M8 Buford Armored Gun System (AGS) Light Tank

[wordbeyotch]

In 1995 I volunteered for this program, then they cancelled it and I went to M1a1's at Hood.

[fmoa]

instead of mass produce it like the abrams..the yanks should just produce it just for the u.s rangers n recon marines.

[fushheads]

Thumbs up if the first time you saw this vehicle was in the A-Team movie.

[rolficus]

why is the audio backwards

[Capt777harris]

@rolficus It's German.

[Speedless73]

@Capt777harris

no, it's not...

may be turkish...

[Craigers22763]

The Army has been against the light tank since the 80's. Remember the RDF light tank? Another good idea that got snuffed by the Army brass.

[colnagocowboy]

america's last light tank was the M551 sheridan which was burdened with a gun not suited to the role of a light tank, and an engine the vc could hear from half a mile away,the m41 walker bulldog soldiers on in several countries proving its sound design every day. in all honesty top american brass no longer believe in either the light tank concept or the airborne concept. and feel no need to support them

[dynmicpara]

@colnagocowboy American brass are idiots who want to be either too light or too heavy. The former means they love AIRBORNE ops--just don't want to do them right. We still have M113 Gavin light tanks whenever we decide to pull our head out of our rears.

[Breakerchase]

If only the end of the Cold War and Bosnia didn't get in the way of this vehicle....

[RaptureandZune]

Imagine a Brigade consists of Gavins and Bufords, commanded by Sparky...

[dynmicpara]

@RaptureandZune Imagine VICTORY.

[pmamae1]

Why did we spend all the money on Strykers when we could have used light infantry backed up by these handy little things? They drop out of a C130 just think how many one could jam into a C5.... Wow. We could have kept the rest of the conventional force intact for major conflict and augmented them with these things for low to mid intensity conflict. Too simple, right? Oh, not enough contracts would have been written to to right people...

[pmamae1]

Why did we spend all the money on Strykers when we could have used light infantry backed up by these handy little things? They drop out of a C130 just think how many one could jam into a C5.... Wow. We could have kept the rest of the conventional force intact for major conflict and augmented them with these things for low to mid intensity conflict. Too simple, right? Oh, not enough contracts would have been written to to right people...

[ww2footage]

The M8 is not a tank -- it may look like a tank, but it's not a tank. It's a thin-skinned vehicle with a gun on it. The vehicle was designed to support the infantry from a position where it can fire and be behind dirt with an elevated gun and to fight in areas where its not going to run into tanks. It has more than one role, and it just doesn't kill tanks. It kills other kinds of targets.

[dynmicpara]

@ww2footage It's a LIGHT tank. LIGHT TANKS do the roles you describe and others like CAVALRY functions. Tanks can be light, medium or heavy. Only idiots ASS U ME tanks can only be "heavy". Don't be an idiot.

[VickersIndependent]

This looks like a formatable opponent to the 2S25;the M8 may even be suprior.

[VickersIndependent]

Is there at least an English subtitled version of this video depicting an AMERICAN TANK?

[aag005]

very similar in concept to the russian airborne vehicle the sprut

[SwissLeo1]

This is the tank in the new A-team movie trailer that I saw.

[texasdustfart]

Shame the US didn't go with this, the reason as was explained to me was that a. the Congress used the money for the C-17 that could carry our current combat vehicles (M1 and Bradley) and b. a wheeled AFV like the Stryker is cheaper, faster, easier yada yada yada. I'm an old Tanker trained on the M60a1 transitioned to the M1 and served in Desert Storm on an M1a1 and I want tracks and lots of armor. Lets face it the Abrams isn't the best in urban combat but I've seen this in action and like it.

[dynmicpara]

@texasdustfart wheeled Strykers are not "faster" if they are STUCK or on FIRE due to their rubber tired vulnerability. The M8 AGS money was used by the Army to buy MORE Javelin ATGMs to further the idiotic light infantry narcissists who think all they need are bazookas to fight tanks; we all know how that failed with Task Force Smith in Korea!

[texasdustfart]

@dynmicpara please re-read my comment, I was being sarcastic about the stryker thus the "yada yada yada" our light forces need this, but as you pointed out and I agree politics got in the way of tactics.

[CosmosPrivateer]

A mind is a terrible thing to waste.

[dynmicpara]

@CosmosPrivateer You will not have a mind to waste if the body is lost due to a lack of infantry fire support-on-the-scene when you need it.

