It was foreseen in 2016. The Russo-Ukrainian war is proving drone carriers are the replacement for tanks.

It was foreseen in 2016. The Russo-Ukrainian war is proving drone carriers are the replacement for tanks.

https://community.apan.org/cfs-file/__key/docpreview-s/00-00-00-00-12/Land-Carrier_5F00_Mad_5F00_Scientist_5F00_27_5F00_Jan_5F00_2016_5F00_V6.pdf

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous
    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This is the future of war: unmanned land carriers recharging drone assaults/scouts while VSHORAD-IFVs move humans behind the front lines.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Drones, AI and droids
        The future starts looks more like a cartoon now

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Weren't all the G.I. Joe vehicles based off abandoned army concepts anyway? It makes sense that as technology improves, most of their designs look more and more viable.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >The future starts looks more like a cartoon now
          and thats a good thing.

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    No it's not at all, because a drone carrier doesn't even slightly or tangentially fulfill the same function as a tank and is therefore not a replacement. A drone carrier does the same thing as any other indirect fire system, except with shitty range but lower price.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It does recon. It does operational penetration. It does fire against moving hardened targets and bunkers. Face it tankie, the future is autonomous drones with robotic logistics. Logistics wins wars and situational awareness wins battles.

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Explain to me carefully how the carrier displaced the battleship, and then explain how the drone carrier would do that for the tank.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Carriers had proven their worth at Coral Sea, but admirals coped because no battleships had been involved. At Midway, carriers' superior scouting proved the game.
      As we can see from the 1942 attempts to relieve the siege of Malta convoys also depended on aerial cover.

      Same for land. Tanks can't stop, out-recon, guard against, or do anything against autonomous drones. Even amateur FPVs with RPG7 warheads work on them.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Tanks can't stop, out-recon, guard against, or do anything against autonomous drones.
        How does this make a drone carrier a replacement for the tank though?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Scouting, penetrating in depth, and blowing up hard or moving targets were the jobs of a tank. Not only does it lose its purpose in a world with drones (as shown in ukraine where tanks are mostly used as crappy artillery) its job is done better by the new meta.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            In what way does a drone penetrate enemy lines?

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              He thinks flying over enemy lines is the same as taking territory. This is just reheated CAS cope.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >flies into your bunker to engage and destroy you in close combat
                Projecting your boomer stereotypes about Predators onto FPVs is like Napoleon saying steamboats will never be practical.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Again: in what way do drones penetrate enemy lines?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                The same way a tank does, except better because they can go inside buildings, bunkers and forests where a tank doesn't fit. You haven't thought about this very hard. Let go of the cope.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                hey bro you still haven't answered my question here

                what if you put a drone on a tank?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                NTA, but putting a drone on a tank would be kind of pointless because you're effectively asking the tank commander to balance yet another spinning plate. This is why multi-turreted tanks never work, because it is far too much hassle.
                Should tanks coordinate with drones as part of combined arms? Absolutely. But giving tanks more shit is always a bad idea. They can barely function with one turret and a machine gun.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I'm somewhat partial to those new concept tanks with the 4 crew in the hull and an unmanned turret with the 4th guy being a dedicated drone operator. A problem that's always existed for tanks is their limited situational awareness, and someone in the tank who has that ability seems quite useful.

                https://i.imgur.com/rpCZI50.jpg

                Then you'd have an inferior drone carrier, vatnig.

                What's the problem with that? You trade the sheer number of drones you can carry in exchange for more direct firepower and not becoming useless if a jammer gets pointed in your direction.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >useless if a jammer gets pointed in your direction
                We are already seeing drones with autonomous last stages of attack. You will be able to launch a drone with orders to scout an area and kill any enemy it sees without needing constant communication.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                swap to an autoloaded gun and turn the loader position into a drone operator

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You're still asking the tank commander to do shit they have no business doing. Just use combined arms instead.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Then you'd have an inferior drone carrier, vatnig.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Wrong filename there mate
                Those are actually called „mobik disposal hatches“

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                So that's how they're feeding the ship now.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >near future
                >2040
                >global big data centers
                >mobile railgun
                >high energy lasers
                >drone swarms
                >near-peer competitors
                >use KV-2
                What did they mean by that?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Bombs and artillery have done this for over two thousand years.
                >but this time the bomb flies!
                One hundred years.

