The Chieftain
5 HN recommenders · recommended in 4 months, 2022
31:36 · 943K views · Apr 16, 2022
Armor expert The Chieftain explains why tanks still have a place on the modern battlefield despite drones and guided weapons. He responds to the 'tank is dead' debate, noting that tanks have been declared dead repeatedly since 1919.
Pointed to as an authoritative answer, from a former Abrams commander and tank historian, to claims that tanks are obsolete.
8 comments from Hacker News
Against an enemy with signal jamming capability remote operation is not a given. Plus tanks communicate in real time with infantry/other elements. The lag introduced by remote operation/communication would be a serious hindrance even if everything was working, which it often isn't. Tanks have to respond in real time, they don't have the luxury of seconds of delay like say an orbiting drone. There's also the case of not wanting disabled tanks to fall into the hands of the enemy. Short of rigging the tanks with a self-destruct system (which would likely just make them explode more easily when hit), you need soldiers to do that. Keep in mind that anything operating in battlefield conditions must be resilient. The entire situation is a constant stream of edge cases. Also, don't look to Russia in Ukraine for an example of how tanks are used. Tanks are generally not meant to act alone. Either they're operating with a lot of other tanks, substantial supporting infantry, or both. There are tons of other reasons as well, The Chieften, a former Tanker, has a good video on the subject: this video
An armor officer can answer this better than I can: this video If you're watching the videos from Ukraine - the Russians are pretty much doing it all wrong. You do not send tanks into cities unless they're following infantry who are clearing houses & rooftops. You do not leave your tanks parked in a nice neat line on a country road. When your unit comes under fire, you do not just sit there. Why are the Russians doing these things when they know it's bad for their health? They don't have much of an NCO cadre. In a modern military, the NCOs have the experience and the authority to make sure stuff happens rapidly and correctly. They will have made sure the junior enlisted know how to operate and maintain their weapon & gear, and are able to do the mission without fucking up.
I really don't think that's a good comparison, cavalry didn't just fall from grace because they became easily slaughtered by infantry, they stopped being used because their role became irrelevant and were replaced. The role tanks play has not become irrelevant and while they aren't as survivable as they used to be they aren't nearly as vulnerable as clips from UA seem to imply. I'd recommend this video by a former Abrams commander and tank historian who presents this argument far better than I can. this video
Yes it does. See "The Chieftain: No, The Tank Is Not Dead" this video TLDW: Tank has a task on a battlefield and fact that you can easily kill it won't take that task away. Same goes for infantry and they are not going away either. On the other hand we don't see battleships anymore, because big guns were replaced by precise missiles with much more range.
> currently completely overmatched by anti-tank weapons The Chieftan disagrees with you. this video I suspect he has more practical and theoretical knowledge on the topic than the sum total of all posters on this thread.