Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Brilliant

That’s a nice concept...but lots of concepts come and go. I wouldn’t classify that as a tank either, as its main gun could never kill another tank.

I’m an old tanker....its hard enough using a 2d night vision driver site (ie there are accidents). I couldn’t imagine negotiating terrain full time through a screen...or identifying targets (which often occurs with peripheral vision). And what happens when you throw track? Too many complications. But beyond that, remote control tanks contradict our fighting doctrine. The only reason we have tanks is to protect pc’s...and the only reason we have pc’s is to bring infantry to an area. If the area doesnt need infantry, it doesnt need tanks....and the remote control operations should be left to drones in the air.
A


39 posted on 05/06/2013 6:34:35 PM PDT by lacrew (Mr. Soetoro, we regret to inform you that your race card is over the credit limit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies ]


To: lacrew

“And what happens when you throw track?”

You push the self-destruct button. Yes, it may not completely replace the manned tank, but I think it will become developed enough that it will be used in battle, and will enable us to save a lot of lives and a lot of supplies. The logistics of supply are a big part of war. The fewer your army uses, the better. You use these tanks as the vanguard, move in to kill the enemy, and the men follow behind to strike the second blow.


45 posted on 05/07/2013 4:15:56 PM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson