ACM10:

APC was used in the dying days of WW1. British invented it from tractor prototype which they used to overrun German positions in the trenches. This forced the Germans to sue for peace. But Germans did perfect the use of APC in the battlefield in the WW2

Bymbolar:


You are very correct guy! I was initially laughing at what somebody wrote that APCs were not used during WW I. Sadly, the guy even wrote with non-existent authority- a very poor student of History...

"During World War I (1914-1918) the British developed and used the first armored track-laying vehicles in an attempt to break the deadlock of trench warfare on the Western Front. To maintain secrecy, the vehicles were shipped to the battle zone in crates marked “tanks,” hence the origin of the name."

ACM10:

APC was used in the dying days of WW1. British invented it from tractor prototype which they used to overrun German positions in the trenches. This forced the Germans to sue for peace. But Germans did perfect the use of APC in the battlefield in the WW2

Bymbolar:
. . . . I was initially laughing at what somebody wrote that APCs were not used during WW I. Sadly, the guy even wrote with non-existent authority- a very poor student of History...

"During World War I (1914-1918) the British developed and used the first armored track-laying vehicles in an attempt to break the deadlock of trench warfare on the Western Front. To maintain secrecy, the vehicles were shipped to the battle zone in crates marked “tanks,” hence the origin of the name."

ACM10:
Young men these days hardly devote time to read history. They spends most of their time watching Nollywood junks.

Chongaiman:

@Chongaiman, no no no! Calling Armoured Tanks an APC is not and will never be tantamount to calling KEKE NAPEP a CAR, ok?

Now, let's get it right! During the WW I, the only Country with the most superior Military capability was Britain. The tank had no single inventor. The Royal Naval Air Service, which operated some armored cars, originated ideas for “landships.” Simultaneously, British colonel Ernest Swinton proposed the military use of track-laying tractors. Both suggestions came to the attention of the First Lord of the Admiralty, Sir Winston Churchill. He set up a Landships Committee that laid down specifications. At that time, Armoured Tanks were the only Military hardware used to move personnel on land with high protection while simultaneously mobilizing armament to the war fronts. See, in the Military Strategy these four are very important- Mobility, communication, Firepower and protection- all of which the tanks served.

Come to think of it. Tanks were the first generation of Armoured vehicles for combat operations to achieve the 4 strategies mentioned above. The commonly used APCs for Infantry Deployment today, which you seem to be familiar with, are latter-Days inventions. Above all, don't confuse yourself with pre-existing notion on Military Armoured Vehicles, please. They are only different in terms of usages- they are all meant to protect the PERSONNEL. It is not the level of armament that matters, otherwise they would be unmanned vehicles like the Drones.So the armoured Tanks that were used during the WW I were the earliest version of APCs and are still the Strongest reserved for Combat operations till date. Pele !


On the contrary, tanks, not APCs were used in WW1. It's just like calling Keke NAPEP a car. Both tanks and APCs are armoured vehicles (or Class 'A' vehicles in military terminology) but perform different functions. In the 9jan Army, the former are the exclusive preserve of the Armoured Corps while APCs are mostly used by the infantry. Other specialized uses of APCs include command vehicles (Sultan), ambulances (Samaritan), recovery vehicles (Samson) and as platform for a variety of weapons such as mortars, anti-tank guided weapons and surveillance devices.

APCs have larger carrying capacity than tanks. Also the main armament of a tank has a very much larger calibre than that of an APC. Tanks are tracked while APCs are either tracked (T) or wheeled (W). In the 9jan Army inventory, the main battle tanks (MBTs) are T-55 (Russia) and Eagle Vickers (Britain). APC variants in its inventory include Steyr Mark I and II [T] (Austria), MOWAG [W] (Switzerland), MTLB [T] (Poland), BTR [W] (Ukraine) and Cobra [W] (Turkey). Over to you. . .

Chongaiman:




On the contrary, tanks, not APCs were used in WW1. It's just like calling Keke NAPEP a car. Both tanks and APCs are armoured vehicles (or Class 'A' vehicles in military terminology) but perform different functions. In the 9jan Army, the former are the exclusive preserve of the Armoured Corps while APCs are mostly used by the infantry. Other specialized uses of APCs include command vehicles (Sultan), ambulances (Samaritan), recovery vehicles (Samson) and as platform for a variety of weapons such as mortars, anti-tank guided weapons and surveillance devices.

APCs have larger carrying capacity than tanks. Also the main armament of a tank has a very much larger calibre than that of an APC. Tanks are tracked while APCs are either tracked (T) or wheeled (W). In the 9jan Army inventory, the main battle tanks (MBTs) are T-55 (Russia) and Eagle Vickers (Britain). APC variants in its inventory include Steyr Mark I and II [T] (Austria), MOWAG [W] (Switzerland), MTLB [T] (Poland), BTR [W] (Ukraine) and Cobra [W] (Turkey). Over to you. . .

Bymbolar:
. . . Above all, don't confuse yourself with pre-existing notion on Military Armoured Vehicles, please. They are only different in terms of usages- they are all meant to protect the PERSONNEL. . .

Chongaiman: I still beg to disagree. Both tanks and APCs are AFVs but perform different roles. Basically a tank is offensive while APC is defensive.



The military puts bread on my table. If it does the same to you, then I suggest you revise your précis and notes so as not to be in doubt.

Chongaiman: I still beg to disagree. Both tanks and APCs are AFVs but perform different roles. Basically a tank is offensive while APC is defensive.



The military puts bread on my table. If it does the same to you, then I suggest you revise your précis and notes so as not to be in doubt.

Chongaiman: I still beg to disagree. Both tanks and APCs are AFVs but perform different roles. Basically a tank is offensive while APC is defensive.



The military puts bread on my table. If it does the same to you, then I suggest you revise your précis and notes so as not to be in doubt.

Chongaiman: I still beg to disagree. Both tanks and APCs are AFVs but perform different roles. Basically a tank is offensive while APC is defensive.



The military puts bread on my table. If it does the same to you, then I suggest you revise your précis and notes so as not to be in doubt.

Chongaiman: I still beg to disagree. Both tanks and APCs are AFVs but perform different roles. Basically a tank is offensive while APC is defensive.



The military puts bread on my table. If it does the same to you, then I suggest you revise your précis and notes so as not to be in doubt.

Beaf: Up 9ja! We can do it! Such news makes me so proud.
I hope the thing looks like a growling beast.

Anyways, lets use it to immediately invade Cameroon. Na me go drive am.

Bymbolar:



You are very correct guy! I was initially laughing at what somebody wrote that APCs were not used during WW I. Sadly, the guy even wrote with non-existent authority- a very poor student of History...

"During World War I (1914-1918) the British developed and used the first armored track-laying vehicles in an attempt to break the deadlock of trench warfare on the Western Front. To maintain secrecy, the vehicles were shipped to the battle zone in crates marked “tanks,” hence the origin of the name."