Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
Famous Tank Battles is a multi-season history podcast series that follows the story of armored warfare from its uncertain beginnings in the First World War to the fast-moving, technology-driven battles of the late twentieth century. Across the full series, listeners move from the muddy shock of Cambrai through the desert campaigns of North Africa, the giant armored clashes of the Second World War, the hard lessons of the Arab-Israeli wars, and finally into the era of thermal sights, modern fire control, and high-speed mechanized combat. The goal is not simply to tell battle stories, but to explain why these battles mattered, how they were fought, and what they revealed about the changing character of war.
Each season is built around one famous tank battle or armored campaign, allowing the series to go beyond broad summaries and instead explore the fighting in depth. That means the podcast does not stop with a basic retelling of who won and who lost. It looks closely at the commanders, units, terrain, planning, doctrine, logistics, communications, weapons, and tactical decisions that shaped events on the battlefield. Some seasons focus on innovation and first attempts. Others focus on adaptation under pressure, desperate defense, operational breakthrough, or the moment when older ideas about armor were challenged by new realities.
Taken together, the seasons show that tank warfare was never just about the tank itself. Armored combat was always tied to artillery, infantry, engineers, air power, supply, maintenance, and the ability of commanders to make decisions under confusion and extreme pressure. One season may highlight the birth of massed armor and surprise attack. Another may show the brutal learning curve of desert warfare. Another may reveal how industrial strength, doctrine, and sheer scale turned armored battle into something vast and devastating. Later seasons trace the rise of anti-tank missiles, night fighting, better sensors, and the professional training that defined modern armored forces.
This series is designed for listeners who want military history with both narrative energy and serious substance. It is for people who enjoy battlefield storytelling, but also want to understand the deeper lessons behind the action. Whether the subject is Cambrai, Kursk, El Alamein, the Golan Heights, the Chinese Farm, or 73 Easting, Famous Tank Battles treats each campaign as part of a larger story: the evolution of armored warfare across decades of conflict, innovation, failure, and hard-won battlefield experience.
The 70 Easting line was invisible, but for a few tense minutes on February 26, 1991, it mattered as much as any wall. It ran north and south across the map, one of the grid lines commanders used to control a battle in a desert with few natural landmarks. To the soldiers of the 2d Armored Cavalry Regiment, pushing east through dust and wind, it was a limit of advance, a place where forward movement was supposed to stop until the larger corps caught up and the next decision became clear. Yet war has a way of making invisible lines feel solid at exactly the wrong moment. At 70 Easting, reconnaissance, caution, artillery fire, and opportunity collided in the blowing sand.
If you would like to move beyond the podcast, you can see my available books at Military Author dot me. And at Trackpads dot com, you will find magazines and galleries with hundreds of thousands of photos and videos to explore.
Eagle Troop had already found the outer teeth of the Iraqi defense around 68 Easting. Tanks in revetments, bunkers, mines, and scattered enemy positions had shown that this was no empty pursuit through a broken army. The troop had entered the security zone tied to the Tawakalna Division, one of the Republican Guard formations positioned in the deeper Iraqi defense. Ghost Troop, moving nearby in the regiment’s line, was feeling the same pressure of a battlefield becoming real through fragments. The cavalry’s mission was still to screen ahead of VII Corps and protect the 1st Infantry Division behind it. But by the time the troopers approached 70 Easting, the screen was no longer merely looking for the enemy. It had found him.
A control measure like 70 Easting exists for good reasons. In a fast armored battle, units need boundaries, phase lines, and limits so they do not outrun support, collide with friendly formations, or plunge into an enemy defense before the main body can respond. These measures are not cowardice dressed up as staff work. They are how large forces keep from becoming mobs of powerful vehicles moving in different directions. The desert made them even more important because there were few roads, towns, rivers, or ridges to organize movement naturally. A grid line could tell a troop where to pause, where to report, and where higher command expected it to be. Without such discipline, speed could become confusion.
Yet the enemy does not always respect the map’s neatness. As Eagle and Ghost reached the 70 Easting line, they were not arriving at a quiet checkpoint. They were arriving under Iraqi artillery fire, the kind of fire that could be terrifying even when it was poorly aimed or ineffective. Shells do not have to hit directly to alter the mind of a battlefield. They force commanders to think about dispersal, movement, exposure, and the danger of bunching up. They remind crews that sitting still is not neutral. A halted armored vehicle may be easier to control, but it can also become easier to target. At 70 Easting, the question was no longer simply whether the troops had reached their assigned line. It was whether stopping there would surrender the momentum they had just won.
