I've seen that the future of the tank is much disputed, so I decided to create a thread where we can talk about the tank's current situation in army and what will become in the future.
Presently, the MBT is still a formidable weapon in many army, but his future is very incertain. The use doctrine by NATO of tank was heavy brigade or division to counter an massive ennemy armored attack. But since the end of the Cold War and the fall of Soviet Union/Warsaw Pact, there's no much heavy armor formation which can threaten Europe integrity.
Presently, US Army and Canadian Armed Forces are forming new motorized brigade with Light Armored Vehicule that can be deployed and react much faster to counter a potentiel ennemy. Also, the LAV are more oriented in the new intelligence dominance warfare. The LAV are better in the new style of asymetric land warfare since they can be deploy at a lighting speed and insure information dominance.
But the US intend to keep the tank within heavy brigade and division (Canada don't have the money to keep our 113 Leo C2 around) to counter heavy formation (like in Iraq, the Abrams where quite useful).
As an infantryman, my point of view is that both are important for us, merely grunt. The tank are the perfect direct support weapon, it draw the fire and the attention of the ennemy and got a pretty decent firepower. The LAV are important since they can give us much more info about the battlefield (I'm thinking about the Canadian Army's Coyote Recon Vehicule) and are much faster to surprise the ennemy.
Still, both are extremely vulnerable to infantry's attack, after all, we are the most versatile "weapon" (i don't like being call a weapon even though, but i cannot find better word)
Tanks are good at conventional warfare, LAV are made for asymetric and movement warfare. Each have his own strengh and weakness.
But each army still need a balance between those element in an army. The tank's dominance on the modern battlefield is over, but we CANNOT say that we are into a LAV's dominance era due to the superior quality of infantry's weapon today.
Presently, the MBT is still a formidable weapon in many army, but his future is very incertain. The use doctrine by NATO of tank was heavy brigade or division to counter an massive ennemy armored attack. But since the end of the Cold War and the fall of Soviet Union/Warsaw Pact, there's no much heavy armor formation which can threaten Europe integrity.
Presently, US Army and Canadian Armed Forces are forming new motorized brigade with Light Armored Vehicule that can be deployed and react much faster to counter a potentiel ennemy. Also, the LAV are more oriented in the new intelligence dominance warfare. The LAV are better in the new style of asymetric land warfare since they can be deploy at a lighting speed and insure information dominance.
But the US intend to keep the tank within heavy brigade and division (Canada don't have the money to keep our 113 Leo C2 around) to counter heavy formation (like in Iraq, the Abrams where quite useful).
As an infantryman, my point of view is that both are important for us, merely grunt. The tank are the perfect direct support weapon, it draw the fire and the attention of the ennemy and got a pretty decent firepower. The LAV are important since they can give us much more info about the battlefield (I'm thinking about the Canadian Army's Coyote Recon Vehicule) and are much faster to surprise the ennemy.
Still, both are extremely vulnerable to infantry's attack, after all, we are the most versatile "weapon" (i don't like being call a weapon even though, but i cannot find better word)
Tanks are good at conventional warfare, LAV are made for asymetric and movement warfare. Each have his own strengh and weakness.
But each army still need a balance between those element in an army. The tank's dominance on the modern battlefield is over, but we CANNOT say that we are into a LAV's dominance era due to the superior quality of infantry's weapon today.
) walking mechs come to life, where will then be light speedy vehicles on one hand for quick dashes and mechs on the other hand for battle in rough terrain, urban enviroments, etc. But that's almost SF now, who know if 50 or 100 years would be enough for that.
