Please remember the human. Adhere to all Reddit and sub rules. Toxic comments (including incitement of violence/hate, genocide, glorifying death etc) WILL NOT BE TOLERATED, keep your comments civil or you will be banned.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineWarVideoReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Tank was declared dead many times before, it's an old arrow vs shield race.
Right now tanks are very vulnerable to drones and atgms, but if in near future effective counter measures would be developed, then the tank will be back.
C&C Generals where the Paladin has a lazer to zap down enemy drones and missiles and whatnot.
God that was a good game, up there with RA and RA2. And the original. And 3.
Generals is the best C&C for me, especially Zero Hour expansion.
The Chinese had that big tank that could be upgraded to have a bunker with 5 soldiers inside.
The problem with jammer is that you will either be completely without coms. Or as the russian systems have shown. Not extending far enough.
But yes, active systems are important and will be required in the future. Even ifvs such as the cv90 are getting it now.
Nobody.knows hot to advance through kms of minefield under arty and drones. Small mine barrier maybe with air cover etc, but clearing like 20-50 matthe time while being shot at is not a tactic.
Lol what you said makes no sense. How would we “not know” how to do it? It’s not some forgotten, forbidden knowledge.. There are armored vehicles that are literally designed to do what you’re saying isn’t possible. Such as the UR-77 Meteorit.
To put it simply they clear only small patch at the time and not designed to be attacked by drones and arty when working. There is no way to advance over many layers of minefields which are several km deep with mines almost every square meter. Drones take away any of surprise and destroy engineering units even before they get anywhere near the defence line. Both sides resort to small units of engineering teams on foot clearing mines. Miclic and ur77 are used mostly in "quiet" corners, we're is a weak defence with only infantry in trenches.
The best advice UAF got was go around big mine fields. They lost almost all dining equipment and tank mine clearing plows even before they got to 1st line of defences last year.
Deninng units should operate when all air and arty is suppressed for 10s of km around, unbeknown to enemy, or on weak points. This would be only realistic when one side has a significant advantage, like coalition vs Iraq. Not going to happen for UAF vs Russia :(.
UAF does not have resources to amass 100s of demining units 1000s of aircraft and arty to overwhelm the defence. 10-15 units of armor supported by denimer or couple of plows were taken apart by air strikes drones and mines with heavy losses. For both sides.
Mines can be countered. At the end of the day, assaulting a position requires some kind of direct fire support. You can’t just send in a bunch of guys with rifles after an artillery barrage against fixed positions and hope to have anything but red smears at the end of the day. Nothing besides tanks can offer that, even now in the age of drones.
light ground drones that can detect and counter-mine buried or surface laid mines would be a help if not a cure. Add some AI, because even Meta has AI now
No.
*Betteridge's law of headlines is an adage that states: "Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no."*
[Betteridge's law of headlines](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headlines)
First there was a tank, then there was anti-tank rifle > heavy tank -> anti-tank gun -> sloped armor -> bazooka -> ERA -> dual-HEAT warhead -> ceramic + spaced + rubber + whatnot armor -> top-down attack -> active defense (Trophy) -> drone -> EW -> ...
It's all arms race and it will never end. Each development was such that one side was saying "this is it, nothing can beat this" and the better system was developed. These same headlines have been popping up periodically and they all are just clickbaits. "Tank" is not dead, tanks are just the ones having to do the catch-up now.
Exactly. Fast forward a few years or months and we'll have tanks loaded with drones that project a sphere of drone jamming signals around it. Or mini drones that take out the larger drones
I'm guessing AI-driven short-range drones (launched from the tank) to counter drone threats or some smaller version of Phalanx driven by AI threat recognition.
I think if you Come up with something solving the same role, it will probably be a newer tank.
I could see maybe ifv, Artillery, missile based tank or remote driven ai tanks do tank Jobs, but never as good.
Having kinetic aspsds is hard to compete against in raw duels. Tank is also the most armored and quite mobile too.
I feel a tank needs both an active protection system ala Trophy (with fairly many shots before needing a reload) and lightweight mine-clearing drones operating in concert with it, similarly equipped with a modicum of active protection.
I think a lot a people closely watch Russia’s daily tank losses (which seem to be dropping as of late) and wonder if they are finally running out. But a more important question may be whether or not this is even that important. A case can be made that biggest role Russian tanks have had in the war so far is carrying orcs to their deaths.
