>>64431859
>however against infantry in the majority of cases the human body and most cover doesn't really care much if it was 14.5, 20, 23 or 25mm
the 25mm round can carry an HE load and it can penetrate thicker cover, so it matters
>What i am getting at is that the definition should be primarily one of use doctrine instead of technical classification
and in doctrine, the M2 bradley is a textbook IFV, since it carries dismounts and supports them in battle
they are not light tanks, except for the M3 variant, and they are not used as light tanks
they are organized under mech infantry and all their combat roles have been in close coordination with infantry
the M2 bradley is an IFV in design, in classification, and in battlefield use
the IFV has totally eclipsed the APC in direct combat and there is no signs of that ever changing
the IFV is and for the forseeable future will be the best possible thing you can equip mech infantry with
>Does a Merkava stop being a MBT and magically become a IFV the instant you kick a squad section out of the back?
thats a non-existant hypothethical because the merkava does not carry dismounts and has never carried dismounts
only the combat ambulance merkava is designed to carry anyone other than crew, and it is classified a combat ambulance because it lacks the necessary ammo storage to act as an MBT
