They are glorious, frightening beasts, bristling with guns large and small and these days, with a target acquisition and aiming technology suite that all but guarantees one-shot-one-kill in a tank-on-tank battle. I’m talking of the Army’s main battle tank, the M1 Abrams. It’s a big thing – 26 feet long, 12 feet wide and 8 feet tall -- 70 tons of steel and composite armor, armed with a 120 mm main gun, a .50 caliber machine gun, and two M240 7.62 mm machine guns. The standard ammunition load is 40 rounds for the main gun, 900 rounds of .50 caliber ammunition, and 10,000 rounds for the M240s. As massive as they are, Abrams tanks are capable of going 45 miles per hour and placing accurate fire with the main gun while in motion.
So I read a little about the Abrams tank to my husband, a Vietnam vet. I didn’t have to say much because he knew exactly what I was talking about. He didn’t want me to remind him of it. What is horrifying is that we cannot squeeze Mike Johnson tight enough for him to call “uncle”. No moderate R’s exist anymore. We are up against Russian operatives in the House. They know Trump’s handlers have a long leather whip should any of them speak back against him. We are in a world of hurt with these Nazis. Tomorrow, we will be talking about Biden’s SOTU. Praying he kicks it out of the park.
Turns out he did (kick it out of the park). The GOP’s rebuttal by ‘Bammy Senator Britt was a pathetic joke, and all Fox and Hannity and his acolytes can do is talk about Biden’s aggressive “tone.” Per usual for the Republican Party, nothing substantive. No issues. Just noise and screaming.
We won’t ever learn. We’re a competitive, greedy, combative species. We covet what the other guy has—- in this case, Ukraine, by Putin. There’s no point (in my view, at least) in wringing our hands. All we can do, given our still-incomplete evolvement from primitive urgings, is prepare to defend ourselves… and act peacefully, until continuously and repeatedly provoked.
A member of the Ukrainian Carpathian Sich wrote a fascinating, terrifying thread on X about some of the recent grueling battles Lucian is describing (flat terrain, mines, trenches, drones). He said that the Abrams tank armor was lifesaving, so that even severely damaged tanks were patched back together to provide shielding.
Sorry, I think the soldier/ writer I mentioned above is just in the Sich regiment..not Carpathian Sich. .I'm relying on cyber translation from Ukrainian to English and some things remain in the Ukrainian alphabet. Grain of salt! Horrified by war. Trying to understand it. Thanks, Lucian for your insights.
A rather chilling essay this evening, Lucian. War is horrible, but where does this particular thread of horror end???? This is like medieval body armor---every new advance in armor plates or hinges, etc. was soon countered by a new weapon or gimmick that defeated the new armor when the going got tough. Some of the advances were gruesome in practice, like all warfare when you get down to the basics.
There is a combat paradigm shift in progress so profound it may be more striking than the move to blitzkrieg tactics between the two World Wars. There are massive lessons to be learned in Ukraine. I hope we get it right.
Understand your point. The paradigm shift you speak of was recognized WABAC in 1980 as the shift from 3rdGEN warfare to 4thGEN warfare. Recognized but not adopted.
3rdGEN is superior firepower and overwhelming force-based. Note the absence of the human mind. To achieve both takes an elongated time frame to spec, design, and produce the weaponry and a force structure. That mindset resulted in an over-focus on offensive capabilities w/little thought given to defending/securing the throughput. No different than what we saw with the internet with the focus on glitzy systems with little thought put into securing them. Didn't tale long for individuals as well as groups and state actors to exploit the intentional oversight. Emphasis, intentional. When so much time, effort, and money dedicated to a sole design concept there was little left for basic necessities, 4eg unarmored or poorly armored HUMVEES and other combat vehicles. Recall Iraw and troops up armoring their own HUMVEES with scrap metal.
