Introduction

As of the latest updates in August 2023, the U.S. Army has not actively maintained a traditional fleet of light tanks akin to the M551 Sheridan, which was retired in the 1990s. However, the Army continues to explore and develop lighter, more mobile armored vehicles to address roles previously filled by light tanks. This article delves into the current state of light armor in the U.S. military and the evolution of armored vehicle designs in response to the changing nature of warfare.

Current Status of Light Tanks

Since the retirement of the M551 Sheridan, the U.S. Army has faced a shift in operational requirements and budget constraints. The M551 Sheridan, while once a pivotal part of the light tank arsenal, was retired in the 1990s due to its limited combat effectiveness and the geopolitical landscape of the time. This shift reflected the broader defense strategies and the diminishing need for light tanks against the backdrop of the Cold War.

Evolving Armored Vehicle Concepts

Recognizing the need for greater versatility and adaptability in modern warfare, the U.S. Army has been working on modernizing its armored capabilities. One such initiative is the Mobile Protected Firepower (MPF) program, which seeks to provide infantry units with a light, highly mobile armored vehicle capable of delivering direct fire support. This vehicle is designed to be air-transportable and adaptable to a variety of operational environments, ensuring that infantry units can be rapidly deployed and supported.

Light Armor in Modern Conflicts

The concept of light tanks as a separate category is largely obsolete, but the need for lighter armored vehicles persists. Modern conflicts have shown that the requirement for versatile, lightweight armored vehicles to support infantry remains significant. These vehicles are often armored cars or lighter tracked armored vehicles equipped with heavy machine guns or light cannons. Their design focuses on providing mobility, agility, and protection in diverse combat scenarios.

Historical Context and Future Projections

Some notable examples of lighter armored vehicles include the U.S. Army's canceled Light Armored Vehicle (LAV) program in 1994. This vehicle was designed to mimic the Miniature M1 Abrams, a compact and highly mobile design that could offer significant support to infantry units. Despite its promising potential, the program was terminated before mass production could begin, primarily due to budget constraints following the end of the Cold War.

In recent years, the U.S. Army has again considered reintroducing a light armored support vehicle (LASV) for infantry direct support. With future conflicts in regions like Afghanistan and Iraq, there is renewed interest in these vehicles. As of this writing, the Army is evaluating two candidates for the LASV, with one expected to undergo extensive research and development before entering production. The timeline for this process is lengthy unless a major war necessitates a faster deployment, as the Army has the capability to expedite development under emergency circumstances.

Conclusion

The U.S. Army's current and future direction in the realm of armored vehicles reflects a strategic shift towards adaptability and versatility. While the concept of light tanks is largely obsolete, the need for lighter armored vehicles remains crucial. As the Army continues to develop and test new technologies, the future of armored warfare in the U.S. military looks promising, with a focus on modernizing to meet the complex demands of contemporary conflicts.