Tank FAQs:


Q: Is a tank an armoured fighting vehicle with tracks and a large tank gun that is designed for front-line combat?

A: Yes.

Q: Were tanks noted for having a two-man crew?

A: Yes, and in which the overworked commander had to load and fire the gun in addition to commanding the tank.

Q: Is a tank determined by the performance criteria required for the tank?

A: Yes.

Q: Was a tank no substitute for armour and firepower and medium tanks were vulnerable to newer weapon technology?

A: Yes, and rendering them obsolete.

Q: Was a tank not invulnerable?

A: Yes.

Q: Were tanks machine gun armed?

A: Yes.

Q: Are tanks mobile land weapon platforms?

A: Yes, and mounting a large-calibre cannon in a rotating gun turret.

Q: Were tanks labelled "With Care to Petrograd," but the belief was encouraged that they were a type of snowploug?

A: Yes, and abelled "With Care to Petrograd," but the belief was encouraged that they were a type of snowplough.

Q: Are tanks a single?

A: Yes, and large-calibre cannon mounted in a fully traversing gun turret.

Q: Was a tank adopted worldwide?

A: Yes, and Stern was wrong.

Q: Are tanks active protection systems?

A: Yes.

Q: Was a tank the result of a century of development from the first primitive armoured vehicles?

A: Yes, and due to improvements in technology such as the internal combustion engine, which allowed the rapid movement of heavy armoured vehicles.

Q: Are tanks of primary importance?

A: Yes, and but tank armour also aims to protect against infantry rocket-propelled grenades, anti-tank guided missiles, anti-tank mines, bombs, direct artillery hits, and nuclear, biological and chemical threats, any of which could disable or destroy a tank or its crew.

Q: Are tanks highly mobile and able to travel over most types of terrain due to their continuous tracks and advanced suspension?

A: Yes.

Q: Are tanks specially designed or adapted for water operations?

A: Yes, and but they are rare in modern armies, being replaced by purpose-built amphibious assault vehicles or armoured personnel carriers in amphibious assaults.

Q: Are tanks subject to additional hazards in wooded and urban combat environments which largely negate the advantages of the tank's long-range firepower and mobility?

A: Yes, and limit the crew's detection capabilities and can restrict turret traverse.

Q: Is a tank the 20th century realization of an ancient concept: that of providing troops with mobile protection and firepower?

A: Yes.

Q: Are tanks limited to fording rivers?

A: Yes.

Q: Was a tank first applied to the British "landships" in 1915?

A: Yes, and before they entered service, to keep their nature secret.

Q: Were tanks developed with immature technologies?

A: Yes, in addition to the crew needed to man the multiple guns and machine guns, up to four crewmen were needed to drive the tank: the driver, acting as the vehicle commander and manning the brakes, drove via orders to his gears-men; a co-driver operated the gearbox and throttle; and two gears-men, one on each track, steered by setting one side or the other to idle, allowing the track on the other side to slew the tank to one side.

Q: Were tanks used to spearhead the initial US invasion of Iraq in 2003?

A: Yes.

Q: Is a tank a large metallic object with a distinctive?

A: Yes, and angular silhouette that emits copious heat and noise.

Q: Are tanks called "Shiryon", meaning "armoured", while in the Arab world, tanks are called Dabbāba?

A: Yes, In Italian, a tank is a "carro armato" , without reference to its armour.

Q: Is a tank described by its battlefield or tactical mobility?

A: Yes, and its operational mobility, and its strategic mobility.

Q: Is a tank called harckocsi?

A: Yes, and albeit tank is also common.

Q: Are tanks vulnerable to infra-red detection due to differences between the thermal conductivity and therefore heat dissipation of the metallic tank and its surroundings?

A: Yes.