" Tank Rider Terror (long)" Topic

If even one of you gets a laugh out of this its worth the time it took to type it. Not to many people can appreciate this kind of humor. I hope you enjoy.

Location Fort Bragg
Date 1985

My airborne infantry company was assigned to a unit of Sheridan tanks for a field operation. We were all equipped with the MILES gear (laser tag). Our assignment was to function as tank riders one squad (9 men) per tank due to a lack of vehicle transport.

We march to where the tanks are and climb aboard the rear of the hull. The tanks are are running their engines and everyone is waiting for orders. A period of time passes and we begin to relax.

Suddenly the tanks button up without warning and lurch forward picking up speed. One man in my squad was asleep on the rear of the hull, rolled off the back and crashed to the ground in a heap. Another man in my squad lost his weapon, he jumped off to retrieve it. They run after the tank but cannot keep up and are left behind in a dust cloud. We had no way of communicating with the tank commander. On the way out of the lager area we pass several men from my unit defecating in the woods they were also left behind.

Soon we are motoring down a dirt road watching the klicks roll by. We are all commenting how it would have taken us all day to cover the amount of ground the tanks are covering in minutes. Life is good but that was about to change when the tank column stopped, pivoted 90 degrees and left the road.

The ride took a turn for the worse when we entered a lightly wooded area. Tree branches were snapping off the hull and our bodies. Branches that did not snap swept across the hull like a giant broom sweeping men off. We lost two more men due to trees.

Our squad leader decided he had enough and started pounding on the turret hatch with the buttstock of his rifle. He must have really upset the TC because the tank turret rotated 360 degrees. The squad leader and one of the team leaders jumped on top of the turret. The last three privates watched the barrel sweep across the rear of the hull like a giant log. Two privates jumped straight up in the air clearing the barrel and came straight down missing the moving hull. I learned from their mistake and jumped the barrel but angled forward so I would land on the hull.

The tanks emerge from the woods into a large clearing. Our tank had three men left, some one or two and most of them had no riders. In the distance we see our objective a dug in infantry position. We are rolling forward to attack humming Flight of the Valkrie.

It was supposed to be a cake walk instead we were confronted with a tank ditch that looked like the Grand Canyon as far as I was concerned. Recon had failed to detect it because the excavated dirt had been pushed into the woods. The tanks come to a halt and are quickly brewed up by TOW launchers well to the rear of the infantry position. We start catching small arms fire and the survivng infantry jump in the tank ditch (12 men).

We had one RTO minus his officer so my squad leader took command. He manages to raise battlion HQ and informs them of our situation, the conversation was not pleasant.

HQ Fill in the tank ditch so the tanks can advance.

SGT. Sir the tanks are all dead (Laser tagged by TOWS)

HQ Attack without the tanks.

SGT. Sir we did not arrive in company strength we are down to a composite squad of a dozen men.

HQ (CURSING) I don't care sergeant fill in the tank ditch and attack anyway thats an order!

We sat down and had lunch.

LMAO. Thanks for that!

Thanks for posting this – I love this stuff!

w.

hehe.. tankers have never liked infantrymen anyway. And vice versa.

Two of our favorite activities were to 1. take a dump in old foxholes in the training areas because we knew grunts would use the old holes instead of digging in new ones and 2. turning on the smoke generator to chase them out of the warm exhaust stream of our M1 on cold wintery mornings.

After a ride like that, you guys should have gotten even and yanked on the 551's external fire extinguisher handle. To a buttoned up Sheridan crew, that would have been some nasty payback for taking you on such a wild ride.

We sat down and had lunch.

In the absence of sensible orders, have a bite.

Great story.

I have my own story about an interesting, uh, interface with Sheridan tanks at Ft. Bragg.

We were in recovery after an FTX. We took our vehicles to the wash point to get the majority of crap off of them. I was riding shotgun in a high-back troop carrier HMMWV. The driver was yapping away, not paying attention to what she was doing as we pulled into line.

RRRRIP!

A Sheridan parked on our right side had rotated its gun over into our direction of travel. We drove right into it. It broke one of the supports for the canvas and ripped the canvas, luckily on a seam. For some reason it was decided that I had to repair the rip by hand with a large guage needle and thread.

You can't make this stuff up.

Sheridans aren't tanks!!!! Never have been, never will be.

