Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The tank is dead: Long live the javelin, the switchblade, the ... ?

warontherocks.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 282 posts

Re: The tank is dead: Long live the javelin, the switchblade, the ... ?

#91

Post by ip26 »

ejolto wrote: post #59
dreen wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of these articles seem to mention WHY the tanks are designed this way (although I admit I just searched for keywords). As far as I know, it is because the current gen of Russian tanks were designed for how they envisioned WW3 40 years ago [1]. Basically the tanks would follow nuclear strikes, and making humans load the ammunition would make them die a lot quicker from radiation, so they made an autoloader. [1] h…

How does loading ammunition make humans die quicker from radiation?

Maybe the turret has less shielding..? Or maybe it was really to enable DU rounds.

Re: The tank is dead: Long live the javelin, the switchblade, the ... ?

#92

Post by swader999 »

zip1234 wrote: post #36
hef19898 wrote: post #29

>> The Russian Army has shown that it is not competent in combined arms fire and maneuver. 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.

I saw some tanker on twitter explaining just how bad the Russian tactics with their tanks are. Poor training, poor logistics, and undermanned. Tanks get such poor gas mileage that they need tons of support. Extremely effective weapons when used properly but clearly Russia is not doing that.

I think it takes seven gallons of diesel just to turn a tank on.

Re: The tank is dead: Long live the javelin, the switchblade, the ... ?

#93

Post by simonh »

Narretz wrote: post #77
simonh wrote: post #63

The tank isn't dead because armies still need the capabilities the tank gives them. You need a long range direct fire weapon, capable of engaging armoured targets and infantry (canister or airburst rounds), with rapid engagement of multiple targets, low time to target, rapid reloads and follow up shots, and high survivability. Lighter wheeled gun armed vehicles can be cheaper, but they don't have the survivability. T…

The second gulf war started almost 20 years ago. Surely you can't use it as an example when anti tank weapons have progressed so much in that time.

So has reactive armour and systems like Trophy. This argument has been made for many decades at this stage. This isn't just about vulnerability. Infantry are vulnerable to practically everything, sometimes they just drop dead all by themselves. It's also about capabilities. What are you going to use instead, and how is it better?

Re: The tank is dead: Long live the javelin, the switchblade, the ... ?

#94

Post by cmrdporcupine »

zteppenwolf wrote: post #70
cmrdporcupine wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no "general western media" in this era, because coverage is no longer centralized. There are dominant ideologies, which the "western media" reflects because the population has that bias already . You can stare at CNN or MSNBC and see a bias, of course. They largely repeat Pentagon or White House talking points. But that is no longer where people get the bulk of their information. Spend 20 minutes clicking th…

You can't justify the lack of commitment to truth with "its the bias of the population". First of all: its not. Its the bias of the media itself; however, the population often manifests much richer judgement than simply reducing this complicated struggle to "good vs evil". And even if it was: the media should impartially cover events. It should not manipulate numbers in favor of cherry picked narratives. edit replyin…

I'm sorry about it's almost become a joke, anybody who uses this phrase: "The Media".

It used to be my fellow travelers on the radical left. Now it's nutcases on the far right. It betrays a simplistic propagandistic desire to create a singular "enemy" narrative to which one is righteously opposed, without having to get deep into the weeds to pick things apart.

It's pathetic and elitist "analysis". There is no singular "media". There is no singular narrative. People pick the poison that fits their ideological biases. In general the ideological biases they have are the ones that fill their stomachs and keep a roof over their head.

But be my guest, rant all you want about the western or "mainstream media". It won't help you convince anybody.

Re: The tank is dead: Long live the javelin, the switchblade, the ... ?

#95

Post by pjc50 »

bobowzki wrote: post #4

Something I've been thinking about is that with the emergence of weapons like the NLAW and Javelin, the Secret Service probably will have to rethink the security of the US president.

I'm not sure the country of three hundred million guns needs advanced weapons. The President might be heavily secured, but as we saw on Jan 6 it's possible to overrun the security of Congress. Then there are all the various state buildings.

There are a lot of Americans who talk up the "right" to armed resistance against their government. There are also an alarmingly large number of mass shootings in America. It's almost surprising that these rarely overlap and you get people shooting up their school, university, a nightclub, or random people in Las Vegas rather than directed terrorism towards the actual government.

Re: The tank is dead: Long live the javelin, the switchblade, the ... ?

#96

Post by swader999 »

fork1 wrote: post #86
swader999 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the note of logistics, the turrrets on these lose their rifling after a few hundred rounds, they need to be replaced in field after this or they just become much less precise. Same with artillery.

I do not know for tanks, but for artillery, it tends to be much higher (few thousands) It is quite variable depending on if you re firing full charges, firing when the tube is hot, etc.

Yeah, the exact number is probably classified and precision does fall off with use.

Re: The tank is dead: Long live the javelin, the switchblade, the ... ?

#97

Post by simonh »

irrational wrote: post #75
simonh wrote: post #63

The tank isn't dead because armies still need the capabilities the tank gives them. You need a long range direct fire weapon, capable of engaging armoured targets and infantry (canister or airburst rounds), with rapid engagement of multiple targets, low time to target, rapid reloads and follow up shots, and high survivability. Lighter wheeled gun armed vehicles can be cheaper, but they don't have the survivability. T…

But, this doesn’t address his points from the end of the article about cheap drone swarm attacks on the top side of tanks.

Or on the top side of infantry. I'd still rather be in a tank. What this tells me is we need better anti-drone air defences.

Re: The tank is dead: Long live the javelin, the switchblade, the ... ?

#98

Post by nimbius »

irrational wrote: post #75
simonh wrote: post #63

The tank isn't dead because armies still need the capabilities the tank gives them. You need a long range direct fire weapon, capable of engaging armoured targets and infantry (canister or airburst rounds), with rapid engagement of multiple targets, low time to target, rapid reloads and follow up shots, and high survivability. Lighter wheeled gun armed vehicles can be cheaper, but they don't have the survivability. T…

But, this doesn’t address his points from the end of the article about cheap drone swarm attacks on the top side of tanks.

s/drones/air support/

imho the failures observed caused by manpad in the ukrane theatre were directly attributable to an almost comically poor systems integration on the part of the aggressor and an unwillingness to commit longer range artillery and missile strikes to soften what were hardened infantry targets equipped with sixth generation anti-air and anti-tank weaponry.

Re: The tank is dead: Long live the javelin, the switchblade, the ... ?

#99

Post by pjc50 »

d0mine wrote: post #65
yakshaving_jgt wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "bs from western media" was so accurate that I could pinpoint when the invasion would start, and I consequently left my home in Odessa in the evening on February 23rd, hours before the invasion started.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias

This is a deeply stupid comment when talking to a war survivor.

Re: The tank is dead: Long live the javelin, the switchblade, the ... ?

#100

Post by SEJeff »

Is it really though? There are some really good active protection systems like Israel's TROPHY which do a pretty good job taking out incoming sabot style (tank shell, javelin, RPG) warheads. The modern incarnation[1] (M1A2 SEPv2) of the US Abrams tanks all have it

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trophy_(countermeasure)

[2] https://asc.army.mil/web/portfolio-item/abrams-main-battle-t...

Post reply on HN