Bangladesh Army

[monitor]

Chinese Humvee in Bangladesh inventory.

Bangladesh Army officer in China firing the PLAs HJ-8 ATGM.

 

[Ideas_R_Bulletproof]

Guderian didn't invent the tank. He specialized in the kind of warfare tanks can participate and effectively establish it's goal. His theory is very much in line with MBT development and tank warfare. The combination of mobile, armor and firepower should be equal and one should no over match the other... Tanks should be made to support infantry rather the infantry should be made to support tanks.
Fun fact: it was Churchill's idea to develop a rolling fortress and it was in development at a water tank factory and to keep the project a secret it was called tank... Off the Germans didn't get what kind of tank it was until they saw it in France and was left with horror. XD

You can even see in bd army exercise... Artillery are always fired first followed by armor supported by tanks which is supported by infantry and air power.

this is a good discussion.... starting to like it....

the thing that I was trying to bring in is not about whether tanks are designed the way warfare is done, or whether warfare is designed the way tanks can be designed.... rather, I was trying to bring in the topic of how warfare is designed.... Guderian brought a theory which almost won them the war, but it also helped their opponents to win against them.... but how did his thought about tank warfare develop?..... Guderian was born in a time when he found something called a tank in front of him.... if he was born in a time when engine hasn't been developed, would he have developed a tank or done something else?

 

[asad71]

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10203274954910818

The Helmet, BA HQ

 

[Michael Corleone]

this is a good discussion.... starting to like it....

the thing that I was trying to bring in is not about whether tanks are designed the way warfare is done, or whether warfare is designed the way tanks can be designed.... rather, I was trying to bring in the topic of how warfare is designed.... Guderian brought a theory which almost won them the war, but it also helped their opponents to win against them.... but how did his thought about tank warfare develop?..... Guderian was born in a time when he found something called a tank in front of him.... if he was born in a time when engine hasn't been developed, would he have developed a tank or done something else?

Guderians theory won them every single war and battle until Hitler decided to take control of the entire armed forces bypassing generals and doing what he wants... Even Stalin when compared was much better.... He relied on his generals and reportedly didnt utter a word against them when the generals got furious against him.
Hitler then gave control back to guderians to save his *** around Kursk or citadel if I remember correctly but it was too little too late. Guderian, Rommel and others hoped to capture Moscow asap.... But when the force was just 30 miles away from Moscow.... Hitler decided to divert troops in the north and then the south in Stalingrad just because it was named after Stalin.... Stalin did his best not to let that city fall and he succeeded and by the time Hitler regrouped to take Moscow the winters already set in with many soldiers ending up dead without proper protection and soviets launched a counter offensive...

Hitler even failed to set in guderians theory and kept developing new platforms to overmatch the other and the industries of wartime couldn't cope with new rapid changing designs.... Also armor became more prioritised than mobility which counteracts against blitzkrieg.

Guderian served in first ww and from the experience in the front line... Observing tank development of other nation after he formulated his theory. If the tank hadnt been there during ww2.... Or ww1 to speak of.... It would be trench warfare all the way.... That my friend slowed battle down.

 

[Ideas_R_Bulletproof]

Guderians theory won them every single war and battle until Hitler decided to take control of the entire armed forces bypassing generals and doing what he wants... Even Stalin when compared was much better.... He relied on his generals and reportedly didnt utter a word against them when the generals got furious against him.
Hitler then gave control back to guderians to save his *** around Kursk or citadel if I remember correctly but it was too little too late. Guderian, Rommel and others hoped to capture Moscow asap.... But when the force was just 30 miles away from Moscow.... Hitler decided to divert troops in the north and then the south in Stalingrad just because it was named after Stalin.... Stalin did his best not to let that city fall and he succeeded and by the time Hitler regrouped to take Moscow the winters already set in with many soldiers ending up dead without proper protection and soviets launched a counter offensive...

Hitler even failed to set in guderians theory and kept developing new platforms to overmatch the other and the industries of wartime couldn't cope with new rapid changing designs.... Also armor became more prioritised than mobility which counteracts against blitzkrieg.