The M551 is/was an Armored Reconnaissance/Airborne Assault Vehicle (AR/AAV). Please do not insult proper tanks by calling it one.

Allen

From a grunt's perspective, it has tracks, a bigger gun than I can carry and I can't ride in it.

It's a tank.

My worst trip on an amoured vehicle was after I had left the CORPS and gone over to INTEL. I was with a bunch of 2CAV guys out in the back blocks of the Northern Territory. We were supposed to return home by C-130 but as usual the RAAF didn't read the OPDEM.
So we drove back the 1200KM. Not a real problem – except I had the gunners seat of the ASLAV, I'm a big guy, I had problems fitting all of my hieght in the drivers hole of an M113. So we are tearing down the highway, no speed limit, when we pull up behind three 3 trailer cattle trucks.
With no where to go, I had to stand in the turret and get covered in $#@&**** and &**^%%$## as we passed all three of the cattle trucks. We passed more between there and Darwin, by the time I got back I stank so much my wife wouldn't let me get in the car – I had to get the duty vehile to drop me home.

Ohhhhh, the memories

Martyn

Ah yes, nothing like being 'painted' by a cattle truck.

Martyn, that's an absolutely hilarious story! (The rest are quite amusing as well.)

Excellent stuff!

I was light infantry and we were to be attacked by Mech (M113's) against our dug in wood line; although we had no MLSE gear. Seemed a waste of time without the proper simulation gear so one of my sergeants asks if we can set up demo charges in the field to our front--Now don't panic these were standard arty simulators-we didn't intend to blow up our own forces. Anyway-I say "Great idea! Run them about 20 yards to our front and we'll set them off with standard lanyards. Well we had enough for about five good charges--little did I know that my troops decided it would be best to set steel pots on top of the charges.

Well the attack comes in a company sized force, 10 M113's loaded creeping across the field and blanks are flying. They get to point blank range and "BOOM--whoosh a steel pot goes flying into the air-it seems the guys put a few charges under each pot-I should have checked!

Anyway-another two charges are set off and the M113 TC's start to button up because they aren't sure what's happening, the troops in the cargo area aren't firing anymore and I'm yelling cease fire and the final charges are set off. One right under a 113-there is a BOOM-WHOMP-RHHINNNNG and the troops are bailing out of the 113. The balance of the attacking force goes into reverse and withdraws from the field. Smoke from the arty simulators is wafting out from beneath the now empty M113.

Well as a young Platoon Ldr. I took the blame as I was responsible so I officially got my *ss reamed for endangering fellow soldiers by the enemy Company CO; in the background my CO was all smiles and giving me and my NCOs' a thumbs up!

Oh the memories indeed!

Dragon Gunner;

If that was 3/73rd (previously 4/68), I was in that unit in '84. I was in the HHC with the PAC. "Only Airborne Armor in the Free World" or something like that.

HI Dragon Gunner and other former US Army/Marine grunts and zipperheads.

That was funny, but to be honest, I also found it horrifying.

Please don't take this as a bash against the US, but as a Canadian armoured crewman, there was a feeling amongst my units that our Yank buddies (or "mer-cans" or "you-alls" we used to call you, not unkindly) sometimes had safety on the back burner. At least with respect to the units I worked with in Canadian divisional exercises in Wainright, Alberta, and on NATO CENTAG FALLEX in Bavaria.

For DG's story specifically, the company commander of that Sheridan should have been sacked and each crew commander have a reprimand recorded in their files. The behaviour DG described for those TCs (we called em CCs) was unacceptable, unprofessional, and above all, unsafe.

1) Moving hatches down while carrying passengers is an unbelievably big no no. Whether its transporting grunts or one of your own people from your armoured company acting as a guide taking you to a harbour location.

2) Hurtling cross country without slowing down and taking precautions, ie, the smoothest route and not tree hunting while carrying passengers is unbelievebly stupid and criminal if hatches are closed.

3) Sounds like the turret turned with power traverse on – we'd be summarily tried and relieved of command if we turned our turrets with power traverse while we had passengers. Hell, we weren't allowed to do it while the driver was hatches up and all our armoured vehicles had a safety switch on the driver's hatch that disabled power traverse (though the commander's controls did have an override).

Any commander that moves his tank hatches down is stupid beyond all belief anyway, so this unit had to be a reserve or militia unit – I can't believe it was regular army/marines, no way.

