# why do we not use drone tanks? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [January 27, 2016, 12:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-not-use-drone-tanks/744326 "2016-01-27T00:46:34Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 19\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![coremelt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/4491bb/32.png) [@coremelt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/coremelt)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2016, 5:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-not-use-drone-tanks/744326/21 "2016-01-27T05:04:31Z")
> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > You don’t “hold territory” with tanks, either. Tanks are a forward offensive weapon (direct artillery) which requires substantial logistical support (fuel, ammunition) to operate for any significant period and distance. Yes, but in my very first post I made clear they would need to be accompanied by friendly infantry to refuel and rearm them. Its a lot simpler to train whichever locals we’re trying to help out to refuel, rearm and fix a thrown track than it is to give them tanks and train them as tank squads. And you don’t run the risk of them deciding to defect and take the tank with them. Theres no reason that drone tanks can’t also have their comms routed up to a satellite to make jamming harder, or even better use a short distance directional local link to a portable comms sat dish thats behind the enemy lines and out of the line of fire. Get the local friendly infantry to advance it as the front moves forward. ---
**Author:** ![Atamasama](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/atamasama/32/12961_2.png) [@Atamasama](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Atamasama)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2016, 7:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-not-use-drone-tanks/744326/22 "2016-01-27T07:08:35Z")
I can’t think of an advantage a tank has over something that can move much faster in the air. We probably develop drones that fly instead of drone tanks for the same reason drones have guns and missiles instead of swords and saw blades. They’re just objectively better. ---
**Author:** ![coremelt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/4491bb/32.png) [@coremelt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/coremelt)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2016, 7:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-not-use-drone-tanks/744326/23 "2016-01-27T07:23:59Z")
> [@Atamasama](#): > > I can’t think of an advantage a tank has over something that can move much faster in the air. Why do we still use manned tanks in warfare when we have planes and helicopters? Same reasons apply to an drone tank. ---
**Author:** ![Urbanredneck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ea5d25/32.png) [@Urbanredneck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Urbanredneck)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2016, 8:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-not-use-drone-tanks/744326/24 "2016-01-27T08:34:31Z")
In WW2 the Germans actually did try such a thing using them as a defense during dday. I dont think they worked though. ---
**Author:** ![coremelt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/4491bb/32.png) [@coremelt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/coremelt)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2016, 8:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-not-use-drone-tanks/744326/25 "2016-01-27T08:55:11Z")
> [@Urbanredneck](#): > > In WW2 the Germans actually did try such a thing using them as a defense during dday. I dont think they worked though. Technology has improved quite a bit since then 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Bear\_Nenno](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bear_nenno/32/3358_2.png) [@Bear\_Nenno](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bear_Nenno)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2016, 9:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-not-use-drone-tanks/744326/26 "2016-01-27T09:17:37Z")
> [@Xema](#): > > I don’t see why it would be hard to make that difficult - and seriously hazardous to anyone attempting it. Before getting that far, we should use that proposed technology to make it difficult and seriously hazardous to do against manned tanks. A tank, Bradley or Stryker driving slowly through a city is notoriously easy to get close to without being detected. The "solution" has been to have more soldiers exposed out of the hatches in order to look around and keep an eye out. I suppose this could be accomplished with a lot of extra cameras. But there would also need to be weapons pointed in every direction as well. What about kids or villagers running up just to steal valuable components off of the vehicle. Can we make the drone tank shoot them? The current solution to prevent villagers from stealing equipment and food off of tanks is to catch them before they do it, and get physical if necessary. We can't shoot them for theft. What options will the drone tank have? ---
**Author:** ![coremelt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/4491bb/32.png) [@coremelt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/coremelt)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2016, 10:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-not-use-drone-tanks/744326/27 "2016-01-27T10:04:28Z")
> [@Bear\_Nenno](#): > > What options will the drone tank have? The same as any other thank, because it would always be accompanied by friendly infantry. Especially in urban environments, you never ever send in armoured vehicles without infantry close behind. And if its advancing across the the open desert you don’t to worry too much about that. ---
