Drones' edge over tanks only temporary

Lt Gen KJ Singh (retd)

Extremely high attrition unleashed by drones on tanks in recent conflicts in Ukraine and Azerbaijan has triggered a serious debate on continued primacy of this platform, which had been used in all major wars in the past century.

Armed drones like Bayraktar generated out of proportion, disruptive effect against tanks, which have been militarily, viewed as the ultimate weapon in land warfare. Like the proverbial David and Goliath analogy, limitations of invincible tanks have been exposed by much cheaper drones.Yet, it may be premature to write an obituary to the tank.

Militaries have shown remarkable resilience and used tanks in Ukraine and in Gaza with what are called “strap-on” protective kits used to ward off drones.

In an Indian context, tanks were in vanguard of preventive occupation of Kailash ranges along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in September 2020. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) was shocked at seeing tanks at those 14,000-plus ft altitude.

The Indian Army is engaged in fast-track development of a light tank, “Zorawar”. It is imperative to carry out an objective appraisal of efficacy of tanks as a fighting platform and examine their continued relevance, especially in the battlefield environment in which the Army operates.

Evolution of tank design philosophy

Tanks made an appearance in 1916 in the Battle of Somme during the World War I and were heralded as game-changers, breaking the logjam of static trench warfare. The success of tanks has spawned movies giving it what would be a Rambo-type image.

The large fleet of armoured fighting vehicles (AFVs) — Russia 12,000, US 6,300, China 5,900, India 4,300 and Pakistan 2,500 — is a proof of proliferation, backed-up by proven combat trackrecord. Over the years, tank designing has remained complex interplay of optimising mobility, firepower and protection, increasingly referred to as agility, lethality and survivability respectively. Different countries have accorded varying importance to key parameters. Germany’s Leopard tanks highlights agility, whereas Merkava of Israel accords primacy to survivability, its additional weight curtails agility.

Russian and Chinese tanks follow the evolutionary approach of incremental up-gradations. To curtail weight and reduce silhouette, these compromise auto-loader and stowing ammunition in crew compartment. The Western tanks, stow ammunition in separate carousels insulating the crew against damages.

The Russian model has resulted in horrific incidents of turrets getting yanked-off and ammunition infernos within the crew compartments. In a quest to maximise ranges, designers have sought to boost gun calibre and currently are at 125mm and have added missile launchers. Optronics like night visiondevices, range finders and battle-field management system have added to the burgeoning costs.

Proliferation of anti-tank threat

The low-cost weapons used against tanks are changing warfare. The armour protection suite on tanks is based on probability of hits, derived from empirical studies like directional probability and simulation. Over the years, frontal arc around gun has got fortified and consequently top of turret, left with just the nominal protection.

Anti-tank weapons have exploited this very vulnerability through the new “top-attack mode” of targeting. A modern tank costs Rs 75-80 crore, whereas a drone around Rs 40 lakh.

The Yom-Kippur War in 1973 witnessed the introduction of wire-guided, first-generation, Russian Malyutka (AT-3 Sagger) missiles as a cost effective, anti-tank weapon system. This was further honed by Hezbollah against the mighty Merkava-4M tanks in 2006 in Southern Lebanon. At least 52 such platforms, each costing $2.5 million were disabled by Kornet missiles/rockets costing just $900. With cost differential and relative ease of operation, it is possible to saturate the battlefield with an array of anti-tank weapons like mines, shoulder-fired rockets, missiles and drones.

Countering these armoured fighting vehicles have sought to boost their protection by improvising tank urban survival kit (TUSK) and built-up area survival kit (BUSK). It incorporates cage-like structure based on the armour. AFVs also incorporate

Explosive reactive armour (ERA) panels, which disrupt penetrative jets of high explosive anti-tank (HEAT) attack by missiles and drones. Expensive automated active protection system (APS) like ARENA, Shtora and Trophy are being incorporated to detect and degrade threats. It would be seen that like the cat-and-mouse game, every new disruptive effect or weapon triggers an anti-dote.

The asymmetrical advantage like the current one in favour of drones is only temporary, till it is offset by an effective counter.

Way forward in Indian context

Employment of tanks or AFVs is based on the basic paradigms. Firstly, operating as part of combined arms teams, secondly, dispersion and thirdly, inexorable manoeuvre. Losses in recent conflicts have been due to disregarding of these factors coupled with marked lack of motivation of crews. Our terrain profile, large open deserts and plains on Western borders, coupled with plateaus in stretches of the Sino-Indian borders provide ample opportunities for mechanised forces.

Drones have limited efficacy in high altitude terrain. This apart, our adversaries have large fleet of similar Russian derivative tanks. Recently, China fielded light tanks ZTQ-15, which have been ordered by Bangladesh also. Above all, our crews have unmatched track-record despite asymmetry of equipment against us in various conflicts. In sum, tanks used in combined arms mode and skillfully employed will remain force multipliers in our context.

The writer is a former Western Army Commander

Join Whatsapp Channel of The Tribune for latest updates.

#Ukraine