Search Results
7/13/2025, 1:04:26 AM
lmao top kek
>An example of how the US Army, which has never personally encountered FPV drones, is trying to remotely comprehend a new threat through recommendations.
>Thus, in the new US Army Tank Platoon Tactics Manual for July 2025, in the event of an enemy UAV being detected on the march, it is prescribed:
>The commander leaning out of the hatch must signal other crews with hand waves about the presence of a UAV threat;
>Tank crew members close the hatches, with the exception of the commander;
>The tank commander passes the information to the command above and orders the platoon to line up in a herringbone formation.
To counter a drone attack, the manual suggests that tankers open fire from the main 120-mm gun with M1028 shrapnel shells and machine guns. How the authors of this manual imagine this is a mystery.
>Now to the point - this is simply non-working nonsense.
>From the visual detection of a drone to its impact on a tank will take a few seconds, no specially approved hand passes or special tank formations will help. Moreover, attempts to shoot drones with buckshot at point-blank range may look attractive from high offices, but again, in practice, due to the small size of drones and their ability to approach a target from any hemisphere, such tactics are nothing more than fantasy and shooting a cannon at sparrows.
>As for the formation with each crew monitoring its sector, this is again a speculative fantasy. Drones approaching from above do not care where the tank's gun is pointing, while in modern combat conditions, only a small narrow track is often free of mines, an attempt to move off which to the side to "become a Christmas tree" will simply lead to the explosion of the entire tank platoon.
>These recommendations can help only when a tank platoon is attacked in open reconnaissance terrain by a single slow-moving drone, detected in advance and from afar. But not by dozens of FPV drones simultaneously in rough terrain with minefields.
>An example of how the US Army, which has never personally encountered FPV drones, is trying to remotely comprehend a new threat through recommendations.
>Thus, in the new US Army Tank Platoon Tactics Manual for July 2025, in the event of an enemy UAV being detected on the march, it is prescribed:
>The commander leaning out of the hatch must signal other crews with hand waves about the presence of a UAV threat;
>Tank crew members close the hatches, with the exception of the commander;
>The tank commander passes the information to the command above and orders the platoon to line up in a herringbone formation.
To counter a drone attack, the manual suggests that tankers open fire from the main 120-mm gun with M1028 shrapnel shells and machine guns. How the authors of this manual imagine this is a mystery.
>Now to the point - this is simply non-working nonsense.
>From the visual detection of a drone to its impact on a tank will take a few seconds, no specially approved hand passes or special tank formations will help. Moreover, attempts to shoot drones with buckshot at point-blank range may look attractive from high offices, but again, in practice, due to the small size of drones and their ability to approach a target from any hemisphere, such tactics are nothing more than fantasy and shooting a cannon at sparrows.
>As for the formation with each crew monitoring its sector, this is again a speculative fantasy. Drones approaching from above do not care where the tank's gun is pointing, while in modern combat conditions, only a small narrow track is often free of mines, an attempt to move off which to the side to "become a Christmas tree" will simply lead to the explosion of the entire tank platoon.
>These recommendations can help only when a tank platoon is attacked in open reconnaissance terrain by a single slow-moving drone, detected in advance and from afar. But not by dozens of FPV drones simultaneously in rough terrain with minefields.
Page 1