On a tank in the garden: why do people in Russia buy military equipment via the Internet?

(link)

Tanks are cool, you say? Three times "ha-ha"! Where did they tell you this? Anyone who thinks so is stuck in the last century! If there was a war tomorrow, all your tanks would be burned in seconds. ATGMs[1] will destroy steel coffins from a safe distance, but what can I say, any infantryman with a $300 grenade launcher[2] can easily destroy a tank costing several million. However, even infantrymen will not be needed - everyone knows that the clumsy tanks will be destroyed by Tomahawks[3], or, in extreme cases, by aviation. Blind and deaf boxes will not be able to oppose anything to airplanes and helicopters, which will destroy them in entire columns using the same ATGMs, or even “smart” cluster bombs, each submunition in which will find and destroy a defenseless victim. And in general, all civilized countries have been fighting with cruise missiles and drones for a long time, and only your stupid generals are still living with the past war and are going to drive the guys to slaughter in useless steel coffins.

And if there are mechs in the setting, the end of tanks will come even faster. How, for example, will a hulking tracked vehicle move through urban ruins? How about dodging flying projectiles on the move? No way, unlike mobile and universally passable walking equipment. And while the tank is turning around with its tracks and turning the turret at a snail's speed, the mech will already go to its rear and destroy it.

Where does all this lead us? Besides, tanks are useless steel coffins that don’t justify their price. This means that tanks are not needed!

The trope is typical for works in settings from modernity to the distant future.

Five minutes of reality[edit]

The opinion about the supposed obsolescence and uselessness of tanks as a type of military equipment in reality is a common misconception[4], stemming from an extremely superficial look at military affairs and the impossibility (or, more often, a conscious reluctance) to go deeper into it.

As a rule, supporters of the theory of the uselessness of tanks in their reasoning consider tanks in a complete spherovacuum, considering them to be the only military equipment and, in general, a combat unit located on an imaginary battlefield, while setting ideal conditions for the opposing side. In such calculations, the organization of tank units and any interaction between military branches are completely ignored, and, as a rule, no tactics are considered for tanks other than “pushing head-on into prepared enemy positions.” The tactical and technical characteristics of the type of weapon that the author of a particular argument believes is the reason for the uselessness of tanks are often overestimated, and technical innovations created to correct the shortcomings of tanks are not considered. The examples that support the argument tend to suffer from survivor bias - for example, they show videos of an ATGM crew successfully destroying a tank, but do not consider cases in which the tank survived a missile hit or was able to destroy the crew before launch. Relying on incomplete information and biased use of facts gives rise to the opinion that tanks are not needed in modern armies; then it is usually proposed to replace them all with something, for example, helicopters or mechs.

In reality, tanks, firstly, are somewhat less vulnerable to anti-tank weapons than is commonly believed (for example, a tank equipped with dynamic protection can often withstand an ATGM hit in the frontal projection [5]). Secondly, the use of some types of weapons against tanks may be effective in a tactical sense, but ineffective economically. Thirdly, tanks with a commander who is more or less tactically competent (or at least knows the regulations) will never fight without the support of at least infantry and air defense, which will provide protection from those same infantrymen with RPGs in the city and from deadly aircraft - helicopters with all-conquering missiles[6]. And finally, fourthly: a tank in modern armies fills a very specific tactical niche - to implement large firepower with a very short reaction time (which is different from airplanes) for a long time (which is different from airplanes and helicopters). By the way, another advantage of tanks is that they are generally much less vulnerable to specialized means of self-destruction than any other type of military force. That is why the strongest armies in the world continue to have a significant number of tanks in service, which also refutes the thesis of war with missiles and drones. However, some armies actually refuse tanks - but solely because of their high cost, replacing them with cheaper analogues, such as the Japanese Self-Defense Forces, which purchased lightly armored[7][8] wheeled tank destroyers.[9].

A significant contribution to the myth was made by low-intensity conflicts in recent years until 2010, in which tanks were used only by one side, while the other had overwhelming air superiority. In the conflicts of recent years, it suddenly became clear that even rebels/terrorists not only post on YouTube shooting at tanks with ATGMs, but also actively use armored vehicles, from improvised to captured ones. The fact is that tanks have not fought in the “Drive me closer” style for a long time, but instead roll out from behind a hill/house/grove, shoot and roll back behind cover, without waiting for the ATGMs to arrive. The relevance of technology increases even more if the conflict involves a minimum of aviation or there is none at all - in such situations they try to use the potential of artillery and tanks to the maximum.

And only time will tell what will happen next.

