82 mm mortar rounds killing tanks?

murx · Post by **murx** » Wed Mar 14, 2001 11:46 am

Re: K_Tiger & tanks under arty

1. If the crew doesnt close fast enough the hatches the airblast/pressure will have some effect on the crew.
2. The structural integrity of the tank could be severly damaged through shock, like fixing the turret in a position.
3. The Winkelspiegel (?periskope?) and viewing slots are open so blast/splinters, heat and smoke can get into the tank.
4. A tank can be tossed to the side or throw his tracks due to the immediate loss of ground contact if it drives into a crater (because the tank hadn't stopped) or the explosion happens to be next to the tank creating a crater right next/under the tank.

A destroyed tank doesn't mean it's a smoldering wreck - it just means that it cant be used at the moment (at least the crew thinks so).

And believe me arty - even if you are IN a tank - isn't nice. I was in a tank simulator in my army time and was under 'simulated arty' - meaning speakers positioned in the simulator replayed the sound of the arty-music as loud as they could. We (the crew) knew exactly that we were under no danger but communication was very hard - give and receive orders was nearly impossible cause we couldn't hear them - and thus we felt the stress/suppression. Now mix it with the REAL danger of incoming shells...
As tankers we learned that - if caught under arty - we either push through as fast as possible or retreat as fast as possible to get out of harms way. Sure nowadays tank-commanders will act immediately without orders but I guess in WWII most soldiers will FIRST get their orders and act then - so suppression does not mean they are terrorized only but that they aren't commanded/disorganized, not knowing what to do next.
murx

JTGEN · Post by **JTGEN** » Thu Mar 15, 2001 10:59 pm

OK Captain Brian where are those ECR numbers from. The ones told us in the artillery were longer and I have previously said in this forum that 155mm has a kill radius of 150m and that goes also to the 130mm artillery that I am more familiar with. Allthough It depends on what kind of detonators are used. If it detonates in the air the kill radius against infartry is offcourse longer than if it detonates when it hits the ground.

I have not encountered as many kills with artillery against tanks as I expected. I used a lot of 210mm art against tanks in SP2 and it affected my tactics. To my knowledge heavy artillery destroyed a lot of T34's in Finland in 44'. But not in this game.

The thinner top armour should really make tanks vulnerable to arty, and maybe to 80mm mortars. I know a mortar shell carries more explosives than same sized arty shell but maybe the speed of it does not give it enogh penetrating velolity against armour.

CaptainBrian · Post by **CaptainBrian** » Fri Mar 16, 2001 5:58 am

JTGEN, The ECR's come from U.S. technical manuals. Not trying to insult anyone's intelligence but this is what I am using as a definition of ECR:

The ECR is the radius that 50% of the effects of a point detonating munition will cover under standard conditions.

I have no doubt that frag from a 130mm shell will burst out to 150m. Also, I know airburst fused shells will have greater effects upon many types of targets.

Also, the ECRs are used as the distance
between the aimpoints for individual howitzers in order to ensure some overlap of their fire and coverage of the target with no gaps in the sheath.

Believe you me, I want to be nowhere near live artillery impacts. I was at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center at 29 Palms California this past week. Looking at the size of the frags from arty, I remembered why I like being on the firing rather the receiving end !

USMCGrunt · Post by **USMCGrunt** » Sat Mar 17, 2001 11:02 am

Originally posted by CaptainBrian:

Believe you me, I want to be nowhere near live artillery impacts. I was at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center at 29 Palms California this past week. Looking at the size of the frags from arty, I remembered why I like being on the firing rather the receiving end !

Ahhhhh.... 29 Stumps, my old stomping ground. You're right CaptBrian, I spent many a CAX out at Camp Wilson, and I can safely say, I don't want to be within a mile of 155 arty, much less within 150 meters. I was on the receiving end of Iraqi 122mm in Desert Storm and it definately had a way of ruining your day.

Pack Rat · Post by **Pack Rat** » Sat Mar 17, 2001 11:56 am

Originally posted by JTGEN:

I have not encountered as many kills with artillery against tanks as I expected. I used a lot of 210mm art against tanks in SP2 and it affected my tactics. To my knowledge heavy artillery destroyed a lot of T34's in Finland in 44'. But not in this game.
.

