Because they have no reason to! I’m basing my answer on an earlier reply that concerned whether the NCR would restore tanks of not. Since the Republic is a paragon of economic and industrial development for the wasteland, it’s a useful point of reference for the Brotherhood and the Enclave.
History
Historically, tanks developed in order to address new challenges on the battlefield. The first tanks were intended to break stalemates on the Western Front of World War I, their armor plating designed to withstand machine gun fire long enough to allow the tank to break through, suppress enemy soldiers, and allow friendly infantry to advance. It was impossible with just infantry due to the concentration of soldiers and ordnance on a relatively tiny, short front.
Tanks then became a primary component of the battlefield thanks to the combination of speed, armor, and weapons. If you didn’t have your own tanks, then the enemy would roll over you. Even if you did, but didn’t use them according to their own strengths, they would do so too, as France learned the hard way.
Enemies
The critical issue in the wasteland is that there is no actual reason to field tanks. There are no conditions for trench warfare to develop, as the military forces of the major players are small compared to modern armies and the territories where they clash vast, while the nature of wasteland warfare means there’s no need to deploy tanks.
- The Republic does not have opponents that would require the use of tanks. Their closest competitor, the Legion, is a highly mobile nomadic force that does not rely on fixed defenses where tanks would be useful in achieving breakthroughs, and excels at guerrilla warfare. Even the Brotherhood of Steel doesn’t warrant using vehicles, as Operation Sunburst
- made it patently clear that regular infantry in the hands of a skilled commander can do the job efficiently, cleanly, and inexpensively.
- This goes double for the Brotherhood. The Brotherhood does not have enemies that would warrant the use of tanks and typically enjoys a crushing technological advantage. Furthermore, it is a very small organization that cannot afford to be engaged in battles of attrition. Tanks, while powerful, represent a level of commitment that’s at odds with their self-interest (and make it rather difficult to retreat without a trace).
- Finally, the Enclave. Its technological advantage is even more clear, particularly in its heyday, as is its necessity to avoid any sort of engagements where they can’t immediately win (so it’s basically undefended Vaults and virtually unarmed tribes). As such, the Enclave uses Vertibirds combined with their brand of power armor: Strike hard, fast, and disappear. A huge box on tracks that can’t fly is less of an answer, more of a problem.
Beyond that, the elephant in the room is that tanks are hideously expensive, even for the NCR, which has an industrial capacity supporting hundreds of thousands of citizens.
Maintenance
Now imagine what makes it tick. A tank is a very complicated and fragile machine.
Yes, you read that right.
A tank has plenty of armor and formidable firepower, but it’s ultimately fragile.
The engine, drive train, and other mobility elements have to carry around tens of tons of alloys, ammunition, weapon systems, and so on and so forth. That puts insane stresses on them and engine lifespans are rated not in days, but in hours.
For reference, in real life, T-64 engines were given a lifespan of just 200 hours of operation. In practice, despite Soviet military engineering, they statistically broke down after less than a hundred (see Steven Zaloga’s book on the tank; I’m oversimplifying things, but that’s the gist of it).
Keep in mind, that is just standard wear and tear that inevitably happens as you simply use the tank. You also have to factor in the damage to moving parts, damage to treads and wheels, rust, and other pleasantries that come with using a metal behemoth salvaged from the scrap yard.
More importantly, the NCR exists in a world that became a lot more arid and deserts, while providing an excellent area for tank operations, are notorious for the wear they put on tanks.
I’ll cite you a figure: 50%.
That’s the lifespan loss for German tanks deployed to North Africa during World War II. Simply being deployed to a desert meant they had to be serviced twice as often, as they broke down twice as fast. Note that we’re talking about tanks manufactured to specifications, during a time when the Reich had access to proper supply lines and quality materials.
So on top of having a very maintenance-intensive weapon system, they also need to put up with an increased deterioration rate.
Logistics
Now, the crux of the problem: Logistics.
Tanks are simply too expensive for the NCR to bother. If the Republic, with its industry, cannot support tanks, then the glorified salvagers of the Brotherhood or ultimate xenophobes of the Enclave most certainly cannot.
The M1 Abrams MBT consumes three gallons of fuel per mile. Fusion power isn’t exactly infinite, especially not when you’re powering a huge metal box on threads that weighs tens of tons. That means the NCR would have to find a source of fusion fuel for onboard reactors (assuming the tanks actually have fusion generators, they might as well run on fission, which means the NCR would have to find a fresh source of fissible material and a way to process it to use the tanks).
Still with me so far? That’s just the fuel. As mentioned above, you need spare parts. Lubricants (and plenty of them). Paint to protect against corrosion. Coolant to keep the tank cool in the arid wasteland. Ammunition (which is another headache, as you can’t just re-use stored ammunition). Copper for wiring. Food and water for the crew.
And all for that for a vehicle that will break down if you attempt to use it as a tank, as the vast distances that it’d have to cover would waste up a good deal of engine hours. Of course, you can transport them on specially modified trucks… Ending up spending resources and engine hours to move around a weapon that has no real purpose, as per the above.
Environment
And that’s before we get to an even more crucial problem: The prevalence of anti-tank weapons like the missile launchers, Fat Men, energy weapons (the shell is very protective, but on the other hand, energy weapons are very powerful and will wear it down at a distance), which mean that every tank would have to be protected by a large detachment of infantry.
Infantry that can accomplish any mission they are provided with, as the wasteland simply does not have threats that would require deploying an insanely expensive tank that’s impossible to keep in a working state, that couldn’t be tackled by a group of guys with rifles and a healthy supply of beef jerky.
Bonus round: Power armor
There is one rather strange myth circulating the fanbase that power armor somehow replaced tanks.
It didn’t. Power armor allows for bringing crew-served weapons into battle and using them like small arms and does indeed protection against actual small arms, but it cannot fill in the tactical niche of a tank. It’s slower, less maneuverable, has a fraction of the firepower or the ability to sustain it, and most importantly, its armor is paper mache compared to that of a tank.
We have the numbers to crunch: T-51 power armor can safely absorb 2 500 joules of kinetic energy, making it very resilient against a variety of munitions… Up to 5.56 mm NATO. Anything above that and it starts having problems. Anything in the proximity of anti-tank weapons and it has a very bad day indeed.
Which means that power armor multiplies the combat ability of an infantryman several times, but ultimately, it’s just armored infantry. Tanks would be alive and well.
Leave a Reply