Tank graveyard

[Olefin]

Oh and Sgt - yes I do have my disagreements with canon - there are a lot of holes in it you could drive any tank of your liking right thru - but the basic premise of what tanks are still in operation, how many are left and why by mid July of 2000 is one that I find believeable - and the fact that MilGov and CivGov were calling anything in the US with a turret and a gun a tank by mid July of 2000 even more so tells me they would be raiding museums, collections, graveyards to get anything into operation they could get their hands on

If they are calling M728 CEV's tanks (as the US Army guide specifies) then I dont see them being too picky as to what they would take for tanks in that situation

And the US Army still had war stocks of 90mm ammo for the M48 in the real world into the time frame of the game

[Raellus]

I guess the argument is not that tanks are invulnerable, but that the "typical" marauder, c.2000, wouldn't know how to kill them. That's not a black or white issue either.

Certainly, this would be true of some marauders- completely inexperienced and ill-equipped forces. These folks would probably experience what the Germans called "tank fright". They would be much more likely to panic when encountering any kind of heavy armor; they probably wouldn't know how to destroy a tank without dedicated AT weapons.

That said, not all marauders are going to have that little experience/training when it comes to dealing with armor.

In every Europe-based campaign module I've looked at, most marauder groups are described as being, in effective, deserters- men with military experience. Many of these guys would have enough experience with armor not to freak out when encountering one or two tanks. Furthermore, they might know a couple of tricks to disable or destroy armor. I'm sure that at least some Mexican/Cuban/Soviet marauder groups operating in CONUS would be similarly capable.

Another variable is access to AT weaponry. Even an old 1st gen. LAW could take out WWII and most Cold War era MBTs, if used correctly. Heck, the Germans were handing out Panzerfausts to 14-year-old Volksturm units in the last days of WWII. With very little training and no experience, some of these kids managed to kill T-34 and JS-2 MBTs.

[robert.munsey]

Yes I agree that tanks are not invincible, but t seems that a few are posting that it is very easy to do so with A, B and C and viola you have a smoking ruin. It is not that easy. However I have seen some stupid tankers get them selves into trouble.
So the tank grave yard or Museum would allow a force to acquire something that 'could' tip the balance. That item maybe a tank or just an APC, but the point is that it will tip the balance until the other side figures out how to restore the balance if they have lost. That is the GM's role in the game.
That aside, any infantry men that say they can whip out a tank with all the items mentioned, I will say that depends on a few factors, but it is not as simple as put together some home made C4 and put it on a bundle and blow the tank up. Nor is it easy to pull the tank off the VFW yard and fill it up with fuel and send it on it's way either.
However at least all posters here are thinking how a item from a tank grave yard would effect their game. Also others have posted tactics a player group could use to overcome the obstacle, after they put some steel back into their spines of the NPCs that just faced the metal monster.

I have to be nice to the infantry, but remember you guys hate to admit, but you need us tankers......and you cannot do it all yourselves.
Crusty old tanker......

[robert.munsey]

Originally Posted by Raellus

I guess the argument is not that tanks are invulnerable, .

Yes the tanks are! Don't listen to the "light Fighter" Hype!

We just need grunts as much as they need us.......

[Olefin]

By the way older tanks aren't all equipped like WWII Shermans FYI

M48A3 - spall liner for the crew, infrared fire control system installed

M60A3 had a laser rangefinder, solid state ballistic computer, and crosswind sensor and a tank thermal sight. They were also fitted with a muzzle reference system, a Halon fire extinguishing system, a vehicle engine exhaust smoke system, and hardware to allow the mounting of equipment such as chemical alarms.

[Legbreaker]

Tank crews do not have eyes in the back of their heads. They have some MASSIVE blind spots, especially when buttoned up. Therefore, with a bit of patience and some small amount of skill, it's not that hard to sneak up close enough to use improvised AT weapons against them.
Yes, it takes balls, but it can be done.
This is why tanks should NEVER operate in close country without infantry support.
https://youtu.be/V7fZ4wxWP1Q

And older tanks are much more vulnerable to improvised weapons than newer one. Isn't that one of the reasons tank design is always being improved? Taking a 50+ year old AFV onto a modern battlefield is just begging for destruction.

[Olefin]

and again - I highly doubt that MilGov and CivGov would go thru the effort of bringing older tanks back to life and deploying them in combat and forget that they need infantry support

if you read this thread it sounds like that marauders are all experienced veterans who can knock out tanks with ease and that the organized military forces of the US are rookies who send tanks out with no infantry support of any sort to fight infantry, which no one has tried since 1943 since the Germans found out the hard way why that didn't work at Kursk

thus the tankers don't need eyes in the back of their heads - that's what the sergeant leading a couple of squads of infantry is there for while the tank uses its main gun to take out fun things like other tanks, APC's, pillboxes etc..

Plus tanks have become something of a rarity by 2001 - so while there may be people who know how to take out tanks they may not be ready to do so - its one thing if you have been facing tanks for years - its another when one shows up out of nowhere to support that pesky infantry you are used to fighting

[swaghauler]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Tank crews do not have eyes in the back of their heads. They have some MASSIVE blind spots, especially when buttoned up. Therefore, with a bit of patience and some small amount of skill, it's not that hard to sneak up close enough to use improvised AT weapons against them.
Yes, it takes balls, but it can be done.
This is why tanks should NEVER operate in close country without infantry support.
https://youtu.be/V7fZ4wxWP1Q

And older tanks are much more vulnerable to improvised weapons than newer one. Isn't that one of the reasons tank design is always being improved? Taking a 50+ year old AFV onto a modern battlefield is just begging for destruction.

That's why track drivers call mechanized infantry, "Crunchies!"

[swaghauler]

A quick question while we are putting all these older AFVs back into service. Where is all the gas (or if its European, diesel) coming from? An M4 Sherman (indeed most WW2 AFVs from the US) use older gas engines. These had points, carbs and floats that would have to be changed to enable the use of ethanol (methanol won't work in these older engines). Who's fabricating the new piston rings, bucket tappets, and lifter springs that will be needed to withstand the higher burn temps of ethanol? There is this idea out there that all of these older vehicles are "plug and play" with alternative fuels just like the newer "FlexFuel" cars mandated in the US today. Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, the major reason the US didn't switch to ethanol or a gas/ethanol mixture during the Oil Crisis was the inability of older gas engines to use ethanol without damage. I remember the old jeeps and gamma-goats; They wouldn't run properly if there was too much water in the gas.

[Olefin]

Originally Posted by swaghauler

A quick question while we are putting all these older AFVs back into service. Where is all the gas (or if its European, diesel) coming from? An M4 Sherman (indeed most WW2 AFVs from the US) use older gas engines. These had points, carbs and floats that would have to be changed to enable the use of ethanol (methanol won't work in these older engines). Who's fabricating the new piston rings, bucket tappets, and lifter springs that will be needed to withstand the higher burn temps of ethanol? There is this idea out there that all of these older vehicles are "plug and play" with alternative fuels just like the newer "FlexFuel" cars mandated in the US today. Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, the major reason the US didn't switch to ethanol or a gas/ethanol mixture during the Oil Crisis was the inability of older gas engines to use ethanol without damage. I remember the old jeeps and gamma-goats; They wouldn't run properly if there was too much water in the gas.

You would have to switch them over to run on ethanol and methanol - just as was done with thousands of other vehicles in the game. I didnt say you would be able to just fire them up and take them out (now if you had gasoline or diesel thats different - and most of the older vehicles I am talking about ran on diesel by the way - unless you are talking WWII vehicles only)

By the way FYI - the Super Sherman that Littlefield has that has the live barrel and is 100% operational that he got from Israel - it has a diesel engine

"Quote:
Originally Posted by Olefin
The Mexican Army is not trained to take on armored forces - they are basically an anti-insurgency force, not a force trained to take on tanks. Now could they have been trained to do this - yes, at least the initial forces that were sent into the US. However I am betting that by 2001 the replacement conscripts that make up most of their forces didnt get much in the way of training before they got sent into the US.

Ridiculous. The Mexican infantry trains for anti-armor missions just like any other. They field an assortment of anti-armor weapons throughout their organization. The Mexicans in real life field recoilless rifles and these is a far easier round and fuse to manufacture. The Mexicans may have a far more robust AT defense in T2K given M40A1 106mm RRs in the force structure. M3 Carl Gustaf RRs at company level too, again a far easier round to manufacture. Both are essentially fuse superquick and the warhead is HEAT. "


Its one thing to be trained in how to use a weapons system - its another to be trained to use alternate ways to take out a tank other than a bottle of flaming gasoline. And the Mexican Army, as per multiple canon references and also real life references, is mostly a conscript army that is specifically trained to take on rebels, not armored forces.

