[Typhoon]

Everything is vulnerable if thrown into the thick of battle without complementary support.

Sure we can all agree on the impact precision weapons have had on warfare but even with complimentary support we have seen that the missile has overtaken the tank in its primary anti-armour (in the west) role. In addition the miniturisation of these weapons has allowed infantary to gain an advantage over armour. Both of these factors devaluing the tank after WWII with the first example being the impact of Egyptian Saggers during the Yom Kippur war. Even with the last modern example of tank vs tank warfare, where the M1 successfully charged Iraqi T-72 during the Gulf War it was actually the TOW equipped M2 which was responsible for the majority of Iraqi tank losses to armour during the war.

[MB.]

it was actually the TOW equipped M2 which was responsible for the majority of Iraqi tank losses to armour during the war.

This thread is for MBT reviews, not panzy mounted troop armed with devastating portable guided missiles reviews.

[Wolfman]

But if the tank is piece of gear from the last war not suited for this one, why bother even reviewing it? Are we going to review Jeeps developed in the last decade as well?

[MB.]

Wolfman, do you believe that a war will be fought in the near future that will not include tanks?

[Wolfman]

Depends on where we go and who we fight. If we fight another asymmetrical war in an urban area, we might as well scrap our armored units. However, if the next war is a symmetrical war mostly outside of urban areas, then we should starting working towards that. However, every study I have seen says that the population of the world in urban areas is increasing, and the odds of conflict taking place in them is also increasing. Since urban combat tends to favor insurgent tactics, it seems to me that the next major conflict we will be in will likely be an asymmetrical conflict in an urban area.

[MB.]

Why do you keep saying "we"?

[Wolfman]

It's a first person plural. Why does it matter?

[Thunderhawk]

I would imagine the future of tanks will be in the asymmetric role. On the open battle field between well developed combatants tanks are to cheaply countered. Insurgents however wont be fielding many, if any, dedicated anti tank missiles but will be using IEDs, anti-armour RPGs and will be reliant on ambush tactics in urban settings. Strong protection and in scene heavy fire support are much better in such situations then air strikes or artillery bombardment.

[Wolfman]

A maximum of 12 RPG rounds into the side of a tank with reactive armor will take it out of the fight. 12 RPG rounds are alot cheaper then a single tank.

[killim]

Haha i want to see your face after the first RPG

The best chance to avoid a symmetrical war is to prepare for one. Thats why i don't like the US approach to mechanized warfare. Not ABC ready.

[Wolfman]

Haha i want to see your face after the first RPG

What's that supposed to mean?

The best chance to avoid a symmetrical war is to prepare for one.

Or go Switz.

Not ABC ready

This is not a phrase I'm familiar with.

[Thunderhawk]

What's that supposed to mean?

Is it 12 guys firing RPGs, a few guys firing and reloading or many guys from different positions firing in turn? If not the first, after the first salvo the tank and its support will fire upon the combatants. The newer missile interceptors that are on, and being developed, might make RPGs and missiles less effective in the future too.

Not ABC ready.

ABC => Atomic rather then nuclear (NBC)?

[Wolfman]

Is it 12 guys firing RPGs, a few guys firing and reloading or many guys from different positions firing in turn?

12 is the max, with the norm being more like 8, and that's only against tanks with reactive armor. In that case half fire from different positions into the same point on the armor. The armor does it's thing, and the other half fire, also from different positions. This is the tactic used by the insurgency in Afghanistan, and they'll normally scatter the rockets across a pretty broad swath of ground. Against a tank without reactive armor they normally need 4 or 5.

The newer missile interceptors that are on, and being developed, might make RPGs and missiles less effective in the future too.

I'm not aware of a missile interceptor system that can deal with a half dozen rpg rounds coming in from different angles.

[Igor Antunov]

12 RPG rounds are alot cheaper then a single tank.

12 anti-ship cruise missiles are alot cheaper than a single capital ship.

12 anti-aircraft missiles are alot cheaper than a single modern fighter jet.

And so on.

[Wolfman]

Just noticed this post. Their are plenty of ways that have been developed to deal with Anti-Aircraft guns.

[Igor Antunov]

AA missiles, not guns.

[Wolfman]

I'm a Marine - we say guns. Just like we call the Mujahideen the Muj (interesting fact, Muj in Arabic means 'Wave').

[Igor Antunov]

In the end all ways are innefective against a barrage of said AA missiles if you're the aircraft and that barrage is coming towards you.

If you're suggesting to destroy the AA missile batteries before they fire, that's not a direct counter, it's an assymetric solution. Not a possibility on a real battlefield against a real enemy with a real military force. Perhaps it works against 3rd world economies with vintage equipment.

[ocelot2]

From what I know (which is in very broad and general terms) I can say...

The M1 is a very proven system, period.
The Leopard series is a jack of all trades and is constantly modified because of different features desired by different customers.
The Merkava series is very interesting as it is built from the ground up to help ensure crew safety. It is probably the toughest tank out there.
The French LecLerc is very high tech, has high specs, and is probability is the most automated tank in the world. Though it is largely untested compared to the other "tank aces"
The British Challenger is similar to the M1 but the barrel is rifled, meaning some projectiles will be more accurate while others won't.

This is all I know from various books from a friends book collection, please add more info.

[killim]

Moah the MTB discussion is gone

http://64.50.166.77/forum/viewtopic.php ... 5&start=20