Comments by "Mike Armstrong" (@mikearmstrong8483) on "Panther 2.0; The Rheinmetall KF 51 Next Gen MBT" video.

Knights in armor went out when something better for the role was found to replace them, a guy with a harquebus. Battleships went out when something better for the role was found to replace them, the aircraft carrier. Tanks will go out when something better for the role is found to replace them. Something with high cross country mobility, armored protection, and heavy caliber firepower. Hmmm..........just sounds like a better tank.
35
Trained, ok. Able to do so in combat is a different matter. This isn't talking about replacing a crewman in his own position to do his job. That sort of cross training has been standard among many armies for a long time. This is talking about the ability to switch crew functions without switching crew positions, such as allowing the driver to aim and fire the gun while still in his driver's seat, or allowing the commander to drive the tank from the turret. That is a whole new concept.
6
@rogerpennel1798 And your comment about me believing there is no invasion is just irrelevant hyperbole. That had nothing to do with my response. Practice your reading comprehension. Discussion over.
4
@GoldMoonGuy If you mean some sort of armored powered exoskeleton type thing, it's not going to happen except in video games. Because the only way to resist the guns already in use is to put on so much armor that you need a large tracked chassis to carry the weight. If something like those mech suits from Avatar tried to get on a battlefield today, a platoon of Abrams would blow the actual almighty ** out of them.
3
@GoldMoonGuy I thought you were serious because there are some limited circumstances where such gear would be better than a tank, and because they are already under development.
3
Videos out of Ukraine cannot be trusted to provide any useful analysis of the situation. They are all edited to show whatever point the producer wants to make depending on their own political affiliation. As an example, I saw a widely distributed video showing a Ukranian missile crew ambushing a Russian tank, with the latter stopping dead and pouring out smoke, presumably a good kill. The point being made that missiles are the ultimate silver bullet, Ukranians are bad ass, blah, blah, blah. I have since seen a longer unedited version of the same video that shows the same damaged tank immediately starting up again and moving away from the kill zone, while the rest of the column deploys in seconds and starts pouring accurate fire into the missile crew's position.
3
@GreatPolishWingedHussars Then the term ethos fits. It describes their ideology. It doesn't have to be positive to maintain its definition.
1
@GreatPolishWingedHussars Wrong! Look up the definition. It is the characteristic spirit of a culture. There is no requirement that it has to be positive.
1
@rob5944 Well, better than flogging a live one! 😉
1
@GreatPolishWingedHussars Ok, we all acknowledge that you are the ultimate arbitrator of the English language and that actual definitions by linguists are irrelevant compared to your personal opinion. Happy now?
1
@GreatPolishWingedHussars There are still too many people like that. The nazis deserved to be eradicated. Their ideals were completely wrong. But that doesn't mean all the German people.
1
@rogerpennel1798 Of course not; analysis by various means shows that Russia is not succeeding as planned. I'm saying no one should rely on videos that they are seeing at home as a source of real information about this conflict, because the vast majority are not telling the whole truth; they are only showing the selected parts that someone wants to present as the big picture.
1
@rogerpennel1798 Ok, I'll grant you that; there are indeed many characters whose opinions aren't worth the miniscule server space their comments take. And I was probably a little harsh in my response in that regard. Edit: your comment doesn't seem to be showing up in the thread, probably due to its reference to a wig-wearing ex president. But I got to read it in my notification, and I agree on that point.
1
@burningphoneix A tank unit quickly reacting to an ambush with return fire, without calling artillery or deploying infantry support, is not using combined arms tactics. And that was the content of the video. Of course combined arms are much better, but my original point still stands: don't believe everything you see coming out of Ukraine. Because obviously the Ukranians are going to be releasing more videos than the Russians who are denying they are invading, and they are going to show Ukranian successes. They don't want anyone to see: "Look, our heroic defenders fired a missile, but it didn't kill the tank right away, and they got shot to shit in return."
1