Tank graveyard

[ArmySGT.]

Originally Posted by unkated

There is lots more detail than this; search the internet for more detail.

Uncle Ted

Those were rhetorical questions you understand. Meant to give the modellers insight into why the veterans keep telling them that WW2 tanks are dead meat and scrap metal in any T2K environment.

[Olefin]

and again the T-54 and T-55, M47, M48, M60, Leopard I, AMX-30, etc.. are still seen on Twilight battlefields, are still in forward deployed divisions and are still effective - all of those can kick a Sherman's butt any day of the week -but all of them basically have the same armor type and many of them very similar layouts to the WWII tanks you say would be dead meat in ten minutes - they have better guns and ammo and thicker armor but M1's and Challengers they arent

but they are better than the alternative - which is no tank at all

[Olefin]

And if you looked at Littlefield's collection, let alone at most museums, you see that we arent talking about WWII tanks -yes he has tanks from WWII - but the vast majority of what he has with working barrels and in operable condition, as well as other museums, are M47/M48/M60/M103/Centurions - i.e. Korean War and Vietnam War tanks

so while for some reason people keep fixating on WWII tanks the reality is that most of what will come out of museums to be used on the battlefield are the same tanks that we already see in the Twilight War - i.e. the second and third line older tanks that countries like Turkey had to use or that the UK pulled out of storage in 1998 or that National Guard units were equipped with when they get sent over

so if you run into a T-55 in Poland or Iran and its a handful to go up against because you dont have any anti-armor weapons then why isnt an M48 or M60 pulled out of a museum in California a similar handful to either oppose or have on your side

[ArmySGT.]

Originally Posted by Olefin

never said they are - but most marauder forces are hardly experienced infantrymen - most dont have any training at all in how to take on tanks - and it also depends if those commanding the tanks are stupid enough to send them into an urban environment where its a lot easier to kill them - its one thing to rain Molotov's down from the rooftops its another to go after a tank sitting in the open without good cover nearby to get close - especially if the tank has sufficient machine gun ammo on board for the coax and any turret mounted machine guns - if its just main gun weaponry then that tank is dead meat

by T2k there are no inexperienced green troops. Those guys are dead. Marauders have military personnel mixed in, the successful ones do, the unsuccessful ones would be dead.

You can take on tanks in any environment. Forest preferably, urban is second best.
Turrets can only engage targets to their relative front. When the turret is facing away from you sprint for the tank. The -10 depression of the gun applies to the coaxial too. In close and a tank has to rely on infantry or another tank to protect it from sappers.

Tankers opening the roof hatches to engage infantry with the TC or loaders machineguns? Let them. Their dead very fast from massed small arms fire and then the hatches are open. Yes, please do that. That TC hatch or loader hatch coming open is exactly what the infantry want. The massed fired on all the periscopes and gunner sights is to blind them and force them to open up.

Let your tank sit out in the open…… That just calls down artillery or mortar fire. Roof hit and it is toast. Smoke mission and it cannot engage targets.

Bundle of C4 and WP grenades on a pole….. Slip that under the tank from up close…. If you don’t blast through the belly armor the WP is going to heat it up quick.

Originally Posted by Olefin

and modern anti-tank weaponry, by 2001, is getting pretty scarce outside of areas that were battlefields - you wont find many marauders with TOW's or RPG's in Iowa for instance - so again that tank resurrected from the local museum may be quite the force multiplier for the local milita.

I agree that modern ATGMs would be scarce……. Unguided rockets like the RPG… No.

RPGS most of all, then systems that need a more sophisticated launcher like LAWS or AT4. Recoilless rifles are going to have a huge resurgence…. If you can make mortar and artillery fuzes you can make these.

You can even mount a TVS-5 on an M40A1 recoilless and give it passive night fighting capability to 1000 meters.

Originally Posted by Olefin

as for MilGov forces using the older tanks - now you have older tanks supported by experienced infantry and artillery - which makes them quite effective indeed

No you have some poor bastard stuck with a fuel hungry and labor intensive beast without a trained crew, without compatible ammunition, no compatible radios except single channel and in the clear, no maintenance personnel to speak of , and a non existent supply chain relegated to one shop with hundreds of other thing to do making one off parts only when ordered that takes day or weeks to produce if all all.

Any smart commander would refuse this tank as the waste of resources it is.

[ArmySGT.]

Originally Posted by Olefin

Which doesnt keep the Soviets from equipping divisions with T-54's and T-55's in the game - they are a pretty common tank - so given your above comment shouldnt they have all been destroyed long before 2001? (when in game canon they are still in deployed divisions in Europe, Korea, China and Iran and still effective)

Thus a tank that has none of the advantages and features of more modern tanks, designed during WWII, is still fighting on the battlefields of the Twilight War as an effective tank.

Let alone the M48, the M60, the Leopard I, the AMX-30, etc.. - all of which are part of the game and all of which dont have composite armor, although some were retrofitted with reactive armor blocks to help against HEAT

All post WW2 and with one giant glaring advantage....... a logistics chain. Parts in abundance and technicians in abundance to keep them running.

Ammunition compatibility.... They use the same MG ammo as the rest of the forces.

Lastly, they have the capability to train crews. There isn't a M4 Sherman or Panzer 4 school about to train some drivers and gunners.

[ArmySGT.]

Originally Posted by Olefin

and again the T-54 and T-55, M47, M48, M60, Leopard I, AMX-30, etc.. are still seen on Twilight battlefields, are still in forward deployed divisions and are still effective - all of those can kick a Sherman's butt any day of the week -but all of them basically have the same armor type and many of them very similar layouts to the WWII tanks you say would be dead meat in ten minutes - they have better guns and ammo and thicker armor but M1's and Challengers they arent

but they are better than the alternative - which is no tank at all

The Leopard I is the only survivable one.... Composite armor and all the protective features.

I give the same odds to the rest as I do a littlefield M4 or Panzer.

[ArmySGT.]

Originally Posted by Olefin

and again the T-54 and T-55, M47, M48, M60, Leopard I, AMX-30, etc.. are still seen on Twilight battlefields, are still in forward deployed divisions and are still effective - all of those can kick a Sherman's butt any day of the week -but all of them basically have the same armor type and many of them very similar layouts to the WWII tanks you say would be dead meat in ten minutes - they have better guns and ammo and thicker armor but M1's and Challengers they arent

but they are better than the alternative - which is no tank at all

All of those still had parts being manufactured well into the 90s. Even ammunition for the M48A5s in 90mm for Turkey and a few small Asian nations. It is the logistics and the trained maintenance that would be keeping these going even when crew after crew is killed and their blood rinsed off the equipment.

[Olefin]

And you have a shop with all those parts in abundance ready to support the tanks that they put back in the field - remember its the fact that he has trained techs and equipment and facilities that most dont have - and also the fact that the days of massed armor are over - thus his shop cant support divisions with hundreds of tanks - but the reality is that those divisions dont exist - and adding six to seven tanks, in 2001, is the equivalent of adding a hundred a few years earlier

and marauders are not highly trained forces - maybe in Europe or Korea or Iran - but not in the US - basically you are looking at gangs of thugs and survivalists, most of whom the only military training they ever had was watching old episodes of Combat on TV

the logistics train you need to support a half dozen tanks is alot less than what you need to support hundreds - and thats basically what a force with tanks has nowadays in the US - so again a place like Littefields is exactly what a T2K armored force would need in 2001 to keep going - and his guys can service an M1 tank just as easily as they can an M48

in 1997, 1998, even into 1999 the Army wouldnt want older tanks

now, as per canon, they will take anything with a turret and a main gun for a tank - and thats what an old M47/M48/M41/T55 fits to a T


oh as for mortar and artillery fire called down on the hypothetical Sherman tank sitting in a field in the US - sounds like a great idea- most Mexican forces have a max of 1-2 artillery pieces and limited ammo and mortars wont do squat to a tank, not the typical 60mm and 81mm mortars that are left - and getting a hit with an unguided artillery shell on a tank with your one or two guns is basically impossible - again this is 2001 not 1997

as for RPG's - look at the Texas module - they are describing combat Mexican forces and what they are armed with - and what they dont have is anti-tank weapons - here and there but most units dont have any - so if they dont how do a bunch of marauders who raided a gun store have RPG's?

as for massed fired on periscopes - lets see marauders using hunting rifles and shotguns - again good luck getting even close enough to make a hit on a periscope or vision block let alone taking one out while the coax turns you into swiss cheese - and unless the tank is the one from Fury I dont see it just sitting there as it takes a hell of a lot of fire or waits for the artillery to get lucky and hit the roof

thats the difference between a pillbox and a tank -a tank moves

[Olefin]

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

The Leopard I is the only survivable one.... Composite armor and all the protective features.

I give the same odds to the rest as I do a littlefield M4 or Panzer.

except Littlefield wont be deploying any Panzers as none of them have live barrels (and most of the Shermans he has are heavily modified Super Shermans he got from Israel)

as for the rest that you mentioned as non-survivable - they must be surviveable because the M48 has been fighting in Turkey, the AMX in Germany, Africa and the US (its probably the tank the Mexicans would have), the Leopard I (the original version without the improved armor) in Europe, the M60 in a bunch of US divisions in Korea, Iran, Europe and the US - otherwise they wouldnt be in the various canon books showing them as still on the equipment rosters of those forces

[ArmySGT.]

Originally Posted by Olefin

And you have a shop with all those parts in abundance ready to support the tanks that they put back in the field - remember its the fact that he has trained techs and equipment and facilities that most dont have –

You don’t have an abundance of parts. You have possibly a crew of talented fabricators….. if after all in canon any have survived the TDM, the famines, and the plagues… all per canon. After that you don’t have an abundance of parts……. You have talented fabricators that can make parts or engineer a fix on something broken. Assuming you have blueprints, not manuals blueprints with specific dimensions and materials….. You can look up in a manual that a tank gun uses part #47-B for a replacement firing pin….it is all together something else to know the dimensions in metric or English and the materials with hardening specifications to make one. A serviceable one that will function repeatedly.

Originally Posted by Olefin

and also the fact that the days of massed armor are over - thus his shop cant support divisions with hundreds of tanks - but the reality is that those divisions dont exist - and adding six to seven tanks, in 2001, is the equivalent of adding a hundred a few years earlier

So their now recreating the British first use of the tank? Throwing them away in a useless gesture in singles? A tank platoon is 2-3 and a tank company is 10 to 15 depending on national doctrine. Using them any other way is a waste of combat power and resources.

Originally Posted by Olefin

and marauders are not highly trained forces - maybe in Europe or Korea or Iran - but not in the US - basically you are looking at gangs of thugs and survivalists, most of whom the only military training they ever had was watching old episodes of Combat on TV

In the U.S. I would expect marauders to be formed from a core of veterans and deserters. Those motor cycle gangs you are scoffing have a great many disgruntled viet nam veterans that know which end the bullets come out of. Don’t underestimate mauraders and partisans as stupid or ineffective….. Read some German WW2 eastern front history or Japanese Burma campaign history for perspective.