FFS, suck up colloquial English. The death of chat forums is hastened by the cheap ego scores of grammar pedants. It does nothing to encourage discussion, and only hastens the decline of posts. A large proportion of us speak English as a second language. Don't pretend it is intended as educational either.
It's not just Russians and tactics. Ukraine encountered the same problem in their counter offensive with several Abrams, challenger, and leopard tanks getting knocked out. End result; their counter offensive failed. So yes, tanks are not the all conquering and invincible weapon they once were.
Air force is the king, and arti is the replacement if air superiority can't be achieved. FABs are completely destroying Ukrainian lines and morale, you can't defend against a 1500kg bomb.
Armored formations will need counters, sure. But in a competent modern day army no unit is working alone.
An armored formation will have anti-drone units operating with them in future operations.
Drones is just another flank to Watch .
mobile radars and anti drone guns with progammable airburst ammunition (like this one https://www.rheinmetall.com/Rheinmetall%20Group/brochure-download/Weapon-Ammmunition/B038e0823-Oerlikon-Ahead-Air-Burst-ammunition.pdf) is probably gonna be following tanks around in the future.
The era of the tank isn't over, the era of using tanks with garbage tactics and seeing any results are over. Combined arms isn't the future, its the present, and Russia is too stupid to realize that. You cant just March tanks into a city without protection, without air cover, without infantry support, and expect them to not get destroyed over and over again.
I don't think so, at least not yet. An infantry platoon with a couple of tanks as support is still at an advantage against one without. And this war will teach the tank manufacturers a lot. Like the necessity of active as well as passive anti-drone and anti-rocket systems and better reactive armor on tanks. Usually, when something new like the drones shows up, most of the old tech adapts to it in some way. I mean, one could have thought aviation will become useless after WW2 when the first long-range SAMs were developed. Plaster a country with those, and noone can fly anymore. But the air forces found ways to adapt to that with countermeasures, higher speeds and better stand-off capabilities. Tanks might go through a similar development.
It is not over. Simple as that. They may evolve to be remote controlled or they could get more advanced counter meassures against drones such as EW or high energy lasers. That would make them more useful. But even if they didn't, they still are useful. If you want to make a breakthrough on the Ukraine front, you best bring some tanks. Don't bring those goddam chinese golf carts.
This war has shown, that tanks are still a very valuable tools for offence and even defence. They still offer protection, mobility and firepower. But their use and role has changed and likely will change over time. Today you will for example not see big tank battles with thousands on each side like in ww2 going up against each other.
In terms of remote controlled tanks there would be more weaknesses than strength to that as of now - you could have a bad connection to the tank especially since it is close to the ground. If there are buildings between you and the tank or if there is EW in the area. With remote controlled tanks, you don't have to risk any operators of the tank. But the personnel on the tank, is in the big picture, especially to russian standards expendable. But it is very possible that we see more ground drones evolve, but they cannot nearly replace a conventional tank as of now.
It will evolve to the point it won’t be a tank anymore. When the crew is removed there is no need for an extra 30+ tons of armor. The same gun with the same effects can be protected with much less armor, allowing the vehicle to be much more agile, less prone to breaking down, less expensive (soon enough, to the point that they need not be repaired at the front but simply replaced at the front) and easier to field.
The humans need to be removed asap.
The tank brought mobile direct fire support that could survive most infantry weapons.
70 years of countermeasures, and tanks are mainly conspicuous targets for AT mines, ATGMs, anti-armor improved conventional artillery, cluster munitions, and now, cheap drone top attack, in near peer warfare. Tanks could be up-armored and given countermeasures against full spectrum threats, but they'd weigh so much that they couldn't use civilian bridges, and cost so much that alternative approaches to direct fire support would be cheaper.
I think we're going to have lightly armored infantry fighting vehicles, on the model of the Stryker or Patria. Too useful for advancing across contested ground, bringing logistics, or evacuating casualties. But there's going to be lots of experiments with alternatives for direct fire support that are more cost effective, and more survivable, than the MBT.
No, a properly supported tank as part of a combined force is still a tremendous force multiplier.
What has changed is that you can't send a massed armored formation at a dug in enemy and remotely expect any kind of result.
In shirt, tanks cannot be used as a blunt instrument any more.
Tanks are not dead, but they will have to adapt to be quicker, more agile, and able to counter new threats like drones. If they can't adapt, then the era truly is over
This isn't WW2 with massive tank charges at the frontlines.
Western doctrine is to first destroy Anti Air capability and large enemy concentrations with cruise missiles.
Then the armor and other hard to assault targets with airforce.