The artillery fire around the line did not break the American troops, and by many accounts it was not accurate enough to cause the damage Iraqi commanders needed. But its presence mattered because it exposed the vulnerability of a halt. A moving armored cavalry troop is hard to pin down, especially when it sees well, shoots fast, and keeps changing the enemy’s problem. A troop stopped on a line becomes something different. It must watch, wait, and absorb uncertainty while the enemy ahead gains minutes to recover, reposition, or bring more fire to bear. The Americans had spent years training to seize initiative. The 70 Easting line threatened to turn that initiative into a pause at the edge of a larger fight.
Captain H. R. McMaster, commanding Eagle Troop, faced the kind of moment that reveals whether training has become judgment. He knew the line mattered. He also knew the situation in front of him was changing too quickly for a simple mechanical answer. If he stopped and held rigidly, Iraqi forces beyond the line might gather themselves, continue firing, or slip away into better positions. If he pushed on without regard for the regiment’s plan, he risked outrunning support and losing the coordination that made the cavalry effective. This was not a movie choice between bravery and obedience. It was the harder military choice between two forms of risk. One risk came from moving too far. The other came from stopping too soon.
Ghost Troop’s experience helped show that this was not only Eagle’s problem. The regiment’s forward elements were entering a defensive zone that stretched beyond one troop’s frontage. The Iraqi army ahead was not a single tank waiting to be dueled, but a system of positions, vehicles, artillery, and command confusion spread through the storm. Ghost, Eagle, and the other troops had to maintain contact with that system without losing contact with one another. A cavalry regiment fights through relationships as much as through weapons. Each troop’s movement affects the next. A halt by one can expose a flank. A push by another can create opportunity or danger. At 70 Easting, the regiment was beginning to feel the pressure of becoming a battle line.
The shamal made every decision feel more private and more urgent. Dust reduced the visible world, and vehicle movement added its own brown curtains across the troop fronts. Thermal sights gave American crews an advantage, but they did not reveal the commander’s intent written on the ground. A gunner might see a heat source. A commander might hear reports of enemy armor ahead. A platoon leader might know his vehicles were aligned, but not know what was unfolding hundreds of meters to either side. The storm made the grid line useful because it gave structure to emptiness. At the same time, the storm made the grid line dangerous because it encouraged a kind of obedience that could leave the enemy just beyond reach.
The Iraqi defenders needed time more than anything. They needed time to understand where the Americans were, time to adjust artillery, time to shift vehicles, time to connect the local fight to the larger Republican Guard defense. The coalition air campaign had damaged Iraqi communications and punished movement, but it had not removed the basic value of minutes. A few minutes can let a tank crew traverse its turret, an artillery observer correct fire, a commander send a warning, or a unit pull back behind another position. Armored warfare often turns on these small openings. When one side is moving and the other is trying to recover, a halt can become a gift. The Americans at 70 Easting could feel that, even if they could not yet see the whole enemy line ahead.
Behind the cavalry, the 1st Infantry Division and the broader weight of VII Corps were still moving into position. That fact argued for caution. The cavalry’s job was not to win the war by itself, and no troop commander had the right to forget the corps behind him. But the same fact also argued for pressure. The cavalry was supposed to protect that corps by finding and fixing the enemy before the heavy divisions arrived. If the screen stopped at the very moment it had the enemy off balance, the main body might inherit a more prepared defense. The cavalry’s mission was becoming larger than its original wording. It was no longer only a shield. It was becoming the edge of the blow.
This is where mission command becomes more than a phrase in a doctrine manual. Mission command means leaders understand the purpose of an order well enough to act when circumstances change. It does not mean ignoring control measures because a commander feels bold. It means recognizing when the measure that preserved order a moment ago may now threaten the purpose it was meant to serve. At 70 Easting, the purpose was to maintain contact, preserve momentum, protect the corps, and prevent Iraqi forces from regaining balance. The line had served its function by organizing movement. Now the battlefield was asking whether disciplined initiative should carry the troops beyond it.
There is a quiet drama in this moment because nothing about it looks grand from far away. No capital city changed hands at 70 Easting. No famous ridge was stormed. No monument marked the line where men sat in armored vehicles listening to artillery and watching heat signatures through dust. Yet this was the kind of hinge on which armored battles often turn. The greatest decisions are not always made in the instant of firing. Sometimes they are made in the pause before the next movement, when a commander decides whether the battle is still contained by the plan or has begun to outrun it. At 70 Easting, the plan and the battle were beginning to separate.
The 70 Easting line matters because it captures the tension at the heart of modern armored warfare. Tanks, Bradleys, thermal sights, radios, and artillery gave the American cavalry enormous power, but power still had to be governed by judgment. Too little control, and a unit could rush into disaster. Too much control, and it could freeze while the enemy recovered. From Cambrai to the Gulf, armored commanders had struggled with the same problem in different forms: how to preserve order without smothering momentum. At 70 Easting, Eagle and Ghost stood on the edge of that question in a storm. The line had brought them this far, but the enemy was beyond it, and the next choice would turn a reconnaissance halt into the road to 73 Easting.