Will the battle tank become obsolete?

[Panzercracker]

Please be patient with me guys.

Do you label are a TOW vehicle as an artillery vehicle? Doesnt it fall with mechanized infantry with AT capabilities?

Because if a TOW attack is efficient on tanks, you can use HUMVEES with TOWs on heavy tanks aswell...

TOW is an AT missile, not an artillery, yes you can use HUMVEES but the survivability of HMMWV in a tank battle is 0.

And do you think that the tanks might evolve to abandon their heavy canons to use smart missiles. More and more tanks have artillery and missile capabilities (think of the Merkava). Dont you think that tanks might evolve in this way, to take rapid fire canons to be effective on buildings/infantry and to use missiles against armor?

Highly unlikely, smart missiles are expensive and military evolves in the direction of maximum effect for minimum cost.

 

[justin1552]

From my perspective, I think the tank will still be there, but APC's such as the BTR and the Stryker will become more commonplace.

 

[Panzercracker]

From my perspective, I think the tank will still be there, but APC's such as the BTR and the Stryker will become more commonplace.

Why would they become more common? They already fill all the roles a wheeled IFV could possibly fill.

Personaly i think we're looking at how the tank will look for another 50+ years, at one point the main gun might get replaced with a railgun since these are the most developed alternative types of weaponry out there right now.

Otherwise its going to get more refined but it will stay the way it is well into the 21st century, same for IFVs both wheeled and tracked.

 

[mark042]

hello

hello friends how are you

 

[FO Seaman]

Please be patient with me guys.

Do you label are a TOW vehicle as an artillery vehicle? Doesnt it fall with mechanized infantry with AT capabilities?

That was not my point when I mentioned the TOW CAP. I mentioned the TOW CAP because the TOW CAP design was to protect the crew against artillary shrapnel, hence it's name; Cover, Artillery Protection. Both the M220 and TWO CAP where designs that where even more venerable to artillery than most armored vehicles.

Because if a TOW attack is efficient on tanks, you can use HUMVEES with TOWs on heavy tanks aswell...

And I know that some European countries are using tank hunter squads, it was lightly armored vehicle with ATGMs. But I fear that these kinds of vehicles are made to be used in a certain terrain to be effective. Their light armor could make them easy target in the open desert as an example...

The US tried this in the 70's and 80's, with the M220 TGMEC , M901 ITV units with the ability to take on tanks, since then we've learned.

And do you think that the tanks might evolve to abandon their heavy canons to use smart missiles. More and more tanks have artillery and missile capabilities (think of the Merkava). Dont you think that tanks might evolve in this way, to take rapid fire canons to be effective on buildings/infantry and to use missiles against armor?

US Army FCS evetually want to replace the M1's 120mm with a coil gun with about the same caliber.

The use of tanks with missiles or artillery has been around for a while. M551 Sheridan ad a 152mm Gun that also launched Missiles.

But as it's been said before, the Merkava was built for Israel, and it does a damn good job.

I think a big player in tanks, depending on it's countries users is doctrine and employment.

 

[imp]

The tank will be around for ever its got a job to fill & is cheap..........
seriously it is.
To take it out costs a lot so long as you are not silly & stick them in urban enviroments etc unless you absolutly have to.
A decent ATGM costs how much a pop while a tank round costs.
Let the flyboys lose if the weathers okay & things are getting real expensive & thats assuming he does not get shot down.
What will happen & already is is air defence will become better modern IFVs & to a small extent tanks are more than capable of dealing with low flying air meaning longer standoff ranges are required to engage it. SPAAA therefore has to cover that role with even more expensive missiles.
APCs have stopped just being taxis good FCS & programable rounds have shaped them into IFVs true multi role support vehicles. Everybody fills a role or 2 & protects everybody else so the cheapest way to reliably kill a tank is still probably with one of your own. CM arty is expensive but might come a close second if the enemys counter battery is not up to spec.

 

[Spaniard]

What happens when the weather turns bad and air support is not available? Tea break everybody.

The Tank will be around for a long time!:tank:

 

[LeMask]

I think that they have the technology to drop bombs with the bad weather.

Ask the iraqis...

 

[senojekips]

This question staggers belief even that it should be asked. Of course Battle tanks will become obsolete as does every weapon.

I haven't seen a trebuchet, ballista or crossbow on a battlefield for some centuries. All of them were the "modern marvel" of their day.

These weapons were in use for centuries, the tank has yet to notch up it's first.

 

[LeMask]

Excuse me. But I still see spears, cavalry, armor, swords, shields, axes, trebuchets, balistas and catapults on the battlefield...

Sword: assault rifles
Shields: camouflage
Spears: light anti tanks weapons
Cavalry: tanks
Trebuchets: artillery
catapults: close air support
Axes: big rifles (Assault rifles with a bigger calibre)
Ballistas: rockets

Something of this kind... The concepts are the same.

