The future of Tanks?

[Northern Socialist Council Republics]

The opinion that I favour is that tanks will stay on the battlefield until something comes along that does what a tank does (rapid, armoured, and direct fire support) better than a tank.

Which hasn’t happened yet.

It doesn’t matter how bad your tanks are. If you don’t have an alternative to tanks, then tanks you will use.

[Emotional Support Crocodile]

Mortar shells follow a nice trajectory and don't come in massive swarms where it is hard to pick a target.

A mortar shells travels conciderably faster than a drone.
And even a drone has a rather predictable trajectory, given it's slow speed. A swarm will not make them better protected against solid-shots, variable-fuse fragmentation or VF-HE either. Especially when all CRAM is fast-firing autocannons.
Swarm drones are very fragile, a single good fragment hitting them will send them tumbling down, especially when it is not one, but a couple dozen a second.

Can CRAM shoot down a tank shell as well, assuming they shoot down artillery shells?

[Armeattla]

A mortar shells travels conciderably faster than a drone.
And even a drone has a rather predictable trajectory, given it's slow speed. A swarm will not make them better protected against solid-shots, variable-fuse fragmentation or VF-HE either. Especially when all CRAM is fast-firing autocannons.
Swarm drones are very fragile, a single good fragment hitting them will send them tumbling down, especially when it is not one, but a couple dozen a second.

Can CRAM shoot down a tank shell as well, assuming they shoot down artillery shells?

HE-FS and HEAT-FS? Yes. They can indeed hit and disable artillery shells too. (It's technically in the name: Counter Rocket, Artillery, Mortar)
APDS and APDSFS? I don't think so.

[Heloin]

Won't the future just be massive swarms of drones anyway?

Drones are extremely effective in the right circumstances and useless in others. There is no catch all super weapon that can be used for every situation and anyone who says there is either a liar or a fool.

[Aegeonia]

I like to imagine Hovering-Tanks in the future that fly, buts that’s probably never gonna happen

[The Huskar Social Union]

I like Tanks, they make me happy. They better stick around, i want Hoverdynes god damn it.

[Picairn]

The tanks have not outlived their usefulness... yet.

[Vistulange]

Long story short I was drafting an entry about Tanks on my factbook and the I couldn't overlook the topic of how Tanks are getting hard-countered in Russia by foot soldiers with rocket launchers. Now that tank warfare has sort of had this massive shift where a single soldier could potentially take one of these things out, what does the future of tanks look like?

If you haven't heard, due to developments in anti-tank weaponry for ground troops, a single soldier can take out a Tank with The Javelin rocket launcher. The Javelin does this by targeting the top hatch of a tank, shooting straight up in the air, then down on top of their targets, piercing through the weakest part of the tank. Think of it as a sniper rifle that can automatically headshot you in a videogame.

Looking through various articles online, there's been a big push to change the "tank paradigm" by military researchers from "More armor, more protection" to " Don't be detected and don't be engageable". A push to making them run cooler so they're harder to detect on infrared, practical camouflage, masking their heat signatures to look like civilian vehicles, composite/explosive armor, support drones, and the list goes on. But its one thing to say that, and another to carry it out.

How exactly do Tanks need to change so that they are viable frontline, heavily armored vehicles? I personally don't see the need for tanks going away. There will always be a need for ground forces to break through enemy frontlines, and thats what the tank is good for. But if armor-piercing and targeting mobile weapons platforms like the Javelin rocket launcher are making their armor a non-issue, where do they go from here?

Real life isn't a video game.

Tanks were never intended to be used without infantry support.

[Ifreann]

The future of tanks is obviously the aero-GAVIN.

[PhilTech]

No. I don't think tanks will become obsolete in the future.

Tanks are mainly used for sieging supported by aerial units. They are, however, very vulnerable when cornered. That's why you don't see them often used in jungle warfare.

[Emotional Support Crocodile]

Won't the future just be massive swarms of drones anyway?

Drones are extremely effective in the right circumstances and useless in others. There is no catch all super weapon that can be used for every situation and anyone who says there is either a liar or a fool.

No there isn't. But drones fill a whole range of niches, and work in a wide range of environments. Most of the defence of tanks here seems based on sentimentality/fetishism.

