Army builds new 18.6-mile-range tank-killing weapon

Discussion in 'The Okie Corral' started by TBO, May 28, 2020.

  1. Railsplitter

    Railsplitter

    Messages:
    7,066
    Likes Received:
    5,273
    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2014

    The last real tank battle fought was 30 years ago and even then the outcome was never in doubt. The biggest mistake a country can make is to try to prepare for yesteryears wars.
     
    IamtheNRA and amd65 like this.
  2. Haldor

    Haldor Formerly retired EE.

    Messages:
    12,126
    Likes Received:
    6,615
    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2006
    Location:
    Central Arizona
    Countermeasures are brittle since usually they are playing on a weakness in the attacking system. Revised or new attack mechanism may not have the same weakness to exploit.

    Especially since one of the main reasons to upgrade a weapon system is to defear known counter measures.

    Like the way shaped charge weapons got delayed detonators to defeat reactive armor.

    It is an endless game of chess between attack and defense. On average, the attacker tends to beat defense. That is why most of the time the first one to fire wins the fight.
     

  3. Big Bird

    Big Bird NRA Life Member

    Messages:
    13,133
    Likes Received:
    6,848
    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2003
    Location:
    Louisville KY
    The assumption in your post is the only role tanks play on the battlefield is defeating other tanks. As we saw in the first Gulf war that can be a major component of armored warfare. Even during WW2 that was not the primary or even doctrinal role for tanks! You would be amazed at how few tank on tank engagements there actually were in the european theater during the second world war!

    However, the real need for tanks was evident in the First World War...an armored gun system that could punch through heavily defended positions and aggressively and quickly attack deep into enemy held territory. Hell...mankind has had that need since warfare was invented and people started fighting from horseback...at least the speed and aggressive part...in the form of cavalry.

    If the tank is obsolete because of a new missle technology then military aircraft would have been obsolete in the 1960's with the advent of anti-aircraft missile technology.

    The next war probably won't be like the last war....but so far nobody has eliminated the need for a man with a rifle to hold a piece of ground.... And that rifleman almost always needs a tank nearby...
     
    Deanster likes this.
  4. AK_Stick

    AK_Stick AAAMAD

    Messages:
    29,287
    Likes Received:
    19,305
    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2004
    Location:
    Where the turbines scream, and the door guns gleam
    Also, battles like Fallujah, where we used tanks in concert with infantry in clearing the city.

    Ironically, the USMC choose not to utilize their tanks to directly support the infantry and as a result saw higher casualties as a result of the same battle.
     
  5. PlayerOne

    PlayerOne

    Messages:
    883
    Likes Received:
    1,360
    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2017
    The poster you're quoting is correct; tanks are pretty outdated on the battlefield. Sure, they have their niche uses, but future wars will not see them used in any significant numbers. Superior air power saw to this. You can also dig for combat footages to see how tanks fare against modern anti-tank weapons, which are more readily available nowadays, as evident in Libya.

    I posted this in an earlier post in this thread, but the Marine Corps is dropping tanks from their arsenal: Military.com article

     
  6. AK_Stick

    AK_Stick AAAMAD

    Messages:
    29,287
    Likes Received:
    19,305
    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2004
    Location:
    Where the turbines scream, and the door guns gleam


    Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.
     
  7. Big Bird

    Big Bird NRA Life Member

    Messages:
    13,133
    Likes Received:
    6,848
    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2003
    Location:
    Louisville KY
    The Marines cut tanks because they couldn't afford them...

    If tanks are obsolete so are water trucks, ammo trucks, SP Artillery, Infantry Fighting Vehicles and anything else that moves on the battlefield.

    If air superiority made tanks obsolete why did we still have to send in tanks and infantry in the first gulf war after completely dominating the airspace above Iraq and Kuwait? We bombed them for like 40 days....and still had to send in the tanks. LOL
     
    Last edited: May 30, 2020
  8. Deltic

    Deltic

    Messages:
    9,666
    Likes Received:
    14,790
    Joined:
    May 21, 2013
    After WWII people were saying the atomic bomb made the army obsolete. The Air Force was getting a lot of funding and the Army was ignored. We paid a high price for that stupidity in the first months of the Korean war.
    Active protection systems will allow our tanks to survive.
    "The primary role of Trophy is defence against missile strikes, particularly for lighter armored personnel carriers, which are very vulnerable to rocket attacks. Since 2011, the system has achieved 100% success in all low and high-intensity combat events, in diversified terrain (urban, open and foliage). The system has intercepted a variety of threats, including the Kornet ATGM, RPG-29, etc. the U.S Army has reported similar success in tests. “I tried to kill the Abrams tank 48 times and failed,” "
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trophy_(countermeasure)
     
    Big Bird and Deanster like this.
  9. Big Bird

    Big Bird NRA Life Member

    Messages:
    13,133
    Likes Received:
    6,848
    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2003
    Location:
    Louisville KY
    But but but....

    BTW...the future of armored warfare is the same as the future of combat aircraft....remotely piloted vehicles/airframes...
     
  10. Deltic

    Deltic

    Messages:
    9,666
    Likes Received:
    14,790
    Joined:
    May 21, 2013
    I like the crew being well protected in the hull and un manned turrets with lighter armor. A 4 man crew with driver, gunner, commander and drone(flying and tracked or wheeled) operator. All off the stations would probably be the same and could do any function. With drones giving better situational awareness autoloading mortars could be used to take out missile launchers.
     