I think Paul made a statement to the effect that artillery vs armor, with the default on, was on the down side of effectivness. I haven't played with it other than the default. It would be interesting for "old timers" from the earlier games to see what the setting might be put to for old SP results. I hate to suggest it for my pbem games because I use German rockets and they are pretty effective as is.

Hammer2000 · Post by **Hammer2000** » Sat Mar 17, 2001 12:14 pm

In simple words : I HATE ARTY

visit the best forum in the world : www.loftboard.de

JTGEN · Post by **JTGEN** » Thu Mar 22, 2001 7:54 pm

OK CaptainBrian. The range differences are difference on what way we think of the effects. The effects certainly are interesting. I could easily see the splashes of our 130mm ammunitions hitting sea 15km's away, even without using eyeglases that I use when shooting forexample. It is wery powerful sight to see, and I would not like to be a marine on the other end.

We would hit normal landing craft from 10km quite easily and if they would get close the airbursting grenades would make life a hell in an open landingcraft. And with 130mm you do not even have to hit the target.

K G von Martinez · Post by **K G von Martinez** » Fri May 18, 2001 2:45 pm

Just reading Artillery in the Desert (see the 88mm Flak-diskussion) there is an interesting statement on page 31: "Indirect 25-pounder fire is, however, not effective for stopping tank attacks, but in can cause the tanks to "button up" their hatches". If even the heavier 25-pounder shell is not effective, I very much dought that a mortar shell will be better. May be a lucky hit say 1 : 1000?

Alexandra · Post by **Alexandra** » Fri May 18, 2001 5:28 pm

Originally posted by kgvm:
Just reading Artillery in the Desert (see the 88mm Flak-diskussion) there is an interesting statement on page 31: "Indirect 25-pounder fire is, however, not effective for stopping tank attacks, but in can cause the tanks to "button up" their hatches". If even the heavier 25-pounder shell is not effective, I very much dought that a mortar shell will be better. May be a lucky hit say 1 : 1000?

Here's the difference. We'll use UK weapons for both parts of this example. The 25#s are heavy arty, say, oh, a battery of the Royal Horse Artillery. They're probably a good distance from the fight, we'd call them off board for SPWAW, and so the odds of a direct tank hit are, indeed, low. However, they can strip the infantry support away and supress tanks.

However, the 3 inch battaltion, and 2 inch company mortars, are, in all likelhood, right on the battle field and can see the tanks, and, so have higher chances to hit them on that vulnerable top armor because the gunners can see the tank's movements and make adjustments.

In my own SPWAW experience, I've rarely seen a mortar kill on a tank that wasn't direct fire. But direct fire mortars are often tank killers.

Alex

fontenoy · Post by **fontenoy** » Fri May 18, 2001 11:39 pm

Just an observation gentlemen.
Speaking purely in terms of the game itself,you just can't beat the German "Wurfrahmen"rocket artillery for destroying tanks,especially when they are bunched together as the computer AI tends to do.The American P-47D "Thunderbolt"dropping napalm is equally effective.It even destroys tanks in adjacent hexes.Merely my two cents worth on useful anti-tank weapons in the game.
Regards,
Fontenoy.

"It is well that war is so terrible,or we should become too fond of it."
Robert E.Lee,Battle of Fredericksburg,Dec.1862.

K G von Martinez · Post by **K G von Martinez** » Mon May 21, 2001 6:16 pm

Well Alexandra,
no problems with respect to direct fire. But if I with my poor knowledge of English understood the starter of the topic correctly, he complained about being hit by indirect fire - at least he thought so having not seen the mortars

Paul Vebber · Post by **Paul Vebber** » Mon May 21, 2001 10:15 pm

Artillery in the game is fairly abstract - a funtion of "Warhead size" and "HE kill". THe intent is to show teh effect of artillery in general and that means occasionally eh individual round kill effects are "off" becasue an overal distribution of effectsis used, not a modeling of the individual round kill mechanism.

You can adjust the kill chances of artillery on tanks in the pref setings if you do not agree with the default "skew" in teh distribution.