What is the future of the tank? | The Economist

is how do you. think about the right. balance between legacy. systems and. emerging technology? Because this seems to me. a very unsettled debate. in NATO armies, which just in the UK, for example, had a defense minister. resign and a junior. minister resigned, saying. our future plans. are not innovative enough. There's not enough on drones, there's not enough. on autonomy. How do you think. about that balance? Because everyone tells me. every general interview. says we need. to get the balance. It's a high, low mix. We need the balance. Nobody's willing to tell me. what the balance is exactly. Are you getting. a clarity around that?

So we need to. get the balance, I would say, in the first place. And of course, that's something we have to. to find out. and experiment with. I think what I would say. for the German land. forces, for the German Army, there are five areas. where we have to be improved. very rapidly and five areas. indirect fires, counter UAS, indirect fires includes. things like artillery just so. artillery, lottery munitions. and something like that. Up to deep,

deep strike capability. seconds like 1000km, which could be like 1000km, but which could also be. the tactical deep. So something between. 100 and 300km. A second thing. we really have to improve our. capabilities is count us. Eddie Fence. A third thing. I'm thinking about is. electromagnetic warfare. A falsely, I would say, the manned, unmanned teaming. integration of. unmanned systems. into our force.

is must be a focus. And lastly, we. need AI enabled. C2 command and. control capabilities. and see that the areas. which I'm focusing. most in the German. armed forces and focusing. on these items. for focusing on these issues, will help us to find. the right. balance between what you call. legacy systems. I wouldn't agree on the term. legacy systems, but.

these are the systems. you need to take. and to hold ground. Because. taking and holding ground, that's that's a main. task of land forces. And at the end of the day, that's always. a physical experience. So I mean, let's talk. a little bit more about that. because you're. an armor officer. by background, right? Recce or recce officer. but you're very familiar. with therefore. with armored vehicles. and that aspect. of ground warfare. I want to just get you. to reflect on the old. and eternal debate.

about the future of the tank. Clearly, on a very. transparent battlefield, troops need protection. and they need mobility, and therefore tanks. have a value. But I. do talk to. some Ukrainian officers. who say. at the end of the day, we're using UVs, uncrewed ground. vehicles, ground. robots for resupply, fire support sticks, and they can perform. some of the same tasks. we would once have done with. something like that. How do you look at this. debate and kind of. what does the tank need. to become to survive.

and modernize? Well, that's a tank. must become a kind of. command and control. center kind of mothership, but it must. also be a mothership. for ground robots, for ground. robots, for. commanding. and controlling. unmanned systems. But on the other hand, you need something like. a tank for situation. 1 to 1. situations. You need.

you need to have. both the capability. to fight over a long distance. or medium distance. And you need to. for direct fire. for dual situations. And I'm completely. convinced that. on the modern battlefield, we will see. AI supported drones. And we need the soldier with. with its rifle and boundary. But in the spirit. of challenge, if we had a more radical. minded military scientist.

here, they might say, why does that need to have. a crew inside it? Because at the. end of the day, there's a human decision. maker. The man in the loop. is a man. who is able to judge. what he is doing. and where where he is. exploiting his firepower. And I think there is no way. that we need that. We will see. a completely unmanned. battlefield in the future. Yeah. Well, okay.

That's, that's that's really, really interesting. One of the other elements. that runs like a thread. through the different things. you mentioned is data. You mentioned AI enabled. command and control. Now data is kind of. critical to that. And I think. the phrase that you used is. you said you compared it to. ammunition. Data is like ammunition. You said, now. if that is true, tell me a little bit more. about what. you're doing about that. You know what. if I can stretch. the metaphor, perhaps to breaking point? How are you. stockpiling this stuff? How do we stop piling?

How are you collecting data? How are you storing it? Labeling it, using it to train. your models. Can you tell me. what are you doing. about this problem? If it's. as central as you say, it is absolutely central. And I think. we have to be very, very fast to the. to develop platforms. I think especially. we are talking about. data integration. we will have. on the future battlefield, especially in the land. domain, sensors. everywhere and anywhere. in the air, on the ground, in space. And we will.

see in in the. past we always. lacked information. And that tells us, especially in my former role. as a Reiki officer. as was also. is all about. getting information, getting information. And now it's. not about. getting information. So then. handling the mass. of information. And I don't think that. this can be a human. task anymore. You are far too slow. for that. You need a data backbone, a digital backbone.

to assemble. all this information. to a semblance of this data. and then exploited by using. a artificial intelligence. There are. some systems out there, and we have to decide. very, very quickly how. we can develop this data. backbone, how we can integrate this. into our systems, and how we can. improve our decision making, making our decision. more, accelerate our decision.

making in a way. we were not thinking about. a couple of years ago.