Thats why in the game they needed Division Cuba - because the Soviets in Cuba had what they didnt have - a fully armed and equipped division armed with tanks and anti-tank weapons. Thats what stopped the 36th in its tracks during the counterattack.

And if the Mexicans are so well trained against tanks then why does a force that includes APC's and anti-tank weapons basically get butchered by the Soviets during the taking of Brownsville - per the module if they get there they only lose a single BTR against a large well equipped marauder force?

By what is being said here by several people that Soviet force, which only included BTR's and trucks, no tanks of any sort, which had no artillery support by the way, with all its infantry mounted in vehicles, should have been butchered left and right by all those veteran soldiers that were part of what was described as a very well equipped and trained Mexican marauder force (they were Mexican Army that had went marauder) - so that shows the reality of what armor does to marauder forces in the game

If they couldnt stop a small force of BTR's in an urban assualt that were unsupported by artillery then I highly doubt they could have handled tanks

[unkated]

Originally Posted by swaghauler

A quick question while we are putting all these older AFVs back into service. Where is all the gas (or if its European, diesel) coming from? An M4 Sherman (indeed most WW2 AFVs from the US) use older gas engines. These had points, carbs and floats that would have to be changed to enable the use of ethanol (methanol won't work in these older engines). Who's fabricating the new piston rings, bucket tappets, and lifter springs that will be needed to withstand the higher burn temps of ethanol?

The easiest way would be to pull the engine and replace it with a more modern truck engine of comparable power.

Now, note that I said "easiest", not that it would be easy. It would take a well-equipped garage and a knowledgeable team to do so. But it would probably be easier than to locate working antique replacement parts, or get the specs to some mechanical artist with a well-equipped machine shop to make them from scratch.

Uncle Ted

[ArmySGT.]

Originally Posted by robert.munsey

Yes the tanks are! Don't listen to the "light Fighter" Hype!

We just need grunts as much as they need us.......

What do you call four tankers and a frag grenade? Spam in a Can!

What do you call four tankers and WP grenade? Extra crispy

What do you call four tankers without ammo? Passengers

What do you call four tankers without fuel? Foot patrol

What do you call four tankers and a Molotov cocktail? Southern fried!

What do you call an idling tank? Clothes drier.

What do you call a tank stuck in mud? Opportunity knocks!

What is closed up tight, covered in oil, and stinks to high heaven? You might have said tankers, but I meant canned fish.

[robert.munsey]

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

What do you call four tankers .......<snip>
What is closed up tight, covered in oil, and stinks to high heaven? You might have said tankers, but I meant canned fish.

You really are a Infantry troll aren't you?

[swaghauler]

Originally Posted by robert.munsey

Yes the tanks are! Don't listen to the "light Fighter" Hype!

We just need grunts as much as they need us.......

And when the s*** really hits the fan, who do you BOTH call.... The KING OF BATTLE... The Field Artillery! Infantry...ICM. Tanks...ICM-DP or HEAT.

1-800-REDLEG..... When it ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY, HAS TO BE DESTROYED!

[Olefin]

Originally Posted by swaghauler

And when the s*** really hits the fan, who do you BOTH call.... The KING OF BATTLE... The Field Artillery! Infantry...ICM. Tanks...ICM-DP or HEAT.

1-800-REDLEG..... When it ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY, HAS TO BE DESTROYED!

Actually I will agree with you there if you have the guns

Nothing says "Goodbye Ivan!" like several batteries of 105's and 155's doing a time on target mission

[ArmySGT.]

Originally Posted by Olefin

Oh and Sgt - yes I do have my disagreements with canon - there are a lot of holes in it you could drive any tank of your liking right thru - but the basic premise of what tanks are still in operation, how many are left and why by mid July of 2000 is one that I find believeable - and the fact that MilGov and CivGov were calling anything in the US with a turret and a gun a tank by mid July of 2000 even more so tells me they would be raiding museums, collections, graveyards to get anything into operation they could get their hands on

If they are calling M728 CEV's tanks (as the US Army guide specifies) then I dont see them being too picky as to what they would take for tanks in that situation

And the US Army still had war stocks of 90mm ammo for the M48 in the real world into the time frame of the game

Then by all means be forth coming..... saying "I follow canon" when you don't is ridiculous. Everyone here has their own biases and feelings about the game material. Just come out with you opinion and be prepared for others to scoff or laugh at it as you do theirs. It is to be expected, understood, and respected.