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >develop new tank that has a 30mm airburst AI aimed cannon that automatically shoots down any drone it sees
    >develop combat laser vehicle that projects are complete no-fly zone in a massive radius around itself
    >develop new component for tanks that leverage their power generation capacity to have a powerful drone jammer onboard
    Any of these rape drones, all of them could easily happen at the same time.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >update the MBT-70
      >attach laser and drones jammers to a RWS with a basic radar
      >throw some slat armour on for fun

      Done, even Africans will be doing this in a couple years

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Ju vill get into zhe pod.

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    what if you put a drone on a tank?

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >imagine thinking that tanks were only recently obsolete

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Actually sweaty

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    we're in the "WWI plane, tank, etc." development phase of drones and anti-drone weapons. the meta for all this new tech is still being figured out and no-one is quiet sure what it'll look like.

    looking forward to seeing the "maginot line" of drone warfare get fricked by whoever does figure the new meta out.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Drones aren't new, though. What's actually happening is that we've been stuck in the Jet meta for so long that all AA focus on dealing with extremely fast moving targets rather than small slow moving targets, and it would take something as simple as reintroducing flak to put drones back in their place.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It's not a perfect analogy, but we are in another phase of history where nations are trying to figure out the best way utilize new weapons and technologies.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >and it would take something as simple as reintroducing flak to put drones back in their place.
        UK-Poland made the Skyhawk Paladin and Germany made that other one which I forget the name of... Sky something. Literally just 30mm autocannons, a radar and the ability to load up on a truck.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Skynex

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I thought it was something like that but I was like 'It's not Skynet...'. Thanks anon. Though I think the Skyhawk Paladin uses a 35mm Bushmaster and the Skynex uses 40mm or 50mm I forget.

            Still, I think militaries will work on a more compact and better protected version of that for use in armoured thrusts. Like the M163 VADS but, you know, with a radar.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >and it would take something as simple as reintroducing flak to put drones back in their place.
            UK-Poland made the Skyhawk Paladin and Germany made that other one which I forget the name of... Sky something. Literally just 30mm autocannons, a radar and the ability to load up on a truck.

            this is too big.

            What there needs to be is a weapons-crew level infantry anti drone gun, sort of like a TOW or something. With it's own fire control and spotting systems for countering drones and something like a 40mm Bofors shell would take out any drone for the foreseeable future. There needs to be something man-portable, organic, vehicles are huge targets and easily spotted whereas an emplaced position dug-in can be camofluaged well if not totally hidden.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            What's the point of that form factor?
            Just house everything in a regular rectangle. Why that complex form?

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              people won't admit it but looks do matter when it comes to weapons. nobody wants ugly weapons.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Aero gainz

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              it looks cool. they should have added random hexes to it as well

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >looking forward to seeing the "maginot line" of drone warfare get fricked by whoever does figure the new meta out.
      it'll be "muh jammer" getting btfo by people just not giving a shit about man in the loop

  9. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Just like artillery stopped tanks from being relevant in the first place

  10. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The USA did a paper on the future of the MBT last year and said that tanks aren't going to disappear until 2040 at the earliest. A big gun on a heavily armoured vehicle is always going to be useful, even in a situation where people have drones. What will happen is tanks will come with protections as standard for FPV drones.

  11. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Replace tanks with a ford pickup truck that has like 6 of those roadrunner vls things in the back
    then whenever your reconnaissance picks up an enemy drive the pickup in range launch the drones and head back to base to rearm

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      You just reinvented mobile artillery

  12. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Infantry are obsolete, literally killed by anything
    >d-dude just put them in Lv.IV plates!
    Yeah and they're still deleted by anything. Don't be moronic. It's over for infantry. It's over for everything! War is just going to be drones flying at each other! It's not like drones are only used because people have vehicles and infantry which need to be hit because those things are useful for the goals you're trying to achieve in battle! Why bother though? Just use drones! Haha drones are the future and has zero-summed the game! Haha! It's OVER for tanks and IFV and AFV and APCs and and and and! It's literally IMPOSSIBLE to create stuff to protect against drones, literally, objectively, IMPOSSIBLE.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This, in fact the second you remove a human from being there any vehicle instantly becomes a thousand times harder to counter, bullets and anti tank/air weapons simply don’t work anymore

