That Tank!

I recently read an article about the massive and impressive tank……but before I go into the article let us look at the tank….which is a little over 100 years old and has been a supporting player in every war since World War One.

Let us now turn to a little history of the tank.

The weapon known as the tank was invented by the British in 1916…..

The first official photograph taken of a Tank going into action, at the Battle of Flers-Courcelette, 15th September 1916. The man shown is wearing a leather tank helmet.

The concept of a vehicle to provide troops with both mobile protection and firepower was not a new one. But in the First World War, the increasing availability of the internal combustion engine, armour plate and the continuous track, as well as the problem of trench warfare, combined to facilitate the production of the tank.

The name ‘tank’ came from British attempts to ensure the secrecy of the new weapons under the guise of water tanks. During the First World War, Britain began the serious development of the tank. Ironically, the Royal Navy led the way with the First Lord of the Admiralty, Winston Churchill, establishing the Landships Committee in early 1915.

The military combined with engineers and industrialists and by early 1916 a prototype was adopted as the design of future tanks. Britain used tanks in combat for the first time in the Battle of Flers-Courcelette on 15 September 1916.

https://www.iwm.org.uk/history/how-britain-invented-the-tank-in-the-first-world-war

Then when the US entered WW1 and the US became a major proponent to tank used in warfare…..

Most American military observers were unimpressed but some officers felt differently. Even before the American Expeditionary Force arrived in France, General Pershing took a liking to the tank. Seeing the metal monster in action, Pershing ordered the formation of an American tank corps before the end of 1917.

Two men, who would go on to become major figures during the next world war, began fitting this new battlefield beast into the U.S. army’s ranks. In France Captain George Patton worked hard to assemble the U.S. Tank Corps, while in the U.S., Captain Dwight Eisenhower helped create the U.S. Tank Service.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a17015005/history-american-tank/

We all remember seeing the impressive sight of the American tanks screaming across Iraq in the 1990s and again in 2003….and of course the tank was credited with our quick successes in both those invasions.

Recently there has been less and less dependence on tanks in our many asymmetric conflicts….and some are proposing a radical idea.

From the day that the concept of a tank was introduced there has been debate about the utility of these vehicles. Hard to build, difficult to man and drive, and ultimately vulnerable once deployed, tanks have never been the perfect package that they externally represent. The late Professor Ogorkiewicz wrote in his 2016 book Tanks, of how Lieutenant Colonel J. F. C. Fuller came to realise the limits of tanks during the 1917 Ypres offensive.  And, following that war, only Britain and France continued to see utility in the tank for close to a decade, before the Soviet Union began to enter the field.

The contemporary discussion around the abiding value of the tank is not therefore new, however the context and the nature of the modern battlefield has changed considerably since 1916, and this in turn warrants a different discussion around the value of the tank. To be clear, this article is intended to initiate discussion, it is a reflection of those issues that must be considered when balancing forces. There is value to any asset deployed to the battlefield, from an entrenching shovel to aircraft carriers, providing that they are used properly and adequately supported.

We have chosen three select areas, which all influence the utility of tanks; the Totality of the Battlefield (TotB), the totality of technology, and the totality of society. Much of this discussion should be regarded as a “Red Team Exercise”, a deliberate attempt to pull apart entrenched thinking. And, while it is framed against the current climate that prevails within the British Army, it should be understood that these considerations will apply in some measure to every single force in the world.

The tank is dead. Long live the tank.

Could this be the beginning of the end for our beloved tanks?

Well let’s look….an Abrams cost about $4.3 million and cost annually about $250,000……that does not include fuel for the many trips to the battlefield.

With Napoleonic battles a thing of the past it would make sense to rid the burden to tanks and their upkeep from the military budget.

Any Thoughts?

Learn Stuff!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

12 thoughts on “That Tank!

  1. I would vote for a tin can before Trump. If the Dems lose it will be a result of Biden leaning too far to the left. I don’t know why the socialists and far left can’t see whats good for them. Better to beat Trump on a Dem agenda than lose by pushing too far too the left. Even Sanders knows that and is supporting Biden’s agenda. He chose a Far left progressive vice presidential nominee. Hopefully that won’t result in a GOP win. You can’t always get what you want…but you might get what you need if you stop pushing what the general population is unwilling to accept.

    1. That has been the attitude for decades and what has been accomplished? Inequality is running rampant and from both parties….Harris is NO progressive she is a centrist at best……I agree he needs beating and sent packing from the White House just do not agree with those generalizations. chuq

      1. Right now, it is imperative to remove Trump from office. If we are too far to the left that won’t happen and perhaps we have gone to far for the general population as it is and he will remain in office which will be a catastrophe. Perhaps down the line enough voters will see it your way but not now. So, let us not cut off our nose to spite our face, or want to have our cake and eat it too, it ain’t happening. Trump must go or we will lose our country to a dictator.

      2. There is absolutely no one in Washington that is too far Left…..all the things that people want could be called Leftists policies…..chuq

  2. The trouble with tanks came about once shoulder-fired missiles became cheap and effective. An Abrams could be put out of commission by one determined man firing a 20-year old A/P rocket from an oudated launcher. I don’t think they have any future in a war where an unseen drone can take them out, the operator possibly even based in another country!
    Best wishes, Pete.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.