4thGEN foresaw and documented how warfare will evolve and expand far beyond the traditional ways. It correctly pointed out bad guys will use any measures ( a holistic approach where pressure is applied not only against a mil force but beyond to the socioeconomic and political spheres) to foil and frustrate much larger forces and their superior weaponry. There was no end goal to vanquish/defeat the other side, only foil and frustrate because the premise of 4thGEN is wars are no longer winnable. Instead of trying to defeat the other side, the goal is to position them to realize the war is unwinnable on their own as in too costly in blood, treasure, time, and effort.
(This is a high-level synopsis of the dawn of 4thGEN warfare that now closer to a 4.5 version that includes states adopting the same tactics as non-state actors and incorporating them. 4eg, Ru mil use of Wagner in conflicts in Sy, Africa, and Uk. And the Uk mil turning to civs, not to a mil industrial complex, to develop the proper weaponry to fit the conflict.)
The Russians, probably due in part to their primitive nature, have always been known to throw bodies at their adversaries in spite of the horrific costs. I told everyone I spoke with, that the Russian front lines before the latest invasion began, were populated with healthy people who were calling their families daily, who are either dead or maimed now, all because of one man’s ego.
We on the other hand try our best to protect our service members so our tanks cost a lot as do our aircraft and ships. Would you want your son or daughter fighting on your behalf to be outfitted with less than the best you could devise, I thought not. Yes admirals and generals are involved in the procurement of the above, which is as it should be, they after all know more about the use of those weapons than any average joe.
We are well aware of the vulnerabilities that guided rockets pose, we are after all proponents of their use. It looks like these conflicts are evolving into long standoff exchanges with ever more accurate munitions most of which require eyes in the sky to acquire their targets. Meanwhile the infantry is engaged on a personal level without the protection that armor affords. What Israel is doing in Gaza, and what Russia is doing in Ukraine are demonstrations of what modern warfare has evolved into, with more powerful weapons and more efficient killing.
I don't know the first thing about military tactics, but from a distance this seems like the same example the Revolutionary Army showed against the British, and the Viet Kong against the U.S. Guerilla tactics are hard to defeat, especially against a foe that is defending its own Homeland. The constant escalation of weapons just ends up destroying everything.
Military equipment is so damned expensive. I wonder what these things would cost if retired generals weren't consultants for the manufacturers. What is Ford, or GM, or other automakers were allowed to bid on these machines? Am I being naive? Don't answer that question. We don't need anymore failed F-35 variants or Ospreys.
History provides many examples of hubris about belief in technology false security like battleships. What did we learn from Pearl Harbor? Sitting ducks. I’ve worried about the asymmetrical vulnerability of large weaponry and high tech defenses. Recently Israel’s “Maginot Line” high tech fence was penetrated with catastrophic results. Why do humans continue to make the same mistakes over and over?
Requiem for the tank. Thank you. Wasn't it a hundred years ago (yikes) that Billy Mitchell was trying to persuade military mucky-mucks that a comparatively inexpensive biplane could destroy the most "glorious, frightening beasts" of that military age, battleships? Speaking of a hundred years ago, the photo of that mobile howitzer rigged out with a boxy contraption to shield it from attack looks to my eye the same shape as the Model T and all other autos of that era --- minus the cannon, of course. Yes, Lucian, your conclusions say that MLK's long arc of history bends under the weight of our species' irrational truculence.
Not to worry, Lucian. Boeing and General Dynamnics will find a way to continue eating up a quarter of our nation's spending. Either with actual weapons systems which are adaptive to this new reality or by buying off a few Senators to buy the ones that aren't.
Navy-less Unkraine has demonstrated that expensive tech is very vulnerable; they've sunk/damaged 20 ships of Russia's Black Sea Fleet. Expensive tech is only good for intimidating and murdering relatively low-tech people (think Afghans). In a war between almost equals you don't want to put expensive tech where you can lose it (think that floating city The Eisenhower), especially lose it to cheap drones. Drone swarms change everything.
