"How would you do missile armed tanks in 5 Core?" Topic

So I'm statting out my micro armour and I come across three really annoying tanks:

M551 Sheridan
T72
T62

And I found out that these s have missiles, or at least some of them have variants that do. What's annoying about this? Well it's easy enough to do for the Bradley and Bimps, as they both have can opening missiles but comparative pea shooting cannons. That's not really the case for these three.

If I understand it, all three of these tanks have decent tank-killing guns but rather shortish ranges for them. So the missile was added to give them some reach. Fair enough, but how do you reflect this in 5 Core Company Commander? My knee jerk answer is to ignore them all together and just factor in that they have a missile into their effect on other vehicles and maybe say these vehicles can't fire on the move unless they are willing to take a one step reduction on their fire effect (as in an Overkill goes to a Kill) simulating that they are using the less effective gun.

I've started a chart here:

link

I'm still tweaking it so input would be helpful. I started my chart by looking at the M60A1 and comparing it to the T62A. Things went rapidly downhill from there!

My first round of games are going to be based off John Hackett's Third World War and Team Yankee to a lesser degree, so that's why I'm going to have T72s in Germany. That'll change later when I have a chance to pick-up some T64s. Like in real life, those s are expensive. Being a "British player" (as in a player who always collects a British force) I'll HAVE to finish my Brit force (which has some Challengers and Warriors, I want Cheiftains and FV432s as well) before I go for a second round of Soviets.

So what do you think? How would you model missile shooters in 5 Core? As always, Ivan, your opinion counts too! LOL!

M551 and T62 are probably similar, in terms of gun range – 1,500m for the T62, and probably thereabout for the M551, from an effective range standpoint.

T-72 has more reach than that, say perhaps 2,500m for effective range – fire control and optics aren't was good as Western tanks?

Then, of course, there are so many armor variants for the T72. I suspect that can be a bit maddening.

I'd be tempted to ignore them in the big picture, but otherwise:

If a missile equipped vehicle is stationary through the entire activation, they can fire the missile, which will give you whatever firing dice is appropriate in your mind (2K seems fair).

No missiles in reaction fire.

As far as range, the tabletop is point blank :-)

It the table top is point blank then the rationale for using the missile from a soviet perspective goes away. IIRC it was introduced to overcome the disparity of optics and gun performance. Sheridan really should be treated as a standard ATGW launcher

Sure, but I mean, put a bunch of 10mm tanks on a normal 3 foot gaming table.

How far away is the enemy to scale? 4-500 yards if we're generous?

So yeah, for some vehicles that will limit things a lot for missiles.

Of course, a lot of people prefer to have the ground scale compressed more, and that's fine too.

I use 50m per inch, so that's about 1,800m.

Of course, if you prefer metric, just go with 2 meters per millimeter, so 500mm = 1 kilometer, and 1 meter = 2 kms..

Lots of other options too, including the very simple 1mm = 1 meter, so a meter is equal to 1 kilometer.

I"d say give them an extra kill dice, no shooting on the move, and extra range.

I'm with Ivan on the 'normal' 5Core Company Command deal, but I've been playing on a 5' x 4' table, where 1"=25 yards, so the difference between the gun range and missile range actually comes into play, though you need to worry about minimum ranges too.

My two cents.

V/R,
Jack

M551 and M60A2 both fired the same missile, 3000m range with an 800m minimum range. Otherwise, the HE round has a pretty short range, not more than 1000m. No HEAT or APDS rounds for the gun, just missile or conventional HE.

The Russian systems were much better. Soviet APFSDS darts weren't as stable as the American equivalents, so have a 1200-1500m range. Even the newest 125mm rounds only reach out to 2000m. The ATGMs reach out to 4000 or 5000m and only have a 100m minimum range.

Move or fire the missiles.

Lion in the Stars: Beehive too

Are you sure about that, Lion?

All the rules I've seen, and references for the 152mm gun mention a HEAT round, which has a considerable punch. I also seem to recall 1,500m, or so as being its effective range.

Was a bit of an arcing shot (low velocity), but with a laser rangefinder, it shouldn't be too difficult to get on the target.

