Re: General Discussions
Reply #735 –
As the 'Art of War' develops we see that previously very effective 'weapons' and tactics are often bypassed by new and more effective equipment or strategies.
Lines of troops in tightly packed formations would have been cut to pieces during WW1
Cavalry is another example and pretty much lost it's impact during WW1.
Trench warfare wouldn't have worked too well in WWW2
As the fighting in Ukraine has shown us. there are things you wouldn't want to be 'sitting in' during the next major conflict-
A: Tanks
B: Most surface warships
It depends on the tanks Lods. State of the art tanks, like our Abrams and most NATO tanks, have sophisticated anti-missile systems. Most Russian tanks rely on explosive-reactive armour and that isn’t effective against smart missiles. Of course, a brave person with a Molotov cocktail and a lot of luck can still take out a modern tank.
It’s much the same with ships; those with state of the art weapons systems should be relatively immune from missile strike.
Moskva is over 40 years old and, while it will have been upgraded, would still have had analog systems.
The closest thing we have to the Moskva are our three guided missile destroyers, all of which were commissioned within the last 4-5 years.
I suppose one factor Putin’s strategists got wrong was how quickly the West would re-arm Ukraine with sophisticated weapons systems.