[Sordhau]

Long story short I was drafting an entry about Tanks on my factbook and the I couldn't overlook the topic of how Tanks are getting hard-countered in Russia by foot soldiers with rocket launchers. Now that tank warfare has sort of had this massive shift where a single soldier could potentially take one of these things out, what does the future of tanks look like?

You realize man-portable anti-armor has been around since WWII, yes? And that this didn't render tanks obsolete?

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Drones are extremely effective in the right circumstances and useless in others. There is no catch all super weapon that can be used for every situation and anyone who says there is either a liar or a fool.

No there isn't. But drones fill a whole range of niches, and work in a wide range of environments. Most of the defence of tanks here seems based on sentimentality/fetishism.

Can drones take ground?

[Arpasia]

Personally, I can still see tank technology still being a relevant thing past the 2020s and possibly beyond, but they might be replaced with more capable vehicles, most likely airborne, as the years pass.

[Jewish Underground State]

Drones are extremely effective in the right circumstances and useless in others. There is no catch all super weapon that can be used for every situation and anyone who says there is either a liar or a fool.

No there isn't. But drones fill a whole range of niches, and work in a wide range of environments. Most of the defence of tanks here seems based on sentimentality/fetishism.

"Hey watch as this drone swarm meets my grenade!"

[Informed Consent]

I like to imagine Hovering-Tanks in the future that fly, buts that’s probably never gonna happen

https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/thela ... 1025194112

Call me old fashioned.

[The Two Jerseys]

Tanks aren't going anywhere, Russia just sucks at using infantry to suppress enemy ATGM launchers.

[Fartsniffage]

Mortar shells follow a nice trajectory and don't come in massive swarms where it is hard to pick a target.

A mortar shells travels conciderably faster than a drone.
And even a drone has a rather predictable trajectory, given it's slow speed. A swarm will not make them better protected against solid-shots, variable-fuse fragmentation or VF-HE either. Especially when all CRAM is fast-firing autocannons.
Swarm drones are very fragile, a single good fragment hitting them will send them tumbling down, especially when it is not one, but a couple dozen a second.

The bottleneck with CRAM is the radar. If you put enough targets up and have them weaving so they pass in front of each other then it confuses the system enough that it can't select a target to fire on and becomes overwhelmed.

I'm sure someone will come up with a software fix for that in the future but right now a drone swarm can and would defeat CRAM.

[Armeattla]

A mortar shells travels conciderably faster than a drone.
And even a drone has a rather predictable trajectory, given it's slow speed. A swarm will not make them better protected against solid-shots, variable-fuse fragmentation or VF-HE either. Especially when all CRAM is fast-firing autocannons.
Swarm drones are very fragile, a single good fragment hitting them will send them tumbling down, especially when it is not one, but a couple dozen a second.

The bottleneck with CRAM is the radar. If you put enough targets up and have them weaving so they pass in front of each other then it confuses the system enough that it can't select a target to fire on and becomes overwhelmed.

I'm sure someone will come up with a software fix for that in the future but right now a drone swarm can and would defeat CRAM.

AFAIK some CRAM does posess manual-fire capabilities, which is sufficient.
2nd We do not deploy swarms yet, so at that point finer radar as well as mass-target analysis might as well be included.

[Adamede]

Tanks haven't been used for Kursk like battles in decades. However they're still useful in brining a lot of firepower in an armored package to the battle field particualr in supporting infantry, who are and will be probably forever the core of warfare. So long as tanks bring more advantages than disadvantages they will remain.

And better a tank which requires super adavanced missiles whcih cost more than a house and require advanced industries that msot nations dont have is still better than a truck or even an apc which can be taken out with a 50 year old RPG that any thrid world rebel group has access too.

The Ukrainains have also taken out a shit ton of jets and helicopters, doesnt mean they're going out either.

[Trollgaard]

Long story short I was drafting an entry about Tanks on my factbook and the I couldn't overlook the topic of how Tanks are getting hard-countered in Russia by foot soldiers with rocket launchers. Now that tank warfare has sort of had this massive shift where a single soldier could potentially take one of these things out, what does the future of tanks look like?

If you haven't heard, due to developments in anti-tank weaponry for ground troops, a single soldier can take out a Tank with The Javelin rocket launcher. The Javelin does this by targeting the top hatch of a tank, shooting straight up in the air, then down on top of their targets, piercing through the weakest part of the tank. Think of it as a sniper rifle that can automatically headshot you in a videogame.