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        That’s only true of anti-air missiles and only if the drone is cheaper than the missile used to shoot it down.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I was being ironic there
          Drones are only a force multiplier that is important to have not a replacement Wunderwaffle that midwits and thrides claim they are

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      you still need infantry for clearing out buildings and tunnels.

      of course the infantry will also be carrying micro-drones for scouting rooms and corners as well.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Just like how you still need tanks to make sure the infantry don't die horribly to entrenched positions. It's just this time tanks will be operating with their own drone support and upgraded active defense systems to repel FPVs just like they do to RPGs and ATGMs now.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          This, tanks are just going to evolve alongside the rest of the equipment for the foreseeable future instead of being suddenly replaced by stuff that doesn't perform even a remotely similar role to it. Something much more sensible would be the appearance of UGV-MBT's that can finally rid themselves of a massive design constraint, the crew.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          But those same RPGs and ATGMs work just as well against entrenched positions which are like tanks, but without the ability to move.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            RPGs and similar launchers don't outrange MGs and ATGMs are primarily defensive weapons due to their bulk. The larger likelihood is the infantry themselves or artillery suppressing AT teams while the tanks eliminate fortifications from range.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >infantry themselves or artillery
              No bro don't you see drones deal with those too so they're obsolete, just like human infantry!

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Infantry and artillery will still be needed because they do things drone carriers can't replace, unlike tanks.

                ^this will be the front wave of drone and counter-drone vehicles. Human infantry in AA/APS equipped IFVs will follow and HIMARS will support from behind.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                There's a reason why ATGM carriers have not replaced tanks. Direct fire cannons provide benefits that ATGMs, indirect artillery, and even drones cannot in the middle of a battle, and that is immediate, mobile, organic fire support against any target within line of sight.

                We will likely see drone carriers acting in unison with tanks and infantry as a middle option between tanks and artillery, but it's not going to be replacing either role.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                ATGM carriers didn't replace tanks because they sucked at scouting. Direct fire scouting takes armor or expendability.
                Drone carriers solve this by having multiple expendable drones to get up close.

                ATGM carriers are to tanks as tanks are to drone carriers. They're a niche cope.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                ATGM carriers didn't replace tanks because they were never intended to. They were intended to hunt MBTs.
                It's like saying "why didn't 105mm armed tanks replace 105mm SPGs?" when theres a massive difference in role.
                Drones can replace both, at least till everyone starts going full moron and jamming and scrambling every form of communication to combat drones, and do so at a lower cost. All it'll take is some savvy mong to make an RPG-7 carrying drone that can roof attack.
                I honestly believe the future is going to be long fire coupled with communications denial in an insanely harsh way using chemical lasers and widespread transmission jammers. Disposable drones are simply too effective and cheap not to combat in any other way and especially once they start using target definitions through on board storage rather than the current man controlled way.

  13. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    missiles/drones/artillery/mortars/loitering munitions have one weakness in that they can all be intercepted by C-RAM/CIWS/AA systems.

    Direct-fire tank guns/autocannons can't be intercepted.

    So if the enemy has heavy AA/C-RAM, it MIGHT be more cost-effective to send in tanks instead.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >the battleship naval gun shore fires argument
      Truly history is a comedy for those who think and a tragedy for those who feel.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Railgun battleships will return bro... They HAVE to. Railguns need big generators, so you need a big superstructure to house the generator and you need a big gun to do big range and shell, so you need to make it big....

        Please....

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        i love tanks and even IFVs, don't take this away from me.
        the thought of armies being nothing more than drones/fighters/PGMs and APCs (for infantry clearing out buildings/caves/tunnels) makes me sad.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >So if the enemy has heavy AA/C-RAM, it MIGHT be more cost-effective to send in tanks instead.

      nah, if army A focuses 100% on SEAD/DEAD and army B focuses 100% on AA/C-RAM, army A will always win.
      I'm always skeptical of AA/C-RAM being able to defend against SEAD/DEAD cost-effectively.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >I'm always skeptical of AA/C-RAM being able to defend against SEAD/DEAD cost-effectively.

        here's the thing though, in a peer fight, it's impossible to test this theory out, because eventually the missile exchange is gonna escalate from tactical missiles all the way to ICBMs.
        there will never be a peer fight where people agree not to use ICBMs, so the whole AA vs SEAD concept will never be resolved.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Well Russia's ability to fight even a limited peer war is greatly diminished and that leaves only China left. Every other nation that could - even for limited periods - are allied with USA or are friendly enough that chances of them doing shit is unlikely.

