by therealchiggs on 4/19/22, 12:10 PM with 273 comments
by simonh on 4/19/22, 1:15 PM
Lighter wheeled gun armed vehicles can be cheaper, but they don't have the survivability. They also can't go everywhere a tracked tank can go, such as jungle busting or just driving right through many kinds of buildings or cover. Missile have much longer flight times to target than gun rounds. A tank can move into position, fire, destroy it's target and be back in cover before a missile gets anywhere near it's target. The missiles are also vastly more expensive than tank rounds.
Yes tanks are vulnerable when not properly integrated with air support, artillery and infantry. They're still a lot more survivable than pretty much anything else that can provide the same capabilities though. One tank in the second Gulf War shrugged off 14 RPG hits, and overall tanks in that conflict amply proved their value, when used effectively.
by csours on 4/19/22, 12:34 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUyAPQEb01Q
Chieftain
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lI7T650RTT8
Bernard
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPth_xqBXGY
Extreme summary, blame me if I missed something obviously important - unsupported tanks will die to infantry or artillery and have done so since shortly after the inception of the tank. Tanks are actually pretty cheap compared to replacing a human, it costs quite a lot to raise a modern human. The tank role still exists, but ratios of tanks to other fighting vehicles may change.
by cm2187 on 4/19/22, 12:29 PM
[1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidhambling/2022/04/01/why-do...
by mothsonasloth on 4/19/22, 12:45 PM
I think we will see the tanks in future battlefields still but rather than cannons they will be using more electronic warfare and will be providing indirect fire with "smart" weapons. Essentially they will be multi role armoured vehicles with high manoeuvrability e.g. (British Ajax Scout Vehicle)
Or my sci-fi'ish theory of a "drone tank"
Why?
* Governments have high demands from defence and at the same time want low costs.
* Military doesn't want an infantryman any more; they want a soldier who can perform several other roles. Same goes for vehicles.
* The concept of modular vehicles with the same chassis is becoming popular.
* Everyone who was taught or believed cold war military tactics is retiring or will be soon. So new doctrines will emerge.
<armchair_opinion/>
by inglor on 4/19/22, 1:25 PM
Do you (honestly) believe the US doesn't have tank armor that can withstand a (from the top) hit from a Javelin?
The tank is not dead (well, not any more than large tank charges are probably dead and ww2 style combat is dead? We likely won't see anything like in desert storm or the Yom Kippur war again).
by hef19898 on 4/19/22, 12:54 PM
Doctrine and training are paramount, together with command and control that's what enabled the early German successes in WW1. And in the case of France a ton of luck.
The article asks the right question: is the role of the tank still needed? A Javelin neutralizes a tank, under the right conditions, it doesn't replace it.
by rozab on 4/19/22, 2:09 PM
Tanks have always been vulnerable to very cheap infrantry weapons if used badly.
by SEJeff on 4/19/22, 1:31 PM
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trophy_(countermeasure)
[2] https://asc.army.mil/web/portfolio-item/abrams-main-battle-t...
by jdougan on 4/19/22, 12:41 PM
by k__ on 4/19/22, 1:08 PM
by exabrial on 4/19/22, 1:51 PM
Tanks must be supported by infantry teams. Without capable mortar teams, rifle teams, automatic weapons teams, they are sitting ducks, as Russia has proven.
by throwawayffffas on 4/19/22, 2:10 PM
Nothing has significantly changed since the 80s-90s, ATGMs have gotten better but they were still a huge problem back then and the solution seems to be the same, better recon, more artillery.
Drones don't represent something new but really precision strikes at a discount, capabilities only available to major powers once are now "buy off the shelf".
The TB-2 with a couple of MAM missiles does the same job as an f4 with a couple of walleyes.
The only difference being the f4 cost 2 million dollars in 1965 while the TB-2 costs 2 million dollars now.
by bobowzki on 4/19/22, 12:31 PM
by bjourne on 4/19/22, 1:09 PM
by chernevik on 4/19/22, 2:45 PM
by jcmontx on 4/19/22, 9:08 PM
Anyone with a mild knowledge of history knows about the huge tank battle that took place between India and Pakistan in 1965. Hard to take the article without any reference to that conflict.
by formerly_proven on 4/19/22, 12:34 PM
by SQL2219 on 4/19/22, 12:29 PM
by mensetmanusman on 4/19/22, 2:08 PM
by kkfx on 4/19/22, 6:16 PM
Given that modern war should be centered toward war crimes, witch means using civilian stuff to disguise forces, mass kill people with poisoned water without damaging significantly the infra, use and abuse modern IT crap vulnerabilities do disable infra (like electric grid, connected vehicles etc) without physical damage, spread disinformation with the best possible ability etc.
That's why, for instance, in Ukraine Russia can't really arrive to a quick victory. Such immoral and criminal pattern is nothing new: WWI was a combat between armies, civilians are evacuated before combats, non-combatant on the front line was a bit respected etc, WWII change the game hitting civilians without any morale, hitting ambulances, putting military in hospitals etc. Now we do not even use State's official army preferring mercenaries with formally no flag and no code of conduct, engaging rule: "do what you want but win".
In such scenario try to be civil is not doable, the sole option is show equal behaviors, not encouraging criminals and violence per se, but mastering it to crush enemy forces and push civilians of all sides against the combatant because being unable to distinguish between them any unknown human being can be an enemy so a legit target for all sides.
Reaching such level of brutality means creating just bloodbaths where public opinion will rise at a certain point against the war itself. At that point no gear will work, the force of the crowd could not be stopped.
That's the modern strategy no one admit of course, but many practice shamefully.
by pirate787 on 4/19/22, 12:42 PM
by S_A_P on 4/19/22, 2:34 PM
by Ambolia on 4/19/22, 12:36 PM