**Author:** ![Bear\_Nenno](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bear_nenno/32/3358_2.png) [@Bear\_Nenno](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bear_Nenno)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2016, 10:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-not-use-drone-tanks/744326/28 "2016-01-27T10:17:04Z")
> [@coremelt](#): > > The same as any other thank, because it would always be accompanied by friendly infantry. Especially in urban environments, you never ever send in armoured vehicles without infantry close behind. What is the benefit, then? What you are suggesting is a way to support foreign fighters with tank support without risking _our_ soldiers’ lives, but still risking _theirs_?? There is a much simpler and cheaper way to do this: lend our allies some tanks. If they are going to have to support them with ground troops anyway, just give them normal tanks to use. What actual benefit do you expect to get from drone tanks? ---
**Author:** ![Atamasama](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/atamasama/32/12961_2.png) [@Atamasama](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Atamasama)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2016, 1:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-not-use-drone-tanks/744326/29 "2016-01-27T13:59:08Z")
> [@coremelt](#): > > Why do we still use manned tanks in warfare when we have planes and helicopters? > Same reasons apply to an drone tank. Tanks protect the people inside them. So should we put people inside drone tanks? ---
**Author:** ![HMS\_Irruncible](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hms_irruncible/32/7394_2.png) [@HMS\_Irruncible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HMS_Irruncible)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2016, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-not-use-drone-tanks/744326/30 "2016-01-27T14:26:41Z")
> [@coremelt](#): > > And drone self propelled artillery, drone light scout vehicles etc. I mean operator controlled, not autonomous ones. Seems to me they’d be not technologically that difficult to do and very useful in current asymmetric warfare. Rather than just air strikes in support of allies we could also have drone armoured units supported by allied infantry, without risking ground troops. Mainly because armor and field artillery are a lot less relevant than they used to be. As a generalization, everything worth automating is already being done by drone aircraft. ---
**Author:** ![TeknoRapture](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7feea3/32.png) [@TeknoRapture](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TeknoRapture)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2016, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-not-use-drone-tanks/744326/31 "2016-01-27T19:11:40Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > It’s tough (next best thing to impossible, if it’s done right) to crack good electronic security to do something extreme like take over the tank. However, it’s quite easy to jam the transmissions, or otherwise cut off its communications. In order for a tank to be effective, it needs to be able to respond appropriately in such situations, which means autonomous operation. We trust humans to operate a tank autonomously, but we do not trust computer programs to do so. I’m surprised this hasn’t been mentioned yet but there’s a Geneva convention requiring a human to at least be in the Firing Loop of any drone or automated system… ---
**Author:** ![casdave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c6cbf5/32.png) [@casdave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/casdave)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2016, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-not-use-drone-tanks/744326/32 "2016-01-27T20:24:18Z")
The thinking that first justified the development of pilotless aircraft does not apply in the same degree to tanks. Unmanned aircraft do not require the heavy, resource sapping equipment necessary to maintain human life. In addition, they would not be subject to the physical limitations of humans, such as G-force, long or frequent flights. This all brings potential benefits in weight reductions, far greater manoeuvrability and completely different protection schemes for vital parts. You have the ability to have a far smaller machine. Operational decisions can be made by a team, instead of overloading a single or dual pilot with masses of information from multiple sources. It is so much easier to ensure a survivable enclosure for a ground based weapons system such as a tank, weight is not nearly so much a problem, and taking humans out does not increase mobility, speed or manoeuvrability. The potential gains of unmanned tanks do not yet mitigate the benefit of removing the crew, and may well reduce its effectiveness. ---
**Author:** ![Ethilrist](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ethilrist/32/4604_2.png) [@Ethilrist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ethilrist)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2016, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-not-use-drone-tanks/744326/33 "2016-01-27T21:15:58Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > I’m guessing, though I don’t know, that if a UAV has all of its communications cut off, it’s programmed to turn around and fly back to base via inertial guidance. Inertial guidance isn’t nearly as precise as GPS, but it should still be good enough to get it close enough to shake off the jamming. > > This is nontrivial for a tank, since a tank’s route back to base is likely to have a lot more obstacles than a flyer’s. According to articles I’ve read about the life & times of drone pilots, when the aerial drones lose communications, they just go on autopilot and circle until comms come back. This happens more often than you’d