Originally Posted by Olefin

the logistics train you need to support a half dozen tanks is alot less than what you need to support hundreds - and thats basically what a force with tanks has nowadays in the US - so again a place like Littefields is exactly what a T2K armored force would need in 2001 to keep going - and his guys can service an M1 tank just as easily as they can an M48

Originally Posted by Olefin

in 1997, 1998, even into 1999 the Army wouldnt want older tanks
now, as per canon, they will take anything with a turret and a main gun for a tank - and thats what an old M47/M48/M41/T55 fits to a T

I have read the books….. They made up a lot of excuses to forc e the setting to work. What we see in canon is National Guard and Reserves being called up and taking those relics because in canon the huge war stocks of M1s and M2/M3 siting at 29 palms, Seneca, and Sierra have been depleted armin allies. A huge stretch but that is the way the authors painted themselves into a corner.

Originally Posted by Olefin

oh as for mortar and artillery fire called down on the hypothetical Sherman tank sitting in a field in the US - sounds like a great idea- most Mexican forces have a max of 1-2 artillery pieces and limited ammo and mortars wont do squat to a tank, not the typical 60mm and 81mm mortars that are left - and getting a hit with an unguided artillery shell on a tank with your one or two guns is basically impossible - again this is 2001 not 1997

A turret hit on a M60 or a Centurion with a impact fuzed 81mm ………I’ll take that bet….. pound for pound, kilo for kilo, mortars pack more explosives than cannon shells….. The blast is going to stun the crew, strip the MGs and and antennas off, crack or shatter the TC and loaders periscopes.. the chance is remote… but, even jamming the turret traverse gears is possible. Then the spalling as pieces of the armor roof flake off and ricochet around the interior among the crew and main gun ammunition. 105mm HE from a Mexican M101 or M102…. Pretty much the same.. a near miss is survivable….. and direct impact not so much.

I’ll take that bet.

Originally Posted by Olefin

as for RPG's - look at the Texas module - they are describing combat Mexican forces and what they are armed with - and what they dont have is anti-tank weapons - here and there but most units dont have any - so if they dont how do a bunch of marauders who raided a gun store have RPG's?

They have IEDs…… and they don’t attack when the tank has the advantage… They wait for night when the tank is at a disadvantage. They deploy mines and deception to lure the tankers into kill zones, then kill or force the protecting infantry off with mortars, machineguns, and artillery. Then Mexican infantry with White phosporuous, pole charges, satchel charges under smoke and protective machine gun fire kills the tank.

Infantry units world wide practice anti tank tactics without AT rockets or ATGMs as core infantry skills.

Originally Posted by Olefin

as for massed fired on periscopes - lets see marauders using hunting rifles and shotguns - again good luck getting even close enough to make a hit on a periscope or vision block let alone taking one out while the coax turns you into swiss cheese - and unless the tank is the one from Fury I dont see it just sitting there as it takes a hell of a lot of fire or waits for the artillery to get lucky and hit the roof

You are giving me civilian hunting rifles! Ok I’ll take that bet too! Those are going to be topped with x4, x6, x8, and even x10 magnified scopes…….. I am going to detail 4-6 guys widely dispersed and give them a dedicated sector with the gunners primary site and the drivers periscope as primary targets.

Read the “Siege of Grozny” and how the Chechens stopped Russian armor attacks cold.

Originally Posted by Olefin

thats the difference between a pillbox and a tank -a tank moves

No, a tank CAN move if not disabled……. Which isn’t impossible for infantry supported by artillery. Most importantly all of these have unstabilized sights and have to stop to move..... the M60A3 being an exception with the Leopard I

[ArmySGT.]

Originally Posted by Olefin

except Littlefield wont be deploying any Panzers as none of them have live barrels (and most of the Shermans he has are heavily modified Super Shermans he got from Israel)

That puts an end to the Littlefield machine shop being able to produce anything theory.

Originally Posted by Olefin

as for the rest that you mentioned as non-survivable - they must be surviveable because the M48 has been fighting in Turkey, the AMX in Germany, Africa and the US (its probably the tank the Mexicans would have), the Leopard I (the original version without the improved armor) in Europe, the M60 in a bunch of US divisions in Korea, Iran, Europe and the US - otherwise they wouldnt be in the various canon books showing them as still on the equipment rosters of those forces

The Leopard I has always had composite armor as original armor...it is a product of the MBT - 70 program.

As for the rest.... the authors made a lot of interesting and imaginative but, sadly now canon choices....... like the Navies for example.

If those are around, functional, with trained crews, fuel, and ammunition then they must be part of Division and Corps reserved in case the other guy commits his armor to a massed attack to achieve a break through and deep battle.

This and many WW2, Korea, and Viet Nam fighting vehicles were repaired and returned to service even after entire crews have been killed more than once..... if it wasn't fire or a catastrophic ammo detonation repair was probable given trained maintenance personnel and new or cannibalized parts.

[Olefin]

Sgt - I go by canon - in canon the armored units that are left have very few tanks left - so what is a platoon today is basically everything they have left in the whole division by 2001 - so that waste of combat power and resources isnt happening because they are the British or French in 1940 - its because thats all there is left

thats why what Littlefield has would be a big deal - if all you have left is seven tanks and suddenly you can have that number doubled to 14 by adding seven of his tanks you now have an actual tank company and go back to doctrine - even if they have old style armor - its a real tank company again

and you really need to read up on what Littlefield had and what the auction had as to parts - he had a pretty good amount of spare parts for his collection - if he found six spare parts for an M48 he didnt buy one -he bought them all - and if his guys made a part because there werent any left they made a few spares while they were at it

Think of why tanks and APC's are getting rare - lack of skilled techs and equipment - he has both - meaning now those 7 tanks you have left get repaired and those six "pillboxes" you have back at base get to be operational again - thats what he has to offer - its great if you have all these spare parts (which by 2000 no one has) - you still need a place to use them, the right equipment to use them and men who know how to use it

and your idea of marauders in the US is way off - I agree totally with you in the combat zones in Europe or Alaska or Iran or Korea or China - but here in most of the US they are made up of desperate refugees, criminals, biker gangs, survivalists and anyone else who had a gun and needed food - read the US modules and you dont see large numbers of deserters and veterans - that happened more in places like Europe and Iran

sure some of them have old half remembered military training but not the vast majority of them - one read of the NYC module shows you what you are looking at - and most of them wouldnt have the first idea on how to take on a tank

as for artillery and mortars - the chance of hitting a moving tank with an unguided mortar round or artillery round fired from a group of three or four weapons is basically nil

and while the books made up a lot of excuses thats the scenario we have to work with - and its why tank graveyards in T2K are potential supply depots and not just wastes of good tanks like they are here in our world

[Olefin]

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

That puts an end to the Littlefield machine shop being able to produce anything theory.



