The Tank's Enduring Role: Lessons from Ukraine and the Evolving Nature of Warfare

Images of destroyed Russian tanks have become synonymous with the ongoing war in Ukraine.

This has ignited a global debate about whether the tank, once a dominant force on the battlefield, has now become obsolete in the face of modern weaponry.

While the losses suffered by Russian armored units are undeniable, a closer look suggests a more complex reality.

Vulnerabilities Exposed​

Ukraine has effectively deployed a combination of man-portable anti-tank missiles like NLAWs, drones, and precision artillery strikes to devastating effect against Russian tank formations.

These relatively inexpensive, easily deployable weapons have exposed the vulnerabilities of tanks, particularly when operating without proper support.

The Indian Perspective​

Interestingly, Indian Army officials offer a nuanced perspective on these losses. They argue that while Ukrainian tactics have been successful, the blame lies less with the tank as a platform and more with "poor tactics" employed by Russia.

The lack of coordinated infantry operations, artillery support, electronic warfare capabilities, and sufficient air cover left Russian tanks exposed and susceptible.

Combined Arms: The Key to Success​

The Indian Army's analysis underscores the enduring importance of combined-arms warfare in the modern era.

Tanks, despite their strengths in firepower, mobility, and protection, cannot operate in isolation.

To maximize their effectiveness, they require integrated support from infantry, artillery, airpower, and electronic warfare assets.

The Future: Adaptation and Integration​

While the war in Ukraine has showcased inherent vulnerabilities in armored warfare, it would be premature to write the tank's obituary. The future likely lies not in the obsolescence of the tank, but its adaptation and integration within a changing battlespace.

Technologies such as active protection systems (APS), which can intercept incoming projectiles, along with enhanced situational awareness and improved communication networks, can significantly boost tank survivability.

These technological advancements, coupled with a renewed emphasis on combined arms doctrine, could ensure the tank's continued relevance.

Lessons Learned​

The conflict in Ukraine offers crucial lessons for militaries worldwide. Key takeaways include:

• The Dangers of Complacency: The Russian experience highlights the peril of relying on past tactics and assuming technological superiority.
• Adaptability: Armies need to constantly adapt strategies and technological capabilities to counter evolving threats.
• Combined Arms Warfare Remains Vital: The synergy between different military branches is essential for success on the modern battlefield.

Conclusion​

The tank's role in modern warfare has undeniably been challenged but not eliminated.

The images from Ukraine highlight the need for tactical and technological evolution rather than the outright abandonment of a platform that still holds potential value when used strategically.

 

[ABHIJIT APSINGIKAR]

Finally somebody who actually pays attention.
We still need armored columns to physically pierce enemy defenses and solidify territorial gains to achieve and solidify tactical/strategic gains. Now as he mentioned nothing is stopping MBTs themselves from incorporating loitering munitions, portable drones for added battlefield awareness and especially the possibility of wider inclusion of Rows(which modern IFVs usually have) into MBTs(relying on passive cope cages) without the need for posting gunners and significantly increased rate of interception will most definitely reinforce existing APS measures.
We already have tracked UGVs, still might be a couple of decades away from actual unmanned tanks, considering the potential risks involved including vulnerability that added automation brings in the form of susceptibility to cyber threats.

Precisely, when people just question the utility of tanks in the modern battlefield, due to the increasing number of threats in the battlefield it does not make sense. Its like saying since the ground infantry is so vulnerable against heavily defended positions, its outdated.

What it just means is that the MBT would have to evolve to counter new threats. True the unmanned tanks may still be few decades away until we can develop a sufficiently robust firewall and encryption to secure it. But we may as well see integration of UGV to work with tanks to clear out minefields or outflank enemy vehicles or positions.

 

[ABHIJIT APSINGIKAR]

Why not add a radar and a SAM too, also sea and air capabilities with stealth features 😅
Probably some sonar and anti sub technologies

U sir are being foolish. The cycle of technology evolution in weapon development has been same. First, u invented the spear then u had the shield, which then again drove the development of Pilum to pierce shields. Thus based on the historic technology evolution trend, its obvious that the Tanks themselves would be integrated with UAV in either tethered or untethered form to scout for targets and also feature a more comprehensive APS, which can theoretically double up as CIWS as well. Its not that difficult, its just that the Tank themselves would have to become more larger to accommodate all the electronics for radars, networking systems, equipment to support data linking and ammunition stowage.

 

[ABHIJIT APSINGIKAR]

Can't rule it out though. Islamabad has quite a lot of urban area we might at some point have to press into. But yeah no need to consider the possibility of urban war with China considering the hostile terrain, cant even get MBTs to properly function at that altitude . Also your suggestion I think is a bit too risky having AA systems moving in tandem with an armored columns just to deal with drones means those armored columns become that much more valuable prize for the adversary. AA systems aren't cheap and India will need LOTS of them considering Indian Airforce has a trash record against Pakis. Its the Army that has always carried the day. Not to Diss our aviators(we have material superiority and our geography is a net +ve) but Airforce is the one thing Pakis surpass us in as their whole schtick is to have a qualitatively superior air force to counter our numbers in air and on the ground. Their pilot's performance in the wars on the subcontinent and elsewhere proves this.

