Q: Is a tank an armoured fighting vehicle with tracks and a large tank gun that is designed for front-line combat? ¶
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? ¶
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? ¶
Q: Were tanks machine gun armed? ¶
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? ¶
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? ¶
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? ¶
Q: Are tanks limited to fording rivers? ¶
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? ¶
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? ¶