Here I give my take on this topic. TLDR: it depends on how much active protection systems proliferate #warfare #russiaukrainewar #tanks #tank #tankwarfare #drone #modernwarfare #militarytechnology #military
What about if tanks themselves become drones? Smaller remote operated tanks could have a different armor set-up once the need for crew space is eliminated.
The tank is still a very useful asset on the battle field, we just haven't built a new tank since early 2000s, we need a new tank, the most advanced tank that can be built hasn't been built yet
AI pattern recognition will make jamming irelevent. like once programed what tank looks like, and you launch it, it will hit any tank in that area. liek jus knoing size, tread it will know its a tank and guide it self to it. i think lance drones will be very very deadly very soon with AI pattern reconigtio built into the. you can send swarm of drones that can target multiple targets at the same time.
You forgot the fact that drones can be fully autonomous, making jamming useless. As my friend said to me when I talked about drones in warfare, any one form of tech in warfare rarely becomes obsolete, their places in warfare just become more nuanced and complex over time - small drones will likely also see continued use, but will just change in response to countermeasures and countermeasures to the countermeasures keep being being developed.
@@kelllakell I would argue that if it requires constant input from a second party to function then it's not actually fully autonomous - unless you're using some obscure definition of jamming.
@@iwiffitthitotonacc4673 I am not using an obscure definition of "jamming". Jamming will work regardless if something is autonomous or not because Jammers targeted at drones do not work by interrupting a signal from anywhere they work by shooting powerful microwaves and x-rays at machinery that cook any electronics motherboard thats why you see drones fall out of the sky when they are jammed, thats why I said you should actually look up the concepts you are talking about instead of "guessing". Google is free my guy.
@@kelllakell I'm not sure why you're acting smug because when I do Google it, it is defined as interference with radio signals between the drone and its operator. So yeah, looks like you're using an obscure definition to me.
@@iwiffitthitotonacc4673 Right because google would know the difference between Universal jammers and the ones Militaries use, so no I'm not using an obscure definition, you just don't know what you are talking about, and if Radio signals are interrupted something "Autonomous" would not work. How exactly do you think something autonomous communicates with itself? I'm being smug because you sound like an idiot and your responses prove it.
I'm not sure I agree completely, as we need to factor in cost as well. Yes kinetic penetrators are still as reliable as ever, but they are launched from a very expensive platform. If drones can achieve the same results for a fraction of the price (even factoring in many failed attacks in the process), then that is simply a more cost effective way of fighting future wars. I personally have a hunch that we might see a higher prevalence of lighter armoured vehicles in the future that are built to engage both drones and other lighter armoured units (something akin to German Gepards). The point of tanks were originally to provide break fortified lines, protecting crew from small arms fire, which is something also lightly armoured vehicles in theory can do. This is all speculation of course, but with the dominance of drone warfare (Russian lancet 3 drones becoming cheaper and cheaper for instance), this would be one cost effective way of shooting them down while still having a somewhat armoured vehicle to move around in and engage enemy infantry with.
Just like many video games we play with, armed drone isn't new but in the eyes of civilians It's cheaper and effective in fight means our taxes is worth to invest that's reality, people keep calling military out for drone,manpads and throw that expensive tank away, which mean in democracy they have right to used their taxes to decide their weapons for war even not in military and they doesn't know anything about tactics just win in our eyes effectively like $50k drone kill tank which $1million that's enough for them and they never care what after that
Shaped charge just entered the comment section. All tanks just left the comment section. Tanks these days have made up numbers for armour thickness against shoulder mounted shape charge stuff. I have heard of claims like 1000-1400mm. Yet all of these armour sections get taken out by 750mm penetrating rounds. I reckon modern tank armour is at its best about 400mm at most against a shoulder mounted weapon.
The reason both sides of the war rely so much on the artillery is because no one managed to gain complete air superiority to suppress the other side. The Russians failed to destroy all AA defenses early in the war and now they can't do deep precise strikes and hold the airspace at the same time. On the other hand, Ukraine still lacks an effective air force that can provide cover for the ground offense, so both sides are defaulting to the good old artillery barrage as a substitute, including short flyovers of gunships and old jet fighters as improvised airborne artillery behind the front line. Also, this is one of the main reasons for the huge losses of troops -- it's a textbook WW1 meat grinder.
I think the current state of the war is proving to importance of tanks. As both sides have devolved into using trench warfare tactics, without tanks, neither army has the firepower and survivability to mount effective attacks, as we can see, the lines haven't moved for nearly a year
what an eclectic channel, i love it. i think that offense will always out pace defense in the long term. i think your analysis on the ukraine war being a degenerate war is correct but I still think the formula that is going to make high end military units like tanks, jets and carriers obsolete is here already, just embryonic (and not evenly distributed, as the saying goes). i dont think anyone around today can paint an accurate picture of that new age of war but i think we are definitely in a place similar to 1903 when hg wells writes about ironclads overruning europe.
Yah, Russia has no opsec. Their tech isn't able to encrypt, neither side is using encrypted control signals and yet the drones were still working as a weapon...which just doesn't work against a Western army. They have jamming gear. They also need to stop riding hatch up, which means they need to plan for driver comfort in an armored up scenario so they aren't opening their hatches in a combat zone.
