Jump to content
Marko

Have you ever tried using Tanks for indirect fire support

Recommended Posts

I found this video interesting.

I can not vouch for its accuracy.

But can see it benefits.

 

I have no access to my gaming machine 

But i wonder whats the maximum range of say a heat round fired from a leo-2 or M1 abrams would be in game.

Mite be fun to create a scenario where you bombard say a small town form beyond visual range you could use a F/O or UAV to spot and range for you

   

 

 

 

 

Edited by Marko

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Note the BIIIG tank clock in the Leo 1 and M60, these were added for the indirect fire support role.

But it's a rather wasteful way of employing tanks, and gun barrels with a limited life (# of rounds that can be fired before wearing out; I don't think the author of that video is aware of such a thing as barrel life limitations). It may be entirely possible that the Russians are going back to this antiquated method because they find their tanks to be more vulnerable than anticipated on the Ukrainian battleground. Also, Russian military doctrine doesn't care about accuracy, they call for area effect, and if precision is low, they throw more fire at the coordinate. BM-21s, for example, are now organic fire support assets at the battalion level (!).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Ssnake said:

Note the BIIIG tank clock in the Leo 1 and M60, these were added for the indirect fire support role.

But it's a rather wasteful way of employing tanks, and gun barrels with a limited life (# of rounds that can be fired before wearing out; I don't think the author of that video is aware of such a thing as barrel life limitations). It may be entirely possible that the Russians are going back to this antiquated method because they find their tanks to be more vulnerable than anticipated on the Ukrainian battleground. Also, Russian military doctrine doesn't care about accuracy, they call for area effect, and if precision is low, they throw more fire at the coordinate. BM-21s, for example, are now organic fire support assets at the battalion level (!).

Yes i did consider barrel wear as a consequence.

But if the situation called for immediate infantry suppression and arty was unavailable or limited.

I can see the logic in training crews for the eventuality.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Ssnake said:

Note the BIIIG tank clock in the Leo 1 and M60, these were added for the indirect fire support role.

But it's a rather wasteful way of employing tanks, and gun barrels with a limited life (# of rounds that can be fired before wearing out; I don't think the author of that video is aware of such a thing as barrel life limitations).

 

 

thats what tanks basically get used for low intesity conflicts where the enemy are rag tag milita groups with No armored vehicles.

 

US and allied tanks in A-stan (and IRaq Post 03 invasion) certainly weren't fighting hordes of enemy Armored formations. UNless Convetional ware occurs Tanks will be largely left on the sidelines if they werent employed to support troops via  Indirect or direct fire artillery.

 

Quote

 

It may be entirely possible that the Russians are going back to this antiquated method because they find their tanks to be more vulnerable than anticipated on the Ukrainian battleground. Also, Russian military doctrine doesn't care about accuracy, they call for area effect, and if precision is low, they throw more fire at the coordinate. BM-21s, for example, are now organic fire support assets at the battalion level (!).


In all fairness Russians arent deploying thier best armored units to Ukraine. Seems they have deployed old and second tier tanks Ranging from pulling old T-64B's from storage or  using unmodernised T-72B's from Reserve units.

 

Naturally theyd be more vulnerable but then again Russia has  massive stockpile of various old , but servicable tanks that can be sold off for  en masse for cheap 9 if there are willing buyers)  or put back into use for lower scale wars.

 

Seriously with the 10s of thousands of T55/T62 and T64 and T72 tanks in storage Russia could potentially  prop up a given underdeveloped nation to be next 3rd world Regional Power ( like IRaq once was)  as a convenient way  of Dumpig their inventories of old tanks they no longer need. Ofc that would be a diplimatic nightmare but i  am digressing here.

 

 

Edited by Kev2go

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure about other nations, but American tanks were frequently used to deliver indirect fire in WWII, Korea and I believe Vietnam. It was most common in terrain where mobility was quite limited, like mountains or impassible mud. These necessities are why later tanks like the M60 received azimuth indicators and gunners quadrants to permit adjusting for indirect fire.

