"Advances in antitank weapons do not take place without improvements in tank design" ~ James F. Dunnigan@SvenSvensonov - A serious question now...*me and serious - what is the world coming too*
Don't you think that with the advent of more and more effective ATGMs and technological advances the MBT may not be as hugely important as it was before ?
Imagine a reasonably well armored and agile drone sporting an ATGM, a mortar, a Gun etc. controlled by an operator sitting in the command car, prowling through the battlefield !
What guidelines will help us to accomplish those missions successfully? In future urban operations, whether in 1997 or 2027, the US military should strive to follow tenets such as these:
Not in the least, tanks are not dependent upon artillery and infantry .@SvenSvensonov
I am sorry but I want to ask a totally different question
Suppose a country has limited resources
SO should they spend money on Tanks or Artilerry / Infantry
An Infantry batallion with plenty of ATGMs can wipe out many Tanks
A ATGM costs far less than a Tank ; A modern tank costs 5 million dollars
No tank can survive 5 ATGM hits
Tanks are heavily dependent on BOTH Artilerry and Infantry
Before Tanks can move forward ; Artilerry has to thoroughly pound an area
And then Infantry soldiers have to keep pace with the tanks
merely to protect the Tank from well dug in enemy units