Reply To: Modern Warfare. A matter of Scale?

[Aethelflaeda was framed]

I haven’t really paid attention to hype from manufacturers, just looking at vehicle casualties vs tactical gains.  Clearly early war Russians were not using armor with adequate infantry support but i am not sure that it would have made really any difference in taking territory. billy mitchell has sunk the battleship…

Artillery has now gained pinpoint accuracy even from extremely long ranges , with terminally guided munitions and laser designators; excellent target acquisition capability via drones, and tactical flexibility with DP ICM and artillery laid mines.  Infantry now have extremely effective, easily concealed, very cheap, man portable ATGM/suicide drones and very cheap drones for recon. What novel thing  have tanks brought to the table?  No breakthroughs, but i can see them still valuable in the pursuit role once a breakthrough is achieved.

Would an NATO armoured force army do better in the face of these doctrinal/technological advances in artillery and infantry? I have my doubts.  combat trains troops pretty quickly, Russians and Ukrainians have both learned what works and what has failed with the tools they have.  Currently the shift is to the defense much as it happened with the advent of the mg against infantry/horse cav armies.  Arms sellers will hype  what they have to sell until the buyers have learned which is hype and what is a battlefield reality.

Mick Hayman
Margate and New Orleans