Yea, those Beehive rounds in Vietnam were ferocious (no ATGMs there for the M551s). One unit fired at the North Vietnamese at night, sneaking up on their positions, by sound (couldn't see them). IIRC, there were approx. 150+ bodies found the next morning (which is unusual, since they usually recovered their dead), so their true losses might have even been much greater.

Here's a pic of it, along with presumably "effective range", and penetration data:

link

Here's an article on the M60A2, which lists the "effective range" of the gun as being 1.5 kms.:

link

Hey Mako, they did make a beehive round for the Sheridan. It was one of its only saving graces in Vietnam! It was a good vehicle, it was just the gun/missile system. However the beehive round made it a scary opponent and was used as a weedwacker in the heavy brush too. Check out this book:

link

In contrast the 11th Armored Cavalry's first combat with the Sheridan was successful. In early February 1969, anticipating an enemy offensive, the regiment's 1st Squadron moved to Bien Hoa as a reaction force. Task Force Privette, commanded by Major William C. Privette, the squadron executive officer, included Troops A and B of the 1st Squadron. After an enemy mortar and rocket attack on 23 February, Task Force Privette moved out on an armored sweep and immediately encountered an enemy force. Placing the Sheridans on line, the two cavalry troops moved forward, firing canister into the enemy ranks. In the face of this firepower, the Viet Cong panicked and fled, leaving behind over eighty dead. This fight demonstrated the devasting effect of the 152-mm. canister round. The troops were impressed with the Sheridan's firepower as compared with that of the armored cavalry assault vehicle.

I don't know if it was a "good" vehicle for Vietnam, as it burned easily and wasn't heavy enough to bust jungle, but it also didn't get stuck as easily as an M48.

I though that the Shillelaghs missile had to me fired when stationary or it'd go wonky after leaving the barrel, and that they had a horrendous failure record?

A guy I knew who worked on the Sheridans said the problem was that the missile was unreliable to begin with and that firing the main gun screwed with it even further.

It also has an incredibly low rate of fire though I'm sure that cannon provides quite an oomph when you need it.

Yea, you can't fire missiles on the move.

The Sheridans were very vulnerable to mines in Vietnam.

The M48s on the other hand, were pressed into service, two-abreast, as make-shift mine-clearers, using their treads to "find the mines".

Apparently, when they did that, it'd usually only cut a track, and blow off a roadwheel, or two, which supposedly could be "easily" replaced. Yea, easy if you're not the guys doing the job in the oppressive heat and humidity, under threat of guerrilla attack, or enemy sniper fire. However, that's how they did their thunder runs back in the day, in order to clear some stretches of highway. Others would take their place in the formation, while those damaged would be left behind to effect repairs.

Yea, the recoil from firing the guns wasn't too helpful in maintaining early, complex electronics, especially on the Sheridans. When they fired their "low-pressure" gun, the vehicle would rock back, and lift off its treads, all the way back to the second, or third roadwheel.

Love this old film.
YouTube link

And this a little more up to date.
YouTube link

I was on a M551 Sheridan off and on over 5.5 years at NTC (Fort Irwin). Lucky for me we never had to shoot them as they were pretty much gutted and set up for MILES combat as OPFOR. I served with some troops that did serve on them. They said that you never new were the missile was going to go. It would even go half way down range and do a 180 and come back at you.

The main gun was to much for such a light vehicle.

Over all it was an electrical nightmare just like the M114.

Huh, thought there was only an HE/frag round for the main gun, not HEAT with a frag wrapper.

The canister round was evil incarnate in Vietnam, but the M551 was way too vulnerable to mines and ammo explosions.

I don't know if it was a "good" vehicle for Vietnam

Maybe not. I'm speaking from my experience with it. Back in '90 I was with 1/12 Cav in Knox and our Echo troop was equipped as an OPFOR Motor Rifle/T72 tank force. Yeah, they were VISMOD vehicles, but under the expanded turrets and fiberglass SAGGERs were the old M551 Sheridans. It was a very rare sight to see one of those vehicles being towed by a M88, and I don't recall ever seeing one with a thrown or broken track either.

The Echo guys I spoke to said that they ran well and weren't horrible to maintain in the field. They never mentioned anything about the electronics to me, but that training video makes them look as complex as the Abrams.

That 152mm does make the whole vehicle jump up which can't be good on the suspension! I can't see that being very good for the fire control system either!