• poVoq@slrpnk.netM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    3 days ago

    Maybe the German definition is derived differently, but notice that in all the English links to military sources a careful distinction is made between “armored vehicles” and “tanks”.

    • Successful_Try543@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      The German definition is indeed different. That’s why the German Wikipedia article on “Panzer” (“armour”) links to “AFV” and not “Tank”.

      This is a quite common misconception present in the media, as e.g. at the beginning of the Ukraine war the back-then German secretary of defense stated: “The Gepard is no tank. The Gepard is for protecting infrastructure by shooting with it’s pipe [Rohr] into the air.” which a) is a bogus quote and b) did not translate well, as she used “Panzer” to translate “tank” and not “(Haupt-)Kampfpanzer ((main) battle tank)”.

    • CyberEgg@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      Tanks have often been modified for special purposes. The most common is armoured recovery vehicles, used during combat for recovery or repair of battle-damaged and inoperable armoured fighting vehicles. Another common use is to provide armoured capability for combat engineers. These include tanks carrying large-calibre demolition guns, with flails or ploughs for mine-clearing, or flame tanks armed with flamethrowers. The tank occasionally may lose its weapons and the chassis alone may be used, as in bridge-laying tanks

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tank_classification#Specialist_tank

      • poVoq@slrpnk.netM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        The chassis of tank models have been repurposed for other tasks, yes. That doesn’t make those armored vehicles tanks.