think, so they don’t have them set to return to base. ---
**Author:** ![coremelt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/4491bb/32.png) [@coremelt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/coremelt)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2016, 3:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-not-use-drone-tanks/744326/34 "2016-01-28T03:22:50Z")
Thinking about it, I guess if you can scale up a drone quad-copter to be able to carry an anti-tank missile then its a better way to go. Can land anywhere and be refuelled and re-armed by local friendlies. This would seem to indicate its possible: > **[Chinese drone maker unveils human-carrying drone](https://phys.org/news/2016-01-chinese-drone-maker-unveils-human-carrying.html)** > > Chinese drone maker Ehang Inc. on Wednesday unveiled what it calls the world's first drone capable of carrying a human passenger. Guess we also might see drone ground effect vehicles as well. ---
**Author:** ![MichaelEmouse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/michaelemouse/32/101_2.png) [@MichaelEmouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MichaelEmouse)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2016, 3:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-not-use-drone-tanks/744326/35 "2016-01-28T03:53:24Z")
> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > In fact, an automated main battle tank doesn’t really make much sense, period. The entire point of a tank is that it allows a crewed human presence to operate direct artillery with near impunity to almost any attack except another tank or anti-tank aircraft. However, that mass and weight mostly exists to protect the crew. If you were to design an automated direct artillery system for battlefield use, you wouldn’t build a tank; you’d probably use a fast, low profile, lightly armored system carrying anti-armor guided missile at a unit cost such than you could build dozens for the cost of a single tank. Or better yet, you’d build a low observable flying drone equipped with such missiles with much greater mobility than any land vehicle. How much more mobile/faster could it get than an MBT while still being a land vehicle? Wiki says the M1A1 is controllable at 72km/h on-road and 48km/h off-road; I’m wondering how much a UGV could improve on that. Once you replace dumb shells with guided missiles, wouldn’t the “direct” part of direct artillery tend to largely disappear? Also, wouldn’t the missiles be more diverse than just ATGMs, given that MBTs do more than just anti-armor duty? > [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > In the future of remote/autonomous warfare, less value will be given to protection of mobile battlefield artillery platforms against attack than mobility and low observability, as well as the ability to interoperate with airborne surveillance and coordination. The heavily armored main battle tank is as much of an anachronism to the future of war as a battleship. Seems that UAVs would have the advantage for high mobility & distant horizon whereas UGVs would have the advantage of low observability, high payload and long time on station. Aside from breaking up its visible spectrum and IR silhouette and emitting little noise, how could UGVs lower their observability? ---
**Author:** ![coremelt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/4491bb/32.png) [@coremelt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/coremelt)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2016, 5:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-not-use-drone-tanks/744326/36 "2016-01-28T05:27:42Z")
> [@MichaelEmouse](#): > > how could UGVs lower their observability? Use them mostly at night for one thing. A UGV can see using radar / lidar as well as a person can in broad daylight. ---
**Author:** ![astro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9dc877/32.png) [@astro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astro)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2016, 6:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-not-use-drone-tanks/744326/37 "2016-01-28T06:17:46Z")
Jus speaking from my observations as a layman. 1: Tanks, even modern ones, need a LOT of care and maintenance in the field 2: Tank crews are not nearly as expensive to select for and train compared to airplane pilots so the real world cost and expendability issues are not as pressing as they are for flying drones 3: While protecting humans makes tanks heavier they would need to be pretty large and beefy anyway to have the firepower they do, so making a protected interior space for a human crew is less of big deal in tanks compared to airplanes. ---
**Author:** ![UncleFred](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/f0a364/32.png) [@UncleFred](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UncleFred)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2016, 2:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-not-use-drone-tanks/744326/38 "2016-01-29T02:37:53Z")
> [@Shagnasty](#): > > I am genuinely curious. Why is that much easier to jam transmissions for a drone tank than a drone aircraft? Distance and speed? I would expect that’s it - its must be easier to get closer, with interfering equipment, to a slower moving, ground-based tank then a higher-speed in-air craft. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2016, 4:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-not-use-drone-tanks/744326/39 "2016-01-29T04:02:48Z")
> [@](#): > > Quoth **MichaelEMouse** : > > Wiki says the M1A1 is controllable at 72km/h on-road and 48km/h off-road Officially, at least. Unofficially, they’re much faster than that. Cite: My cousin in the Army who’s never used any form of transportation at less than its maximum possible speed. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-not-use-drone-tanks/744326.md?page=1)