SOrry to sound preachy, I hope you guys don't take offence, but as I said, injuries on joint exercises with US mechanized units often resulted in disproportionate injuries to US tankers and infantry alike in (I emphasize) my experience. DG's story was just horrifying to me.

I have a tankers perspective on working with infantry. My unit was sent to FT Knox's new MOUT site to practice our urban warfare skills. We were proud to be the first armored unit to get to use to new facilities. Anyway, it was one of our first big excercises to work closely with crunchies (thats what we call infantry). We were tasked with supporting the infantry in clearing the town of the OPFOR. However, nobody thought to make sure that us or the infantry had compatable radios. We had no way to comunicate effectivly with our infantry. Furthermore, our maintance guy left the exhaust deflectors at out homestation (the exhaust coming out of the back of a M1A1 is extreemly hot). So the poor infantry got cooked everytime they tried to use us for cover. The infantry troops ended up throwing a rock into the loaders hatch everytime they needed us to move out. I learned alot from that exercise.

Tim, the Canadians may do it that way, but the only way to train is like you fight. Did your chain of command trust you guys with ammo? As a retired tanker, my objection to DG's story is it was more rude than unsafe and what the @#$% were those guys doing attacking in the open? I once called mortar fire using air bursts on a position as my tanks rolled over it. Granted, we were not carrying passengers, but that was a lot more dangerous than just driving with the hatches shut. We routinely fired main gun and machine guns over and between units and vehicles at Ft Riley, Korea and the NTC. Did accidents happen? Yes, but it made us a whole lot better at our jobs. I have personally bailed out of one burning tank and been blown off a 2d by a near miss on gunnery ranges. But when shots were fired in anger, the other guy came in a very clear 2d place against my unscathed tank crews.

Thanks for the stories guys I love this stuff.

Tim, the Canadians may do it that way, but the only way to train is like you fight.

My guys (The Royal Canadian Dragoons) are doing just fine now, thanks.

As far as safety goes, 5 US Corps guys in Germany were notoriously unsafe in FAllEX 87 and 89 and there were more than a few dead civilians in the restricted manouvre areas to attest to that.

The "train like you fight" argument is good one, but there's a fine line. You don't use live ammo in force on force exercises, so why should TCs be stupid enough to do what DG described? No one wants to get run over by a tank or get a piece of 155mm shrapnel through an open diver's hatch (happened to one of my call signs once on a live fire exercise, outside the supposed danger area) on a peacetime accident. Any commander who thinks that's acceptable does not have the welfare of his troops in mind.

It's an interesting coincidence that this topic came up just after I finished my annual re-reading of the Hammer's Slammers series. I was again mentally translating Drake's fiction throughout to his Vietnam experience with the Blackhorse, and he clearly makes the point that when the big machines go into action, it's time for Joe Snuffy to find a safer place to be than anywhere near them.

We give infantry their own armored vehicles (some more incendiary or otherwise disaster-prone than others) so they don't *have* to ride on tanks. The 82d's "airborne armor" was an aberration, and if we ever sort out a solution to give them armored vehicles again, I sure hope it will be a better one than the last time around.

You can't ask for a better example than the M1 to show that the US Army doesn't *want* crunchies around tanks: needing the bleeding exhaust deflectors, for heaven's sakes; and no external phone boxes.

But then nobody wires in their tank platoons at night any more so they don't have to break radio silence (we're so arrogant about our use of the spectrum…). Nobody knows how to rig a directional antenna any more. "Precision" gunnery ain't anymore. Tanks don't have all the useful rounds they used to. It just sucks to be an old tanker…

Allen

It's a darn good thing we don't really train like we fight. There've always been so many cases of "simulated" fratricide at the CTCs that if we did that in real life, the boards of inquiry would never stop.

Allen

We were doing infantry company attacks supported by tanks at Graf. We had completed tank gunnery and were given all the left over ammunition to use in these live fire exercises. It included some service heat rounds, some training sabot and a pallet of .50 cal ammo and we had hard targets down range to shoot at. When we reached the far end of the range we were to take up defensive positions using slit trenches and hull down pits that had been pre dug.
On the first trip down the range when we reached the defensive positions, the M113's dismounted their infantry, who rushed forward into the slit trenches. The trenches were just about even with the end of the gun tube of the tank. I can remember a soldier positioned to my right front smack dab in the middle of the trench, firing his M-16 as we fired the main gun. As it was summer, a large dust cloud brewed up. As it cleared I noted that the poor soldier was now as faraway from the tank to the right as he could get in the trench. In addition to ringing ears and rattled nerves he was coated in dust

Use of the phone box on the M-60 series tank was a nice benefit, the Army did away with them on the M-1 as it was felt they were extrainious. I always liked to have the grunts around, especially in woods and towns. Also helped with perimeter security at night.