So I read a little about the Abrams tank to my husband, a Vietnam vet. I didn’t have to say much because he knew exactly what I was talking about. He didn’t want me to remind him of it. What is horrifying is that we cannot squeeze Mike Johnson tight enough for him to call “uncle”. No moderate R’s exist anymore. We are up against Russian operatives in the House. They know Trump’s handlers have a long leather whip should any of them speak back against him. We are in a world of hurt with these Nazis. Tomorrow, we will be talking about Biden’s SOTU. Praying he kicks it out of the park.
He did.
Turns out he did (kick it out of the park). The GOP’s rebuttal by ‘Bammy Senator Britt was a pathetic joke, and all Fox and Hannity and his acolytes can do is talk about Biden’s aggressive “tone.” Per usual for the Republican Party, nothing substantive. No issues. Just noise and screaming.
Only the dead have seen the end of war.
—- Plato
Very true, Linda. Sad but true.
Ohhhh
“Where have all the flowers gone. . . When will we ever learn?
Technology is capable of designing a stunning array of weapons for every conceivable occasion! What about a weapon that makes war obsolete?
Killing our sons is good for the economy [sarcasm].
"War's good business, so give your son." (Grace Slick, "Rejoyce")
We won’t ever learn. We’re a competitive, greedy, combative species. We covet what the other guy has—- in this case, Ukraine, by Putin. There’s no point (in my view, at least) in wringing our hands. All we can do, given our still-incomplete evolvement from primitive urgings, is prepare to defend ourselves… and act peacefully, until continuously and repeatedly provoked.
That was the thought when we had nuclear weapons...
A member of the Ukrainian Carpathian Sich wrote a fascinating, terrifying thread on X about some of the recent grueling battles Lucian is describing (flat terrain, mines, trenches, drones). He said that the Abrams tank armor was lifesaving, so that even severely damaged tanks were patched back together to provide shielding.
Sorry, I think the soldier/ writer I mentioned above is just in the Sich regiment..not Carpathian Sich. .I'm relying on cyber translation from Ukrainian to English and some things remain in the Ukrainian alphabet. Grain of salt! Horrified by war. Trying to understand it. Thanks, Lucian for your insights.
A rather chilling essay this evening, Lucian. War is horrible, but where does this particular thread of horror end???? This is like medieval body armor---every new advance in armor plates or hinges, etc. was soon countered by a new weapon or gimmick that defeated the new armor when the going got tough. Some of the advances were gruesome in practice, like all warfare when you get down to the basics.
There is a combat paradigm shift in progress so profound it may be more striking than the move to blitzkrieg tactics between the two World Wars. There are massive lessons to be learned in Ukraine. I hope we get it right.
Understand your point. The paradigm shift you speak of was recognized WABAC in 1980 as the shift from 3rdGEN warfare to 4thGEN warfare. Recognized but not adopted.
3rdGEN is superior firepower and overwhelming force-based. Note the absence of the human mind. To achieve both takes an elongated time frame to spec, design, and produce the weaponry and a force structure. That mindset resulted in an over-focus on offensive capabilities w/little thought given to defending/securing the throughput. No different than what we saw with the internet with the focus on glitzy systems with little thought put into securing them. Didn't tale long for individuals as well as groups and state actors to exploit the intentional oversight. Emphasis, intentional. When so much time, effort, and money dedicated to a sole design concept there was little left for basic necessities, 4eg unarmored or poorly armored HUMVEES and other combat vehicles. Recall Iraw and troops up armoring their own HUMVEES with scrap metal.
4thGEN foresaw and documented how warfare will evolve and expand far beyond the traditional ways. It correctly pointed out bad guys will use any measures ( a holistic approach where pressure is applied not only against a mil force but beyond to the socioeconomic and political spheres) to foil and frustrate much larger forces and their superior weaponry. There was no end goal to vanquish/defeat the other side, only foil and frustrate because the premise of 4thGEN is wars are no longer winnable. Instead of trying to defeat the other side, the goal is to position them to realize the war is unwinnable on their own as in too costly in blood, treasure, time, and effort.
