Originally posted by Michael Brinkhues:
The Problem goes both ways. Tanks can't hold ground(1) but neither can Infantry as soon as the enemy has realistic tanks. Sure, the AT team may kill a tank (ATGM did not expect 100 percent to hit IRL) but that tanks partner will very likely kill the AT team. And any other Infantry is dead without shooting back. Not every tanker is a brain-dead SS guy in "Shaving Privat Ryan" or "Kellys Heros" style after all.
Tank defence against artillery will also benefit from automation
(1) Actually they can IF they have a secure line of supplies and large enough numbers. Since that can not be guaranteed IRL they are considered unabel to do so. Depending on Traveller variant Traveller tanks have far less dependency on resupply due to Fusion power and can have far more automation
And here I thought the reason that tanks were not suitable for holding ground is because one of the major advantages of a Tank is mobility. When you are holding ground you give up that major advantage. After all if you are going to use tanks to hold ground or spread out the armament found in a tank and fortify the positions that you put the weapons in, you are better suited to holding the ground. (2-3 machineguns and a canon spread out with equal protection to a tank or one tank, which can go down to one hit.)
A second reason is that a tank is easier to detect than the equivalent systems when they aren't mounted on a tank, are dug in and dispersed.
A Tank unit takes up less ground to an equivalent sized Infantry unit when set up in defensive positions making them easier to bypass.
Supply is only one reason Tanks aren't suited to holding ground. In fact I would say it is a secondary reason, as a Tank that isn't moving, with the exception of an M1 which uses almost as much fuel sitting still as it does while moving, uses very little fuel and just as much ammunition as a similarly armed unit in a defensive position.
And yes I know that defensive positions are not exactly static. With fall back positions, secondary positions, etc.
A Tank is designed, primarily as an offensive weapon, maximizing firepower, protection and mobility in as small a package as possible, where a defensive position can actually be better protected, with equal or greater firepower and set up to cover more ground with the same size unit.
As for AT teams getting shot up after only getting one shot off, that depends on several large assumptions. The type of AT weapon. The range of the engagement. The firing position. The signature of the weapon. The vision capability of the target unit, including whether the target unit is buttoned up.). Terrain.
For example a the Javelin system is fire and forget, with little signature, and can even be fired from within a building. With the reload time of the Javelin the second missile can pretty much be enroute to a second target before the target unit realizes it is under fire. A GLID, backed up by either Copperhead or Hellfire, in a good defensive position, has no signature, and can strike several units without warning or detection. Even the Tow IIC has a low signature and if properly set up and located the launch signature can be well hidden from potential return fire. Further most ATGM have longer range than the units firing back at them.