Once for training force on force exercises at Ft. Riley, M203 gunners were issued smoke rounds. I was amazed that it took a full day and a few fired rounds for the Battalion and Brigade commanders to order that they not be used.

I agree with Tim about the Sheridan commanders but, the fault was the platoon leaders. If I'd been the infantry commander, at a minimum, I'd have dumped CS powder in the Sheridans on one dark night.

The first thing I did when I got home was brush my teeth.

Use of the phone box on the M-60 series tank was a nice benefit, the Army did away with them on the M-1 as it was felt they were extrainious.

Wow, I had no idea and I sized up the M1 (along with Leo II, Challenger – II was in design at the time – Leclerc and Ariete) as part of the MBT replacement project (that never materialized) for Canada in the late 80s.

Why on earth did they do away with it? I know the M1's very heated exhaust was particularly unpleasant for infantry behind it, but surely, especially in the streets of Iraqi cities today, there's plenty of opportunity for use of this?

Why on earth did they do away with it?

There is a body of thought that nobody on Earth hates the US infantryman more than those who design and procure weapons and equipment for the Army… ;-)

" Sheridans aren't tanks!!!! Never have been, never will be.

The M551 is/was an Armored Reconnaissance/Airborne Assault Vehicle (AR/AAV). Please do not insult proper tanks by calling it one…."

Oh how true Allen.

As an Armored Cavalry platoon ldr we had 10 vehicles: 2 scout M113s + 2 x TOW M113s+ 1 HQ M113 (mine) + 1 Mortar M113+ 1 inf Sqd w/ M113+ three of the mentioned M551s.

It was always a tactical mistake for Bde Cdrs to try to use us a a normal tank Bn. Excercise losses were always heavy in the DRS tests when we were told to assault. Best on defensive when our firepower was supplemented by the Cobra Plt.

DG knowing how fast those M551s ran, I am surprised that anyone stayed on the tracks. Riding on the outside was common for us especially in gunnery and as evaluators.

There are phone boxes back on some of the M1's in Iraq now. I believe they are going to be standard once again on the M1A2SEP.

I am a US M1 Armor Crewman and I agree with Tim Marshall. In our unit and anywhere I've trained any of the behavior in Dragon Gunner's story would have resulted in the firing of a whole lot of Tank Commanders, PSGs, and PLs. I'd be ashamed to be part of that armor unit.

Allen sez:

Tanks don't have all the useful rounds they used to.

Interest has been piqued – could you elaborate?

Tim sez:

Why on earth did they do away with it?

I'm guessing here, but it might have been because the M1 was expected to fight in Germany against hordes of Soviets, not in congested streets with grunts behind it.

IIRC, the urban upgrade package for Iraq includes an exterior phone, among other things.

Oh, wait, Cold Fire mentioned the M1A2SEP – that's the one.

I should add to the above that even if the M1 was expected to be zooming around the North German Plain…an exterior phone still would have been a good idea.

Major Mike wrote:

"Also helped with perimeter security at night."

You ain't kidding. Best thing about having a mech platoon cross-attached is that you can get a good night's sleep!

Nvdoyle wrote:

"Interest has been piqued – could you elaborate?"

The NATO L68 105mm gun on the M60 and M60A1 (and retrofitted onto the M48A5) had APDS (penetrator antitank), HEAT (shaped charge antitank), HE (high explosive, same as British HESH), Smoke, and Beehive. Over time, the powers that be, believing that the proper role for a tank was to engage other tanks (proof that the powers that be HAVEN'T A CLUE!!!) reduced the options to APDS and HEAT, and after the M1 came along, similarly limited the options when the M1A1 got the 120mm.