[CosmosPrivateer]

@CosmosPrivateer

I agree but the need for infantry and fire support seems to get lost these day's.

JMO

[rocketshipstud2]

the barbaric muslim turk wants this tank for its plans to invade south cyprus ...greek islands like crete and rhodes in bloodthirsty war of agression against greek civilization! /milwaukee

[1453madturk1453]

idiot this tank is producing for export ignorant look at the turkish aifv in greek army called vbl its based on turkish otokar cobra

[dynmicpara]

U.S. should be "importing" these light tanks...=o)

[1453madturk1453]

no u.s cancelled the program and turkish FNSS producing and exporting by under licence

[Skyguyfrom501legion]

@1453madturk1453 so , this tank vreated by USA but it is for export in turkey? i dont understand

[murattk22]

@Skyguyfrom501legion It is a light tank that only shares the name and body of the original. This new Turkish produced variant has superior armor however Turkey has decided to build Altay MBT tanks therefore this tank will most likely not see service in the Turkish military and the manufacturer is looking for a buyer. So it only shares with the U.S original but it has been upgraded in every way (powerplant, armor, weapon etc).

[paratrooper629]

Shame on the 4 star leadership of the US Army! On time-on budget ! Cancelled. No Lt armor for 82d airborne. 2003- were going to use those built for Iraq- cancelled by CSA. Loser!!!! Sold out to Strikyer crowd ( just look up who had 4 stars-then reitired and went to GCLS afterwards!!! Fact! IF I were CSA or SA- 1 BN to 82d, 1 BN per Light Infantry Div, 1 cO per light Infantry Brigade- active and ARNG. Army leadership should show some concern for troops and show some goddam balls!!!!

[D2RScout]

I was part of the platoon from the 82nd ABN division that tested this tank. The only major short coming we found was the routing for the ammo belt for the coax would cause the links to break and sometimes jam the weapon. Aside from that, this tank was a beast. Incredible speed and accuracy. This was the first tank I ever fired. Instead of resupplying the 3/73 Armor with this vehicle they disbanned the unit which was the only armor support the 82nd infantry had. .

[SpaceMonkey1983]

Why is the video in Turkish?

[dynmicpara]

FNSS makes these light tanks under license from FMC/UDLP/BAE whatever they call themselves this week.

[Uptalk]

Thats what Native americans call a boom boom that goes vroom vroom.

[digisage57]

i would have total droped the abrams for this i would just developed a small turbane endine to fit in this thing give it the same armor forule the abrams has give it a short barrled 120 smothbore gun give all that digital shit the abrams has give it a auto loader like styker has and nlos and we get a tank we send any where also install a small drone luncher to see more battle space i have kick ass tnak

[TheElusive]

This is the type of tank we should be making--the age of the MBT is so over. Not only is their fuel consumption insane, but how are you going to use a 70 ton behemoth in Europe or European Russia where there's a river every ten miles.

The Germans' biggest problem with the Tiger (besides its cost) was transporting it: it was too heavy for anything but the largest bridges and trains.

No matter how much armor you put on a thing someone will build a gun to pierce it.

[dynmicpara]

Call them what they are; HEAVY tanks. No such thing as a "MBwhatever".

[VickersIndependent]

Didn't heavy tanks like the T-10 and M103 become obsolete with the introduction of the M60,America's own Main Battle Tank. Haevies were underpowered and had too slow turret-drives to track targets even while standing still!

[dynmicpara]

@VickersIndependent Anything over 50 tons that is tracked and armored is a HEAVY TANK. No such thing as "main battle area" for BS "MBT" concoction.

[fanofrhymeswithstar]

Despite meeting cost and time deadlines, not to mention the requirements I cannot believe the US Army cancelled this. Even to an untrained, ill-informed outsider the decision to cut the M8 program was stupid. The US buys many weapons systems that either did not deliver what was promised, delivered the goods but compromised something else, and or went over-budget. It seems it doesn't pay to get it right. I can't comprehend this at all. Can someone pls explain why this is? It's a Joke!

[BlacktailFA]

This vehicle was production-ready and on-schedule, but there was a lot of pressure to cut costs in 1996.

The Whoppertank Mafia, seeing the M8 Buford as a threat to their monopoly on Armor, used the (then) US economy as an excuse to kill it.

[200184994]

Who makes it? How big is the gun?