On the other hand, we are talking about the interaction of troops, more precisely about their proportions and presence: of course, having complete air superiority, you can fight with tanks, finishing off those who were driven into the ground with missiles and bombs, and if someone else resists , you can call in air support again. But if the enemy has superiority, then the tanks are already sharply losing their effectiveness and all that remains is to hide in cities that are afraid to bomb, but where the tanks become vulnerable to infantry. The presence of tanks in any irregular armed formation is not an argument - the poor don’t have to choose; what they have is what they use, even scooters with bombs. It’s not for nothing that in settings where tanks, aviation and missile weapons (and sometimes even infantry) are popular, they are at best in their infancy. No, of course, it’s too early to write off tanks, there will be work for them (although cheaper and more multifunctional vehicles can cope with these tasks), but relying on them and developing new models is already a dubious decision.

Another problem lies in the isolation of tanks from the context of war: how is a tank developed? Well, the best tank of the potential enemy is taken [10], and a response is made for it. Thus, it turned out that by the end of the 20th century, tanks were made not for any specific tasks, but to kill enemy tanks. As it turned out, their armor, weapons and cost are prohibitive, and on the fields of real combat battles all this is simply unnecessary. Do you want to know what is considered a healthy man's tank in modern warfare? T55MV. Yes, he does not carry ATGMs. Yes, he is already half a century old. Yes, it is unlikely to kill a modern MBT using its obsolete gun. Yes, it lacks many fancy options. Yes, the gun of any modern MBT can shoot it out. But at the same time, it has an extremely low cost of operation and modernization[11], high maintainability, low requirements for the quality of the crew, and, damn, they riveted a lot of them. And considering that they will have to fight not against modern MBTs, but against technical vehicles, guntrucks, other similar tanks and various rolling scrap metal from the Cold War, this is the best option, because as they say, “you don’t need the best weapon to win. Quite a lot of just good things.” Okay, but what if modern MBTs arrive? A low supply of shells[12], gluttony for fuel[13], expensive repairs[14], reputational losses during destruction and other interesting realities of modern war, when every frag is posted on YouTube, will force the enemy to take care of these tanks and use them only in conditions of total dominance in the air and on the ground. But the first - given that modern aircraft are also expensive - in the presence of at least some serious air defense immediately becomes impossible[15], and the second is impossible when a fighter with an RPG sits behind every pebble. Thus, bad questions arise for tank design bureaus, which, instead of tanks that are needed on real battlefields (that is, simple, technologically advanced and having a tactical role different from fighting enemy tanks), produce sponges for shells and anti-tank systems. The Third Reich also tried this, and where is it now?

Second generation guns in the game Tanks online

Second-generation guns will appear in the life of a Tanki Online user upon reaching the rank of Warrant Officer 1. Then it will be time to meet Thunder, Freeze, Ricochet and Shaft.

Thunder

By analogy with Smokey, it is the most accessible of the second generation weapons. It has a larger damage radius and a longer cooldown time than Smokey. Inventive tankers, playing Deathmatch, have become accustomed to finishing off the enemy with a blast wave (up to 10 m), shooting at buildings and walls standing next to him.

Even having opened access to Thunder, you should not rush to climb onto it, because Rails or also Twins, upgraded to M3, can easily cover unpumped weapons of the second generation. Having refueled with crystals around 14K, you can pump Thunder up to m3 and then feel free to go into battle! The heavy second-generation Mammoth hull or the slightly faster Viking will go well with the Thunder. The tactics of the game are shooting from a distance. Preference is for medium to large sized locations.

Frieze

In fact, it is the antipode of a flamethrower, that is, it releases a powerful freezing jet at a distance of up to 20 m. In addition, Frieze slows down opponents and causes damage to everyone caught under his shot. Since Frieza's owner is a melee fighter, such a tank would be good as a flag carrier or as a base guard. It is extremely pleasing that Frieze, even in the zero modification, covers the pumped-up Flamethrower and Isis, therefore, it will work from new. A pumped-up Viking will go well with Frieza, since he has good speed and decent armor. The battle tactic is to quietly drive up to the enemy’s rear and say “Boo!” A frozen enemy will be a more tractable prey, the main thing is to dodge his gun, you can also hide behind nearby tanks and obstacles. Maps for Frieze - small locks like Hill, Island, Farm.

Ricochet

A single-barreled cannon that shoots plasma that ricochets off surfaces, and in its design has something in common with Twins. Due to its specificity, it has the widest range of muzzle elevation angle adjustment. Deals decent damage at a distance of about 60 m, in addition, plasma projectiles slow down the enemy. Rick, upgraded to M3, is a megabender in the Tanki Online game, since the opponent does not have time to reach him within shooting range. You can have a lot of fun with Ricochet on the maps Fort Knox 3, Iran, Garder, Arena, where you can ricochet off the walls and rock the enemy tank, it just won’t be able to aim properly. Rick is good at running with the flag and shooting in locks with corridors and a lot of walls.

