2004, p. 30.
  50. ^ Mauser, Lieutenant Colonel George E. (January 1996). "The Armored Gun System (AGS) Autoloader" (PDF). Armor (January–February 1996): 10. Retrieved March 24, 2022.
  51. ^ "TRADOC Study Finds Billions of Dollars in Unfunded CSS Requirements". Inside the Army. Vol. 5, no. 46. Inside Washington Publishers. November 15, 1993. p. 17. Retrieved January 27, 2022.
  52. ^ a b Hunnicutt 1995, p. 178.
  53. ^ Hunnicutt 1995, p. 172.
  54. ^ Nagl 1992, p. 27–28.
  55. ^ Hunnicutt 1995, p. 309.
  56. ^ Hunnicutt, Richard Pierce (1990). Abrams: A History of the American Main Battle Tank. Battleboro, VT: Presidio Press. ISBN 978-1-62654-166-5.
  57. ^ "United Defense Unveils Thunderbolt 120 mm Demonstrator". United Defense. Archived from the original on October 10, 2003.
  58. ^ "BAE Systems awarded development contract for Mobile Protected Firepower".
  59. ^ "Light tank project of BAE Systems for Mobile Protected Firepower MPF program of US Army | April 2020 News Defense Global Security army industry | Defense Security global news industry army 2020 | Archive News year".

Bibliography[edit]

External links[edit]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=M8_Armored_Gun_System&oldid=1082647367"