Historum - History Forums

Historum - History Forums (http://historum.com/)
-   War and Military History (http://historum.com/war-military-history/)
-   -   Are tanks still crucial in today's battles? (http://historum.com/war-military-history/49561-tanks-still-crucial-todays-battles.html)

infestÝr November 16th, 2012 05:29 AM

Are tanks still crucial in today's battles?
 
(i hope this is the correct subsection)

this question came up in some of the turkish sites i read, upon the development new turkish mbt altay.

many people argue that a country (turkey in this case) should concentrate on spending money on missile systems and fighter planes instead. also, tanks are not that effective on the battlefield if you have superior air power.

what do you think?

Nemowork November 16th, 2012 06:05 AM

Missiles are good if your defending, Hezbollah showed that even if some shoddy Israeli planning helped them along, if your going to attack you need tanks to break open the enemies defences.

Air power is good but it doesnt bring the amount of dedicated and pinpoint accuracy of heavy explosives and the sheer intimidation factor of a tank.

infestÝr November 16th, 2012 06:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nemowork (Post 1258828)
Missiles are good if your defending, Hezbollah showed that even if some shoddy Israeli planning helped them along, if your going to attack you need tanks to break open the enemies defences.

Air power is good but it doesnt bring the amount of dedicated and pinpoint accuracy of heavy explosives and the sheer intimidation factor of a tank.

good point. well, in turkey's case it's mainly defense. except the offenses against pkk. but i very much doubt that tanks are being or will be used in mountainous terrain against small groups of terrorists. in turkey's case maybe it's the purpose of renewing the entire old fleet with a new tank. also, turkey was denied the sale of many leopard 2 tanks. a new domestic production tank will circumvent this problem.

dagul November 16th, 2012 06:39 AM

With the age of drones, I don't think tanks are as material as it was during WW2.

But, the fact is the terrain is very important regarding its relevance, because in the deserts and steppes, perhaps tanks shall still play the role, but not in jungle warfare and mountainous territories such as in tropical countries.

Also, in urban warfare I think personnel carriers and armored vehicles are much better to be used than the heavy tanks.

diddyriddick November 16th, 2012 06:44 AM

The bottom line is that in traditional linear warfare, you still have to take the real estate. Air power can be a great equalizer, but it still can't replace boots (or in this case treads) on the ground. For mobility the tank is still the best weapon.

So yes, tanks are still one of the necessary tools of the modern military man.

infestÝr November 16th, 2012 06:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dagul (Post 1258874)
With the age of drones, I don't think tanks are as material as it was during WW2.

But, the fact is the terrain is very important regarding its relevance, because in the deserts and steppes, perhaps tanks shall still play the role, but not in jungle warfare and mountainous territories such as in tropical countries.

Also, in urban warfare I think personnel carriers and armored vehicles are much better to be used than the heavy tanks.

i tend to agree. but apparently they're still regarded important that they are still being manufactured and developed :D

Quote:

Originally Posted by diddyriddick (Post 1258883)
The bottom line is that in traditional linear warfare, you still have to take the real estate. Air power can be a great equalizer, but it still can't replace boots (or in this case treads) on the ground. For mobility the tank is still the best weapon.

So yes, tanks are still one of the necessary tools of the modern military man.

yes. i mean the infantry still has to go down to "the real estate" after all. totally forgot about this point :smile1:

funakison November 16th, 2012 08:21 AM

Planes, helicopters and missiles are good at clearing out the enemy, but tanks capture and hold ground better,

yakmatt November 17th, 2012 04:58 AM

Watch or read Blackhawk down. Tanks are needed now but their need is being questioned because of many concerns unrelated to battle, fuel, transport, support, collateral damage to name a few. In a real no-holds-bared war tanks would be a key factor after control of the air.

Apachewarlord November 17th, 2012 05:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nemowork (Post 1258828)
Missiles are good if your defending, Hezbollah showed that even if some shoddy Israeli planning helped them along, if your going to attack you need tanks to break open the enemies defences.

Air power is good but it doesnt bring the amount of dedicated and pinpoint accuracy of heavy explosives and the sheer intimidation factor of a tank.

Agreed.

Earl_of_Rochester November 17th, 2012 06:37 AM

As has been shown in recent COIN ops tanks are essential heavy firepower for use against terrorists with RPGs. The Brits at the siege of CIMIC House discovered this after their Warrior APCs were turned into swiss cheese. Convoys were able to get through when escorted by Challenger 2s though.

Heavy armour/mobile artillery is a useful thing to have when seconds. If there's a sniper in a building a tank can smash open the window with a SABOT or HEAT whereas a missile or artillery has to be called in and artillery may not be that accurate.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:25 PM.


Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.