tanks

1. Design and development

Tracked Armoured Fighting Vehicles (AFVs, called tanks by the British) were first used in battle in 1916 as a weapon system incorporating firepower (two 57 mm./2.2 in. guns plus machine-guns), protection (10 mm./.39 in. armour plate) and mobility (a 105 hp engine driving endless tracks to give a maximum speed of 6.4 kph/4 mph across country and obstacles). But after the First World War the original British 28-ton, rhomboid tanks were replaced by lighter types armed with anti-tank guns up to 50 mm. (1.95 in.) calibre mounted in revolving turrets, with 14 to 20 mm. (.54 to .78 in.) homogenous steel armour, speeds up to 29 kph (18 mph), and marginally improved mechanical reliability. Most were modelled on the Vickers Medium of 1922 and were similar in layout to Second World War tanks (see table for principal types).

Experiments in tank warfare during the 1920s and 1930s centred on infantry support tactics, long-range so-called independent operations, and tank versus tank action, all controlled by radio communications. The first role called for ‘infantry tanks’, proof against existing anti-tank weapons but slower than those for the second role which demanded tanks with lighter armour and a wide radius of action. The size of anti-tank weapon dictated a tank's size—the bigger the gun, the larger the turret; therefore the heavier the vehicle and the more powerful the engine. But increased complexity in search of a universal machine, capable of fulfilling all roles, only placed extreme demands on technical feasibility and manufacturing capacity—as well as cost when governments were insisting upon cheapness. Compromise ruled.

British and French tanks in 1939 were either very light (up to 10 tons), fast, and machine-gun armed; slower 20-ton mediums with light armour and an anti-tank gun; and very slow 30-ton machines armoured against 37 mm. (1.44 in.) high velocity (HV) guns. The Germans also built light tanks but no heavies yet; instead their mediums, the Mark III with a 37 mm. gun and Mark IV with a short 75 mm. (2.9 in.) piece firing only shells and smoke, had only 30 mm. (1.17 in.) armour, or less, compared with opponents up to 60 mm. (2.34 in.). The Soviets, on the other hand, built light and heavy tanks (mostly based on British Vickers designs) and 48 kph (30 mph) mediums based on the designs of the American J. Walter Christie (whom the British also copied for one of their medium types, the so-called cruiser tanks). Both the Japanese and Italians were influenced by pre-war Vickers designs and concentrated on infantry support vehicles which, in due course, fell well below the standards of other major combatants in all respects.

After gaining experience in the battles of 1940, the Germans and British accelerated the classic gun versus armour contest. The first German reaction was to equip their infantry, instead of tanks, with the improved 50 mm. anti-tank gun. The British aimed to mount 57 mm. guns and also fit 80 mm. (3.1 in.) armour to their newest medium tanks. The Soviets meanwhile, in great secrecy, produced in quantity in 1941 two revolutionary models—the 43-ton KV 1B, with 110 mm. (4.3 in.) armour, and the 26-ton Christie medium T34/76A with 45 mm. (1.75 in.) sloped armour. The former was proof against the German 88 mm. (3.4 in.) dual-purpose gun and both were armed with the dual-purpose 76 mm. (2.9 in.) gun. These tanks shook the Germans into emergency up-armouring and arming of their Mark III and IV mediums, and hastening the design and production of the 56-ton Tiger I Tank, with 88 mm. gun, and the 45-ton Panther with an extra-long 75 mm. gun.

Tanks: Armoured fighting vehicles, 1939-45

2. Tank warfare

Tracked Armoured Fighting Vehicles (AFVs) made their battle debut in September 1916 during the First World War. At first they were used as auxiliaries to infantry, operating within the limits of their slow speed, short range, and poor mech anical reliability. But as improvements were made Colonel J. F. C. Fuller of the British Tank Corps advanced ideas for penetration in depth of the enemy lines by armoured forces, supported by aircraft: a concept he expanded in his celebrated Plans 1918 and 1919 which were blueprints for blitzkrieg (see also land power).