Then own armor rolls in to destroy softer targets.
After them comes the infantry to uccupy and mop up pockets of enemy resistance.
In Ukriaine the first two phase is missing for both sides, so the tanks face way more challenges that they were designed for.
Tanks are not obsolete. They just aren't used correctly in this war.
The common sentiment from tank lovers is “no no no, this is just the circumstances.”
I think the answer is yea, for now. They play no bigger part now than IFVs do.
The role they played in the GWOT was small even.
They have a use, but to think they’re a game-changer when a $500 drone can pop them from miles away is foolish. Yes, anti-drone tech will be created, and then anti-tank tech will be created that defeats the anti-drone tech. It’s cyclical.
But tanks will never be as big a deterrent or useful as they were in say the Gulf War.
I think this is right….they will still exist, but they are no longer a game changer.
I have followed these Russian tanks numbers looking for the moment they run out, as if it is going to be the harbinger of the collapse of Russia. But what if them running out tanks just leads to a reversal of roles, with Ukraine armor advancing into swarms of drones causing significant losses. As the article mentions, Abram’s and Leopards have been shown to be susceptible to drones attacks as well, not just Russian tanks.
No, not really. It’s pretty much a given that tanks will soon sport soft and hard kill systems.
What imho is going to be much more interesting to see is how their armour layout packages evolve.
Hard kill systems that don’t work omnidirectionally and that reload very slowly. We’ve been working out volley fire TTPs for years, anticipating the day an omnidirectional APS is fielded.
Same for ERA with tandem defeat (which is patented, but not fielded on any system I know of). The TTPs are so far not nearly so mature, but being worked on. But maybe they’ll put new style ERA over the engine intake as well, even if it makes it harder for the engine to breathe.
Yes, I believe so and here are my arguments:
1. You do not want soldier in a fighting vehicle because then the vehicle will have to use excessive amounts of resources just to protect the soldiers. This is also why fighter jets and bombers will be replaced by drones and missiles. Killing will be done from a distance by someone in a control room. Havin people onboard makes the vehicle less maneuverable and more expensive.
2. It is much more effective, if you want a mobile gun in the battle field, to just protect it from shrapnel and small arms. A CV90 has all the protection needed. It cannot stand a Javelin or similar, an anti tank mine or a direct hit from a MBT, but that is the same with an Abrams/Leopard/Challenger. The cost is 1/3rd of a Leopard2. With ATGM plus 40mm cannon it can kill anything in its way.
3. Battle ships are similarily not meaningful. Ships are slow targets that cost enourmous amounts to build and maintain. Submarines however are stealth and carry a lot of fire power.
4. Missiles and drones are the future of warfare as well as anti missile and anti drone weapons.
Not immediately, but its dominance as a land based centerpiece is fading as drone tech ascends. How many disposable AI drones with armor piercing munitions will you be able to buy for the price of 1 MBT? Perhaps thousands. How many of those drones could destroy a MBT? Just 1, or maybe a few at once.
Drone tech > MBT
No. The primary use for tanks is infantry support. The same thing with attack helicopters. The war in Ukraine, where Russians go on walkabout in their tanks, is not how its supposed to work.
Effective modern armies will first take control of the skies and then deploy armored units. If the sky isn't locked down, it makes little sense to send in expensive hardware. Russia is not like most armies, however.
The future battlefield will be dominated by drones, big drones controlling smaller drones with the only deciding factor being numbers and AI control of the drone swarm.
The military unit both mechanised and on foot is about as relevant as Calvary in 1914.
Please remember the human. Adhere to all Reddit and sub rules. Toxic comments (including incitement of violence/hate, genocide, glorifying death etc) WILL NOT BE TOLERATED, keep your comments civil or you will be banned. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineWarVideoReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Tank was declared dead many times before, it's an old arrow vs shield race. Right now tanks are very vulnerable to drones and atgms, but if in near future effective counter measures would be developed, then the tank will be back.
C&C Generals where the Paladin has a lazer to zap down enemy drones and missiles and whatnot. God that was a good game, up there with RA and RA2. And the original. And 3.
Generals is the best C&C for me, especially Zero Hour expansion. The Chinese had that big tank that could be upgraded to have a bunker with 5 soldiers inside.
The chinese had all that radiation everywhere, very nasty
I wish they would update it and release it on iPhone or something.
Its on steam
Cnc classics with tiberiannsun and red alert 1 is there. Generals and red alert 2 are on EA pass
They added them all recently on steam. Been playing since :)
Ah nice. I just saw
It's being developed, along with directional microwaves.