Looking through various articles online, there's been a big push to change the "tank paradigm" by military researchers from "More armor, more protection" to " Don't be detected and don't be engageable". A push to making them run cooler so they're harder to detect on infrared, practical camouflage, masking their heat signatures to look like civilian vehicles, composite/explosive armor, support drones, and the list goes on. But its one thing to say that, and another to carry it out.

How exactly do Tanks need to change so that they are viable frontline, heavily armored vehicles? I personally don't see the need for tanks going away. There will always be a need for ground forces to break through enemy frontlines, and thats what the tank is good for. But if armor-piercing and targeting mobile weapons platforms like the Javelin rocket launcher are making their armor a non-issue, where do they go from here?

Tanks, like any ground based weapon system, need infantry support to work properly. From my understanding of the situation (not in depth research, mind you) is that in some people's minds Russia has actually not deployed enough infantry to support its tank forces. Also, tanks in cities suffer high attrition.

[Jewish Underground State]

Long story short I was drafting an entry about Tanks on my factbook and the I couldn't overlook the topic of how Tanks are getting hard-countered in Russia by foot soldiers with rocket launchers. Now that tank warfare has sort of had this massive shift where a single soldier could potentially take one of these things out, what does the future of tanks look like?

If you haven't heard, due to developments in anti-tank weaponry for ground troops, a single soldier can take out a Tank with The Javelin rocket launcher. The Javelin does this by targeting the top hatch of a tank, shooting straight up in the air, then down on top of their targets, piercing through the weakest part of the tank. Think of it as a sniper rifle that can automatically headshot you in a videogame.

Looking through various articles online, there's been a big push to change the "tank paradigm" by military researchers from "More armor, more protection" to " Don't be detected and don't be engageable". A push to making them run cooler so they're harder to detect on infrared, practical camouflage, masking their heat signatures to look like civilian vehicles, composite/explosive armor, support drones, and the list goes on. But its one thing to say that, and another to carry it out.

How exactly do Tanks need to change so that they are viable frontline, heavily armored vehicles? I personally don't see the need for tanks going away. There will always be a need for ground forces to break through enemy frontlines, and thats what the tank is good for. But if armor-piercing and targeting mobile weapons platforms like the Javelin rocket launcher are making their armor a non-issue, where do they go from here?

Tanks, like any ground based weapon system, need infantry support to work properly. From my understanding of the situation (not in depth research, mind you) is that in some people's minds Russia has actually not deployed enough infantry to support its tank forces. Also, tanks in cities suffer high attrition.

What about air support?

[Trollgaard]

Tanks, like any ground based weapon system, need infantry support to work properly. From my understanding of the situation (not in depth research, mind you) is that in some people's minds Russia has actually not deployed enough infantry to support its tank forces. Also, tanks in cities suffer high attrition.

What about air support?

Was/is the Russian air force living off reputation rather than capability? I don't know man!

[Big Bad Blue]

Planters
Scrap metal
After weaponry removed, mega Humvees/ATVs for those with more money than sense
Taken apart and reassembled in creative ways, modernist sculpture
With rope walks, monkey bars, etc. added, playground equipment for Ukrainian children
Moved slightly from the places where they failed to cross, could be useful for riverbank stabilization, erosion control, etc.
Artificial reefs at the bottom of the Black Sea, off Snake Island, etc. alongside Russian warships
After Putin runs out of shells and bombs, drop tanks on Ukrainian apartment buildings
more to come...

[Jewish Underground State]

What about air support?

Was/is the Russian air force living off reputation rather than capability? I don't know man!

To dominate the ground you need infantry
To dominate the skies you need an air force
To dominate the sea you need a navy.

Tanks help infantry dominate the ground. Tanks are armored vehicles with big guns. If soldiers without explosives chose to fight a tank they would lose. If they had explosives it would depend on how good the explosives were.

Until a revolutionary war machine is made, tanks are here to stay. The reason why stories of tanks failing in this war are so common may be because of their poor quality and armor leaving soldiers with explosives a chance to blow them up, the terrible strategies the russian generals are using leaving tanks isolated or just that the stories were cherry picked.