Will the battle tank become obsolete? - Page 22




 
--
 
April 8th, 2010  
uppercut
 
 

Topic: The tank as a weapon platform



Already smoothbore tanks can fire a lot o different projectiles- from fire and forget missiles, incendiary and all kinds of anti personnel, to traditional tank busters. in the future they will probably launch digital warfare projectiles or some other sci-fi stuff . they are already in use as mobile mini command centers with all their computers on board ant radio relay stations- and modern tanks are now getting good anti missile active gadgetry and retaliators. road bomb sniffers are in develop too (infantry can't carry those) they are also very resistant to germ and chemical warfare. I think that right now a fully modernized tank is almost equal to a modern chopper in 1 on 1 scenarios. if you think tanks are not proving their financial worth in low intensity- and counter terrorist warfare that is common today- i would say you are mistaken- they have a nice fear aura that is well respected still (if not by the actual fanatic warriors then by their civilian supporters) and if all else fail the can always develop new turrets that will make them real urban warfare worthy (i can imagine a turret with 3 smaller rapid fire guns at 120 deg from one another with special digital anti personnel systems that will be specially designed as an urban sniper hunter that will support infantry inside big cities- but I bet u can imagine other turrets too)
April 8th, 2010  
uppercut
 
 

Topic: The tank as a weapon platform



Already smoothbore tanks can fire a lot o different projectiles- from fire and forget missiles, incendiary and all kinds of anti personnel, to traditional tank busters. in the future they will probably launch digital warfare projectiles or some other sci-fi stuff . they are already in use as mobile mini command centers with all their computers on board ant radio relay stations- and modern tanks are now getting good anti missile active gadgetry and retaliators. road bomb sniffers are in develop too (infantry can't carry those) they are also very resistant to germ and chemical warfare. I think that right now a fully modernized tank is almost equal to a modern chopper in 1 on 1 scenarios. if you think tanks are not proving their financial worth in low intensity- and counter terrorist warfare that is common today- i would say you are mistaken- they have a nice fear aura that is well respected still (if not by the actual fanatic warriors then by their civilian supporters) and if all else fail the can always develop new turrets that will make them real urban warfare worthy (i can imagine a turret with 3 smaller rapid fire guns at 120 deg from one another with special digital anti personnel systems that will be specially designed as an urban sniper hunter that will support infantry inside big cities- but I bet u can imagine other turrets too)
April 8th, 2010  
LeMask
 
Eh Uppercut, using the fear factor against civilians is just plain wrong...

You cant name an acceptable amount of fear that can be used on unarmed civilians. Because this amount will change with time. It's inevitable.

So, any kind of attacks against civilians is criminal and must be punished. So saying that tanks scare everything but fanatics means that its fear factor isnt working when fighting against fanatics.

The civilians have to support the people who fight for their interests. It's up to the governments to find working solutions to the civilians' problems.
because when you forget to do that... terrorists get support. And then, you lost an important battle...

And if we start to speak like terrorists... Then the tanks are awful weapons. They are hard to produce. And they are easy targets for the enemy who got A-10s, helicopters, accurate missiles, powerful and accurate shoulder carried anti tank missiles etc etc...

We are speaking about these weapons from the perspective of a democracy. A real democracy... Not like in Syria or Iran...
--
April 9th, 2010  
usinfantryMOS11c10
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SHERMAN
Many around the world now say that tanks are irrelevent, a relic of the cold war...In Israel there are rumors that the Merkava project was completely scraped....Do you think the tank is at its end?
Well with the invention of those things that basically knock an rpg out of the way or a missile headed towards an armored vehicle there really is no need for that much armor. Besides, a small light chassis can still carry a large caliber gun, and be much faster in the process.

The IDF is light years ahead of the game on most stuff. So I would probably take their rumors, as things to come.

And shalom to you by the way.
April 9th, 2010  
LeMask
 
Trusting the Israeli knowledge is one thing, but still, armor is still needed in a battlezone.
The armor that protects you against RPGs can also protect you against IEDs.

If you have a system that can counter RPGs, what about artillery shells? tank shells? high caliber munitions?

If you care about naval warfare, they made battlecruisers, and we can define them as vessels with less armor and much bigger guns... So they can inflict more damage to the enemy than they could take. And they were faster too.

This is a sound tactic when you are fighting in open seas, where you cant hide unless you can dive (submarines)... And where the amount of armor needed to assure a good survivability underfire is just huge because of the powerful modern guns...

But is it the case for ground troops?

The big enemy of the MBT is still the costs... They are not cheap. And there is a lot of other weapons systems that can do the same job... But only in low intensity conflicts/wars... Like the war against terrorism.

These high tech toys are just additions to heavy armor. they can kill the reactive armor and such addons... But I dont think they are efficient enough enough to make heavy armor obsolete...

The only way it could happen... is... If they make fully automated or remote controled tanks with light armor...
December 23rd, 2010  
CornCod
 
I think there will be continued convergence between APC's and MBT's. I also think that there will be continued development toward heavy APC's. Man-portable anti-tank weapons are getting better and better. Tanks will be around for a long time, but in the future I see some kind of hybrid vehicle that has both APC and Tank features. Is the APC version of the Merkava a true tank because of its ability to carry troops? Is the BMP-3 really an APC or does it's 100mm gun really make it a tank? Some countries are turning old T-55's into "Heavy APC's" I think armored vehicles will be around a long time, but perhaps not the tank as we now know it.
December 23rd, 2010  
Klibanophoros
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Panzercracker
A medieval knight on the other hand was a purely offensive creature completely unable to support other types of arms, hold ground or be employed in defensive operations, just because both units are offensive doesnt mean they're the same idea, based on that we could say that celtic berserkers who ran at the enemy dressed stark bloody naked are the same concept as tanks since they were both offensive units.

The only thing knights and tanks have in common is Civilisation PC game series.

Not necessarily, the reason medieval men-at-arms were the dominant arm was because they were what we'd call multi-role. One the one hand they could fight as heavy horse. On the other they could dismount and fight as heavily armed and armoured infantry. Or he could remove the heaviest bits of his gear and perform as a light cavalryman.

@ Rattler, the Pope's ban on Crossbows was largely for political reasons (He didn't want an enemy of his to be using them against him) And Mail and Plate performed very well against Crossbows.
December 25th, 2010  
Korean Seaboy
 
 
I don't see them becoming obsolete on the short run. However, like the battleship, it may suddenly and spontaneously become obsolete. Who knows. Maybe Iron Man will ruin the battle tanks
January 4th, 2011  
MP35 Fanboy
 
Tanks, like machineguns; and they are a basic military technology that will always be needed to an extent, too. I'd rather develop tanks in case we are suddenly fighting a tank heavy army.
January 4th, 2011  
senojekips
 
 
Something to think about,...

Anti tank weapons are smaller, lighter, cheaper and far easier to get to any specific battlefield than a great lumbering tank with it's large crew and highly specialised support team.

I think that we are in a transition stage at the moment, but eventually the tank will go the way of the battleship.
 


Similar Topics
Main Battle Tank Battle
US main battle tank destroyed in southern Iraq
What's your MOS (Military Occupational Specialty)?
I want Redleg banned.
Yom Kippur war - Shmuel Askarov story