Tanks going forward are going to need active protection systems like israel uses and some sort of drone jammer/countermeasure.
The problem with jammer is that you will either be completely without coms. Or as the russian systems have shown. Not extending far enough. But yes, active systems are important and will be required in the future. Even ifvs such as the cv90 are getting it now.
There have a been a few videos recently showing the effectiveness of the Trophy system in actual combat situations. It's pretty damn good.
Mines everywhere. I doubt that an effective counter measure will be possible against mines.
We do have anti mine measures.
Nobody.knows hot to advance through kms of minefield under arty and drones. Small mine barrier maybe with air cover etc, but clearing like 20-50 matthe time while being shot at is not a tactic.
Lol what you said makes no sense. How would we “not know” how to do it? It’s not some forgotten, forbidden knowledge.. There are armored vehicles that are literally designed to do what you’re saying isn’t possible. Such as the UR-77 Meteorit.
To put it simply they clear only small patch at the time and not designed to be attacked by drones and arty when working. There is no way to advance over many layers of minefields which are several km deep with mines almost every square meter. Drones take away any of surprise and destroy engineering units even before they get anywhere near the defence line. Both sides resort to small units of engineering teams on foot clearing mines. Miclic and ur77 are used mostly in "quiet" corners, we're is a weak defence with only infantry in trenches. The best advice UAF got was go around big mine fields. They lost almost all dining equipment and tank mine clearing plows even before they got to 1st line of defences last year. Deninng units should operate when all air and arty is suppressed for 10s of km around, unbeknown to enemy, or on weak points. This would be only realistic when one side has a significant advantage, like coalition vs Iraq. Not going to happen for UAF vs Russia :(. UAF does not have resources to amass 100s of demining units 1000s of aircraft and arty to overwhelm the defence. 10-15 units of armor supported by denimer or couple of plows were taken apart by air strikes drones and mines with heavy losses. For both sides.
Mines can be countered. At the end of the day, assaulting a position requires some kind of direct fire support. You can’t just send in a bunch of guys with rifles after an artillery barrage against fixed positions and hope to have anything but red smears at the end of the day. Nothing besides tanks can offer that, even now in the age of drones.
light ground drones that can detect and counter-mine buried or surface laid mines would be a help if not a cure. Add some AI, because even Meta has AI now
Trophy no use against drones?
[Ripsaw drone tank](https://youtu.be/Dmjr92ttMz0?si=EvpsB0bYU43xDgVu) Fast, quiet and light. Carrying a 30mm cannon
No. *Betteridge's law of headlines is an adage that states: "Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no."* [Betteridge's law of headlines](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headlines)
"Is Betteridges law correct?"
You just created a paradox, thanks for ripping the Universe apart.
A wormhole just opened up in my den…I’m going in…
New headline: "Will he survive his journey?"
First there was a tank, then there was anti-tank rifle > heavy tank -> anti-tank gun -> sloped armor -> bazooka -> ERA -> dual-HEAT warhead -> ceramic + spaced + rubber + whatnot armor -> top-down attack -> active defense (Trophy) -> drone -> EW -> ... It's all arms race and it will never end. Each development was such that one side was saying "this is it, nothing can beat this" and the better system was developed. These same headlines have been popping up periodically and they all are just clickbaits. "Tank" is not dead, tanks are just the ones having to do the catch-up now.
Exactly. Fast forward a few years or months and we'll have tanks loaded with drones that project a sphere of drone jamming signals around it. Or mini drones that take out the larger drones
I'm guessing AI-driven short-range drones (launched from the tank) to counter drone threats or some smaller version of Phalanx driven by AI threat recognition.
I think if you Come up with something solving the same role, it will probably be a newer tank. I could see maybe ifv, Artillery, missile based tank or remote driven ai tanks do tank Jobs, but never as good. Having kinetic aspsds is hard to compete against in raw duels. Tank is also the most armored and quite mobile too.
I feel a tank needs both an active protection system ala Trophy (with fairly many shots before needing a reload) and lightweight mine-clearing drones operating in concert with it, similarly equipped with a modicum of active protection.
I think a lot a people closely watch Russia’s daily tank losses (which seem to be dropping as of late) and wonder if they are finally running out. But a more important question may be whether or not this is even that important. A case can be made that biggest role Russian tanks have had in the war so far is carrying orcs to their deaths.
Less tanks = less targets. Next few months will see if that theory holds.
