Article by Kevin Sloan – Director Business Development Soucy Defense
Upon revisiting a whitepaper I authored three years ago : Wheels or Tracks? , it is evident that the discussion on the choice between tracks and wheels in modern conflicts remains nuanced, with current evidence from conflicts failing to decisively sway the argument in either direction.
The evaluation of these two vehicle types extends beyond a mere binary, considering factors such as terrain, mission objectives, and the threat environment, each influencing the advantages and disadvantages associated with tracks and wheels.
In recent years, wheeled vehicles have garnered increased favour, particularly in urban and long-range operations where attributes such as speed, agility, stealth, and comfort play pivotal roles. Additionally, wheeled vehicles boast lower maintenance and logistics costs and exhibit ease of air transportation. Noteworthy examples of advanced wheeled vehicles include the General Dynamics Piranha V, the Stryker, and the Rheinmetall Boxer.
Conversely, tracked vehicles retain their relevance in scenarios involving peer conflict, where substantial armour and firepower are imperative for countering enemy tanks and other formidable threats. The superior off-road mobility and load-carrying capacity of tracked vehicles, along with their ability to surmount obstacles that wheeled counterparts cannot, are defining features. The XM30 Mechanized Infantry Combat Vehicle (MICV), formerly known as the Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle (OMFV), exemplifies a modern tracked Infantry Fighting Vehicle (IFV) program, competing with counterparts like Rheinmetall’s KF41, and concepts from General Dynamics.
In the most recent conflict in Israel, the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) has demonstrated a preference for deploying its Armoured Corps to spearhead major ground operations in the ongoing conflict in Gaza. Notably, IDF’s armoured units executed a multifaceted approach by advancing into northern Gaza from various directions. The IDF also see a need and employs ‘heavy APCs’ equipped with armour comparable to that of main battle tanks, rendering these APCs considerably more robust than wheeled APCs.
Additionally, the IDF has strategically employed armoured engineering vehicles and fortified tractors to clear debris and obstacles from crucial routes leading into the city to allow their Eitan eight-wheeled infantry fighting vehicle cleared routes. Eitan weighing 35 tons and built on an Oshkosh chassis, stands out as a formidable asset and still a requirement in the IDF’s arsenal. Israeli 8×8, Eitan APCs
The absence of a clear victor in the tracks-versus-wheels debate underscores the necessity of evaluating strengths and weaknesses within specific contexts and scenarios. Consequently, some military entities and Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) are actively exploring avenues to enhance the performance and durability of both vehicle types or even hybridizing designs to incorporate the most advantageous features of both. This may involve equipping wheeled vehicles with enhancements such as run-flat tires, advanced suspension systems, and traction technologies for improved off-road capabilities. Similarly, tracked vehicles can undergo design modifications to prioritize attributes such as reduced weight, increased fuel efficiency, cost-effectiveness over their lifecycle, and enhanced user well-being.
The Ukraine conflict has starkly demonstrated the distinct constraints and advantages of wheeled and tracked vehicles in modern warfare, particularly in winter and muddy conditions. Wheeled vehicles, valued for their speed, agility, and logistical efficiency, perform well in urban and long-range missions. However, the conflict’s harsh terrain has revealed their limitations in heavy mud and snow, where they struggle with traction and manoeuvrability. Conversely, tracked vehicles have proven indispensable in such environments, offering superior off-road capability, obstacle clearance, and durability under extreme conditions. These lessons highlight the importance of tailoring vehicle deployment to operational contexts, reinforcing the nuanced debate over wheels versus tracks. Ukraine Winter War, Tracks-or-Wheels.
One notable development in the realm of tracked vehicles is the increasing prominence of Composite Rubber Track (CRT), gaining attention from OEM architects and finding applications in various new tracked platform designs. For instance, the XM30 places a premium on providing superior occupant safety and combat power compared to its predecessor, the Bradley, offering the flexibility of operation with either a human crew or remote control by a dismounted crew. Notably, General Dynamics and Rheinmetall have opted to retain CRT as the primary track system in their configurations.
In conclusion, the choice between wheeled and tracked vehicles in military operations remains a complex decision shaped by terrain, mission objectives, and evolving combat environments.
Insights from the Ukraine conflict reaffirm the enduring value of tracked vehicles in harsh winter and muddy conditions, where their superior mobility and durability are unmatched. Conversely, wheeled vehicles continue to excel in urban and long-range scenarios, leveraging their speed and logistical efficiency. Recent IDF operations in Gaza further emphasize the complementary use of both vehicle types, with heavy APCs like the Eitan providing protection and operational flexibility while supported by specialized engineering vehicles. These evolving battlefield lessons highlight the necessity of tailoring vehicle strategies to specific operational contexts, with hybrid advancements such as Composite Rubber Tracks bridging traditional gaps between wheels and tracks. As technology advances, the future of armoured mobility will likely combine the strengths of both platforms, redefining modern warfare capabilities.