The war in Ukraine doesn't provide sufficient evidence that modern combined arms operations are outdated. Russia deployed combat troops significantly short on man power, leading to a situation where attacks had far more armor than infantry. See https://warontherocks.com/2022/06/not-built-for-purpose-the-... for example. It's been known since the Spanish Civil War that tanks are vulnerable to anti-tank teams when not properly supported by infantry, especially in adverse terrain. WW2-era tanks were effectively countered by anti-tank gun teams in entrenched positions, which is why they worked in concert with infantry, artillery, and close air support to suppress anti-tank guns and enable the tanks to advance. Or they could bypass these well-defended positions and attack at weaker points, taking advantage of the tank's superior tactical mobility.
While it is possible that drones and modern ATGM teams could effectively counter traditional combined arms operations, the evidence from the war in Ukraine is largely inconclusive at this time. If Russia were to correct their manpower issues, or at least be able to conduct traditional combined arms offensives in certain areas, then we'd have more solid evidence. Notably Ukraine still sees value in the tank, since they've been repeatedly requesting tanks (along with a variety of equipment) from the West.
Personally, I think we'll see an adjustment to the balance of military forces, but the tank will continue to play a pivotal role. Active protection systems will continue to improve, we'll see the expansion of short range air defenses and doctrine to counter drones (and even longer-ranged ATGMs), increased teaming of drones alongside infantry and armor (in doctrine acting as a sort of middle ground between artillery and air power), and the usage of novel indirect fires for tanks like the KSTAM.
It’s hard to get a feel for what is happening overall, but the amount of video of Russian armor of all types operating alone ( no infantry support) has been pretty shocking.
Circumstantially, its possible these are semi-abandoned and what we're seeing is attrition of the b-grade troops sent to try and recover them.
I suspect like all the other armchair experts this is actually a massive russian doctrine failure, but if I was being charitable I'd say we're not seeing the FEBA in play, this is post-fight or side-fight mop-up stuff.
And, they've been let down by spares, failure to do tire rotations in the last 5 to 10 years, fake parts, fuel quality, you-name-it. A lot of the materiel we see in the videos could be the class of stuff you would also have seen post D-Day: Dang: the duce is bust: ok, drive it off the road for later and move to another truck...
I think the biggest issue facing the Russian armed forces is that their branches don't operate well with each other. There's little inter-branch training, the command staff don't seem to know what the others are doing in the same theater, and the like. Plus, I think the fact that their logistics system is based around the train means their ability to project forces further and/or faster is limited. It's easier to just destroy a rail bridge than it is to make every dirt road impassable. It's clear, that the Russian military is suffering from multiple dysfunctions.
Taliban technicals were failures when engaging NATO forces with air support. Larger tactical aircraft can remain at medium altitude (out of MANPAD range) and smash anything that moves with precision munitions.
What does a tank do better than a technical in that situation? AFAIK they don't generally carry better-than-MANPAD AA, they're not heavily armoured enough to resist precision munitions, and they're vastly more expensive.
The situation is a bit different in forested areas. Maybe modern aircraft have thermal imaging good enough to detect heat signatures from out of MANPAD range, dunno.
Technicals can't move through heavily forested areas. Can't drive through a tree. In more lightly forested areas, aircraft targeting pods and radars can pick them up just fine.
Fun fact: Ukrainian anarchist general Nestor Makhno is credited with the invention of the technical during the Russian Civil War, in the form of a machine gun mounted on a horse-drawn wagon.
While it is possible that drones and modern ATGM teams could effectively counter traditional combined arms operations, the evidence from the war in Ukraine is largely inconclusive at this time. If Russia were to correct their manpower issues, or at least be able to conduct traditional combined arms offensives in certain areas, then we'd have more solid evidence. Notably Ukraine still sees value in the tank, since they've been repeatedly requesting tanks (along with a variety of equipment) from the West.
Personally, I think we'll see an adjustment to the balance of military forces, but the tank will continue to play a pivotal role. Active protection systems will continue to improve, we'll see the expansion of short range air defenses and doctrine to counter drones (and even longer-ranged ATGMs), increased teaming of drones alongside infantry and armor (in doctrine acting as a sort of middle ground between artillery and air power), and the usage of novel indirect fires for tanks like the KSTAM.