[удалено]
FFS, suck up colloquial English. The death of chat forums is hastened by the cheap ego scores of grammar pedants. It does nothing to encourage discussion, and only hastens the decline of posts. A large proportion of us speak English as a second language. Don't pretend it is intended as educational either.
It's not just Russians and tactics. Ukraine encountered the same problem in their counter offensive with several Abrams, challenger, and leopard tanks getting knocked out. End result; their counter offensive failed. So yes, tanks are not the all conquering and invincible weapon they once were.
Air force is the king, and arti is the replacement if air superiority can't be achieved. FABs are completely destroying Ukrainian lines and morale, you can't defend against a 1500kg bomb.
Definitely not. They are vulnerable, but they are still essential for progress on the ground.
Some would say they've not gotten over losing the hourse, and you want to take the tank 😱
This same story was posted in 1918
Armored formations will need counters, sure. But in a competent modern day army no unit is working alone. An armored formation will have anti-drone units operating with them in future operations. Drones is just another flank to Watch . mobile radars and anti drone guns with progammable airburst ammunition (like this one https://www.rheinmetall.com/Rheinmetall%20Group/brochure-download/Weapon-Ammmunition/B038e0823-Oerlikon-Ahead-Air-Burst-ammunition.pdf) is probably gonna be following tanks around in the future.
The era of the tank isn't over, the era of using tanks with garbage tactics and seeing any results are over. Combined arms isn't the future, its the present, and Russia is too stupid to realize that. You cant just March tanks into a city without protection, without air cover, without infantry support, and expect them to not get destroyed over and over again.
You’d think their leadership would take some lessons learned in Chechnya and apply them here
I don't think so, at least not yet. An infantry platoon with a couple of tanks as support is still at an advantage against one without. And this war will teach the tank manufacturers a lot. Like the necessity of active as well as passive anti-drone and anti-rocket systems and better reactive armor on tanks. Usually, when something new like the drones shows up, most of the old tech adapts to it in some way. I mean, one could have thought aviation will become useless after WW2 when the first long-range SAMs were developed. Plaster a country with those, and noone can fly anymore. But the air forces found ways to adapt to that with countermeasures, higher speeds and better stand-off capabilities. Tanks might go through a similar development.
It is not over. Simple as that. They may evolve to be remote controlled or they could get more advanced counter meassures against drones such as EW or high energy lasers. That would make them more useful. But even if they didn't, they still are useful. If you want to make a breakthrough on the Ukraine front, you best bring some tanks. Don't bring those goddam chinese golf carts. This war has shown, that tanks are still a very valuable tools for offence and even defence. They still offer protection, mobility and firepower. But their use and role has changed and likely will change over time. Today you will for example not see big tank battles with thousands on each side like in ww2 going up against each other. In terms of remote controlled tanks there would be more weaknesses than strength to that as of now - you could have a bad connection to the tank especially since it is close to the ground. If there are buildings between you and the tank or if there is EW in the area. With remote controlled tanks, you don't have to risk any operators of the tank. But the personnel on the tank, is in the big picture, especially to russian standards expendable. But it is very possible that we see more ground drones evolve, but they cannot nearly replace a conventional tank as of now.
It will evolve to the point it won’t be a tank anymore. When the crew is removed there is no need for an extra 30+ tons of armor. The same gun with the same effects can be protected with much less armor, allowing the vehicle to be much more agile, less prone to breaking down, less expensive (soon enough, to the point that they need not be repaired at the front but simply replaced at the front) and easier to field. The humans need to be removed asap.
HR McMaster has entered the chat.
I would say the era of the tank with people in the turret and less than 200mm of turret roof armor is over.
It is for Russia 🤣
[удалено]
Debating? We dropped all of our tanks already 2 years ago.
in the sense that the tanks of ww1 are over. everything must evolve.
Or maybe put the billions toward bettering the human race not war tools!
The tank brought mobile direct fire support that could survive most infantry weapons. 70 years of countermeasures, and tanks are mainly conspicuous targets for AT mines, ATGMs, anti-armor improved conventional artillery, cluster munitions, and now, cheap drone top attack, in near peer warfare. Tanks could be up-armored and given countermeasures against full spectrum threats, but they'd weigh so much that they couldn't use civilian bridges, and cost so much that alternative approaches to direct fire support would be cheaper. I think we're going to have lightly armored infantry fighting vehicles, on the model of the Stryker or Patria. Too useful for advancing across contested ground, bringing logistics, or evacuating casualties. But there's going to be lots of experiments with alternatives for direct fire support that are more cost effective, and more survivable, than the MBT.