  11. DocCasualty

    DocCasualty Wolverine

    Messages:
    8,231
    Likes Received:
    16,940
    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2010
    Location:
    Northern Michigan
    619A8DB8-C4C1-423E-8F44-C312C7DD0215.jpeg
     
  12. PlayerOne

    PlayerOne

    Messages:
    883
    Likes Received:
    1,360
    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2017
    Of course it's about money; everything is about money. That's the whole point -- they have a set amount of money and they decided not to spend it on tanks (in actuality, they're cutting tanks and tank crews). They de-prioritized tanks because they made the decision that tanks are not valuable enough and not worth spending money on going forward. How is that not a clear statement that USMC sees a diminishing need for armored vehicles on the battlefield years from now?

    I'm going to say we sent in tanks because it was 30 years ago and that's how we've always been fighting wars up to that point? 30 years ago we applied what we learned from WW2, Vietnam, and Korea. We had to advance on the ground and we did it with tanks and infantry (but let's also not discount the work put in by A-10 crews). Let's jump back to 10 years ago. How important were tanks in Iraq and Afghanistan then? Nice to have? Sure. Necessary? Ehh... Might be time to reshape based on the lessons learned this past decade.

    If you re-read what I said, I never said tanks were going away completely, just that their usage and numbers will be of less significance in future battlefields.
     
    Last edited: Jun 1, 2020
  13. AK_Stick

    AK_Stick AAAMAD

    Messages:
    29,287
    Likes Received:
    19,305
    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2004
    Location:
    Where the turbines scream, and the door guns gleam

    Tanks proved exceptionally useful several times in Iraq when our troops cleared insurgents out block by block, and the tank was a mobile, armored enforcer to backstop them.

    The Marines are reorganizing for focused sea and island based operations. They see little use for full scale MBT’s in the operations they’re tailoring their force to perform. But they’re also not going to be the force that’s used to combat militaries equipped with large amounts of armor.
     
  14. Big Bird

    Big Bird NRA Life Member

    Messages:
    13,133
    Likes Received:
    6,848
    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2003
    Location:
    Louisville KY
    I

    People talk crap about things they have no clue about... I'll never forget...I had planned out an attack on an Iraqi held airfield and my ALO (Air Force Liason Office) tells me I have priority for 6 pre-planned CAS (Close Air Support) sorties from the air force....we're all lined up and in our final attack positions--the ALO gives me the thumbs up--the planes are circling in their holding positions. I look at the ALO sitting in a M113 next to my tank and I say...OK Lieutenant...send in the CAS. Nothing... waiting for it...nothing? I look at him and he looks at me and shrugs. All planes diverted.... Wait? What? I had priority on those missions! Sorry... So the clock is ticking and we should have crossed the LD (Line of Departure) by now... The Squadron Commander is hammering me on the command net...why isn't my troop moving? I just looked at my 4.2" mortar section chief and gave him the nod to shoot the backup mission we planned if the CAS failed to show...and in my experience at that point in my career in several command and operations officer positions...the CAS almost always fails to show.... We shot the mortars and crossed the LD... Thanks Air Force! LOL
     
  15. amd65

    amd65

    Messages:
    3,265
    Likes Received:
    4,927
    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2004
    Location:
    North Coast of Ohio
    If the Marines are focusing on island based operations, their likely opponent is the Chinese, who have quite a few tanks. The USMC must not be too concerned by that.
     
  16. AK_Stick

    AK_Stick AAAMAD

    Messages:
    29,287
    Likes Received:
    19,305
    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2004
    Location:
    Where the turbines scream, and the door guns gleam
    Just because your opponent has something in their arsenal doesn’t mean it’s a threat you’re going to have to counter.

    The Chinese also have submarines, and long range bombers. But that doesn’t mean the Marines need their own subs and long range interceptors.
     
  17. Deltic

    Deltic

    Messages:
    9,666
    Likes Received:
    14,790
    Joined:
    May 21, 2013
    I think what is going to happen is the Marines will have Army armored units attached to them.
     
  18. AK_Stick

    AK_Stick AAAMAD

    Messages:
    29,287
    Likes Received:
    19,305
    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2004
    Location:
    Where the turbines scream, and the door guns gleam
    Almost like they’re envisioning being the force responsible for securing a beach head through which we can land armored units
     
  19. Big Bird

    Big Bird NRA Life Member

    Messages:
    13,133
    Likes Received:
    6,848
    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2003
    Location:
    Louisville KY

    View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGQxR1FXta8


    1-64 Armor Thunder Run to capture Bagdad in 2003....

    This would NOT be possible without tanks... A deep raid into heavily defended territory! This screws up the enemy in so many ways and literally causes panic and mayhem... Ya ain't doing that without a tank....not even on the battlefield of the future...

    This was our sister tank battalion in 2d Brigade 3 Infantry Division when I was stationed in Kitzingen Germany during the Cold War in the 80s. I know the Task Force commander who commanded 1-64 during the Thunder Run and he was one of the best Armored Officers I've served with...
     
  20. Big Bird

    Big Bird NRA Life Member

    Messages:
    13,133
    Likes Received:
    6,848
    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2003
    Location:
    Louisville KY
    The Army conducted WAY more Amphibious landings in the Pacific Theater than the Marines did...not to mention Normandy....where the only Marines present were gunnery officers on Navy boats...lol