The Leopard I has always had composite armor as original armor...it is a product of the MBT - 70 program.

As for the rest.... the authors made a lot of interesting and imaginative but, sadly now canon choices....... like the Navies for example.

If those are around, functional, with trained crews, fuel, and ammunition then they must be part of Division and Corps reserved in case the other guy commits his armor to a massed attack to achieve a break through and deep battle.

This and many WW2, Korea, and Viet Nam fighting vehicles were repaired and returned to service even after entire crews have been killed more than once..... if it wasn't fire or a catastrophic ammo detonation repair was probable given trained maintenance personnel and new or cannibalized parts.

no those tanks are in front line units - one of the best units in the Soviet forces in Iran, per the RDF and Kings Ransom, is armed with T-55's and its a frontline unit facing US and Iranian forces - ditto many other Soviet forces

and I never said he could make live barrels - the vehicles with those either had them to begin with or he bought them when they were available and had them in storage waiting to refit the vehicles - not everything he had was live - but there were enough to form a nice composite mech battalion when you add in the APC's and SPG's that worked and were functional as well - and none of them were Panzers

and live barrels are out there - Auction hunters found one in a storage bin for a M3 Stuart in Mass

[ArmySGT.]

Originally Posted by Olefin

Sgt - I go by canon

When you are in agreement with canon material. However, when you are not such as the discussion on Naval units, Division Cuba, the Mexican campaigns, Howling Wilderness, Armies of the Night, Red star Lonestar, or Urban Guerilla you will depart fast.

Originally Posted by Olefin

- in canon the armored units that are left have very few tanks left - so what is a platoon today is basically everything they have left in the whole division by 2001 - so that waste of combat power and resources isnt happening because they are the British or French in 1940 - its because thats all there is left

Yes, if you are using them in ones and twos like 1917 or 1940 then you invite defeat in detail. That would be a waste of tanks as a combat multiplier and the resources put into furnishing them and the trained crews. If a platoon of tanks is all there is in the entirety of a division in 2001, then those tanks are the division reserve and used when and where the division commander needs them. That is not a resource left to the decisions of a company, battalion, or brigade commander.
The Division Commander will hold that small number of tanks to counter an enemy armor break through or to exploit a gap made by his own infantry with artillery support to free those tanks to get into the enemy rear and kill the enemy logistics train or support troops.

Originally Posted by Olefin

thats why what Littlefield has would be a big deal - if all you have left is seven tanks and suddenly you can have that number doubled to 14 by adding seven of his tanks you now have an actual tank company and go back to doctrine - even if they have old style armor - its a real tank company again

No you have a ersatz made on the spot unit of tanks without training, without ammo, and without integral support that would be sketchy for any commander to use in a dedicated defense let alone in a attack. A unit made of mismatched armor, incompatible parts, fuel use different in consumption and type. A nightmare for a commander and enough trouble to make a S4 OIC to desert his post.

Originally Posted by Olefin

and you really need to read up on what Littlefield had and what the auction had as to parts - he had a pretty good amount of spare parts for his collection - if he found six spare parts for an M48 he didnt buy one -he bought them all - and if his guys made a part because there werent any left they made a few spares while they were at it

I have seen it and read about it…… It is neat, it is a wonderful preservation of history….. What it is not is the huge resource you claim it will be in T2k or T2K+1,+2, or +3. There isn’t a power grid to run it, or the industrial and supply infrastructure to keep it going with cutters, bits, welding gas, and material. Those factories and power plants died in the exchange and no matter how much the Littlefield collection has on hand; when the attempt to get that much equipment repaired those stock are going fast.

This is even assuming,,,,, it is a huge assumption that all these technicians who are retirees and such are have survive the TDM, famines, and plagues. Then to come to work at what has become in your vision a militarily significant target. I posit that they are dead or have departed to care for their families as best they can just like any other civilians. Dollars don’t mean much in T2K.

Originally Posted by Olefin

Think of why tanks and APC's are getting rare - lack of skilled techs and equipment - he has both - meaning now those 7 tanks you have left get repaired and those six "pillboxes" you have back at base get to be operational again - thats what he has to offer - its great if you have all these spare parts (which by 2000 no one has) - you still need a place to use them, the right equipment to use them and men who know how to use it

If the techs are alive, if the shop has power, if you have consumables, if government forces haven’t destroyed them to prevent others from using them. The reasons against the Littlefield collection being anything but another repair depot and one that can be replicated at any truck stop with the lift and cranes, are to many and too damning.

Originally Posted by Olefin

and your idea of marauders in the US is way off - I agree totally with you in the combat zones in Europe or Alaska or Iran or Korea or China - but here in most of the US they are made up of desperate refugees, criminals, biker gangs, survivalists and anyone else who had a gun and needed food - read the US modules and you dont see large numbers of deserters and veterans - that happened more in places like Europe and Iran

Nope, those bikers and survivalists will have at their core veterans from wars and actions prior to 1997. Knowing what they know, probably not going to show up for any muster or recall. Refugees? Likely as not you are right; the other groups you name will have veterans who will teach the others skills and any actions will reduce the unskilled and stupid. War is it’s own Darwinian sieve.

Originally Posted by Olefin

sure some of them have old half remembered military training but not the vast majority of them - one read of the NYC module shows you what you are looking at - and most of them wouldnt have the first idea on how to take on a tank

All it takes is one to teach… What is the Siege of Warsaw, for example.

Originally Posted by Olefin

as for artillery and mortars - the chance of hitting a moving tank with an unguided mortar round or artillery round fired from a group of three or four weapons is basically nil

You lead them like any other target. Flight time is in seconds from the call for fire from a known point. This is a core forward observer skill so I don’t know where you are coming up with your example.

Originally Posted by Olefin

and while the books made up a lot of excuses thats the scenario we have to work with - and its why tank graveyards in T2K are potential supply depots and not just wastes of good tanks like they are here in our world

Which is why the article and the title are a misnomer….. Those are Depots. Those are undamaged, nearly complete vehicles. A tank graveyard is filled with battle damaged vehicles to difficult for company and battalion assets to return to service. A graveyard like that is a Corps collection point far, far, far to the rear. These would be wrecks with a very low probability of any serviceable parts.

[swaghauler]

Originally Posted by Olefin

and your idea of marauders in the US is way off - I agree totally with you in the combat zones in Europe or Alaska or Iran or Korea or China - but here in most of the US they are made up of desperate refugees, criminals, biker gangs, survivalists and anyone else who had a gun and needed food - read the US modules and you dont see large numbers of deserters and veterans - that happened more in places like Europe and Iran

sure some of them have old half remembered military training but not the vast majority of them - one read of the NYC module shows you what you are looking at - and most of them wouldnt have the first idea on how to take on a tank

The FBI tracks various criminal groups in the US. Most "motorcycle clubs" are comprised almost entirely of veterans (many with combat experience).
The Sovereign Citizen movement is comprised of at least 50% veterans and the movement has a "basic training" program for new members. The KKK also has a "basic training" program run by former vets. The various "Militias" throughout the north east and the south are usually headed by vets. There was even a report by the Feds about various gangs in CA and TX joining the Army and then going AWOL after basic. These "bangers" would then come home to their fellow gangsters bragging about "infiltrating" the Army and getting "trained to kill." This doesn't even cover private citizens who attend classes at places like Thunder Ranch, Gunsite, Tactical Response, Valor Ridge, or DTI; Many of these "paramilitary" by nature.

[swaghauler]

Originally Posted by Olefin

as for artillery and mortars - the chance of hitting a moving tank with an unguided mortar round or artillery round fired from a group of three or four weapons is basically nil

and while the books made up a lot of excuses thats the scenario we have to work with - and its why tank graveyards in T2K are potential supply depots and not just wastes of good tanks like they are here in our world

Any forward observer worth his salt would "prefire" on a tank (call fire on where he thought the tank would be in about 5 seconds). Starting in the late 80's, Fire Direction took an order of magnitude increase in capability (even with WW2 M114s or Vietnam era M102s) due to the invention of laser rangers and GPS.
Even in the aftermath of an Exchange; It would be possible to equip a forward observer with a civilian laser rangefinder (the kind you find at gun shops) and a GPS. These devices used together (if GPS signal is present) will give even an average Forward Observer a pinpoint CEP (1 to 3 meters).

We have the advantage of Hindsight, unlike the Devs. We should use our hindsight to improve the game. The devs believed that M48s and M60s would "soldier on" in mothballs. We know that they did not. This doesn't change the premise of the game; We should strive to "modernize" Twilight with our 20/20 view of the last years depicted in the game.

[Panther Al]

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

The Leopard I has always had composite armor as original armor...it is a product of the MBT - 70 program.

You have your Leo's confused.

The Leo 1 Predates the MBT70 program, where as the Leo 2 program was built off of the German successor to the failed MBT70. So, no, the Leo 1 has no composite armour as originally built (later marks did on the turret, after a fashion).

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

Those M48s, M60s, and T55s don't stand a chance against the current ATGMs and can't fight at night anyway. Israel doesn't have a lot of friends that they can sell to any way. The ones that they would sell to can do better than this stuff at home.

It's surprising that they haven't repurposed those hulls. The Israelis still field heavy APCs based on the T-55 hull (the "Achzarit"*) and they use other obsolete MBT hulls for dedicated combat engineering vehicles. Those must be bottom-of-the-barrel examples to be completely discarded.

*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IDF_Achzarit

[ArmySGT.]

Originally Posted by Raellus

It's surprising that they haven't repurposed those hulls. The Israelis still field heavy APCs based on the T-55 hull (the "Achzarit"*) and they use other obsolete MBT hulls for dedicated combat engineering vehicles. Those must be bottom-of-the-barrel examples to be completely discarded.

*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IDF_Achzarit

They are just making purpose built engineering and breeching equipment on newer hulls. The obsolete systems are probably running out of parts and it would be expensive and redundant to make parts for those and Merkava Mk3 and Namurs. That and they have been going heavy on wheeled armored MRAP types lately.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

They are just making purpose built engineering and breeching equipment on newer hulls. The obsolete systems are probably running out of parts and it would be expensive and redundant to make parts for those and Merkava Mk3 and Namurs. That and they have been going heavy on wheeled armored MRAP types lately.

That makes sense. They have so many old T-54/55 chassis, though, a lack of spare parts probably isn't prohibitive. And I reckon that the unit cost of the Achzarit is considerably lower than that of the Namer.

That said, the Namer looks badass. I'd take a Namer over an Achzarit any day. It was evaluated by the U.S. as a Bradley replacement. I kind of wish it'd won.

[Raellus]

An HE or WP 81mm mortar round can take out even the most modern MBTs. A direct hit on the engine deck can cause a total mobility kill. A hit close enough to the wheels/track/track return can cause a temporary mobility kill.

[ArmySGT.]

Originally Posted by Panther Al

You have your Leo's confused.

The Leo 1 Predates the MBT70 program, where as the Leo 2 program was built off of the German successor to the failed MBT70. So, no, the Leo 1 has no composite armour as originally built (later marks did on the turret, after a fashion).

You're probably right. I am thinking of some cut away views of various tanks and Leo I's where a part of that. Might be a later model of Leo I that I am thinking of.

[raketenjagdpanzer]

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

Even the MK 1s are a drain on resources when they a fielding the MK3 and the MK4 is in development.

Those M48s, M60s, and T55s don't stand a chance against the current ATGMs and can't fight at night anyway. Israel doesn't have a lot of friends that they can sell to any way. The ones that they would sell to can do better than this stuff at home.

The Israelis rebuilt their M48s as ATGM carriers. They apparently still think enough of them to keep them in the line in that role.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

I see such places as the Littlefield collection as a great resource but for their workshops, not so much for the vehicles.
I think this because I see the major issue with trying to bring older armoured vehicles back to life is simple economics - how many resources are you going to consume to bring back a very mixed fleet of vehicles with limited potential?

I think the newer vehicles might be brought back for direct combat and the older vehicles for recce work depending on the perceived threat but they all will be subject to the economics - is it really worth pouring all these resources into a vehicle that could be fuel hungry, has no ammo, has limited spares, is a maintenance hog etc. etc.
I think the answer can be yes but on a very limited scale. If not, they're going to be destroyed so the enemy can't get them.

These places simply don't have the resources that a proper vehicle maintenance facility has access to. If you end up committing serious quantities of materiel on a vehicle or three that you are a bit nervous of sending into combat for any of the reasons mentioned above - then yes, sometimes no vehicle is better than any vehicle.

Plus any armoured vehicle recovered from a museum/collector's fleet may not be as armoured as it looks. There's no telling how much damage the armour took before it was restored because these places want a vehicle that looks as though it's working, they don't need to replace damaged armour plates with new armour plates. In most cases it would either be too expensive or they simply wouldn't be allowed to buy armour plate - if you want it, you cut up a donor vehicle for it.

Like I say, I think the workshops are the real treasure in these places, all those tools and POL stores, stocks of basic metal and various fasteners (rivets, bolts etc. etc.) They'll be worth more for keeping current vehicles running than they will be for resurrecting older types.

[CDAT]

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

You can take on tanks in any environment. Forest preferably, urban is second best.
Turrets can only engage targets to their relative front. When the turret is facing away from you sprint for the tank. The -10 depression of the gun applies to the coaxial too. In close and a tank has to rely on infantry or another tank to protect it from sappers.

Yes, but if you can not sneak up on them, or do not know they are there it will be murder on the troops on the ground. One experience I know of my brother was in the battalion command tank section (two tanks) they were parked behind the TOC when an infantry company came out of the woods to take the command post, the two when the CP saw the troops coming up the hill they let the tanks know and the two tanks destroyed the company with no losses on there side. Now yes this was in training with MILES gear but if it had been live the results most likely would have been the same. Infantry can do anything, but with out the right tools they can not do everything. No anti-tank weapons, you are going to have a very hard time taking out a tank, even a WWII one. As for if you get to close for the weapons, if it is a single tank maybe. If there is more than one we can just shoot the troops as it will not do any damage to the tank. Also some tricks that some used, fire your smoke grenades they are WP. WP will not hurt the tank but does the infantry. Some tankers have put Claymores around the tank with the controls ran to the driver so if you get close just fire it off, and say good night to the troops. Again it does not real damage to the tank (messes up the paint and that is about it).

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

Tankers opening the roof hatches to engage infantry with the TC or loaders machineguns? Let them. Their dead very fast from massed small arms fire and then the hatches are open. Yes, please do that. That TC hatch or loader hatch coming open is exactly what the infantry want. The massed fired on all the periscopes and gunner sights is to blind them and force them to open up.

You do know that not all tanks have to expose them self to use some/all of there machine-guns. For example both the M1 and the M60 can fire there Commanders MG from inside with out exposing them self at all. Some other thoughts when I was in basic (early 90's) they were still using some M60 and so we took some classes where they talked about them. The M1 was the worlds deadliest tank (you can argue other nations equivalents), and the M60 was considered the worlds best defensive tank, it did not have the mobility the M1 had, but had a better thermal sight, more ammo and from prepared positions would have torn up any tank in the world at the time.

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

Let your tank sit out in the open…… That just calls down artillery or mortar fire. Roof hit and it is toast. Smoke mission and it cannot engage targets.

Artillery yes, mortar I do not think so. One of my drill sergeants talked about how his tank in Desert Storm drove through an anti-personnel mine field, they were part way in before they noticed it, after they got out looked for damage. All that it did was take some rubber off the tracks. Tanks are very tough (not invulnerable but very tough). As for the smoke, if it is not thermal smoke do not expect it to give you any cover, we can see through smoke.

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

Bundle of C4 and WP grenades on a pole….. Slip that under the tank from up close…. If you don’t blast through the belly armor the WP is going to heat it up quick.

As already covered WP does not really affect the tanks, C4 you are going to have to spend some time placing it if you want it to do more than just mess up the paint. Good luck with that if you have a half way competent tank section.

[robert.munsey]

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

<snip>
"You can take on tanks in any environment. Forest preferably, urban is second best. "

Spoken like a true 'light fighter'. While you 'can' take on any tank in any environment and you name the two best environments to do so, most of what you write is based on old tactics and the fact that you have an inexperienced crew.
An 'experienced' crew is one that has trained together for no less than six months. Once you get an experienced crew, most of what you point out is null in void.

"Turrets can only engage targets to their relative front. When the turret is facing away from you sprint for the tank. The -10 depression of the gun applies to the coaxial too. In close and a tank has to rely on infantry or another tank to protect it from sappers."

Wow...this assumes that the tank will sit still and let the 'sapper' to close with the tank. No tanker worth his salt will fight closed hatch. I never did so. I have watched units in NTC (Ft. Irwin) get slaughtered trying to fight open protected when I was an O/C. In Iraq we never fought closed hatch and we were in a 'Urban' environment. Don't get me wrong, a tank can get killed, especially when you don't have support, but to say all you need is a set of brass balls and some C4, is stupid and short sighted.

"Tankers opening the roof hatches to engage infantry with the TC or loaders machineguns? Let them. Their dead very fast from massed small arms fire and then the hatches are open. Yes, please do that. That TC hatch or loader hatch coming open is exactly what the infantry want. The massed fired on all the periscopes and gunner sights is to blind them and force them to open up."

Lots of assumptions there buddy...and spoken like a true light fighter.....once the snaps of hornets (incoming fire) starts I drop down and tell the gunner to hose the area with coax and light the grunts up with fifty, all while the driver is moving. Why do you think we have TUSK kits and SCWS or 'Pope' glass. It is snipers, not massed infantry or smalls arms fire. SNipers killed one of our lieutenants during our last few months in Habbaniyah, Iraq, when the insurgents got smart and started having trained snipers shoot at us. When just mounted the windscreen glass in ad-hoc side shields. That allowed us to operate open hatch and not get shot, but it still could happen.

Let your tank sit out in the open…… That just calls down artillery or mortar fire. Roof hit and it is toast. Smoke mission and it cannot engage targets.


Yeah, yeah heard this allot too. You know it tanks over 54 rounds from 8 155mm howitzers to concentrate the rounds to knock out a tank (mostly mobility kills mind you). Look at the studies from Sill on this, 432 rounds and one tank kill out of four tanks to show for it and those tanks were STATIONARY.
Granted in the Ad-Hoc stateside Museum quality tanks you could rain death and get a few more, but be serious.

Bundle of C4 and WP grenades on a pole….. Slip that under the tank from up close…. If you don’t blast through the belly armor the WP is going to heat it up quick.

Dang boy, use an IED, it is much better. That old Nam trick doesn't work any more. The WP grenade does nothing to the tank but piss the crew off. I think you meant M8 Thermite grenade.
Also take a look at the amount of explosive in anti-tank mines to get an idea of the amount of power you need. Hand Grenades don't do it.

I agree that modern ATGMs would be scarce……. Unguided rockets like the RPG… No.

I think there would be a lot more RPGs then most people think. In the states however I would agree, that they would be scarce. Now homemade rockets, ok but they would not have ready made EFP warheads, unless you have a machine shop and a ready supply of copper.

RPGS most of all, then systems that need a more sophisticated launcher like LAWS or AT4. Recoilless rifles are going to have a huge resurgence…. If you can make mortar and artillery fuzes you can make these.

By fuzes I take you mean simple fuzes (point detonating) right? Because many modern (even WW2) fuses use very sophisticated arming systems to get them to explode at the right height. above the ground.

You can even mount a TVS-5 on an M40A1 recoilless and give it passive night fighting capability to 1000 meters.

Wow that is an OVER statement of the TVS-5. I have never seen one that good, Even with the rebuilt depot ones with the new image tubes. The TVS-5 sucks donkey urine (and I am being nice).

No you have some poor bastard stuck with a fuel hungry and labor intensive beast without a trained crew, without compatible ammunition, no compatible radios except single channel and in the clear, no maintenance personnel to speak of , and a non existent supply chain relegated to one shop with hundreds of other thing to do making one off parts only when ordered that takes day or weeks to produce if all all.

I think we are explaining the what ifs, but the same could be said about the IED makers in Iraq and A-stand (or even the IRA or Columbia). The person supporting and keeping the beast running is a very special person and is part of the battlefield equation that a Commander in T2K will have to weigh on keeping a tank around.

Any smart commander would refuse this tank as the waste of resources it is.

Your words, and lets just say that we disagree. I will take a tank any day. However I am biased as I am a crust old DAT.

Now where is that can of fuel.......

[LT. Ox]

Here goes...
Thermite, I can make it right here in my little shop. I am near 67 years old but I can get close enough to a tank in this part of the world to use said thermite in one of perhaps a dozen locations on any armor.
Now is that just wishful thinking? I think not but then I have been in the field for a week or two at a time, I got tired. How many hours do you think anyone will sit in our presumed world of 2000 to 2013 in a tank?
If you separate the foot soldier from armor even in our modern tech world it is a target for a number of tactics to render it ineffective.
I can also make a claymore, now said separation is a fact. What personnel are still around will be buttoned up. I know what they taught us a long time ago about staying buttoned up without infantry support. They taught us the positon we were to assume was our head between our legs and kissing our well you should say a prayer cause your goin to judgment soon.
A note on who will or will not be roaming around in the States. Just because a person has taken an oath to defend this country against all enemies foreign and domestic does not mean that person will not take whatever he can. I have spent a good deal of time in study and observation of organized crime and served with two states taskforces related to them. Those being California and Colorado and they were related to drug trafficking. The major players were Motorcycle outlaw groups and Latin and Hispanic groups IE MS13 etc.
Weapons; way more than any prepper groups I ran across and the outlaws have the willingness to use them.
Training; both groups had a large number of prior service personnel and they worked at training others in the “clubs”.
Money; or the means to procure needed equipment, that goes without question.
My take is the threat posed by such groups is perhaps more serious than ANY other and more so her in the States than any other area of the
World (except down under, I had to put that in!!)

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by LT. Ox

...(except down under, I had to put that in!!)

We only have to worry about the wildlife down here. Anyone you meet is more likely to call you a dick head and then hand you a beer (a real one, not that weak arse camel piss you've got in the US).

[ArmySGT.]

Originally Posted by CDAT

Yes, but if

Oh the “What if” game. This is when “discussion” spirals into the ground.

Originally Posted by CDAT

Yes, but if you can not sneak up on them, or do not know they are there it will be murder on the troops on the ground.

Pre dawn darkness and engine idling to charge batteries is an excellent time. Among others.

Originally Posted by CDAT

One experience I know of my brother was in the battalion command tank section (two tanks) they were parked behind the TOC when an infantry company came out of the woods to take the command post, the two when the CP saw the troops coming up the hill they let the tanks know and the two tanks destroyed the company with no losses on there side. Now yes this was in training with MILES gear but if it had been live the results most likely would have been the same.

Actually, No. This is a training scenario…. Everything is forced to produce that force on force contact. Find a CP and call artillery on it. Not a good example of what happens…. Weapons like the M203 and the grenades can’t be simulated in MILES. As for training, better than none! Not a good example for this discussion though.

Originally Posted by CDAT

Infantry can do anything, but with out the right tools they can not do everything. No anti-tank weapons, you are going to have a very hard time taking out a tank, even a WWII one. As for if you get to close for the weapons, if it is a single tank maybe. If there is more than one we can just shoot the troops as it will not do any damage to the tank.

Infantry trains to get it done without ATGMs being available. It is one of these “Nuclear Battlefield” training points. EMP could destroy the gunners sights of the Dragon and TOW. Fire, satchel charges, pole charges, command detonated mortar rounds, AT mines rigged to command detonate, using detonation cord and mortar rounds to drop trees or walls on tanks. With more preparation and engineer support then you get AT traps like pits and trenches.

ATGMs are like a crescent wrench in an overflowing tool box.

Originally Posted by CDAT

Also some tricks that some used, fire your smoke grenades they are WP. WP will not hurt the tank but does the infantry. Some tankers have put Claymores around the tank with the controls ran to the driver so if you get close just fire it off, and say good night to the troops. Again it does not real damage to the tank (messes up the paint and that is about it).

This scenario is discussion the relics in the Littlefield and other collectors……… These don’t typically have smoke dischargers. By T2K smoke grenades for those are probably as scarce as anything else.

Now those are valid defenses…… But they are also one shots….. You are not going to get many properly using the terrain.

Originally Posted by CDAT

You do know that not all tanks have to expose them self to use some/all of there machine-guns. For example both the M1 and the M60 can fire there Commanders MG from inside with out exposing them self at all. Some other thoughts when I was in basic (early 90's) they were still using some M60 and so we took some classes where they talked about them. The M1 was the worlds deadliest tank (you can argue other nations equivalents), and the M60 was considered the worlds best defensive tank, it did not have the mobility the M1 had, but had a better thermal sight, more ammo and from prepared positions would have torn up any tank in the world at the time.

Of those in the discussion this applies to the M48 and the M60 so I agree with you. However, only the M60A3 TTS has a thermal sight for the gunner. The periscopes do not. Blind those periscopes and this doesn’t matter.

Originally Posted by CDAT

Artillery yes, mortar I do not think so. One of my drill sergeants talked about how his tank in Desert Storm drove through an anti-personnel mine field, they were part way in before they noticed it, after they got out looked for damage. All that it did was take some rubber off the tracks. Tanks are very tough (not invulnerable but very tough). As for the smoke, if it is not thermal smoke do not expect it to give you any cover, we can see through smoke.

Those in discussion do not have thermal sights, possibly passive / active infrared though.

AP mines sure. They have a charge measured in ounces. Not going to affect a tank tread by itself.

I did the hole deeper, cluster there 81mm HE rounds, remove the fuzes, pack the wells with C4, add a blasting cap just to be redundant, then cap it with the AP mine and weather proof….. I have a mobility kill. Then I wait to engage the recovery team from long range with MG fire and mortars. I want to kill those mechanics and their M88 as badly or more than one line tank.

I separate the tanks from infantry, I separate the tanks from mutual support, then destroy them in detail, usually when and where I can get them to dismount.

Originally Posted by CDAT

As already covered WP does not really affect the tanks, C4 you are going to have to spend some time placing it if you want it to do more than just mess up the paint. Good luck with that if you have a half way competent tank section.

Spread out around the tank, sure. Detonated beneath the hull where the affect is contained another crispy, smoky story. A 8, 10, 15 kilo charge in a satchel under the belly is going to do a lot. Placed against the last road wheel and the belly, the road wheel and torsion bars are coming off. I also have time to make shaped charges or use the cratering charges used to destroy roads, bridges, and bunkers. All depends on what can be carried or what it tanks to lure the tank right up onto it.

[ArmySGT.]

Originally Posted by robert.munsey

Your words, and lets just say that we disagree. I will take a tank any day. However I am biased as I am a crust old DAT.

Now where is that can of fuel.......

I am not going to spend time editing that to reply.

Here is how you do it.

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

Ok, I am very guilty or compulsive about this.

How to...... Well, I use the "Quote" button of course just as normal. such as this.


and you get that.

Now the operative part that makes it a "Quote" is what is between the square brackets [ or ].

Now I will Quote again replacing [ with an elliptical bracket ( so you can see the code.
(QUOTE=ArmySGT.;35723) (/QUOTE)

So I can chop up a lengthy post into manageable pieces and reply to each part I simply put the (QUOTE=ArmySGT.;35723) and (/QUOTE)

ahead of each sentence or paragraph I wish to quote as a separate piece.

Note, that each quote must be proceeded by (QUOTE=ArmySGT.;35723) and then by (/QUOTE) to function as a "Quote".