In the 1920s, while most armies regarded AFVs as infantry adjuncts alone, the British experimented with the so-called ‘independent’ role of all-arms mechanized forces, in which the tank was the dominant weapon and from which horses were excluded. In the 1930s, while the French and the Soviets were forming mixed divisions either for infantry support or in the traditional cavalry roles of reconnaissance and exploitation of success, the Germans (inspired by Guderian) copied the British by creating armoured (Panzer) divisions. Armoured divisions were organized for all phases of land warfare—reconnaissance, advance to contact, attack, exploitation, defence, and withdrawal by day and night. Ideally, their combat vehicles were to be fully armoured, although this, for economic and industrial reasons, was never achieved. Essentially, however, their flexibility and ability to concentrate rapidly against decisive points, was dependent upon efficient radio communications enabling fluent command and control with maximum economy.

Tank tactics at their most sophisticated, under Guderian's tutelage, revolved around close co-operation by tanks, armoured cars, infantry, artillery, and engineers within ad hoc battle groups, supported by aircraft. After careful reconnaissance they would seek out and attack the opposing side's weak spots to occupy vital ground. This ground they would then hold with infantry and anti-tank weapons as a pivot for further offensive action. Although most tanks were armed for tank versus tank combat, it was hoped to provoke the opposing side into expending tanks against the pivot's anti-tank guns. This conserved the more valuable tanks to spearhead thrusts into their opponents' rear with mobile columns, logistically self-contained for three or four days, which were aimed at strategic and politically sensitive objectives.

In the Polish campaign of September 1939 these methods proved themselves, although the Germans found (as the British and French had realized when providing special infantry support tanks) that the ordinary infantry divisions needed AFVs to stiffen their offensive spirit. Prior to the German invasion of western Europe in May 1940 (see FALL GELB), therefore, a number of armoured assault guns (self-propelled guns) were produced for infantry support—with a significant outcome. For thereafter assault guns, with tanks, played a dominant role in tank warfare, particularly in tank versus tank combat as far larger, high velocity guns were needed to defeat improved armour in the classic gun versus armour race.

Tank warfare dominated campaigns in open terrain—in western Europe, the Eastern Front, the Western Desert, and North Africa—where freedom of movement was least impeded and static defences were easily outflanked and logistical support relatively easy to sustain. It was also effective in the mountains during the Balkan campaign in 1941 when the Yugoslavs, Greeks, and British were hopelessly outclassed. The tank thrived against smaller opponents, even in defensively favourable surroundings, but this superiority tended to diminish once forces of rough equality were pitted against each other in built-up areas, such as Stalingrad, or in adverse terrain.

As the Axis forces lost the initiative after 1942, and their initial offensive superiority was eroded, they developed highly effective anti-tank defences. These were founded upon the maximum utilization of employing counter-strokes within a framework of strategically located static defences keyed to natural or man-made obstacles. The laying of mines, to delay tanks and channel them into killing zones dominated by artillery and anti-tank guns, meant expensive and time-consuming Allied set-piece attacks by all arms; and attacks also frequently needed specialized AFVs to create gaps in minefields, cross water obstacles, and demolish obstructions and strong points (see engineers, 1(d)).

Having at last refined the blitzkrieg technique, the Allies were frequently compelled to indulge in attritional warfare to wear down their opponents' tank and logistical strength before achieving the breakthrough and thrusting enormous armoured forces deep into their opponents' rear. The second battle of El Alamein, successive Soviet offensives from Stalingrad onwards, and the latter phase of the Normandy campaign are outstanding examples of tank warfare in the modern style—offensives which as often as not were halted more by logistical factors (notably fuel shortage) than by force of arms.

Notwithstanding the magnetic drama of massed armoured forces in motion, the effects of small groups or even individual tanks in special situations must not be overlooked. On narrow frontages, such as the jungle trails of Burma, the effect of a single tank pushed forward by immense engineer effort, could be as decisive as a regiment of 60 tanks in a European setting. Regardless of improved anti-tank measures, the mobility, firepower, and protection of tanks, regardless of numbers, was as potent in 1945 as in 1939.

Kenneth Macksey

Bibliography

Macksey, K. , Tank versus Tank (London, 1991).
—— Guderian (London, 1992).
Orgorkiewicz, R. , Armour (London, 1960).

military tank armored vehicle having caterpillar traction and armed with machine guns, cannon, rockets, or flame throwers. The tank, together with the airplane, opened up modern warfare, which had been immobilized and stalemated by the use of rifled guns (see mechanized warfare ). It was developed by the British and first employed in World War I in the battle of Flers-Courcellette, on the Somme (Sept., 1916), but it was used piecemeal, without any overriding strategy, and seemed a failure. In Nov., 1917, the tank achieved a major success at Cambrai, when 300 British tanks made a dawn attack on a 6-mi (9.7-km) front and shattered the German defenses.