Shaft

A gun with targeted combat mode and huge damage. An expensive item designed for sniper tactics in the game. The amount of damage is adjusted with the spacebar, a quick tap is a simple shot with a small effect, and a long press of the key will result in precise targeting and high damage. Shaft begins to show its true power in modifications m2 and higher. Since in sniper scope mode, the player loses sight of the immediate surroundings, the tactic of playing with Shaft is to find a well-protected rear and camp from there slowly. It is good to place it on a fortified Mammoth or Viking hull. The shaft, despite its power, is a weapon for targeted players, since you need to be able to find good cover, regulate the power of shots, and not forget about switching between modes. Maps for Shaft - Chernobyl, Serpukhov, Kolkhoz, Stadium.

Examples[edit]

Literature[edit]

• “Starship Troopers” is justified by the existence in the setting of the Mobile Infantry, a universal type of troops that is much more mobile than tanks, but has a sufficient range of weapons to destroy them. Highlighted by the author in one of the chapters.
• Dale Brown's universe - in 2001, the US ground forces were disbanded altogether
  , precisely because the 21st century had arrived, and now aviation and special forces are in charge (the main characters also wear eco-skeletons with railguns, but these are very secret devices) By the end In the 2010s, the author finished writing about humanoid combat robots that can’t hold a tank shell, but tanks don’t hit them, because they are capable of… contaminating the tank’s fire control system with computer viruses. How it is possible to infect a tank's guidance system that does not have wireless communication, however, is not specified. Very strong technology.

Cinema[edit]

• In most kaiju and alien invasion films, tanks fall into this trope, suffering from the Worf effect.
• Iron Man - The only thing a tank round can do is knock Iron Man to the ground without doing much damage to his armor. Tony Stark easily dodges the second projectile, after which he just as easily destroys the tank. In Age of Ultron, Rhodey talks about making fun of someone's panzer: “I grab a tank and fly with it to the palace of the local dictator...”

Cartoons[edit]

• “War of the Worlds: Goliath” - instead of tanks, humanity uses airships and giant robots.

Anime and manga[edit]

• Basically, any mecha anime.
• Code Geass - tanks and armored personnel carriers are present in the setting, but as the plot progresses they play a less and lesser role in battles, giving way to knightmers (local mechs). However, over time, Knightmers displace all types of troops from the picture, including infantry and aviation (when they become capable of flying). What’s most offensive is that initially these same knightmers were not in the script, but a fairly realistic anime about partisans was planned, but the distributors decided that without OBHR the target audience would not watch the series. And this is how you look at it. The more knightmers there are in the series, the more their quality drops. And if the battered “Glasgow” Cullen (the simplest production model), capable only of driving and shooting harpoons, survived several battles until the owner herself destroyed it, then the ultra-modern flying “Gekki” and “Vincents” (also serial models) fall apart in the last battle into pieces simply by falling into the protective radiation zone of “Damocles” (in our opinion: they are killed by the force field), and the “cardboard” armor is torn open by the wrist blade of the local Terminator. Special-purpose Knightmare like the “Scarlet Lotus” and “Lancelot” survive to the end only due to constant repairs and increased characteristics (for fabulous money).

Video games[edit]

• Act of War - here the grandmother said in two, on the one hand, due to the fact that each faction has cool infantry, tanks don’t seem to be needed, on the other hand, they are quite effective, although they are also vulnerable, so a tank rush does not work well here
• Command & Conquer - zigzag. In Tiberian Sun, GDI troops retire traditional tanks, including the famous Mammoths, and replace them with walkers. And in the Tiberium Wars lore it is directly stated that walkers turned out to be ineffective due to the vulnerability of their legs (and they were also very expensive!). But the Brotherhood of NOD in the third part uses walking vehicles without any problems (however, quite limitedly - their light armored vehicles are quite traditional). And in the Kane's Wrath expansion, it was revealed that the walkers remained in service with the GDI Steel Claws unit.
• Deconstruction in the Red Alert series - not a single Red Army offensive is complete without powerful armored vehicles. The most recognizable of them are Mammoth tanks (in RA3 - Apocalypse Tanks) withstand a colossal amount of damage, can simply crush smaller vehicles into the ground with their weight, and in the first two parts of the series they are even capable of fighting an airborne enemy.

Board games[edit]

• Battletech - there is evidence that the most advanced weapons in the setting - energy - can only work by being powered by the mechs' thermonuclear reactors and cooled by their huge heat sinks. Double subversion - The Hell Horse Clan invented chemical lasers suitable for use on conventional armored vehicles, but, according to some hints, the Clans at a secret conference banned them as a threat to the existence of mechs and the associated clan way of life. In fact, tanks are used quite successfully there along with mechs. And they have energy weapons and Gauss cannons ready to please the mechs. Some even know how to jump. But close combat with fur is categorically not recommended for them.
• In fact, the technical basis of the mechs is not energy weapons, but extremely powerful synthetic muscles, which allow the mechs to run over very rough terrain many times faster than tanks on the highway. At the same time, there are mechs without energy weapons at all, but tanks with muscles are not.
• In the second book about the Gray Legion of Death it is written in plain text that a dozen tanks can easily defeat a robot, which many commanders use, because tanks are cheaper to produce and more repairable.