Guderian served in first ww and from the experience in the front line... Observing tank development of other nation after he formulated his theory. If the tank hadnt been there during ww2.... Or ww1 to speak of.... It would be trench warfare all the way.... That my friend slowed battle down.

hmm.... again, I wasn't actually talking about Guderian's tank battle history.... to talk of history, we can go on and on - how Hitler approved the Manstein plan, or Hitler's halt order before Dunkirk..... or his decision to divert forces to the Caucasus during the Battle of Stalingrad..... that's not the point of the discussion....

lets talk about why Guderian was thinking the way he did.... lets talk of mobility and the need for it.... that would bring the discussion to a more relevant stage.... e.g. the dominating effect of the XVIII Airborne Corps during the Gulf War in the left wing.... that's mobility, but not entirely tanks....

 

[Michael Corleone]

hmm.... again, I wasn't actually talking about Guderian's tank battle history.... to talk of history, we can go on and on - how Hitler approved the Manstein plan, or Hitler's halt order before Dunkirk..... or his decision to divert forces to the Caucasus during the Battle of Stalingrad..... that's not the point of the discussion....

lets talk about why Guderian was thinking the way he did.... lets talk of mobility and the need for it.... that would bring the discussion to a more relevant stage.... e.g. the dominating effect of the XVIII Airborne Corps during the Gulf War in the left wing.... that's mobility, but not entirely tanks....

Well mobility is equally needed because a bogged down beast is as good as a car without wheels or a blender without blades.

 

[Ideas_R_Bulletproof]

Well mobility is equally needed because a bogged down beast is as good as a car without wheels or a blender without blades.

exactly....
so, a beast has to move, right?
but how far?.... what distance does he have to move or prepared to move?
that distance will be based on what thought?

 

[Michael Corleone]

exactly....
so, a beast has to move, right?
but how far?.... what distance does he have to move or prepared to move?
that distance will be based on what thought?

Now we re coming to the discussion. Of requirements... And requirements progresses with science....

 

[Ideas_R_Bulletproof]

Now we re coming to the discussion. Of requirements... And requirements progresses with science....

if you base your requirements on science, then some things need to sorted out....
science is based on agreement.... its an agreement on an idea....
agreements change; science changes.... something that stood valid 50 years ago is considered false now.... like people once believed that the earth is flat.... some time down the line, they changed that thought.... people agreed on something untrue that was known true even to the earliest man.... yet, they questioned it and came to naught.... and then reverted back to it....
you can't base your thoughts on something that shifts....
have to base your thinking on things that don't shift.... e.g. geography

 

[Michael Corleone]

if you base your requirements on science, then some things need to sorted out....
science is based on agreement.... its an agreement on an idea....
agreements change; science changes.... something that stood valid 50 years ago is considered false now.... like people once believed that the earth is flat.... some time down the line, they changed that thought.... people agreed on something untrue that was known true even to the earliest man.... yet, they questioned it and came to naught.... and then reverted back to it....
you can't base your thoughts on something that shifts....
have to base your thinking on things that don't shift.... e.g. geography

That doesn't change the fact that gravity is 9.8m/sec or that speed of light Other universal constant. It's the change of science that leads to improvements.... For ex who would say carbon sandwiched between steel would nowadays stop reportedly.... DU rounds or those regular armor piercing nowadays that can easily pen more than a meter of rolled homogeneous armor....

I didn't mean to say requirement on science but rather requirement is as good as the science behind it. You cant expect to have an impenetrable tank which can also run without proper research in science that makes it all happen.

 

[Ideas_R_Bulletproof]

requirement is as good as the science behind it.

hmm....
so, requirements fetch solutions in science or science determines what requirements should be?

 

[masud]

পার্বত্য চট্টগ্রামে ভুমি ধসের ফলে বিপর্যস্ত যোগাযোগ ব্যবস্থার উন্নতির জন্য সেনাসদস্যরা নিরালসভাবে কাজ করে যাচ্ছে, এ পর্যন্ত আপডেট তথ্য

 

[Michael Corleone]

hmm....
so, requirements fetch solutions in science or science determines what requirements should be?

requirements fetch solution in science and science determines what results would be....

 

[masud]

 

[EastBengalPro]

East Bengal