Comments by "Igor Shluker _" (@igorshluker_9787) on "Task & Purpose" channel.

You didn't ask me, but I will answer. Booker, this is the right way of thinking, but at the same time ALREADY outdated. Yes, many tons of unnecessary armor, this is wrong. Put Bradley boxes a couple of sheets at a distance and it is already better than the Abrams forehead. However, insufficient firepower by caliber - powerful high-explosive shells are needed in the city, and in the field. Also, there is no anti-drone protection, electronic warfare, etc. Instead of a bunch of unnecessary electronics. Good old panorama, nothing more. Too expensive and stupid to lose it to a cheap drone. You have to be ready to lose it almost immediately at the beginning of the battle. That's why everything should be against drones and as cheap as possible. But with amazing firepower.
1
M 113 is much better suited for modern warfare. Bradley is very good, but the cheaper the vehicle, the more profitable it is against drones. It is enough to put a turret with 30mm on M 113 and hang additional protection BRAT from Bradley. This will save from RPGs and drones. If you also install modules on the roof. The 600 hp engine may be excessive in terms of development and replacement costs. The only advantage is faster task completion. 1-3 drones can still destroy an APC. That's why replacing engines looks too expensive. I would make a new tank on the Bradley base, or just develop a new chassis from scratch. Because Booker is just a waste of money and a dead end. 105mm gun is useless in modern warfare, only 130-140mm with powerful HE shells(8-10 rounds in the ammunition load. This is more than enough to perform tasks on the modern battlefield). And also small size and stuffed with electronics, it's all trash and a loss before the war. 1 drone against an expensive machine? What's the point? Defeat in terms of economy.
1