Will tanks become irrelevant?

#1
Some might know I looked into the AAC, but have decided on the RAC. But reading up on related matters I read somewhere that tanks may be coming of little or no use in the future, due to mobility and other factors. That coupled with viewing a few videos on YouTube of anti-tank missiles raping tanks have uneased me a bit to say the least, but I'm remaining scarily enthusiastic. Just wondering if anyone knows or thinks what, if any future tanks may be like in future and if they will stay as an important part of possible future wars as in the past.

Boobs (I like them).
 
#2
Having seen Iron Man last week, I can confirm that tanks are now passe. :lol:

(I know, e accent acute but I don't know how to do that on here)
 
#3
gosh

from a girlie point of view, i dont think that army wld b the same without!
i love the look of them :oops:

i think way , way , way in the future eveything will b run my robots
they will b behind the shop tills, fillin stations, banks, also i have to say the army

terminator will come true i do believe, but not in any of our life times or out kids !

my opinion !

x
 
#4
chitchat said:
gosh

from a girlie point of view, i dont think that army wld b the same without!
i love the look of them :oops:

i think way , way , way in the future eveything will b run my robots
they will b behind the shop tills, fillin stations, banks, also i have to say the army

terminator will come true i do believe, but not in any of our life times ot out kids !

my opinion !

x
Nurse,

Another one has escaped....

:roll:
 
#6
Don't worry. When the oil runs out you can go back to wearing red trousers and riding horses in to battle (while in the infantry do all the real work).
 
#7
boobs said:
Some might know I looked into the AAC, but have decided on the RAC. But reading up on related matters I read somewhere that tanks may be coming of little or no use in the future, due to mobility and other factors. That coupled with viewing a few videos on YouTube of anti-tank missiles raping tanks have uneased me a bit to say the least, but I'm remaining scarily enthusiastic. Just wondering if anyone knows or thinks what, if any future tanks may be like in future and if they will stay as an important part of possible future wars as in the past.

Boobs (I like them).
There has been lots of debate about the life of the tank, especially with the introduction of Apache! :roll: But hey there is nothing more impressive as a 60/70 ton beast at full clip and firing! :D ........................Pass the tissues! :p I think their life has been extended due to the way they were used on TELIC 1 / OIF IMHO!!! 8)
 
#9
Yep tanks are going out of fashion - not.

So much so the Canadians leased/borrowed 20 Leopard 2 from the Germans (IIRC) to send to Afghanistan to support their lads out there. And have also decided to reverse their policy of doing away with heavy armour - and relying on the likes of LAV's, Cougars, etc - by buying 100 Leopard 2 to replace their aging Leopard 1.
 

AlienFTM

MIA
Book Reviewer
#10
GreenSlime said:
Having seen Iron Man last week, I can confirm that tanks are now passe. :lol:

(I know, e accent acute but I don't know how to do that on here)
If you know the ASCII* code for an é, you can use smoke, mirrors and an Alt key to insert the ASCII code and display the é. It's a lot of hard work especially if you don't use it often.

You can use your favourite word processing software to create a file containing all the special characters you might need, then you can copy and paste. In OpenOffice.org the selection is Insert / Special Character...

Or you can open your favourite word processor and type in a word containing the special character, WITHOUT using the special character, then putting it through the spell-checker.

Interesting this last method (which I used in this case), brought to light the fact that the word is actually passée, as confirmed by a dictionary search.

You learn something new every day.
______________________________________________________________
*ASCII: American Standard for Character Information Interchange, ALWAYS referred to incorrectly as American Standard Code for Information Interchange. Try websearching for the latter and see how many hundreds of thousands of hits you get. Then search for the former and find 94 hits, one of which is my explanation of this a year ago (it'll be 95 now then). More crucially, another hit is the actual specification in PDF format available from the American National Standards Institute itself, for a fee amounting to a king's ransom.
 
#11
NEVER - Blitz tactics are still as effective today as they were 60 odd years ago for invading countries!

As for you though


Twaaaaaat
 
#13
NEVER FECKING NEVER!!!!!

Mind you my artwork would become more valuable?!?!?!
 
#14
AlienFTM said:
GreenSlime said:
Having seen Iron Man last week, I can confirm that tanks are now passe. :lol:

(I know, e accent acute but I don't know how to do that on here)
If you know the ASCII* code for an é, you can use smoke, mirrors and an Alt key to insert the ASCII code and display the é. It's a lot of hard work especially if you don't use it often.

You can use your favourite word processing software to create a file containing all the special characters you might need, then you can copy and paste. In OpenOffice.org the selection is Insert / Special Character...

Or you can open your favourite word processor and type in a word containing the special character, WITHOUT using the special character, then putting it through the spell-checker.
Or you could just go Start>All Programs>Accessories>System Tools>Character Map. Find what you want, Select, Copy and Ctrl V to Paste. In XP.
 
#15
When you see what a Challenger 2 can do at full pelt then you'll know there is a future for them, yes there are Apaches and so on, but they can just as easily be taken out with high tech missiles, launchers, etc, they also cost a fair amount more than tanks and again they both do different roles and different missions.
 

Biped

LE
Book Reviewer
#16
The only place where a tank is not a valid weapon of war is where it cannot operate for terrain reasons, or where it cannot operate because of the capabilities of the enemy.

If the enemy has lots of Apache-type tank-killers and control of the air, then tanks might suffer so much as to make it unviable.

I believe that in pretty much most other circumstances tanks are an essential and viable weapon platform.
 
#17
Good to hear! As to the anti tank missile worry, Wikipedia said a Challenger 2 survived 70 RPG hits and another survived 8 RPGs and a French MILAN missile? That makes me feel better. Also i assume the RAC will take the FCS so i wont be made redundant in 10 years (Just waiting for Glencorse).
 
#18
I think the MBT , whilst being a definite asset when you need the fire power esspecially against other tanks, has had its day.
but what tanks are we likely to come up against nowadays? ....
..and there are better ways to deal with enemy tanks - strike aircraft with all weather capability.
Take your point that Canadians have started to use Leopards out in Afghanistan but they aren't really much use when you are conducting COIN operations and trying to win hearts and minds.....are they?
Are the Canucks using them to make up for their lack of helicopter and air support?
 
#19
There may not be much Taliban armour for the RAC to fire APFSDS at, but armour still makes a very good firebase and a good way of holding ground under fire (it takes a lot of RPGs to penetrate the Chobham armour even without explosive armour packs and RPG mesh), and can move quickly around the battlefield. Armour can bring down relatively heavy fire at shorter notice than air support, is cheaper to run and provides cover for dismounted infantry. So whilst armour may not now be employed in the original tank-warfare Soviet invasion scenario, it still has a role to play supporting ground forces in open ground.
 
#20
Bravo_Zulu said:
There may not be much Taliban armour for the RAC to fire APFSDS at, but armour still makes a very good firebase and a good way of holding ground under fire (it takes a lot of RPGs to penetrate the Chobham armour even without explosive armour packs and RPG mesh), and can move quickly around the battlefield. Armour can bring down relatively heavy fire at shorter notice than air support, is cheaper to run and provides cover for dismounted infantry. So whilst armour may not now be employed in the original tank-warfare Soviet invasion scenario, it still has a role to play supporting ground forces in open ground.
Take your point BZ but ain't that what the Warriors for with its chain gun etc.?...firing 120mmm HESH at the Taliban seems a helluva nutcracker - but I bow to superior knowledge.

In the long term though, having air support is a lot cheaper than the logistics involved of moving a 60 ton vehicle to the areas.....but then again thats if the air support is effective and reliable
 

Similar threads


New Posts

Top