          China isn't going to start lobbing ICBMs at California even if they got into a war with USA because there are much better targets to hit.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          the attacker always has the advantage since they can launch cheap decoy missiles, and the defender will have no way of discerning decoys from real missiles, so they'll be forced to intercept decoys that might hit them.
          So it's pretty much always more expensive to intercept missiles than it is to launch a missile.

  14. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I’m a neverserved loser, but isn’t the main tenant of modern militaries state that long fires are what win wars?

    These drones are basically the opposite. How do extremely short range fires defeat an adversary that can strike you with impunity from 1,500 miles away with pinpoint precision?

    Have we observed an actual analog to NATO style long range fires in Ukraine, consistently in the way NATO would implement them?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Yes, right at the start. The issue was it was Russia who did it.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      You're confusing a two separate things. Yes, missiles are great. So is artillery. But what do you do when you have to actually hold territory? What do you do when you want to capture a target largely intact?
      There's a reason Marines haven't been replaced with medium range missiles.

      That being said, I'm not convinced you can't just throw a drone carrier or two into a tank squad to end up with a more effective formation. Like a carrier with its escorts. It'd make up for vulnerabilities, like enemies sneaking up from unexpected positions, gives the ability to directly punch through enemy lines, makes the formation still useful if the enemy manages to jam the signal, etc.

  15. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Consider this :

    Large high-flying aerial platform that flies at extreme high altitudes and can detach small drones that get dropped and then stabilize at an altitude where they become operational.

    You'd basically have a spy plane that would be impossible to detect/deal with on time that can spread small drones which can then seek out and eliminate with precision.

    The benefit is that the smaller drones do not need large operating ranges and can be used locally, wherever they're dropped. Potentially they can even land and then remain dormant until needed.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      High altitude isn't really the safety net it used to be. A large, high-flying aircraft is going to be pretty easy to spot regardless of whatever stealth features it has, better to just launch from completely outside of your enemy's AD network. Rapid Dragon-esque systems are probably going to fill that role because it allows nearly any cargo aircraft in your fleet to act as a carrier aircraft with little to no lead time. Just load up the pallets and go.

  16. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >what is the benefit of a fast maneuverable scouting unit that can also explode things, even multiple things
    >what is the benefit of a mobile platform that can deploy these fast scouting exploding units.

    dunno lol

  17. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    I humbly present to you the T-55. See this? See this goober meme tank whose reputation consists of getting turret-tossed by WWII tanks and being the fodder vehicle the Soviets gave to those allies it didn't entrust with an actual decent equipment, that had no victories to its name in the century of its conception?

    This shitbox, this dated piece of junk that is the bare minimum of what a tank ought to be.
    This thing won Somliland its independence.
    That is more than the battleship has done. That is more than any drone has done.

    If the absolute worse tank in service today can still pull decisive victories on its own, than you better believe there's still life in the top of the line models.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Arab and Africa tier conflicts with zero air support on either side isn't a good argument.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >most of the wars fought in the last 70yrs arnt relevant

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Yes, that would indeed be the case. Quantity != quality. I wouldn't use some random drug war in Mexico to prove some stupid point.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Because we all know the Taliban drove the US Army off with its powerful air campaign.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          The Taliban didn't drive off the US Army, and didn't have any tanks either. The US handed over military operations to the Afghanistan government, who promptly turned out to be a bunch of corrupt incompetents as all Arabs are.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >LIGHT TANK OF THE GLA!

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Afghanistan
            >Arabs
            I guess we can add geography and ethnicities to tanks, and warfare in general on the list of things you moron understand less than nothing about.