Before World War II tanks and tank tactics were greatly improved, and in the first campaign of that war German tank armies conquered Poland in less than a month. Whole armored divisions and corps of tanks were soon formed on both sides. In mass tank battles in Europe and N Africa the tide often tended toward the side with the most effective use of armored units. Among the great armor commanders were Erwin Rommel and George Patton . There were also specialized tanks for amphibious landings and clearing mines. Antitank weapons were developed, such as bazookas, armor-piercing shells, recoilless rifles, and antitank missiles, as well as airplanes armed with rockets and bombs.

Since World War II the basic features of tanks and tank tactics have remained unchanged, but there have been refinements such as reactive armor that explodes out when hit, laser rangefinders, automatic loading, and computer systems for fire control and navigation. Antitank weapons have also been greatly improved; they now include specialized munitions capable of attacking dozens of tanks at once that are delivered by artillery or aircraft, as well as powerful infantry weapons. Tanks are particularly effective in desert fighting, as demonstrated by their use by the Israeli military and in the Persian Gulf War .

Bibliography: See B. H. Liddell Hart, The Tanks (1959); D. Orgill, The Tank (1970); H. C. B. Rogers, Tanks in Battle (1972); D. Jeffries, Battle Kings (1987); P. Wright, Tank (2002).

tank / tangk/ • n. 1. a large receptacle or storage chamber, esp. for liquid or gas. ∎  the container holding the fuel supply in a motor vehicle. ∎  a receptacle with transparent sides in which to keep fish; an aquarium. 2. a heavy armored fighting vehicle carrying guns and moving on a continuous articulated metal track. 3. inf. a cell in a police station or jail. • v. 1. [intr.] fill the tank of a vehicle with fuel: the cars stopped to tank up. ∎  (be/get tanked up) inf. drink heavily; become drunk: they get tanked up before the game. 2. [intr.] inf. fail completely, esp. at great financial cost. ∎  [tr.] inf. (in sports) deliberately lose or fail to finish (a game): the lackluster performance prompted speculation that he tanked the second set. DERIVATIVES: tank·ful / -ˌfoŏl/ n. (pl. -fuls) . tank·less adj.

tank

tank Tracked, armoured vehicle mounting a single primary weapon, usually an artillery piece, and one or more machine guns. Modern tanks have an enclosed, fully revolving turret and are heavily armoured; main battle tanks weigh from 35 to 50 tonnes and usually have a crew of four. Developed in great secrecy by the British during World War I, tanks were first employed at the Battle of the Somme (1916).

tank1 in India, reservoir or water for irrigation, etc.; artificial receptacle for liquids in large quantities. XVII. — Indian vernacular word such as Gujarati ṭākū, Marathi ṭākē.
Hence tanker vessel for conveying oil. XX.

tank n. a heavy armored fighting vehicle carrying guns and moving on a continuous articulated metal track.
from the use of tank as a secret code word during manufacture in 1915.

tank2 armoured military vehicle. XX.
So named for reasons of secrecy.

tank •ankh, bank, blank, clank, crank, dank, drank, embank, flank, franc, frank, hank, lank, outflank, outrank, Planck, plank, point-blank, prank, rank, sank, shank, shrank, spank, stank, swank, tank, thank, wank, yank •sandbank • piggy bank • mountebank •fog bank • mudbank • Bundesbank •databank • riverbank • Burbank •greenshank • sheepshank •scrimshank • Cruikshank •think tank • Franck • Eysenck •bethink, blink, brink, chink, cinque, clink, dink, drink, fink, Frink, gink, ink, interlink, jink, kink, link, mink, pink, plink, prink, rink, shrink, sink, skink, slink, stink, sync, think, wink, zinc •rinky-dink • Humperdinck • iceblink •cufflink • bobolink • Maeterlinck •lip-sync • countersink • doublethink •kiddiewink •tiddlywink (US tiddledywink) •hoodwink