Yes, technically some of those tanks are ‘modern’, but many of them appear to have fake reactive armor, are poorly built, and they are being deployed without infantry, air, or logistical support. It’s the perfect recipe to lose all of your tanks.
Does the Tank Have a Future?
161–170 of 490 posts
Re: Does the Tank Have a Future?
#162It's easier to make a weapon that takes out a tank, than it is to make a tank that can defend itself to it. Javelin missiles are just one thing, but cheap drones with simple rockets on them should be able to take out a moving force of numerous tanks. Imagine having an arsenal of 20 tanks storming your city. Now imagine having about 100 drones ordered from Amazon, outfitted with RKG-3 anti-tank grenades. One each. You…
https://acoup.blog/2022/05/06/collections-when-is-a-tank-not...
edit: for example, I would not want to be a drone operator controlling a drone in real time anywhere near a modern army. RF direction finders are a thing.
Re: Does the Tank Have a Future?
#163Earlier quoted context omitted.
To paraphrase The Chieftan (who's video is linked elsewhere in this thread but I'll included here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lI7T650RTT8 ), it's not about the tank's vulnerabilities, but the capabilities it provides that have yet to be provided elsewhere. ATGMs, RPGs, guided mortar rounds and switchblade drones are not offensive weapons that can take and hold ground. But infantry, supported by a tank which they…
Why do portable drones not offer the instant firepower?
Re: Does the Tank Have a Future?
#164It's easier to make a weapon that takes out a tank, than it is to make a tank that can defend itself to it. Javelin missiles are just one thing, but cheap drones with simple rockets on them should be able to take out a moving force of numerous tanks. Imagine having an arsenal of 20 tanks storming your city. Now imagine having about 100 drones ordered from Amazon, outfitted with RKG-3 anti-tank grenades. One each. You…
Re: Does the Tank Have a Future?
#165It's easier to make a weapon that takes out a tank, than it is to make a tank that can defend itself to it. Javelin missiles are just one thing, but cheap drones with simple rockets on them should be able to take out a moving force of numerous tanks. Imagine having an arsenal of 20 tanks storming your city. Now imagine having about 100 drones ordered from Amazon, outfitted with RKG-3 anti-tank grenades. One each. You…
A decade from now what's happening in Ukraine won't work against most major military powers. The drones we're seeing are very slow and very low but modern anti-aircraft systems aren't optimised to detect things this small and low so are getting away mostly untouched, but there's no significant technological hurdle against modifying existing systems or developing new ones that work against this type of threat.
Re: Does the Tank Have a Future?
#166Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you want to occupy territory, you've got to do that on the ground.
If Clausewitz is to be believed, killing the enemy army is priority 1, and territory only matters in pursuit of that goal. Makes sense - if all combatants in the Russian army are dead, there’s no further need to defend territory for Ukraine. A boom with a border guard stamping passports would suffice.
Re: Does the Tank Have a Future?
#167I never understood why the tank tracks weren't targeted. They look easy to immobilize.
Re: Does the Tank Have a Future?
#168Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you want to occupy territory, you've got to do that on the ground.
If Clausewitz is to be believed, killing the enemy army is priority 1, and territory only matters in pursuit of that goal. Makes sense - if all combatants in the Russian army are dead, there’s no further need to defend territory for Ukraine. A boom with a border guard stamping passports would suffice.
Political goals are always the first priority. Fighting may be exciting, but it may also be irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. Defeating the enemy is neither necessary nor sufficient for winning the war.
Re: Does the Tank Have a Future?
#169Earlier quoted context omitted.
How could you figure? How would they be controlled while under communication jamming? Until autonomous AI exists we'll need people on the ground.
The same way that airplane drones are controlled, from a satelite in orbit directly above. To jam that you'd need to get yourself above the tank, which to be fair is probably doable to some extent, so there would have to be countermeasures for it. But it's not exactly impossible.
Which is the reason why great-powers don't go to war with each other these days. Forget nukes, the first thing that will be destroyed is each other's satellite communication systems. That alone would devastate the world's economy.
Anti-satellite warfare is a huge reason why the Space Force (stupid name) came into existence.
Re: Does the Tank Have a Future?
#170Earlier quoted context omitted.
Small drone warfare? The Ukraine / Russian conflict has degenerated into trench warfare with thousands of 155mm / 152mm artillery being shot into each other's positions per day. These are the kinds of conditions where tanks excel. Humans who try to walk at 3km/hr get blown up by shrapnel, even 100m away is "close enough" to cause a significant injury and take a human out of a fight. Tanks? They pretty much ignore eve…
I simplified the argument for brevity, but drones are critical to the artillery war right now because of spotting and fire-correction. Artillery is far more lethal in 2022 than it was in 1945 because you can spot and kill individual infantry units from ten miles away.
If memory serves me correctly, my brother said the cannon he captained was capable of incredible accuracy at 30 miles.