Main battle
tanks are in the news again; the Russians are coming with a new model, the
Armato (tomato?) state of the art high tech' and allegedly way ahead of ours or
anybody else's. Perhaps it is not surprising this being the centenary year of
the Battle of Cambrai in 1916.
Much admired
at the time, there are historians who question their success. My grandfather
who was in attendance among the infantry had his opinions, blunter and with
short words.
It had been
near sixty years since The Charge of the Light Brigade in The Crimea when the
cavalry rediscovered the cost of charging artillery. After some famed cavalry
charges in the colonies and later chasing the Boers of South Africa on horses
etc. early in World War One the cavalry had to relearn the lessons of The Crimea.
These Pathe News clips from the 1930's tell us that the romantic notion
of horsed cavalry was still in the public mind and in the media. The first,
less than one minute, rejoices that the Royal Scots Greys will not be
mechanised. This is November1937 and the Secretary of State For War was Leslie
Hore-Belisha, see Wikipedia, a politician to his finger tips. He and the
Generals did not get on well.
The next clip
from 1930 is a couple of minutes of fancy horse display, musical riding once a
useful form of training for movement in antique battle. A hard act to follow,
largely because of the expense, it needed the taxpayer to pay for that one.
Sixty odd
years ago I had dealings with tanks. Their officers were still attracted to
horses, the training manoeuvres had to be timed to fit in with the various
point to point fixtures. I think many of them still thought that we would be
better off using horses against the Third Soviet Shock Army.
But they may
have been right. Our old Centurion tanks were in poor condition, I handled the
returns on tank states sent to the War Box. The new Conqueror ones we were
being given were shockers. Over weight for power and tracks, under gunned death
traps their drivers alleged that they broke down when any of the crew broke
wind, a common feature of life in the tanks.
What is
consistent through time is the support cost of both horses and tanks,
especially the tanks. You do not see this in the public domain, it is there but
overshadowed by the image of the machine and what they can do. Keeping them
going and being able to function demands major back-up, repair, immediate
spares and parts availability and a horde of highly trained mechanics with top
grade management systems.
But just as
tanks have been modernised and equipped to keep up to date so has anti-tank
artillery, also now with modern systems and in our 21st Century world devices
such as drones. This means that tanks
may be valuable against low grade opposition that is without such weaponry but
against high grade opponents they could be more of a liability than an asset.
It is possible
that a proper cost benefit analysis might well find that they are not a good
option, in fact the age of the tanks and cavalry in wars between major powers
is over.
Where might
Russia's tanks be best used in that case?
Perhaps The
Crimea?
"...tanks may be valuable against low grade opposition..."
ReplyDeleteReminds me of this for some reason.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U90dnUbZMmM
What instead of tanks?
ReplyDeleteAn infantry mans shirt is more vulnerable that any tank.
And tanks quell fractious civilians rather well.