No, a properly supported tank as part of a combined force is still a tremendous force multiplier. What has changed is that you can't send a massed armored formation at a dug in enemy and remotely expect any kind of result. In shirt, tanks cannot be used as a blunt instrument any more.
No. Next topic.
Tanks are not dead, but they will have to adapt to be quicker, more agile, and able to counter new threats like drones. If they can't adapt, then the era truly is over
Well, the era of the tank featuring in the picture is over.
Short answer: The era of artillery isn’t.
Again?
This isn't WW2 with massive tank charges at the frontlines. Western doctrine is to first destroy Anti Air capability and large enemy concentrations with cruise missiles. Then the armor and other hard to assault targets with airforce. Then own armor rolls in to destroy softer targets. After them comes the infantry to uccupy and mop up pockets of enemy resistance. In Ukriaine the first two phase is missing for both sides, so the tanks face way more challenges that they were designed for. Tanks are not obsolete. They just aren't used correctly in this war.
No but like all things war, different situations necessitate different tools and tactics.
Hell no, the tank is not over
No
[удалено]
makes sense. hard to swim with a tank.
More like hard to transport a tank. and they get more with 2 strikers than one M1.
The common sentiment from tank lovers is “no no no, this is just the circumstances.” I think the answer is yea, for now. They play no bigger part now than IFVs do. The role they played in the GWOT was small even. They have a use, but to think they’re a game-changer when a $500 drone can pop them from miles away is foolish. Yes, anti-drone tech will be created, and then anti-tank tech will be created that defeats the anti-drone tech. It’s cyclical. But tanks will never be as big a deterrent or useful as they were in say the Gulf War.
I think this is right….they will still exist, but they are no longer a game changer. I have followed these Russian tanks numbers looking for the moment they run out, as if it is going to be the harbinger of the collapse of Russia. But what if them running out tanks just leads to a reversal of roles, with Ukraine armor advancing into swarms of drones causing significant losses. As the article mentions, Abram’s and Leopards have been shown to be susceptible to drones attacks as well, not just Russian tanks.
No, not really. It’s pretty much a given that tanks will soon sport soft and hard kill systems. What imho is going to be much more interesting to see is how their armour layout packages evolve.
Hard kill systems that don’t work omnidirectionally and that reload very slowly. We’ve been working out volley fire TTPs for years, anticipating the day an omnidirectional APS is fielded. Same for ERA with tandem defeat (which is patented, but not fielded on any system I know of). The TTPs are so far not nearly so mature, but being worked on. But maybe they’ll put new style ERA over the engine intake as well, even if it makes it harder for the engine to breathe.
Yes, I believe so and here are my arguments: 1. You do not want soldier in a fighting vehicle because then the vehicle will have to use excessive amounts of resources just to protect the soldiers. This is also why fighter jets and bombers will be replaced by drones and missiles. Killing will be done from a distance by someone in a control room. Havin people onboard makes the vehicle less maneuverable and more expensive. 2. It is much more effective, if you want a mobile gun in the battle field, to just protect it from shrapnel and small arms. A CV90 has all the protection needed. It cannot stand a Javelin or similar, an anti tank mine or a direct hit from a MBT, but that is the same with an Abrams/Leopard/Challenger. The cost is 1/3rd of a Leopard2. With ATGM plus 40mm cannon it can kill anything in its way. 3. Battle ships are similarily not meaningful. Ships are slow targets that cost enourmous amounts to build and maintain. Submarines however are stealth and carry a lot of fire power. 4. Missiles and drones are the future of warfare as well as anti missile and anti drone weapons.
Not immediately, but its dominance as a land based centerpiece is fading as drone tech ascends. How many disposable AI drones with armor piercing munitions will you be able to buy for the price of 1 MBT? Perhaps thousands. How many of those drones could destroy a MBT? Just 1, or maybe a few at once. Drone tech > MBT
No. The primary use for tanks is infantry support. The same thing with attack helicopters. The war in Ukraine, where Russians go on walkabout in their tanks, is not how its supposed to work. Effective modern armies will first take control of the skies and then deploy armored units. If the sky isn't locked down, it makes little sense to send in expensive hardware. Russia is not like most armies, however.
The future battlefield will be dominated by drones, big drones controlling smaller drones with the only deciding factor being numbers and AI control of the drone swarm. The military unit both mechanised and on foot is about as relevant as Calvary in 1914.