[kcrhk]

The M8 Buford carries a 105mm gun; while the new AGS carries a 120mm.

[dynmicpara]

@kcrhk Newest M8 AGS variant with the 120mm gun is called the "Thunderbolt".

[DocotWho94]

Rheinmetall M35 105 mm rifled gun

[BlacktailFA]

200184994,

The M8 Buford is presently an BAe product, and has two available main guns;

The 105mm M35 (wide variety of ammo, and greater ammo capacity than 120mm)

...and a 120mm gun (shares ammo with the M1A1/A2 Abrams, and has more tank-killing power)

[losermantega]

amazing! how can a tank safely land with a parachute? i thought tanks were at lease 5-7 tons.............

[kcrhk]

The M8 Buford weights 21 tons.

[dynmicpara]

@kcrhk Not in airdrop configuration. Weight changes with armor packages attached--or not attached.

[haydayslay]

The Abrams is a 70 ton main battle tank.

[dynmicpara]

Call them what they are; HEAVY tanks. No such thing as a "MBwhatever".

[VickersIndependent]

Absolutly correct! The definition of a main battle tank is a medium weight tank (40-60 tons unloaded) with the protection and firepower of a heavy 70+ tons tank.

[Kingonads]

I always found this light tank or AGS a great concept. And far more capable than the Stryker... I too am baffled by the choice of the military to take the Stryker over this.

[dynmicpara]

@Kingonads Research light infantry narcissism and mech pussyism that wants to be either too light or too heavy--and you will have your answer.

[th3boy75]

nice at 2:53, that 40 mm grenade launcher is mad sexy.

[1200strong]

The fact that the Army seriously picked the Stryker over this brings me real life stress. It is just hard to comprehend. Our MEUs are LACKING. We need 2 tanks, not one. Save the Abrams for the hypothetical clash of the titans, because we don't need a 70 ton juggernaut to defeat some export model T-72s with a poorly trained crew. We need to be able to park an amphib offshore and take REAL armored support ashore. An M1 is of no use if you can't take it anywhere. We aren't gonna fight Canada...

[th3boy75]

or are we gonna fight canada. we need that syrup!!!

[haydayslay]

I could understand using the M1 series for fighting in plains and farms but as for an urban fighter the Abrams is just to large. The gun would endanger friendlies in other buildings. It's two wide for most of the streets in Iraq, and Afghanistan. And you don't need a 120 mm canon to pierce a standard T-72 tank's armor plating. This tank is smaller and would work even better in a urban environment that the Abrams does currently.

[dynmicpara]

Capt777harris writes:

"I was there when FMC presented the AGS to the Pentagons top NCO who was in charge of evaluating armor procurements.

It was an excellent tank killer. If flipped, it could be righted manually by hand cranking the turret, and had component armor for the interior."

[nomadnametab]

I heard Mexico was interested in the M-8.Anybody know what came of this?

[draadstaal33]

looks like the tiger tank

[TURKSTA19]

i think it would be good for rapid responce as well save it for reserves ?

[1Paintballer]

I dont understand a damn thing but this thing looks kick ass kinda reminds me of an M1 but smaller better for urban combat

[gunmonkey1185]

M8 Buford was one of the possible replacement for M1 Abraham for 2nd ACR. Also was intereted by Taiwan as Tank Destroyer. This vehicle was planned with add-on armor to level greater than M60 Patton with Reactive Armor. This would have been great with uparmor and upgraded m113 gavin as competitor to Stryker. Also was planned as replacement for m553 Sheridan in 82nd Airborne.

[BlacktailFA]

I've never seen video of an M8 Buford before, aside from a short clip of firing on the move.

I've never seen a lot of the stuff from this video before!

[dynmicpara]

That's FMC/UDLP/BAE effectively marketing their products.

NOT.

This video should be in ENGLISH posted on their web sites but they are too greedy and coewardly to stand up for WHAT AMERICA NEEDS and contradict the lightitis idiots ruining our Army. In the final analysis "what's good for business" is making sure your country EXISTS by having an effective military.

[dynmicpara]

How many Bradleys will there be to upgrade if our cities are in radioactive ruins because we lacked a high technology, air-deployable, M113 Gavin light mechanized infantry that can dominate in closed terrains?

[maxrafaelwaller]

Germany is an ally!

[wyrdmagyk4]

Sweet...

Will they take checks...

I drive in L.A and traffic sucks so...lol