Today in History: First successful use of tanks in battle

Today, tanks are being phased out by the military of many countries around the world because of their relative vulnerability to a wide variety of inexpensive technology and the fact that they are extremely expensive to produce and maintain.

However, there was a time when the introduction of this "King of the battlefield" was so momentous that it appeared to be the missing link that could turn the tide of the "unwinnable war" that was World War 1.

The year was 1917

source

In the Battle of Cambrai nearly 400 battle-ready tanks crossed the battlefield which had previously been a fool's errand to attempt to cross. Called "no man's land" it was relatively understood that all infantry attempting to cross to the enemy's trenches would almost certainly be killed. Bringing a mechanized metal shield with you seems like a pretty obvious answer. These armored beasts were capable or resisting most small arms fire, and even many types of artillery and mortar rounds.

This was not the first time the tanks were used in battle. That honor belongs to the Battle of the Somme. However, losing 500,000 troops and having less than half of the tanks being functional before the first bullet was fired can hardly be called a success.

The Battle of Cambrai, which started today in 1917, was the first time they were used with what can be considered successful results. Some modifications had been made to improve engine reliability and also to prevent the vehicles getting stuck, which is something that really shouldn't happen to a tank. Getting stuck was pretty disastrous for the 4-man crew, since the armor was weaker in certain points especially the bottom of the machine.

source

The major advantage that these tanks provided wasn't so much their offensive capabilities, since the weapons on the front (or sides, depending on which version of the Mark IV was being used) were supplemental to the fact that this moving shield could quite easily march straight through barbed wire and other defensive barriers. Allied forces would walk behind the armor allowing for a significant amount of infantry to penetrate the enemy trenches.

source

While the sheer number of tanks used was certainly a big part of the reason behind the advancement, the fact that the Allied forces were able to take a portion of the German position by simply advancing in a forward manor was seen as a triumphant victory in military tactics and "the tank" was lauded in the press around the world. What they press didn't reveal was the fact that a German counter-offensive actually resulted in the loss of territory on the Allied side as well. (old school-fake news!).

There was no denying that this new weapon gave any military a distinct advantage on the battlefield and the Germans scrambled to develop their own tank technology in response but because of British blockades on supplies, it was "too little, too late." If you look at virtually any memoir of German military leaders in regards to "how did we lose?," there is always some mention of the Mark IV tank.

The focus on building newer and better tanks would become a high priority for military leaders around the world for the next 60 years.

source

This decision to phase out tanks as a warfare mechanism began in the 70's when tanks were being easily dispatched by small groups of infantry with crude Soviet handheld weapons that used wires to guide an antitank missile to the tank's ultimate demise. In 1973 during the Yom Kippur War hundreds of Israeli tanks were left burning on the battlefield using exactly this tactic. Though this massive defeat is largely attributed to arrogance and poor military planning on the part of the Israelis, it pointed to an end of an era, since now a massive and expensive metal beast could be destroyed by a single foot-soldier with the right equipment.

Tanks would continue to be used for many years after, including recent battles in the Middle East. However, this only happens with tremendous amounts of infantry and air support, less the metal goliaths end up becoming literal cannon fodder.

---

source
It seems a bit silly to look at the trench warfare of World War one and realize the tactics at the start consisted of trying the exact same approach over and over of first using extensive artillery on the distant enemy and then sending tens of thousands of soldiers into "no man's land" where they would often be slaughtered in droves or simply entirely wiped out with no gain made at all.

It is rumored, sadly, that the idea to develop the armored vehicle was spawned only because military leaders were concerned they would eventually run out of soldiers to send to their deaths at the hands of an entrenched enemy.

Despite that rather morose ending, there really isn't a happy ending to any war is there? Nonetheless there is no denying that the tank changed warfare for a great time after the British marched the Mark IV onto the battlefield that day, and that day was today, 102 years ago.