  18. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >tanks are obsolete

    I sure haven't heard this claim being thrown around before. F&F ATGM's launched by both infantry, ground vehicles and aircraft have been around for decades, yet MBT's still roll around and provide critical maneuverable, direct firepower on the ground. On the day you lie on your deathbed there will be tanks rowing around, be it tomorrow or in 100 years.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >MBT's still roll around and provide critical maneuverable, direct firepower on the ground.
      yeah we can see that every day in ukraine, right?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Yes, let's point to the army that literally has no idea how to use tanks as the example of how tanks are properly used.

        Also, if tanks are obsolete, why are both sides always trying to find ways to press more into service?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Obviously because both sides find tanks blowing up incredibly amusing and as a result want to see more blow up

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Russians being incapable of doing something due to their rank incompetence does not prove that the thing they're trying to do is impossible or useless to attempt.

  19. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    moron take

  20. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They should replace infantry with drones and give them guns which are also drones that fire smaller drones instead of bullets. I am very smart.

  21. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Doesn't the increase in drones just put a greater emphasis on more SPAAG coverage?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Yes, in the same way battleships added more AA guns to help them escort carriers.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Same energy. Just use combined arms.

  22. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Initiating laser strike
    What now dronegay?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Initiate SEAD protocols and fire a wave of 10 high speed drones + 10 ground-hugging drones + a HIMARS strike coordinated for a multiaxis time on target attack.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >He is demanding like 21 assets to bring down a single vehicle which could be killed by some 20th century tank firing slugs.
        >Also for some reason he thinks all AA and APS weapons need to be radar based.
        What did he mean by this?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >we need to conserve shots so we'll issue the soldiers single shot manually loaded cannons instead of full auto swarm seekers with 30rnd mags!
          okay boomboom, go back to bed.

  23. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I've been eagerly awaiting drone carriers since 1998.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Hot key one group to ctrl +1, another to ctrl +2 and so on. Hotkey to move between drone and squadrons and provide unique flight paths and targets on the fly.

  24. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >tanks are obsolete because of [thing that doesn't replace the tank in its role]
    People have been reciting that song of dance for damn near 100 years now, and yet the tank is still stubbornly there and doing its job.

  25. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    IMO the biggest benefit of drones is omnipresent recon.
    It's almost impossible to concentrate enough force to break through a defensive line when your enemy can see exactly what you're doing and blast your ass with long range PGMs.
    You'll still need conventional armor to break through after you achieve drone superiority, drone carriers can't do that.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >You'll still need conventional armor to break through after you achieve drone superiority
      Why?
      I can understand armor vs infantry weapons since infantry will still be able to hide from drones but once you have the drone superiority vehicles are dead and there's nowhere to hide them.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Ok, let's say you have drone superiority and destroyed all the enemy vehicles. Now what?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Now you push it forward to destroy retreating enemies and leave a few swarms behind to support IFVs moving in human troops to finish sweeping the area.
          Drones fly faster than cars so they can break through to a better depth faster and catch more surprised or retreating troops than tanks dependent on heavy logistics and subject to landmines.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Suppose I'm in a basement. How are you going to dislodge me with a quadcopter?

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              The same way a tank would. Guard it with one quadcopter to keep you pinned while they either call the infantry or fly a second thermobaric quadcopter into the house as seen in Ukraine.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >IFVs
            That's a form of conventional armor.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >IFV
            And how does shoving a troop compartment on your AFVs make them more resistant to being droned?
            Wouldn't that space be better served with anti-drone equipment?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          you win?

  26. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It took decades of improvement in technology and doctrine to make the battleship obsolete. Will tanks become obsolete? Yes. Are they obsolete right now? No.

  27. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Iowa Decomission

    It could have been retained with updated shells with massively expanded range. Radically cheaper and faster time to target/kill chain vs. cruise missiles. And it's a big payload. Which is exactly why SPGs/Tanks/Assault Guns of various configurations are always going to be in the mix-- ATGMs have a huge exposure time (e.g. the Bradley knife fight recently) and direct fire HE out of a canon now is better than getting on the radio to call in artillery/mortars later and less precisely. There are supposed to Done AWACs analogs getting trialed now by the Ukes as we speak ... drone/mortar carriers should be the SkyNet future of infantry assaults, but they'll always need big AFV guns of some description for overmatch and standoff against similar formations.

  28. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    wouldn't just more SPAAGS like the gepard be better?

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *