It's just a question that's been gnawing at me for a few days:
Did it really make that much sense? Not like just Casement type TDs, like the
SU-100 and the Jagdpanzer series, but also vehicles like the
M36 Jackson, and
17pdr SP Achilles, (which were basically Medium Tanks with the Armor of a Light Tank and Jackrabbit acceleration,) and heavy armored cars like the British
AEC Armored Car and modern
B1 Centauro.
Do they make more sense than using light tanks in a combat situation for given roles?
Like scouting, which seemed to be the entire reason for the M5 Stuart's existence IOTL. Could, let's say, an
M10 or
M18 Hellcat accomplish the same role as the M5 with less risk and more of an ability to defend itself? Could something like a 76mm armed
M38 Wolfhound have been useful in Korea in general as a vehicle for Airborne units, comparable to the Soviet
ASU-57 and
ASU-85?
Heck, with ERA, ATGMs and Cage armor does it make more sense just to buy a ton of
AMX-10RCs, Centauros or
Rooikats instead of modern Main Battle Tanks for a motorized or Armored Force?
I mean, the argument for Airborne units is fairly clear, but what about an Armored force?
Also, are modern Light Tanks (Like the Stingray family, M8, PT-76 and the Chinese Type 63) more in the old American-style Tank Destroyer mold or that of the Light Tank of similar vintage?
The links are included for the benefit of Members who don't have access to Macaulay's Gearwhore Nirvana private library, and people who honestly have no Idea what the fuck the M36 was.