Technological advances in weaponry usually produce changes in doctrine. The capabilities of a new friendly weapon system prompt planning for its proper use on the battlefield. Likewise, an enemy development may cause a shift in doctrine as a counter. Finally, a change in doctrine may require a new weapon system to implement it!

Having doctrine create a demand for new weapons is common. In some cases, however, it is akin to putting the cart before the horse. The intention is to give guidance to a nation's weapons industry in fulfilling an army's requirements, but can lead to problems where a weapon cannot be designed to meet the doctrine's specifications. The weapon may fall short in performance or be rejected outright as unsatisfactory. Solving such a problem is very costly. More time and money must be thrown at the weapon in an attempt to make it usable within the established doctrine.

An additional problem is caused by the training inherent in a new doctrine. Schools may have already begun training the use of the new weapon in lieu of the weapons being replaced. If the new weapon is unavailable to units, portions of the new arrival's training will not be applicable to the tactical situations in the field. A vulnerable point may occur when an army's units are trained to fight with weapons that are unavailable when they are required to fight! In short, doctrinal changes are much smoother when experience with the new weapons has been the impetus behind the change.

The general trend of new weapons has been toward more technologically complex systems. While greater training and education are required to employ and maintain these more advanced systems., the potential return in the field is greater as well. These weapons are designed for greater lethality, pushing toward the goal of maximizing the number of kills on the enemy forces. In most cases, these weapons are designed to combat or protect tanks.

Main Battle Tank

The main battle tank has remained the dominant weapon system on the modern battlefield since the end of World War II. Its shock and firepower capabilities have been increased with each improvement to its main gun. Improvements have been made to its power plants as well. Modern tanks, in particular the German Leopard II and the U.S. M1, are much more maneuverable than their predecessors.

Protection has also improved. Most current tanks have some degree of spaced or laminated armor for increased survivability against shaped charge weapons. A shaped charge is designed to penetrate armor without high velocity. The warhead has a weaker casing in its front, allowing the explosive force to focus its power in a smaller area. Spaced armor is designed to absorb the power of the charge in its exterior layers and prevent complete penetration of the armor. This armor was introduced as a direct result of the number of anti-tank guided missiles (ATGM) in the arsenals of modern armies. These ATGMs, introduced in the sixties and refined in the seventies, brought the tank-killing capability of the infantry to an all time high. These extremely accurate weapons are relatively portable and of ever increasing reliability.

The development of helicopter gunships, as well as transport helicopters by the U.S. Army in Vietnam, yielded a new asset to commanders. Infantry and other light assets redefine the concept of mobility when transported by helicopter. The gunship has been developed into a highly capable tank killer armed with a deadly array of ATGMs. At present, the Apache AH-64 helicopter gunship is the state of the art. Its Hellfire Missile can be fired from a complete defilade position several terrain features away and still home in on a laser designated target. It is being introduced into the U.S. corps level aviation units. It can make a major contribution to the defense against a Soviet invasion.

Infantry fighting vehicles (IFVs) are also present in the forces of most armies. Previous mechanized infantry vehicles were merely armored personnel carriers, designed to transport infantry to the battlefield. Modern IFVs are designed to allow infantry to fight mounted and survive in certain environments. Infantry is more capable than ever of operating with armor on a mutually supporting basis. Current infantry units can maneuver with armor units and provide close, effective infantry support. Infantry support is critical for armor. There is no environment in which armor may operate without infantry support. Infantry is needed to clear many terrain types for tanks and to defeat the enemy infantry and their anti-tank weapons. Such weapons, used unopposed, would prove devastating to an armor force.

Artillery support plays a major role in the doctrine of both armies. The range and lethality of modern artillery have been tremendously increased over that of the forties and fifties. Artillery can fire guided projectiles that kill "painted" or laser-designated targets with near certain probability. Long range rocket assisted projectiles are also available. Ammunition has been introduced that is more capable against hard targets while maintaining its deadly effects on soft targets. Such dual-purpose ammunition produces bomblets that explode as a shaped charge against a hard target or as a high explosive. Other ammunition allows the firing of scatterable mine fields and persistent or nonpersistent chemical weapons. Combined with improvements in fire control and survivability of the battery, modern artillery possesses greatly enhanced capabilities.

Chemical defenses are also growing more sophisticated. Armies are striving for the capability of maintaining a defensive or offensive posture under chemical attack. Such attacks can include persistent agent contaminated areas. Most modern armies envision operating in such areas for long periods of time. Defensive and decontamination equipment is being designed (or is already in service) that permits such a capability.

More Modern Battle Doctrine

Introduction
Objectives and Doctrine
Weapons and Doctrine
Terrain and Doctrine
Soviet Army Doctrine
US Doctrine: AirLand Battle