 

[senojekips]

Excuse me. But I still see spears, cavalry, armor, swords, shields, axes, trebuchets, balistas and catapults on the battlefield...

Sword: assault rifles
Shields: camouflage
Spears: light anti tanks weapons
Cavalry: tanks
Trebuchets: artillery
catapults: close air support
Axes: big rifles (Assault rifles with a bigger calibre)
Ballistas: rockets

Something of this kind... The concepts are the same.

You really should seek professional help then. Where was it asked about "concepts", if you start going down that road, I can link the biblical era salt trade to space exploration.

There is absolutely no comparison within the meaning of this question.

 

[LeMask]

It's just a comparison.

If I say that Earth is like an Orange... It's not false. But it's not real.

The comparison is saying that something shares the properties of something else... Not all the properties.

I just said that I see the same concepts in these weapons and their primitive/medieval sisters.

And I think that the concepts are important. So, I somehow see swords and axes in the modern battlefield.

To explain why I say that the concepts are important, it's because I think that the battlefield is about combinations. Combined arms.

If the enemy have tanks, you use close air support or anti tank weapons.
Like we used spears to stop cavalry.

Sending light infantry against tanks is suicidal, like sending archers against heavy cavalry... etc...

I think that the relations and the combination are still here.

We are still sending infantry with the tanks like we were sending infantry with cavalry, because we know that they cant hold the ground alone...

 

[senojekips]

Well lets forget the arty crafty "concepts" and get back to the actual subject.

I was once told that stars were merely the sun shining through moth eaten holes in the night sky. Like your concepts, it's just BS and has no place in reality.

 

[Spaniard]

[qoute]I haven't seen a trebuchet, ballista or crossbow on a battlefield for some centuries. All of them were the "modern marvel" of their day. [/qoute]:lol:

Your right with time the Tank will be obsolete N.S. a relic! It could last a century.

 

[senojekips]

I haven't seen a trebuchet, ballista or crossbow on a battlefield for some centuries. All of them were the "modern marvel" of their day.

:lol:

Your right with time the Tank will be obsolete N.S. a relic! It could last a century.

I have no doubt whatsoever that will easily see out a century, maybe two, but none of us knows what the future holds. eventually it will become just another interesting piece of military history.

 

[FO Seaman]

[qoute]I haven't seen a trebuchet, ballista or crossbow on a battlefield for some centuries. All of them were the "modern marvel" of their day. [/qoute]:lol:

Your right with time the Tank will be obsolete N.S. a relic! It could last a century.

The tank has lasted a century.

 

[senojekips]

The tank has lasted a century.

Not yet!

A century is only small change considering the lifetimes of many earlier weapons that have all now become military curiosities.

 

[Spaniard]

The tank has lasted a century.

think about this the Trojan Horse transported men inCognito to appear and win the Battle.
How many years was that that was an early version of a APC.

I believe the Tank will evolve just like weapons reinvent themselves.

I think Hes right not yet a century, But close enough.

Well they used that armoured Subs in The War of Independence, I have seen some thing in armoured wagons and horses.

look at the Assault Rifles of WWII to now. Everything involves with time.

Hey I can build a Bow Trap with wood string and Dental floss, with a trigger wooden device. Victim activated fires two wooden Arrows.
or a swing trap. Will kill you or severely wound.

A weapon is only as effective as the Imagination of the Individual how builds and uses it effectively.

 

[Spaniard]

Origin. Although Guido da Vigevano in 1300, and Leonardo da Vinci in 1500, designed armored combat vehicles, the first modern, motorized tank was invented by E. L. de la Mole of North Adelaide, Australia, in 1912. De la Mole sent his designs to the British War Office where they were filed away into bureaucratic obscurity.

Tommy invented the Tank. Working at Foster's Engineering Works in Lincoln, England, Wilson constructed the Mark 1, the first tank used in battle, and tested it in January, 1916. The Mark 1 was box-shaped, with two movable guns protruding from its sides and six machine guns. Manned by a crew of eight men, it weighed 26 tons and was driven by a six-cylinder, 105-hp engine at a maximum speed of 4 mph.


First Use. In the summer of 1916, the British offensive on the Somme was fast becoming the bloodiest and most useless battle in history. Desperate because each advance was costing him hundreds of thousands of soldiers' lives, British Gen. Sir Douglas Haig ordered the newly arrived Mark 1 tanks into battle in September, 1916. Forty-nine tanks rumbled toward the front lines, but 17 broke down along the way. The remaining 32 tanks were scattered along a 5-mi. front and, after a three-day artillery barrage, were ordered into action on Sept. 15, 1916.

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[SIZE=+0][SIZE=+0][SIZE=+0][/SIZE][/SIZE]



[/FONT][/SIZE]

 

[03USMC]

Where was it asked about "concepts", if you start going down that road, I can link the biblical era salt trade to space exploration.

That is sig-line worthy right there. LMAO:cheers: