Nelclaret | 28 May 2006 4:28 p.m. PST |
In my Skirmish-type rules I have a basic minimum range for tanks engaging infantry with their main gun in the open (arbitrarily 6") I am assuming a HE capability for the tank and I am talking about infantry targets in the open rather than in houses or behind/within cover. Is this kind of rule common – at what range would it be more feasible to use integral MGs? What are the pros and cons? Similarly I am quite interested in mimimum ranges for infantry mortars. Any thoughts? |
Saber6 | 28 May 2006 4:53 p.m. PST |
Minimum on most tanks would be @ 10m (depression angle). Of course tanks rarely operate alone
|
Cold Steel | 28 May 2006 4:55 p.m. PST |
Except for straight ahead, tanks can not usually depress the main gun far enough down to hit a target inside 50-60 meters. Directly ahead, they can usually depress lower, but still have a minimum range of 30-40 m. Even the co-ax machine gun will not depress any lower. When things get that close, a tank has 3 choices: have another tank protect it, have friendly infantry very near, or, my preference, see how fast his tank will go backwards. |
Lentulus | 28 May 2006 5:48 p.m. PST |
", tanks can not usually depress" Does that vary by model enough to be worth worying about (in a game, of course) |
GrossKaliefornja | 28 May 2006 6:12 p.m. PST |
some tanks had cannister rounds, which would decrease the range considerably |
Ditto Tango 2 1 | 28 May 2006 6:17 p.m. PST |
Except for straight ahead, tanks can not usually depress the main gun far enough down to hit a target inside 50-60 meters Hmmmm, that seems an awfully long distance away, at least with respect to the coax. I just can't see that at all based on my experiences with modern (sort of) Leopard I and Scorpion turrets. Attacks on unaccompanied (by their infantry) tanks would simply not have been so dangerous if this were the case. Now, I've never considered a minium range for direct fire HE (though I have for mortars in the direct fire role and such), but it would make sense to me that a vehicle would be very reluctant to blast something so close by
It's a good question. |
Katzbalger | 28 May 2006 7:07 p.m. PST |
P;ease don't forget that WWII tanks generally had MG's mounted adjacent to the driver as well, so MG fire would not be limited to even 10 meters, but HE shots
never really thought about it. Rob |
DoctorStu | 28 May 2006 7:11 p.m. PST |
You should also consider muzzle blast as a weapon at really short range. You don't have to hit the infantry, just put a high velocity round downrange with them in front of the barrel. If you want an example of this, (and my primary source;) check out RED DAWN, there is a scene of this when they are trying to get the pilot (Powers Booth) back to friendly lines and they get caught in the midst of a tank battle. |
Blind Old Hag | 28 May 2006 9:08 p.m. PST |
As Sabre says 10 yards is generally the minimum range (based on depression angle) with the main gun, less with the hull MG. Mortars, depends on the ammo etc, but in general 100 yrds for 50 to 80 mm guns and for larger 120mm 200 yds. While these represent the minimum ranges they are not the minimum SAFE ranges, which are a bit more.
|
Mobius | 29 May 2006 12:08 a.m. PST |
Blasting away at units in the open at close range is not all that effective. The shell lands almost side first and may even skip. Detonation produces an odd pedal pattern of shrapnel mostly in the ballistic direction. To get better effect something vertical should be aimed at like a wall. Likewise firing base eject smoke shells at close ranges is not too effective as the shell has a tendency to skip. |
chonk34 | 29 May 2006 12:26 a.m. PST |
On the M1A1 we use the coax on infantry in the open out to about 900m. I don't think a main gun round would be considered unless the infantry were in or behind some sort of fortification or they were far enough out to "splash" a HEAT round directly in front of them. I'd say that coax or .50 cal. would be used out to about 1000m, with main gun being used from there on out. As far as minimum range, probably 20-30m would be reasonable for the machine guns and a couple hundred meters for the main gun. I know I wouldn't want a HEAT round going off too close to me. |
Grinning Norm | 29 May 2006 1:43 a.m. PST |
For very close range setting off one tile of explosive reactive armour would do wonders. Don't know if this is technically possible though. Support from other tanks would be the best protection.. |
Nelclaret | 29 May 2006 3:13 a.m. PST |
Thanks for the interesting replies. I must admit that this question was prompted after playing numerous games of 'Combat Mission' on the PC. It seemed to me that tanks were engaging infantry in the open at awfully close range with their main guns. If you try to do this with mortars in the same game you get an 'out of range' warning. Not so with armour. That started mr thinking about minis, as Combat Mission appears to be founded on its technical accuracy (FANTASTIC game, by the way) |
Dropship Horizon | 29 May 2006 4:32 a.m. PST |
Instead of guesstimating refer to the relevant US Army Field Manuals which are readily available online: link They provide a wealth of information which can be used as a base for further reasearch. Mark |
eaterofdead | 29 May 2006 4:55 a.m. PST |
vietnam there was a battle where the tanks where using behive rounds to shoot off vc. that where swarming the other tanks in the unit. for all it is worth. |
von Scharnhorst | 29 May 2006 5:14 a.m. PST |
If you are that close, why bother with the gun at all? Full steam ahead and beetle juice all over the place. |
TankGuy | 29 May 2006 11:06 a.m. PST |
Tank guns have ~ -10 degree depression with Soviet tanks ~ 3 degrees. Same for SP guns. This depression means there is, even to the front, an area near the tank that the tank's weapons can't hit. The area to the side and rear is even greater since the gun has to clear the deck. This is the reason tanks shouldn't: 1. operate without at least 1 other tank and; 2. operate without supporting infantry. Both allow you to shoot infantry in the blind area of your accompanying tank. Soviet tanks in 1941-1943 often failed to provide support for their companions, allowing the German infantry to isolate and kill a tank with personal anti-tank weapons. Magnetic shaped charge AT mines and Teller Mines worked well. 6" to the front is reasonable (30-60 meters). Even the bow machinegun has a blind area to the front. The area to the side can either be determined using a right triangle (rest one side of the triangle on the side of the tank pointing at the target and move the point of the 90 degree angle to the gun mantle. That is the blind area to the side. Do the same for the rear area. Using 1"=5 meters an approximation would be: Front 6", side 18", rear 30". Double the front blind area for the turret weapons for Soviet tanks. Note that a turret AA machinegun mount may be able to cover parts of this blind area. Last points. 1. cannister is effective only from the end of the barrel on out to the maximum cannister range. 2. WW2 German armor (Panzerjager, tanks, SG) in 1943 had smoke projectors added to the hull front or the turret. These were quickly removed or never loaded because at Kursk the Germans found out that small arms fire could set off the smoke cannisters in the launch tube, and the smoke would be sucked into the tank forcing the crew out. They started placing an internally loaded grenade launcher in the turret roofs in late 1943/early 1944. This was a single tube that rotated 360 degrees and could have either a smoke projectile or an anti-personnel cannister (the business part of the bouncing betty mine)put in it and fired from inside the tank, and then fire it in any direction. The smoke projectile would emit smoke. The anti-personnel cannister would explode in the air near the tank covering the blind area with 'ball bearings'. So, if the tank crew detected (hard to do!) enemy infantry coming in close they had some defense. 3. Allied armor had a 2" internally loaded mortar in the turret roof facing forward which could fire smoke shells out about 50 meters or so to make a smoke screen. 4. I have seen movies (any help from the TANKERS on this site) of an Abrams tank firing its armored turret smoke projectors to create a smoke screen. The screen uses 1/2 of the rounds. It spread very quickly and was anti-thermal. It was also anti-personnel because the smoke was created by white phosphorous. I think the Leopard tank's smoke projectors include anti-personnel rounds of some type – WP, air exploded projectiles, I don't know. The US projectors on the outside front of the turret are British, so a Chieftain or Challenger should have the same capability. Warriors and Bradleys also have smoke projectors so I would assume they do as well. Please do not fire these near your own infantry. TG |
Ken Sharp | 29 May 2006 12:22 p.m. PST |
The 88mm L/56 gun as mounted in the Tiger I had a depression of minus 6.5 degrees, measured from the gun trunnions. The height of the trunnions is 1.85 meters. That places the strike of the shell at 17.33 meters from the tank's trunnions. To put that in perspective, keep in mind that the length of the gun was 4.93 meters, while the tank itself was 8.46 meters overall. The round hits a little more than 2 tank lengths away. The hull MG with an approximate height of 1.6 meters, and with minus 7 degrees depression, hits about 12.9 meters in front of the tank. That all assumes that the tank is sitting on a hard, level surface that it cannot sink into, and thus shorten the above distances proportionally. Not a really safe assumption, considering it's 56 ton weight. Of course the opposite is true when the tank is cresting a rise, or similar. Mobius- The 6.5 degree angle of attack at maximum depression is sufficient to ensure detonation, just as it is when the distance and trajectory bring about a 6.5 degree angle of attack at range. The fusing for the HE shell can either set for impact, or delayed detonation. I've seen no mention of a minimum arming distance from the muzzle when the round is fired. There are cautions for the loader against loading a round without first checking the bore along with an example cartoon of what can happen should things as minor as camouflage and brush be present when a round is fired. That may be an indication that the warhead becomes armed immediately when fired, as opposed to the several meter delay possessed by more modern munitions. Regarding the pattern of fragmentation, the Tigerfibel of 1943 (operators manual) indicates that the HE round generates shrapnel 20 meters to either side and only 10 meters in the direction of fire. Since the maximum lethal radius(the distance at which an unprotected man is likely to be killed or incapacitated) for the 88 mm HE round is 16 meters, I can only conclude that the manual includes less lethal fragmentation as well in it's area of effect. The steeper the angle of attack, the closer the fragmentation pattern approaches the ideal, circular pattern. The manual also discourages firing the hull MG beyond 200 meters, and the co-ax MG beyond 400 meters as wasteful of ammunition. On early Tiger I's, four of the 10 smoke grenade launchers were usually loaded with anti personnel grenades. As they often were damaged during combat operations, a system was installed that allowed smoke, flare and anti-personnel grenades to be fired from inside the turret without exposing crew or launcher. The anti-personnel grenades burst near enough to the tank to ensure that any assaulting infantry within the tanks blind spots were dealt with, without more than cosmetic damage to the tank. And, as von Scharnhorst graphically hinted at a tank traveling at 10 KPH will cover 50 meters in less than 20 seconds. Ken
|
Ken Sharp | 29 May 2006 1:55 p.m. PST |
Tankguy- The sides of most tanks present less hindrance to depressing the main gun than does the roof of the drivers compartment, until the turret is traversed to about the rear quarter. In the Panzer III series, the rear deck represented a reduction of depression from minus 10 degrees to only minus 6. Another limiting factor of main gun depression is the desirability of a lower silhouette. Any lowering of the turret roof, to present less of a target, is accompanied by the reduced clearance for the breach end of the gun system, thus limiting depression. The detectability of infantry from tanks is situational in nature. The best infantry tactic is to hide and let the tanks come to you. If the armored force is using a bounding over-watch method of approach, a portion of the tanks will be looking with optics with a magnification of at least 3X. Any movement of infantry is likely to be spotted by the non-moving element, unless undertaken through concealed routes. There is a level of predictability of such routes, provided the attacker has adequate maps and recon. Artillerymen like that kind of predictability when they have enough assets to be speculative. If an infantry force has to attack a defensive armor force, it is best to modify the tanker's behavior. Artillery to force the commanders to button up greatly reduces their ability to detect approaching infantry. Ideally, your own tanks will give the enemy a higher priority target to occupy them while you move to engagement range. In the absence of such assets, it becomes more crucial to have multiple covered lanes of approach and enough of a numerical superiority that the grunts engaged by the armor can be in deep cover, while the other elements close with the enemy. When the armor shifts fire to the nearing new threat, the last target has to resume their advance to maintain the pressure and tempo. You know what? I just deleted four more paragraphs on how to get at tanks with infantry(I taught the Infantry Anti-armor Course at Fort Benning, Georgia for several months in the early 80's). I know that there is little I might add to the insurgents knowledge of the subject, but I'm not comfortable with the thought it might be of use to some johnny-come-latelys. Let's just say that anyone that thinks one type of weapon system or troop is the combat end-all is deluding themselves. In a crisis, you have to make do with what you have. If they can, your opponent will make you pay dearly for your short comings. Try not to let them. Ken |
Chris PzTp | 30 May 2006 6:02 a.m. PST |
"You should also consider muzzle blast as a weapon at really short range. You don't have to hit the infantry, just put a high velocity round downrange with them in front of the barrel." Someone recently related a story to me that their father (or uncle or ?) was captured during the Bulge when a German tank stuck the end of its gun into the window of the building in which they were hiding and fired off a round. The projectile didn't directly harm anyone, but the concussion instantly knocked everyone unconscious. |
TX Tanker | 30 May 2006 10:07 a.m. PST |
I was an M1A1 gunner, and one instance while on the range one day(Tank Table 8) they had a tank target pop up at a distance and an infantry target pop up close. I fired a SABOT at the tank and the petals from the round took out the infantry. So to the point I personally believe that if you are in front of a tank you are in grave danger to some degree if it shoots ANYTHING in your general direction. This might help or not, but I thought it was a good opportunity to tell that story. |
Chris PzTp | 31 May 2006 10:51 a.m. PST |
SWKearney, Nice story, thanks! As an aside to my story, the soldier in the building suffered nearly complete and permanent hearing loss as a result of his encounter with the peeping panzer. |
Martin Rapier | 01 Jun 2006 4:07 a.m. PST |
In Delaforces 'Montys Highlanders' one incident recounted is when an unfortunate Lt stood too close the end of a 17pdr when it fired. The concussion killed him. |