They certainly play their part in less well equipped armies, and can prove to be a deadly weapon, so no, they are most certainly not useless.
super6-4ive seen videos from iraq made by the insurgents of them shooting RPg's at convoys, the one was a big close up, i mean right down the alley to a street then a bradley passed by and boom, i pretty sure it kept going, never new the end result, big humvees would most likey definately be hammered
Insurgents aren't exactly the most honorable..
KnippschildInsurgents aren't exactly the most honorable..
There is nothing honorabale about warfare paticularly guerilla warfare.
Against APCs that are not protected from HEAT charges, they work just fine. Heck, as a cheap AT weapon they are pretty damn good.
No, they have no place anymore in a true tanker's battlefield. But on one dominated by APCs and infantry, they work just fine.
I have to agree with USMA there.
Well, I think tanks are becoming useless, and will be replaced with Stryker type vehicles within a couple decades. Therefore RPGs will be useful for quite some time.
7th December 2003
They are very cheap and effective unless someone tries to use them against modern armor.
I few days ago I saw a video about a new technology, some kind of force-field that is supposed to destroy RPGs before impact.
Here's the video:http://www.zerosign.net/index.php/2006/04/09/us-military-deploys-force-field/ Yeah I know, it's Fox-news, but they wouldn't make something like this up, or would they?
Well, Aero, virtually every major military seems to disagree with you. Perhaps tanks with personell carrying abilities such as the Merkava IV will become standard, but the tank itself is here to stay.
Since RPG doesnt stand for Rocket Probeled Grenade, then no...
An RPG can be many things,Ruchnoy Protivotankovy Granatomyot / handheld antitank grenade-launcher, then its still in developing... heres the newest child in the family
USMA2010Well, Aero, virtually every major military seems to disagree with you. Perhaps tanks with personell carrying abilities such as the Merkava IV will become standard, but the tank itself is here to stay.
Sure, right now the tank is going to stay, but it will be faded out.
You see, this is how I see it. Large formations are becoming more and more outdated. They take time to move around and use up too much resources. That is why these BUoA (Brigade Unit of Action) teams are being made. They increase the speed at which the unit can be put on the battlefield and increase unit cohesion. Today's wars are all about how fast you get to your destination and cohesion. Tanks only hinder speed. Plus, tanks cannot be transported by smaller cargo planes, they are generally transfered by sea. Smaller APCs, Strykers, and the like can be quicky flown into the war.
No major countries seem to be on the verge of war, and terrorists seem to be the main enemy. And, Tanks don't seem to be the best way to chase terrorists. Spec Ops and small units are.
So, that's why I think tanks are going to be faded out and APCs and light vehicles will take over, especially since they don't cost as much. What would you rather loose, a stryker or an m1? A styker of course, it costs much less. I wouldn't want some renegades with RPGs popping out of a window and knocking out M1s left and right. Atleast you save money.
Besides, the military is always behind in updating weaponry. We actually used horses upto before WWII started (hell, other countries besides the US used horses in WWII.) North Korea pwned us at the start of the korean war since we didn't have the jets to take out the migs. We were still using propellar driven bombers... come on.