Posted on Jun 15, 2015
LTC Bink Romanick
14.9K
90
52
5
5
0
M1a1 abrams tank in camp fallujah
With fewer tanks being procured, and Armored Cavalry being organize around the Stryker (and dropping Armor from the title) do you think that the tank is an endangered species?
Posted in these groups: Tanks logo Tanks
Avatar feed
Responses: 33
LTC Jason Mackay
13
13
0
Edited >1 y ago
You don't need tanks, right up until you do. We have to maintain the capability, materiel, training, and R and D. Everyone thought tanks were obsolete after the 1967 Arab-Israeli war when Egypt fielded Sagger3s. Not so much. Evident in the 73 Yom Kippur War, 1991 ODS, and 2003 OIF initial combat operations. Nothing demands respect like a 72 ton M1A2, in the tight terrain, against the right enemy. Lop-sided victories are the best kind, if we are the winners. We get nothing out of a fair fight.

It is all about the right mix of forces for the threats and to deter threats.
(13)
Comment
(0)
SSG Roger Ayscue
SSG Roger Ayscue
>1 y
War IS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE FAIR. You Kick the crap outta the bad guys, come home and make babies and get jobs....But get the first part RIGHT...Kick the crap outta them.
(1)
Reply
(0)
LTC Jason Mackay
LTC Jason Mackay
>1 y
My point Roger. We don't get extra points for a "close game"
(1)
Reply
(0)
SPC Clifton Peacock
SPC Clifton Peacock
>1 y
There will always be room on the battlefield for a MBT. The only way I would justify replacing the Abrams is if we develop a meaner solution to fill its role. Don't see that happening anytime soon, granted the current political climate.
(1)
Reply
(0)
LTC Stephen Conway
LTC Stephen Conway
10 y
Sir, they will not be obsolete while we give them away. We did not give a terms of use agreement like I did in Civil Affairs deployment to where we tell the government who will use the vehicle. We should have done so with the Iraqi Government. Now we give them away to supposed allies who give them to hezzbollah. I just did a posting on this on RP. I know its old news but I did not know about this until I talked to a friend who looked this up on defense news daily. http://www.military.com/video/operations-and-strategy/terrorism/hezbollah-brigades-in-ramadi/ [login to see] 001
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SSG Roger Ayscue
10
10
0
NO...Being a Grunt, I can tell you that a tank can give you a real edge. I do tink that they need to develop a replacement for the M551 Sheridan that can be dropped by parachute to give the 82d Airborne organic armored fire support.

As long as there is a Fruitloop named Kim in North Korea, as long as the Russians and Chinese have tanks...we will need tanks...and tankers...
(10)
Comment
(0)
LTC Jason Mackay
LTC Jason Mackay
>1 y
When the XM8 died, Airborne Armor died with it....hate to say it. I was there when 11ACR inherited the last of the M551 Armored Airdroppable AmphibiousReconnaissance (not doing any of these well) vehicles from the 82d. Nightmare.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
LTC Bink Romanick
9
9
0
Image
(9)
Comment
(0)
SPC Joshua H.
SPC Joshua H.
>1 y
58693bb4
Best Job I Ever Had.
(8)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
Avatar feed
Do you think that tanks are becoming obsolete?
1SG Special Forces Senior Sergeant
6
6
0
Nope, not at all. There is something about 70 tons of tracked, sovereign US territory rolling around. Tanks are still a must even though the last 15 years has every conventional unit trying to ditch traditional doctrine and become COIN experts. Nothing can reinforce a hasty position or fill gaps on a FLOT of any size like an Armor column can.
(6)
Comment
(0)
LTC Bink Romanick
LTC Bink Romanick
>1 y
Couldn't agree more!
(0)
Reply
(0)
SFC Armor Crew Member
SFC (Join to see)
>1 y
Amen 1SG
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SFC Armor Crew Member
3
3
0
I think this can go either way. If someone that does not know what they are doing, and honestly BELIEVES that the piece of crap MGS can actually replace the Abrams there may be an issue there. Being an 12 year Armor guy, having only had to endure the MGS for 3 years, but at the same time I had to endure the MGS for 3 years.
It is NOT capable of fighting Armor in an extended fight. I missed my tank EVERY gunnery, I missed smoothly going from one target for my Gunner to shoot to the next. The MGS is simply inferior.
Whomever is making the call NEEDS to understand that the Stryker platform is not designed for Armor fights. There is STILL Armor out there and they are bad guys.
We will never be totally gone. If they DO lose their minds and mothball (hypothesis) Armor it would not be long before they had to get put back into the game. Someone as tactically and technically smart as Putin will be SO FAST to jump on us for it.
Armor will never be gone, maybe smaller again for a while, but in the end we are indespinsable.
(3)
Comment
(0)
LTC Bink Romanick
LTC Bink Romanick
>1 y
Amen, amen and amen!
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SPC Ben Cedeno
2
2
0
ITS SACRILEGE NOT TO HAVE TANKS!!!! I'm a Tanker & WILL ALWAYS BE ONE, what needs to happen is to Put an American President in office with some Balls & stop selling our Tanks to these other nations & putting them on the same level with us.
(2)
Comment
(0)
LTC Bink Romanick
LTC Bink Romanick
>1 y
"The best job I ever had". Stay on the tank.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
MAJ Danny Clark
2
2
0
I've got to agree with the main sentiment in the room. While I ended my career as a logistician, I started as a Field Artillery officer. Did my share of FIST duties with both mech infantry and armor. Nothing more intimidating than seeing a company of tanks rolling towards you. Makes God fearing men out of anyone.
(2)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SSG Randall Speck
1
1
0
11 yrs a tanker here. Heavy Armor is a must have on the battle field. Putting the striker up against, let's say, current Russian tanks, will just get good soldiers eliminated. If they wanted to have light armor on the battlefield, why didn't they just re-field the M551 Sheridan? If we go back to pre Desert Storm thinking, the feeling then was less armor will be needed in the future. Then we suddenly have Desert Storm, followed by Iraqi Freedom. The thinking is wrong, just as the elimination of the A-10 was wrong! Armor is needed, at least as a deterrent to war. OH! And move the Armor back to Ft. Knox where it belongs!
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SGT Ryan Harris
1
1
0
i would hope nobody out there is crazy/stupid enough to believe that tanks are obsolete or need to be scaled back. when I was in Iraq we went thru a mine field with the sweeper out front (a little scary when one of the chains set off a mine but very useful). if the army doesn't want the M1 ABRAMS I will take them and put them to good use.
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SPC Daniel O'Neil
1
1
0
Absolutely not. There are still large spans of land between civilized center and civilized settlement. There are areas of penetration that need that ferocity that only the tank can bring. With the creation of new weapons occurring at an alarming rate, tanks are all the more needed on the modern battlefield.
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close