 

Does anybody know if the M1A2 SEP can display the information necessary for indirect fire?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually we used the gunners quadrant and the azimuth indicator primarily for shooting at night from a range card.  There was a second, larger, quadrant we would have used for indirect fires that mounted, but not affixed, to the flat surface on top of the breech block (the mounting points indicated by two engraved squares).  We were told we would be given an azimuth, an elevation, and how many rounds to fire.  We were also told that ramps might be built for us to fire from as in a well known picture from the Korean war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Kev2go said:

(1)

US and allied tanks in A-stan (and IRaq Post 03 invasion) certainly weren't fighting hordes of enemy Armored formations. UNless Convetional ware occurs Tanks will be largely left on the sidelines if they werent employed to support troops via  Indirect or direct fire artillery.

 

(2)
In all fairness Russians arent deploying thier best armored units to Ukraine. Seems they have deployed old and second tier tanks Ranging from pulling old T-64B's from storage or  using unmodernised T-72B's from Reserve units.

1) Yes, but in that case you're better off with a handful of dedicated artillery pieces. The Bundeswehr, for example, brough (just) 2 armored howitzers into the theater, effectively covering an area of 50km around Mazar-e-Sharif to deliver weather-independent, short response time precision fire support for the troops. They didn't have to move around, keeping maintenance and operating costs at a minimum.

This is particularly important when you consider the fact that the effective fuel price that you had to pay for a gallon in some remote valleys, according to US sources, was approaching 3,000.- USD; that includes the cost of transportation over long-winded, RPG infested mountain passes and the compensation for the very brave (or very desperate) Pakistani truck drivers.

 

 

2) That's "mostly true". May I defer you to some interesting reading, here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, TSe419E said:

Actually we used the gunners quadrant and the azimuth indicator primarily for shooting at night from a range card.  There was a second, larger, quadrant we would have used for indirect fires that mounted, but not affixed, to the flat surface on top of the breech block (the mounting points indicated by two engraved squares).  We were told we would be given an azimuth, an elevation, and how many rounds to fire.  We were also told that ramps might be built for us to fire from as in a well known picture from the Korean war.

That was a common practice in Vietnam too, and I wouldn't be surprised if it happened in Korea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the summer of 1970, the IDF used T-54 tanks for indirect fire (from special ramps) on Egyptian SAM batteries beyond the Suez canal.

The advantage of a tank over the M-50 howitzer was the tank's armor protection, which allowed the firing ramps to be established very close to the canal.

The 100 mm HE-FRAG could go over 20 km if fired in 45 degrees and was found more suitable for the mission than the M48's 105 mm HEP. 

Edited by Iarmor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Long range lawn dart action:

Events

  Shooter Target Target damage
Time Type Unit X Y Ammo Type Unit X Y Target distance Hit location Destroyed Immobilized Commander Gunner Loader Driver Fire control system Radio Turret
21:18 Tank (Leopard 2A6) 1/1/A (Blue) 8800 3000 DM53 APFSDS-T Tank (T-55A m.1970) 1/1/A (Red) 0989 3000 21892 Front                  
21:42 Tank (Leopard 2A6) 1/1/A (Blue) 8800 3000 DM53 APFSDS-T Tank (T-55A m.1970) 1/1/A (Red) 0989 3000 21892 Front X   X            

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/9/2018 at 12:14 AM, Nate Lawrence said:

I'm not sure about other nations, but American tanks were frequently used to deliver indirect fire in WWII, Korea and I believe Vietnam. It was most common in terrain where mobility was quite limited, like mountains or impassible mud. These necessities are why later tanks like the M60 received azimuth indicators and gunners quadrants to permit adjusting for indirect fire.

 

Does anybody know if the M1A2 SEP can display the information necessary for indirect fire?

Yes the M1A2 SEP can display the information necessary for indirect fires, Using the FBCB2 system

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Rotareneg said:

Long range lawn dart action:

Events

  Shooter Target Target damage
Time Type Unit X Y Ammo Type Unit X Y Target distance Hit location Destroyed Immobilized Commander Gunner Loader Driver Fire control system Radio Turret
21:18 Tank (Leopard 2A6) 1/1/A (Blue) 8800 3000 DM53 APFSDS-T Tank (T-55A m.1970) 1/1/A (Red) 0989 3000 21892 Front                  
21:42 Tank (Leopard 2A6) 1/1/A (Blue) 8800 3000 DM53 APFSDS-T Tank (T-55A m.1970) 1/1/A (Red) 0989 3000 21892 Front X   X            

is this old? or did you do the lawn dart action again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...