|
|
Post by mao on Sept 2, 2017 8:56:02 GMT -5
Is the era of the main battle tank over? With modern anti tank weapons so powerfull is it time for the main battle tank to go the way of the dodo? Discus.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Sept 2, 2017 9:53:04 GMT -5
Is the era of the main battle tank over? With modern anti tank weapons so powerfull is it time for the main battle tank to go the way of the dodo? Discus. I haven't played any mechanized games, do you have any specific games in mind? |
|
|
|
Post by mao on Sept 2, 2017 10:22:48 GMT -5
Is the era of the main battle tank over? With modern anti tank weapons so powerfull is it time for the main battle tank to go the way of the dodo? Discus. I haven't played any mechanized games, do you have any specific games in mind? I mused to play Tractics a long time ago, just sort of thinking about real life and I was wondering if there were any fellow woegamers here to bouxe this off of. ? |
|
|
|
Post by ripx187 on Oct 12, 2017 18:31:31 GMT -5
The tank has become a very romantic weapon, and they are fun to play with. Seen as a fairly balanced weapon today, they weren't at the time. As much as it pains me to say it, I think that the days of the tank were numbered during WW2. As a unit, we love them like we love WW1 era flying aces. Romance of a bygone day!
The tank has a certain magic to it, and even the younger generation can feel it. I know that my youngest son likes to draw them. Was this something that he learned from me? Probably from Star Wars, his tanks are very Scifi.
|
|
|
|
Post by robkuntz on Oct 12, 2017 19:21:15 GMT -5
The tank has really gone the route of the Battleship in WWII. Air power, and now missiles, drones, satellite guidance, have all but circumvented the mass ground tactics of years ago. They are still used in support or against an enemy not having an inventory of technology as I listed, but their heyday is over.
|
|
|
|
Post by ripx187 on Oct 12, 2017 19:57:27 GMT -5
I saw somewhere that they were going to start retiring Aircraft Carriers, which is weird, though when combat was heavy the boys were flying out of the States, dropping their payloads in the Middle East, and flying back which is just incredible! I think that Aircraft Carriers have been more of a show of force than of any real military purpose. To know that just having one out in the waters was enough to make most nations sweat, but now even hick countries like N. Korea can target them with missiles, which defeats the purpose, as those guys are meant to be seen.
Tanks used to put the fear of God into people. Just parking one in town was enough to demoralize the civilians and keep your claim on it, but it was more of a psychological weapon. Once enough information got out, and their vulnerabilities figured out they were no longer the gods of war.
|
|
|
|
Post by robkuntz on Oct 12, 2017 20:11:37 GMT -5
Uh, the aircraft carrier is till an effective weapon because they are accompanied by Aegis Cruisers which have a 100% accuracy for shooting down surface missiles.
|
|
|
|
Post by ripx187 on Oct 12, 2017 21:22:50 GMT -5
My thoughts are along the same lines, which is why the news blip stuck with me. Even as a mobile base of operations and supply those massive ships should have a purpose, though if you do find one and are able to sink it (good luck) you have dealt a nasty blow to the US, that is a lot of men and supplies to go down with one attack. Not that we should believe anything that the military tells us, it does sound like they are going smaller with specialized ships. It takes a lot of fuel to move those hulks around.
From what I gather, they are still in use, but they have no plans to build more.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2017 11:39:38 GMT -5
The main purpose of a tank is to tote around a big direct-fire gun.
As long as it's handy to have mobile big direct-fire guns, there will be tanks.
|
|
|
|
Post by robkuntz on Oct 18, 2017 19:27:08 GMT -5
The main purpose of a tank is to tote around a big direct-fire gun. As long as it's handy to have mobile big direct-fire guns, there will be tanks. Rather an oversimplification, no? For those wanting to learn about the power of combined arms and the use of armor in lightning warfare which changed the face of modern warfare starting with the invasion of France, 1940, there probably would be no better starting point than Heinz Guderian's, "Panzer Leader". |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2017 20:58:01 GMT -5
Simplified, perhaps. But when considering "is the tank obsolete" one must get down to the very basics; the basic task of a tank is to carry that gun. Before the tank will be obsolete, that gun will have to be obsolete. And there is still much utility in a large caliber direct fire gun, just like there is still much utility in basic unguided artillery.
Guided missiles were supposed to make guns on aircraft obsolete, and in the late 50s and early 60s many aircraft were designed without guns. Not any more.
|
|
|
|
Post by robkuntz on Oct 19, 2017 6:22:40 GMT -5
Simplified, perhaps. But when considering "is the tank obsolete" one must get down to the very basics; the basic task of a tank is to carry that gun. Before the tank will be obsolete, that gun will have to be obsolete. And there is still much utility in a large caliber direct fire gun, just like there is still much utility in basic unguided artillery. Guided missiles were supposed to make guns on aircraft obsolete, and in the late 50s and early 60s many aircraft were designed without guns. Not any more. I will of course take issue that the idea of modern tank warfare--progressed as it was from its ill-considered but technological bereft beginnings in WWi--is about bringing guns to bear only. In Achtung Panzer! (1937, Heinz Guderian) Guderian describes the Schwerpunkt ("point of attack") as a mobile lightning fast thrust to penetrate the enemy lines and subvert their communications and supply lines. Notably in WW2, France 1940, this tactic was brought to bear against better armed tanks (the French and British outgunned the Germans), so the main use of modern tactics for tanks was not for the use of bringing guns to bear (a tactic the French still advocated by splitting their brigades into support units for static troops--a throwback to WW1 thinking),which loss them the battle for France among many other reasons related to hubris and antiquated methodologies mostly). |
|
|
|
Post by ripx187 on Oct 19, 2017 17:10:41 GMT -5
Did anybody watch the movie "Fury" back in 2014? It was boss!
|
|
|
|
Post by LouGoncey on Oct 24, 2017 20:46:34 GMT -5
The main purpose of a tank is to tote around a big direct-fire gun. As long as it's handy to have mobile big direct-fire guns, there will be tanks. Repeated for TRUTH! |
|
