Britain’s Challenger 3 prototypes are entering trials while our military prepares to replace its tank-led force in Estonia with a mobile anti-armour formation. It looks contradictory. But neither development persuades me that the tank has had its day.
Ukraine has certainly changed the battlefield. Cheap drones destroying expensive armoured vehicles make compelling viewing, and we have become rather mesmerised by them. Yet the conclusion that tanks are therefore obsolete runs well ahead of the evidence.
Armed drones developed into what I call a “threat vacuum”, with few natural predators. That vacuum is now filling with counter-drone systems. Drones will remain part of warfare, but armies still need mobile, protected firepower to close with the enemy.
As a former tank soldier, I understand the accusation of bias. Nevertheless, my judgement is that the tank retains a role, provided it has the protection and supporting forces required to survive.
Estonia reflects Britain’s circumstances. Our tank fleet is small and shrinking. Allies such as Poland and Germany are better placed to provide armoured mass. A British force built around drones and anti-tank weapons may be easier and cheaper to sustain.
The Challenger 2s involved might also be needed for conversion to Challenger 3, although I cannot confirm that. We should avoid treating their withdrawal as a verdict on armoured warfare.
The bigger lesson is that mass matters. You need a lot of stuff to fight a war. Buying ever smaller numbers of exquisitely engineered vehicles risks leaving an army with impressive individual machines and insufficient strength.
Challenger 3 will improve on its predecessor. Its armour will be better and, in my opinion, its gun substantially better. We argued for adopting the German smoothbore cannon when I worked in the Ministry of Defence in 1986. Progress has taken decades.
Protection raises questions, too. My understanding is that 60 active-protection systems have been ordered for 148 planned tanks. What happens to the remaining 88 if they must deploy into conflict?
Ultimately, survival requires combined arms. I would want dispersed operations, reliable vehicles, local air superiority, artillery, infantry, engineers and air defence. Ukraine has demonstrated how demanding that combination is in practice.
The tank’s obituary remains premature. Britain must now ensure it can field tanks in sufficient numbers, protect them properly and provide the support that makes them effective.
Lt Col Stuart Crawford is a defence analyst and former army officer. Sign up for his podcasts and newsletters at www.DefenceReview.uk
Lt Col Stuart Crawford’s latest book Tank Commander (Hardback) is available now
- http://www.DefenceReview.UK
- @peoplemattertv
- @509298
Discover more from PeopleMatter.TV
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.