HE is a big, heavy, honking projectile fill of plastic explosive, which flattens out on contact (thus, the British nomenclature High Explosive Squash Head) before detonation. It makes a really big bang, kablooey, or what have you. The powers that be decided that the shaped-charge HEAT projectile would do a good enough job for taking out a bunker, engaging an antitank position, or what have you, and so HE was dropped. And they make the *troops* get drug tests… HE makes a really big, satisfying hole where tha target used to be, and something like HEAT that forms a high-velocity jet of molten metal and gas to punch a teeny hole through stuff just ain't the same thing.

Smoke was, well, smoke. Heck of a good thing to have on hand when you wanted to blind the other guy without blinding yourself. That's less of a consideration now; you can pop your self-protective smoke and still see through it with your thermals. Sort of. But smoke was also white phosphorus; it was really, really good when you wanted to make something 3000m+ away burst into flames that nobody would stay around to put out. Kind of a grim idea? Yep. But then I always thought fuel-air-explosive mine-clearing devices would be just the thing to pop on the enemy's strongpoint you were about to assault--to make sure there weren't any mines on it, of course. And then we never did buy a good FAE area mine-clearing device…

Then there was Beehive (APERS), the smarter grandson of the flechette round on the old 90mm. You could set it for muzzle action, basically creating a 105mm shotgun, with 8000 steel flechettes making mincemeat of anything close. Ask Vietnam firebase artillerymen about the goodness of Beehive. Or you could set "Beehive time", delaying the bursting charge up to 100 seconds, I think. This meant you could engage something like a Sagger team at long-range (3000m+) and still put lots of holes in the enemy's fatigues. I always thought it would be a winner against unarmored helicopters, as well.

These rounds were all slow and required a good crew using precision gunnery to put them on target, sort of like pitching a strike with a slider from far right field. APDS and HEAT were: 1) antitank rounds (Fools!!! Fools!!! Tanks are for driving at high speed through the enemy's rear area, destroying his artillery and his fuel and ammo depots, and eliminating his ability to continue to fight--not duelling enemy tanks! That's why we give infantry ATGMs and attack helicopter support!)…

…and 2) fast, flat-trajectory rounds that could be fired at a pre-set battlesight, which meant we didn't have to try so hard to train the Cat 5 armor trainees we were given in the mid-70s. Recall that these were the days before electronic ballistic computers, wind sensors, tube droop sensors, and all the other gizmos on M1s. So we got to keep APDS and HEAT, because they were no-brainers. We lost the rounds that it took skill to employ, but which best did the job--oh, mama!--for which the Almighty caused tanks to be made.

And now we find ourself using tanks in places that tanks aren't meant to go, but where all these munitions would come in mighty handy for standing off and making the place safer for the infantry that has to go in and clear buildings. Crazy.

Allen

Man, Maybe I should be writing on the Ranting board!

Allen

"There are phone boxes back on some of the M1's in Iraq now. I believe they are going to be standard once again on the M1A2SEP."

Holy carp, Cold Fire, that's great news! When did we start assigning geniuses to the Armor and Engineer Board?

Tim and chonk34: tell it, brothers. No need to make training unsafe. I don't need to tell my USMA cadet story again, do I?

Allen

Thanks, Allen, that was interesting. Especially the 'what's a tank for' observations.

I always thought it (beehive) would be a winner against unarmored helicopters, as well.

One word…

"Pull!"

Even if it didn't penetrate the metal skin, that would make for some very nervous 'copter pilots.

NVdoyle,The M1s had APFSDS Armour Piercing Fin Stabelized Discarding Sabot,HEAT High Explosive Anti Tank ,HEP High Explosive Plastic ,and Beehive a 105mm shotgun shell filled with flechetts. It could carry 52 rounds as standard load The M1A1 had only Sabot and HEAT ,and a 40 round load. The reduction in load types were just for the reasons you deduced.Less rounds because of size and space of course.It was hordes of soviet armour that was our primary concern.

HEP: of course!

Allen

Amen, Tim and Allen.

Just a bit surprised the Sheridan TCs weren't beaten senseless by the infantry.

@ Troopwo
They remained buttoned up until they drove away.

Just wait until they work together again. The infantry will provide security for the night,,, sleep well.

Even Bragg is a small place once a vendetta gets going. They have to come out eventually.

Although most tankers I know live by the mottoe, 'death before dismount'.

I have never seen a Sheridan live, but wouldn't 9 men in the rear deck be a bit crowded – I was under the impression that the M551 was not particularly large vehicle.