(This is a high-level synopsis of the dawn of 4thGEN warfare that now closer to a 4.5 version that includes states adopting the same tactics as non-state actors and incorporating them. 4eg, Ru mil use of Wagner in conflicts in Sy, Africa, and Uk. And the Uk mil turning to civs, not to a mil industrial complex, to develop the proper weaponry to fit the conflict.)
The Russians, probably due in part to their primitive nature, have always been known to throw bodies at their adversaries in spite of the horrific costs. I told everyone I spoke with, that the Russian front lines before the latest invasion began, were populated with healthy people who were calling their families daily, who are either dead or maimed now, all because of one man’s ego.
We on the other hand try our best to protect our service members so our tanks cost a lot as do our aircraft and ships. Would you want your son or daughter fighting on your behalf to be outfitted with less than the best you could devise, I thought not. Yes admirals and generals are involved in the procurement of the above, which is as it should be, they after all know more about the use of those weapons than any average joe.
We are well aware of the vulnerabilities that guided rockets pose, we are after all proponents of their use. It looks like these conflicts are evolving into long standoff exchanges with ever more accurate munitions most of which require eyes in the sky to acquire their targets. Meanwhile the infantry is engaged on a personal level without the protection that armor affords. What Israel is doing in Gaza, and what Russia is doing in Ukraine are demonstrations of what modern warfare has evolved into, with more powerful weapons and more efficient killing.
I don't know the first thing about military tactics, but from a distance this seems like the same example the Revolutionary Army showed against the British, and the Viet Kong against the U.S. Guerilla tactics are hard to defeat, especially against a foe that is defending its own Homeland. The constant escalation of weapons just ends up destroying everything.
What popped into my head was a slogan from the Vietnam era: "Take the toys away from the boys."
Military equipment is so damned expensive. I wonder what these things would cost if retired generals weren't consultants for the manufacturers. What is Ford, or GM, or other automakers were allowed to bid on these machines? Am I being naive? Don't answer that question. We don't need anymore failed F-35 variants or Ospreys.
History provides many examples of hubris about belief in technology false security like battleships. What did we learn from Pearl Harbor? Sitting ducks. I’ve worried about the asymmetrical vulnerability of large weaponry and high tech defenses. Recently Israel’s “Maginot Line” high tech fence was penetrated with catastrophic results. Why do humans continue to make the same mistakes over and over?
Requiem for the tank. Thank you. Wasn't it a hundred years ago (yikes) that Billy Mitchell was trying to persuade military mucky-mucks that a comparatively inexpensive biplane could destroy the most "glorious, frightening beasts" of that military age, battleships? Speaking of a hundred years ago, the photo of that mobile howitzer rigged out with a boxy contraption to shield it from attack looks to my eye the same shape as the Model T and all other autos of that era --- minus the cannon, of course. Yes, Lucian, your conclusions say that MLK's long arc of history bends under the weight of our species' irrational truculence.
Not to worry, Lucian. Boeing and General Dynamnics will find a way to continue eating up a quarter of our nation's spending. Either with actual weapons systems which are adaptive to this new reality or by buying off a few Senators to buy the ones that aren't.
Keith Laumer is my go to guy on Bolo Tanks.
Currently that old Krupp sword is now my coffee pot.
How i long for the times i spent on the Serengity with my domesticated dog 15000 thousand years ago. Dying at 35 was Ok.
Navy-less Unkraine has demonstrated that expensive tech is very vulnerable; they've sunk/damaged 20 ships of Russia's Black Sea Fleet. Expensive tech is only good for intimidating and murdering relatively low-tech people (think Afghans). In a war between almost equals you don't want to put expensive tech where you can lose it (think that floating city The Eisenhower), especially lose it to cheap drones. Drone swarms change everything.
Lucian, you must have gotten all “A”s in your weaponry class at West Point. I am very impressed with your knowledge.