The end of tanks as we know it?

[Cult Icon]

I remember reading after the 73 Yom Kippur war how tanks were dead as the dodo thanks to the ATGM Sagger Missiles.

In the video he advocates the use of an infantry carrier with "armor like a tank" and large numbers of infantry to support the tanks.

The Russian infantry in the Ukraine is very well mechanized but their IFV/APC are of the unusual variety..

[wm]

the ATGM Sagger Missiles

They were wire-guided and not that easy to guide. You could deploy smoke against them.
The fire-and-forget missiles are something entirely different.

[wm]

Russia’s Only Prototype T-80UM2 Tank Was Destroyed In Ukraine

T-80UM2_UKRAINE_DESTROYED.jpg

[Cult Icon]

The tank tactics used by the Russians in Ukraine reminds me of how they used their armor in WW2.

With 22,000-12,000 tanks I wonder if the tank is seen as somehow disposible- easier to use up tanks than train and organize divisions.

[LineDoggie]

the ATGM Sagger Missiles

They were wire-guided and not that easy to guide. You could deploy smoke against them.
The fire-and-forget missiles are something entirely different.

And yet tanks are still NOT Obsoleted by professional Militaries

Huh? guess they dont listen to the experts

[wm]

We need a real war to be sure of that.
What would happen to Western tanks facing masses of soldiers and partisans armed with fire-and-forget.

[wm]

The tank tactics used by the Russians in Ukraine reminds me of how they used their armor in WW2.

With 22,000-12,000 tanks I wonder if the tank is seen as somehow disposible- easier to use up tanks than train and organize divisions.

They can't afford it. Their Army, Navy (and whatever else) are huge but they spend 12 times less than the US on them.

[Cult Icon]

Can't afford what?

[Cult Icon]

The Russian next-generation AFVs have not appeared so far- especially the supposed world-beating T-14- supposedly Javelin proof with an unmanned turret and advanced features). The Russians wanted to have around 2000 of them IIRC. Saving them for WW3?

+There are clips of Russian tanks shooting at targets in Mariupol and also of tanks being knocked out by the Urk. They appear to be using them in a "shoot and scoot" way and individually.

An observation by analysts of Syria was that the Russians used it as a testing ground for new tactics, organization, and weapons. They also used it as a dumping ground for obsolete munitions.

A possibility is that dominant tank in this war so far, the T-72 is really seen as expendible, old inventory.

[mezsat2]

Tanks continue to provide mobile cover for infantry. The future tank will probably need to be more like Hitler's "Maus"- completely impregnable to all forms of fire (except nukes, of course). These will simply be called on to provide an armored wall behind which infantry can follow. Still, with the sophistication of infantry weapons, each man, in and of himself, becomes essentially a "tank"- at far less cost.

[wm]

More like this:

[wm]

A possibility is that dominant tank in this war so far, the T-72 is really seen as expendible, old inventory.

What could they do differently?
The tank has to go there, use its gun and expose to enemy fire in the process.

Can't afford what?

In size and structure, the Russian Army is not much different from the US Army, so a 12 times smaller budget means you can't afford almost anything.
Most of the army is in a semi-Potemkin state - for the show not for the real war.

[Cult Icon]

A lot of factors go into the US military budget being much higher, such as high income/2.3 times more people, overseas bases, navy/air force far superior, having actual divisions,more professionals, etc. In watching some analysts from RAND and Ukrainian military advisors they had no such disregard for Russian "hybrid warfare" capabilities or their track record prior to this war. They anticipated a focus on short wars and a transition way from conventional warfare.

While the "Special Military operation" is blotched, the war is now entering a new phase- a war of attrition and the conventional warfare the Putin reforms aimed to distance itself from..

Besides gigantic numbers of tanks, the Russians have 3 times more artillery pieces than the US and this part of their capability has not been revealed yet. They also have banned ammunition types. War-watchers are anticipating Kyiv being the subject of an artillery offensive as heavy long-ranged pieces are transported into Ukraine. Also encirclement of large areas in the Donbas.

There are satellite images emerging of Russian tanks/IFV/APC being dug in on both flanks of Kyiv showing a defensive posture.

[Cult Icon]

What could they do differently?
The tank has to go there, use its gun and expose to enemy fire in the process.

I think this is a cost issue, to have tanks with high survival prospects they would need modern, high cost models heavily supported by well balanced combined arms. The Russian army, with its reliance on BTG is not in this state.

Given Russian military thinking is focused on the strategic/operational levels the preference of huge numbers of cheap tanks comes across as intentional. With small number of high cost models they would end up having less offensive capabilities.

[LineDoggie]

We need a real war to be sure of that.

Do we ?

What would happen to Western tanks facing masses of soldiers and partisans armed with fire-and-forget.

They would take losses like in any war since 1917, still does not make tanks obsolete, and why only Western tanks?


Those Partisans you mention are they alive? I ask as then they have thermal signatures and Western tanks have thermal optics that can see where they hide, M1A2 even has a thermal sight for the cdr so the gunner can use his one direction and the commander can scan with his. Ever use a Thermal sight? You also forget tis an integrated battlefield with drone surveillance and JLENS type systems besides the tanks STANO systems

See what I'm getting at?
You seem to think its simply a matter of a missile cannot miss and a tank cannot see dismounts because.

Never assume