About Us

Welcome to Tank and AFV News!

The name of the site is pretty self explanatory, we are here to provide news about tanks and AFVs.  And by “we”, I mean the “royal we“, which pretty much means just me.  The goal of the site is to be a daily aggregator of news about tanks while also providing occasional original content.  We also will be providing updates on upcoming books and the occasional book review (Hey publishers, how about some review copies?)  Our goal right now is to post 3 to 4 updates a day, although we may need an occasional day off.  As the site continues to grow and develop, we hope to increase the output of content and build a pool of contributors.

About the Author:

After having spent several years reading extensively on the history of tanks and AFVs, I decided to start putting down my thoughts into a blog – tankandafv.blogspot.com. This blog was aimed at the rather small segment of the population interested in such matters. After a couple years of sporadic updating of that blog, I decided to focus on a more ambitious project, Tank and AFV News.

My interest in tanks and AFVs is purely a hobby.  I have never been in the military or served as part of an armored vehicle crew, nor does my day job have anything to do with tanks or the military/defense complex. I have some interest in models, although my collection is limited primarily to 1/72 scale plastic and diecast prebuilt models. I sometimes post book reviews on Amazon under the name “tanksonthebrain.” I may also be spotted in various tank related forums as “Walter_Sobchak.”

I may be contacted at tanksonthebrain@gmail.com


  1. Just became acquainted with your site yesterday.

    I liked it very much and have dowloaded several interesting information you posted.

    I have just registered to receive your mail.

    For your knowledge my name is Reginaldo Bacchi, Brazilian, mechanical engineer, 85 years old.

    My last job was at ENGESA where I worked during 13 years until its closure. Would you like my writing on the Osorio MBT history, which was published at AFV News? I have made some improvments on the article since then.

    Myself and 2 friends have finished a book on the M3 Light Tank on the Brazilian army and the X series of light tanks produced by Bernardini. The book is at the hands of the publisher now.

    Since leaving ENGESA I started a second career as a writer on teh Brazilian defence magazine Tecnologia & Defesa.



    Liked by 1 person



  3. congratulations for your fine job in publishing armor subjects.


  4. Pete Higgins says:

    Just happened across your site when looking up some information on VISMOD Sheridans. I was very surprised to see my ZSU 23-4 Vismod from NTC in your picture gallery! I served in the US Army as a Armor Crewman for 25 years on a variety of different vehicles multiple versions of each: M48, M551, M60, M1, M113, M557, MRAP. I have always had a fondness for the M551 which was a very powerful (in the right trained hands) yet misunderstood Reconnaissance Vehicle. I look forward to visiting your site more in the future.


  5. Love the information you have posted.
    It has given me more places to visit, during future world travel destinations.
    Keep up the good work.


  6. Geoffrey Zimmer says:

    Gents can anyone assist me in this quest please photos of the armour at Fort Benning including the storage sheds. I know that much of the armour that was at APG has gone to Benning, and Sill. thanks again


  7. Edward Glamuzina says:

    Looking for tracks for my 1935 Marmon Herrington track laying tractor.
    The original tracks have a BF Goodrich emblem on them. They are almost identical to halftrack tracks but about 1 1/2 foot shorter. Anyone have any ideas?


  8. William says:

    Great site! Very helpful.


  9. Smokerr says:

    I have been long interested in Tanks, I had quite the book collection when I was younger. Sadly gave it away.

    What I feel is badly missed all too often is tanks are treated like Fighter Aircraft when indeed it boiled down to one on one (wing man was not intended to shoot though would if the situation changed and he had the shot)

    Its good to see good reviews on Tanks. I at one time felt the T-34 was the best WWII tank (and again context is critical) but as time has gone on, two man turret, poor or no coms, diesel engines that are persnickety (far less forgiving than gasoline) – awfull systems for turret traverse and transmission. You cant’t fight well if you can command and you are reduced to getting inside of knife range.

    T-34/85 was an improvement but I still questions its systems.

    Pzk IV has been suggested as the best overall WWII by SZ. As much as I respect his well done books, I disagree but mostly politely.

    My conclusion has become the Sherman was and not for the obvious reason but those that Zalaga and Moran bring forth. It was part of a system and the system was by far the best be it German or Soviet.

    So the question should always be, if you want the Panther, then you have to take the German Armry of 1943-45. Me, I will take the Sherman and the US Army of 1943-45 let alone the Russian Army of any part of the war.

    Recent books on Kursk show that the vaunted Russian Artillery did not have good command and control and firing director systems and the inertial barrage was wasted.

    the US and Britain clearly had the best of all of them by some magnitude.

    Air Power was superior when it counted.

    Logistics were a mainstay.

    So yes I would rather have a Sherman and the system behind and around it than the Panther and its system.

    Unlike WOT, tanks don’t run around willy nilly, there is infantry with snit tank capability (bazooka, RPG) artillery , anti tank guns and in the US case TD as well as air power and air observation.

    While the Characteristics of the tanks are better, their role is hugely a joke.

    And its clear, the US could have up armor Sherman’s sooner, deployed the 76mm gun sooner.

    Its only real flaw was that it did not look as COOL as other tanks. Context beats looks any second of the day


  10. Interesting in reviewing some of my dropped history, there really was a 90 mm Sherman.

    Technically they called it a TD, but the M36B1 variant was a 90 mm open top type TD (latter with options for cover) – as a Sherman though it had the same (though not great at that point in the war ) armor

    So now you have an interesting mix. 250 Jumbo Sherman (converted to 76mm ) up armored M4A3 of various US Armies (with 76mm) and hundreds of the M-36B1 (that could have been up-armored.

    It does not seem like the US really had a tank deficit.

    Let alone the independent Tank Battalions (and assigned TDs) to a regular division that matched a real world strength of a Panzer Divisions.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: