OK, This is F%$#ing Nuts………

The US Army's next infantry combat vehicle, the successor to the Bradley is set to weigh more than an M-1 tank:

What may weigh more than an M1 Abrams tank and carry 12 soldiers? The Army's Ground Combat Vehicle. New weight estimates for GCV, released this week by the Congressional Budget Office, will likely go over like a lead ballon with the program's critics in Congress and in the Army itself.

Depending on the model and add-on armor package, an M1 weighs 60 to 75.5 tons. According to the CBO report, the General Dynamics design for the GCV weighs 64 to 70 tons. BAE s proposal is still heavier, at 70 to 84.

There's a tactical reason for all this weight: It's armor. The Ground Combat Vehicle is supposed to replace the Army's current frontline infantry carrier, the M2 Bradley, carrying more foot troops in back -- nine instead of six -- and protecting them better against everything from rocket-propelled grenades to roadside bombs. Even the most heavily uparmored models of the M2, at almost 40 tons, proved too vulnerable for the worst streets in Baghdad during the "surge," so commanders often sent 70-plus-ton M1s to clear the way. Even some of those M1s blew up, in part because the insurgents could build huge improvised explosive devices, in part because the M1's armor is mostly on the front to protect against enemy tanks, not on the underside.

Let's start with the first thing: The Bradley could carry 9 troops if they went with an unmanned remotely operated turret, (see also here) which eliminates the gunner, and his station, which rotates along with the turret.

Even the Israeli Namer, the highest weight IFV in the world, does not top 60 tons, and unlike the US army, they do not have to deploy half way around the world.

It should also be noted that the Nammer does not carry an autocannon in the turret, it carries either a .50 cal machine gun or 40mm grenade launcher, because the Israelis realized that they would have to reduce the armor levels to keep the weight to a manageable level.

The US army should separate what it wants from what it needs, as the Israelis did.

If they do that, and avail themselves of new developments in armor that are in the pipeline, they could keep the weight below 60 tons.