Infantry or Tanks - Which Should Lead An Attack?

Comments · 954

• TH

  @thehaloguy117 · 8 years ago

  Their front armour is thickest at the front - Matsimus 2017

  664

• CO

  @connorquerin · 9 years ago

  Here&apos;s the correct answer without watching the twenty minute video: It depends on the situation!<br><br>Excellent video nonetheless mate.

  835

• DA

  @daljiba · 9 years ago

  when it was victory <br>Cavalry claimed it out right<br>Gunner boasted of it calibre<br>infantryman stood silent with victory at his feet<br>__ Fd Marshal Wavell

  95

• TH

  @theoshorthouse3945 · 9 years ago

  Its simple tanks go first in open terrain and infantry in close quarter/urban to clear the way of concealed threats.

  137

• WE

  @weissjaeger2018 · 9 years ago

  Anime girls with ancient Japanese warships spirit

  237

• MO

  @MotokoTai · 9 years ago

  In an urban enviroment , infanrty first in my opinon

  116

• AG

  @AgrippaMaxentius · 9 years ago (edited)

  Depends, scout infantry should keep an eye out for enemies ahead of tanks particularly in modern warfare situations. Although at the same time Hollywood seems to always portray armor up first, as seen in films like &quot;Fury&quot; tanks should always support infantry only unless you&apos;re in a wide open field. Obviously Hollywood films rarely get it right, with tanks way out in the open like sitting ducks

  322

• MI

  @mississippirebel1409 · 7 years ago

  From my 10 plus years in the US army, it really isn&apos;t practical for infantry to perform the role of a MBTs. Think of it this way, a MBT is just a bunker on tracks with a large cannon that can fire a lot of different rounds from anti armor and HEP rounds. A infantry platoon or company cannot carry anywhere near that kind of firepower. Yes they have a few anti tank weapons, but they can&apos;t carry that many and those types of weapons are far to expensive to waste, whereas a tank round doesn&apos;t cost nearly as much and can fire a lot of rounds very fast. Tanks are great at taking a position, just not very good at holding them. That is were infantry come into play.<br><br>Also you have to take into consideration what the target is and the terrain when deciding who will lead. In a built up enviroment, infantry should normally lead the way by clearing each structure, but in a more open enviroment, the tank should always lead and the infantry should provide security for the tanks.<br><br>That is as simple as I can explain it for all you civilians. Tanks such as the Abrams have very powerful and advance sensors and optics, so they can detect and spot targets from a very long range in eithe day or night and in any kind of weather. Normally infantry won&apos;t have that kind of advantage. Also you would be very suprised at how quite and fast an Abrams is. It will be up on you before you realize what the hell is going on. Sometimes it can be harder than you think to tell in which direction a tank is coming from, depending on what kind of terrain and enviroment you are in.

  123

• CA

  @Capitanvolume · 7 years ago

  An officer with a whistle and sword should obviously lead.

  19

• DA

  @danielaramburo7648 · 5 years ago

  The tank is not only useful, but it will boost the morale of the soldiers. Going into combat with a giant tank on your side next to you is very comforting.

  10

• ST

  @Stormgebieder · 9 years ago

  Reminds me on that scene in &quot;A Bridge Too Far&quot; where after the conquering of a bridge the tanks stopped &nbsp;their advance because of lack of infantry support.

  50

• TA

  @tankninja1 · 9 years ago

  Not much has really changed since WWII. In restrictive terrain infantry will lead the way since the infantry can clear all the little nooks and crannies the armor can&apos;t reach. But in wide open fields and deserts armor will lead the way since infantry can&apos;t hide nearly as well. Plus NATO has a lot of aerial assets available relative to a lot of individual countries that makes setting up good AT positions difficult.

  19