True moving SPAAG such as Gepard or Shilka in long armored columns just increases the vulnerability of the entire armored column. That is why it's best to provide tanks with some organic air defense capability. The base capability for that already exists in the form of APS which is designed to knock down incoming missiles and rockets and protect the tank. What it now needs is also to consider airborne threats such as loitering munitions or drones with IED. It's not that difficult, but would require a serious redesign of the future tanks as a system as well as the tank to accommodate all the electronics, networking, and data-linking apparatus.

They would invariably start to feature Auxiliary power packs as a standard feature to support sentry duties, in silent observation role. Also the Auxillary power system itself would have to be fairly large to adequately power up all the electronics for radars, networking and data linking equipment. Lastly, the gun used in active protection system would have to be a fairly large caliber of about 20mm to perform air defense duties. We may also expect two distinct set of guns in APS to provide protection against drones as well as RPG, missiles.

 

[Preet kohli]

With close to half a million soldiers dead on either side i I do not hear Infantry is in trouble. On the contrary see the videos Infantry has been hunted outside and inside bunkers by the FPVs.... Whereas armour atleast took it on the chin and saved the crew and the Infantry Sticks inside the BMPs... All assaults over open terrain by both sides have been led by armour.... Pl see the terrain... open flat fields with no cover... extensive minefields restricting movement to certain corridors.....So If anything Armour has been the saviour. Pl see videos again not the ones that West show .... Most crews lived to fight another day. Al

 

[Anant]

Having larger/smaller fleet is not enough u should be able to mass produce quickly to compensate loses and indigenously

Mass-production is important, but so is the survivability of each individual vehicle.

If numbers were all that were needed to win wars, we would be throwing stones at each other, since you just have to blast some rocks to get those in large numbers.

 

[das bab]

Future will be air borne warfare with automated search and destroy

 

[ABHIJIT APSINGIKAR]

Why not add a radar and a SAM too, also sea and air capabilities with stealth features 😅
Probably some sonar and anti sub technologies

Already partially done, how do u think the Active Protection System works? it works by integrating a small radar to sense incoming projectiles.

 

[Siddharth Asthana]

Future will be air borne warfare with automated search and destroy

For your grandsons....for indian subcontinent with $2k per capita GDP and lack of technical graduation degrees in soldiers, it will take a generation (Read 25 years) before we start thinking widespread use of AI and other fancy gizmos...until then the brute muscle force of a foot soldier will prevail

 

[Siddharth Asthana]

Not every joe on our western border will be hauling an ATGM, so our Tanks will fare better just becasue the Joe wont be running on infinite resources with billions being poured by 20+ nations.
Plus, all future conflicts in Indian sub-continent will not be in densely populated areas but rather in rural open settings....so armour by default has an upper hand in those...if you start hauling even an Abrahams MK4 in the streets of any densely populated city, it will meet a similar fate of being blown up through surprise attacks with RPGs and MANPADs

 

[Hari Sud]

Not quite. As I said before, Tanks are still indispensable to enforce physical control of the battles pace. That aspect will not change and no matter the risks is unlikely to change anytime soon. However we may nevertheless witness a radical change in the definition of role of Tank in battles pace and also expect a major change in equipment.

The loss of tanks in Ukraine invalidates your point. Moreover the flying ammunition has totally reduced the front line role of the tank.

 

[Pad UwU]

Stupid author forget that Ukrainian too are getting wreck by drunkard's Russian with a flying shovels 😹😹😹
I saw footage Abrams fighting Russian troops and tanks with ammo WTF 🙀
Ukraine has a poor leadership especially if have Zeltler clowning around begging to European Union and Joe Biden 😺😜🙃

Many Indian folks still believing in Zeltler that his winning against baldy Putin

 

[Pad UwU]

Govt of India must order DRDO to completely localize the T72 and T90, BMP 1/2 amongst other Russian weaponry. From Engines to Transmission, suspension, ammunition nothing should be imported or built under licence. We have had these tanks and ICV for 40 to 50 years now. DRDO cannot make lame excuses like US sanctions on India etc etc.

Let them work on it and come up with a prototype of the completely localized version built by OFB in 6 months Max. Then look to export it to existing Russian hardware users.

DRDO should be relieved from Arjun MBT, FRCV and FICV. Their job is Russian equipment.

Time to get tough with DRDO and OFB. They have wasted enough time and money over useless things.

How can India localize t90 and bmp if we don't have technology of it and license 🤔🧐 plus the experience and expertise 🙃