That said, I have to admit that the exercise sounded pretty messed up: having better part of a company dropping off from tanks sounds pretty unsafe – in addition to any injuries received from the fall, there is also the danger of getting run over by any following vehicle. Also, the purpose of the training is to learn something – I doubt how much the guys that got dropped off in the beginning learned that day.

As for the "train like you fight" comments, the guys better be happy that it was just a training exercise: in a real fight you just cannot lose the better part of an attached infantry company before even sighting an enemy, due to the carelessness of the tank commanders (for example, just how difficult was it to open the hatch and ask if the passengers were ready before starting to roll?).

Also, not sure how sensible the tactics of the final engagement were – rolling across open country towards enemy positions with passengers on – and certainly were not improved by the final orders of the HQ (how are 12 men expected to fill in a tank ditch under fire or to assault an enemy position without support?

Griefbringer

"Although most tankers I know live by the mottoe, 'death before dismount'."

It's hard on the knees.

Allen

@griefbringer
It was very crowded but there is no such thing as to small of a vehicle as far as my unit was concerned. We looked like a cluster of grapes on the rear of the hull.

The story continues with the unit being scattered all over Fort Bragg for the better part of the day. Some of the men attempted to follow the tanks on foot. Others sat down and expected someone to come get them. A few started walking back to the barracks as soon as they found a major road.

Grief you are right. 9 on the back of an M551 would be crowded and dangerous. The exhaust vent gets very hot . that many riders would also make the engine run hot.

I qualified for a M551 designator on my 'MOS rating' at Fort Knox and was assigned to them at Fort Hood. A mechanical nightmare. Not large enough for the size of the gun. Concussion injuries to crewmen (mainly TCs and drivers were very common was very common, the short barrel ended right over the driver's head .

Once you fired the main round, the electronics were so scrambled that you could not fire a missle. As a result a lot of tactical training focused on one using missles (based on the situation) while the others fired main gun rounds. Not really in the book but was effective. We used three tank sections in the Cav. Since we also had two TOW launchers, it was balanced.

Dragon Gunner: "It was very crowded but there is no such thing as to small of a vehicle as far as my unit was concerned."

Well, it surely beats going on foot. And if necessary, it is possible to fit quite many people on a vehicle if you do not mind some extra intimacy with each other – I have plenty of memories of truck travel from my military days.

As for the people regrouping, I presume that in the end nobody got lost or seriously injured? Imagine if somebody had ended up isolated in the woods with a broken leg – might have taken some time to find him (after figuring out that the guy was lost in the first case).

Griefbringer

@griefbringer
I don't recall any serious injuries.

Dismounting the tank was usually only socially acceptable for track maintainance, gasthaus beer-stops and conjugal visits.

Beehive slowly left the inventory as many thought it was inhumane. I've been told of times in Vietnam that individuals have found after a battle something that resembled hamburger pinned to a tree, and he was still unfortunately alive. The flechette could go thru a body, doing its damage and the individual hit might not even know how badly they were hit as all they might see is a small red dot while they bleed internally.
I've seen tests of them being shot at helocopters, and they leave lots of holes, something that pilots don't like. Of course, that ment that the Sgt. York might not get built and we had to have that. So, the round dissappeared.

TWO POINTS OF VIEW ON THE BEEHIVE.

Having fired the round and seen the effects on the target ,the next target and all the trees and anything else in the area, it would make you shudder.

As a Vietnam War era veteran, I had several 'In-country' veterans serving in my unit. They would simply say that "…when the situation is 'hot' and they keep coming, you fire anything that you can regardless of the carnage. It was them or us…"

An interesting report from Vietnam indicated that combat casualties among M551 (despite being made of Styrofoam and aluminum) crew were a lot lower than those among M60s or other AFVs.

Tim and chonk34: tell it, brothers. No need to make training unsafe. I don't need to tell my USMA cadet story again, do I?

Yes, please do. I vaguely remember it, but would like to hear it again!

Please Major Curtis I never heard the USMA cadet story.

An interesting report from Vietnam indicated that combat casualties among M551

Rudy, I seem to recall reading that it was a fire trap?

BTW, no offence to any folks out there, but the M551 meets most definitions of tank that I'm aware of.

BTW to Chonk, thanks for the reassurance! And I have worked with safe US units as well.