[Raellus]

Hey guys, this is starting to get pretty chippy. Let's all dial it down a couple notches, take a deep breath, and consider agreeing to disagree. It's pretty clear by now that no one involved in this argument is going to change his mind.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by Raellus

Hey guys, this is starting to get pretty chippy. Let's all dial it down a couple notches, take a deep breath, and consider agreeing to disagree. It's pretty clear by now that no one involved in this argument is going to change his mind.

I posted this yesterday. It holds doubly true today. Either folks chill themselves out or this thread will be shut down.

[CDAT]

I was basing my comments on my real life experience, I spent about half my time as a Tanker, before moving over to EOD. In the late 2000's last time I did a large ammo destruction, the US still had ammo for weapons that we no longer have (some WWII) so I do not think getting ammo for them would be as hard as some think. I also think that if you want to set it up so that the side with tanks has troops that do not know there job, and the other side has super troopers then yes you can take out the tanks. But if both sides are the battle harden vets with the limited amounts of ammo the game provides you will have a very hard time taking out the tanks. Make a HEAT round is not something you are going to do in a garage shop, most likely you are not going to be able to make many fuzes in the garage shop. There is a reason that you do not see many homemade fuzes besides point detonating in the sand box.

[ArmySGT.]

Originally Posted by CDAT

I was basing my comments on my real life experience, I spent about half my time as a Tanker, before moving over to EOD. In the late 2000's last time I did a large ammo destruction, the US still had ammo for weapons that we no longer have (some WWII) so I do not think getting ammo for them would be as hard as some think. I also think that if you want to set it up so that the side with tanks has troops that do not know there job, and the other side has super troopers then yes you can take out the tanks. But if both sides are the battle harden vets with the limited amounts of ammo the game provides you will have a very hard time taking out the tanks. Make a HEAT round is not something you are going to do in a garage shop, most likely you are not going to be able to make many fuzes in the garage shop. There is a reason that you do not see many homemade fuzes besides point detonating in the sand box.

http://www.theatlantic.com/photo/201...rebels/100086/

Pictures #20 and #21 is guy reusing RPGs.

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

http://www.theatlantic.com/photo/201...rebels/100086/

Hmm, so why is a supposedly Russian made rocket pod (#23 for example) clearly printed in English?

[ArmySGT.]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Hmm, so why is a supposedly Russian made rocket pod (#23 for example) clearly printed in English?

You know, that is curious. I would just have to guess that English was better understood by the plethora of international techs that Qaddafi had to hire to keep shit in the air.

[CDAT]

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

http://www.theatlantic.com/photo/201...rebels/100086/

Pictures #20 and #21 is guy reusing RPGs.

Yes as a HE not HEAT round.

[Olefin]

and HE is much easier to make in a backyard/small machine shop environment than a HEAT round

[ArmySGT.]

Originally Posted by CDAT

Yes as a HE not HEAT round.

HEAT is an inverted cone with a detonator affixed in front equal to the depth of the cone. This focuses the blast like a Fresnel lens..... no magic or complicated machining.... The copper cone the HE is applied to on the back side is a stamped sheet of copper.

This is late 1930's refined bazooka or late 1940s panzerfaust technology not Javelin or Bill.

[CDAT]

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

HEAT is an inverted cone with a detonator affixed in front equal to the depth of the cone. This focuses the blast like a Fresnel lens..... no magic or complicated machining.... The copper cone the HE is applied to on the back side is a stamped sheet of copper.

This is late 1930's refined bazooka or late 1940s panzerfaust technology not Javelin or Bill.

You may want to look a bit more into this, in a nut shell you are right, however the angle of the cone and the stand off must be just right or it will not work well, maybe even less effective (depending on how off they are) than just basic HE. Getting the timing right so that when the round goes off by the time the jet is formed it is at the correct distance is complicated.

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by CDAT

Make a HEAT round is not something you are going to do in a garage shop, most likely you are not going to be able to make many fuzes in the garage shop.

Perhaps not somebodies backyard shed, but there's plenty of workshops in any town, even some villages with the necessary machinery for small scale production.
Skill and knowledge/plans are the big issue - that and fuses.