Good Old Fashioned Tank P*rn

[Murph]

Thank you.  I was curious on that since it appeared to have the Merkava look to it.  I am going to make an assumption it makes it easier on the transmission rather than have it like on the Sherman.

[shep854]

10 hours ago, shootER5 said:

 

Since the M10's drive sprocket is located at the front that means the power pack is there.
 

You can also see the grillwork on the right front, ahead of the turret and the driver's hatch to the left.

[shep854]

 

[shep854]

These guys seem to do their homework; there are photos and info I haven't seen before--not that that's saying a lot... 😛

 

 

[bojan]

M48 and M132 in Vietnam, used starring in some movie:

https://x.com/AnnQuann/status/1888230531491602716

[shep854]

Not exactly a tank, but as Adam says, a Wheeled Death-Trap that wasn't.  Adam Peter (sorry for lack of proper accents) on Facebook

https://www.facebook.com/reel/539734952029588

[Mighty_Zuk]

Elbit introduces the Challerams. Or Abllenger.

 

Edited April 3 by Mighty_Zuk

[TrustMe]

Isn't that just saying that urban combat is the domain of the infantry?

[bojan]

Infantry still needs support and in the long run armor saves lives.

[Stuart Galbraith]

Well the tank was invented as an infantry bully. And whilst there are undoubtedly better tank killing systems now than the tank , as far as making people run  there are still few incentives better than 70 tons of steel and ceramic killing machine to encourage you not to be a hero.

Edited April 3 by Stuart Galbraith

[shep854]

Hence the cover photo for our Facebook page:

[sunday]

31 minutes ago, shep854 said:

Hence the cover photo for our Facebook page:

Could not see it. I think it was Tomas' interpretation of the MerkaGavin.

[shep854]

3 hours ago, sunday said:

Could not see it. I think it was Tomas' interpretation of the MerkaGavin.

That's tough.  It's a photo of a surrendering soldier getting a good look down a Chally's main gun during a training exercise

[Mighty_Zuk]

6 hours ago, TrustMe said:

Isn't that just saying that urban combat is the domain of the infantry?

No. It says that as urban warfare becomes more common, armor becomes even more relevant.

Armor is vital in urban warfare.

[TrustMe]

4 hours ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

No. It says that as urban warfare becomes more common, armor becomes even more relevant.

Armor is vital in urban warfare.

 

I read somewhere that under the 1980's AIRLAND battle doctrine of the US army that they never trained for combat in cities. It was always outside. 

Does anyone know if this was true?

it seems to be a massive doctrine black hole and not fit the  "train as you fight, fight as you train" ideology.

[shep854]

13 minutes ago, TrustMe said:

 

I read somewhere that under the 1980's AIRLAND battle doctrine of the US army that they never trained for combat in cities. It was always outside. 

Does anyone know if this was true?

it seems to be a massive doctrine black hole and not fit the  "train as you fight, fight as you train" ideology.

And then, during the Iraqi operations during the 2000s, the Army decreed that future combat would be overwhelmingly urban, due to increase in the size of cities.  A few years later in Afghanistan, they had a 'Wait A Minute' moment...