Tweet
the only offensive action you should have toward a tank is using a radio to get some one else to fight it for you,"
while i agree that the best anti tank option is a tank give me a lepord II and i would be more than happy such resorces are not allways available to the muck trodders, due to the fact that we dont have them in our inventory ,they are doing somthing else , they are unable to move because of enemy air superiority ( german armour in normandy 44) or the dasterdly phantasians or corkistanis to pso vets have knocked them out, gravel agitators can only relay on there organic weapons ,shawws ,84s ,rpg-7/18s, - milan, javilin, tow ,sagger this is not to say a inf unit should assault a armoured unit head on in open terrain but the presence enemy tanks in certain situations should not mean an infantry unit should break off a offencive operation or abandon a otherwise tenible defencive one , cowardice in the face of the enemy . a infantry unit use abushes as part of operations these may be anti personell, vechicle and armour abushes and ambushes may be offencive in nature so there is a chance the corkistani incidence that i would have to get personel with a tank
tanks are dangerous yes the combine armour to protect the crew weapons system , mobility to get them in and out of the s***t and others into it , and firepower .phscological the fear factor but limit any of these and you have a chance even with a drainpipe
tanks if they can be isolated & supporting troops can be nutralised/ suppressed are vernerable to close in infantry( especially in urban ,close country mountionous terrain ) because of turret traverse speed limited observation and the limited depression of main and co axil armament , in this situation a few 3 man units can "stalk" menovering for position and a shot at a vernerable spot such as the engine. i am not suggesting human wave assaults such engaugments would be like any other undertaken using cover and concelment and the jugement and training of those envolved
not pretty not safe , hell no i never want to do it but it has been done and it has worked but im sure the participants know 1 of the 99 types of stains surf removes .
"Interesting that most of the above described anti tank weapons are rarely used as AT weapons and are more in line with urban ops and anti personnel roles."
the situation in chechney http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/rusav.htm , an analisis of russian combat losses and rebel tactics in short 20 men would be broke down in 4 man teams of sniper/marksman mg gunner 2 rpg the mg /sniper would open up on the support infantry who in many cases got into there afv to burn then the rpgs would engauge the armour from bacements Russian main armament co- ax were unable to depress or nearby roofs where they were not able to elavate yes casualties were high and it took multiple hits some where about 8 to knock out a mbt but the Russian losses were high too 225 armoured units of which 62 were mbts in first 2 mounth and the withdrew to the outskirts and leveled the place with FAE eventually zsu-23s armoured AA vehicles were added to tank units to suppress basements, the Russians learned to fear panzer sheck Faust long before they reached the streets of Berlin in the varid terrain of Poland Prussia Rumania against trained tank destroyer units so it wasn't just urban ops. a us airbore unit decimated a albeit nderstrenght ss division in germany 1945
the use of drain pipes against abrams and bradley ifv in iraq have resulted in a tarishing of the abrams indestructable image and when you concider that the iraqi insurgents fanatics are useing Iran Vs Iraq 1980s surplus much of which fails to detonate and one would ask what the newer Russian model rpgs would be capable of
yes the rpg 7 has become the poor mans artillery and older model warheads are no longer capable AT weapons and probably for every 1000+ used in the anti personnel / building / bunker role in Chechnya Iraq or any where else 1maybe used vrs a tank same is true of shrawws 84s and other drainpipes they should not be discounted as useful anti tank weapons, most landrovers are used my mums to bring there kids to school in rural Dublin X but this doesn't mean that when mucky Mick the farmer goes chasing sheep in one it isn't useful offroad.
"to be deduced........waste of time waste of life ...unless you have the required support"
tank vs. unguided at
to be deduced by a infantry head ........ a secondary option, my live is the emperors to spend how he sees fit banzii, ... adapt improvise and overcome the way of the infantry
well that's my too cents anyhow its gone a bit off topic sorry to come quickly, perhaps I have been trodding mud too long with walter mitty u decideme time to now where did i leave the keys to my lepord II and my singar
while i agree that the best anti tank option is a tank give me a lepord II and i would be more than happy such resorces are not allways available to the muck trodders, due to the fact that we dont have them in our inventory ,they are doing somthing else , they are unable to move because of enemy air superiority ( german armour in normandy 44) or the dasterdly phantasians or corkistanis to pso vets have knocked them out, gravel agitators can only relay on there organic weapons ,shawws ,84s ,rpg-7/18s, - milan, javilin, tow ,sagger this is not to say a inf unit should assault a armoured unit head on in open terrain but the presence enemy tanks in certain situations should not mean an infantry unit should break off a offencive operation or abandon a otherwise tenible defencive one , cowardice in the face of the enemy . a infantry unit use abushes as part of operations these may be anti personell, vechicle and armour abushes and ambushes may be offencive in nature so there is a chance the corkistani incidence that i would have to get personel with a tank
tanks are dangerous yes the combine armour to protect the crew weapons system , mobility to get them in and out of the s***t and others into it , and firepower .phscological the fear factor but limit any of these and you have a chance even with a drainpipe
tanks if they can be isolated & supporting troops can be nutralised/ suppressed are vernerable to close in infantry( especially in urban ,close country mountionous terrain ) because of turret traverse speed limited observation and the limited depression of main and co axil armament , in this situation a few 3 man units can "stalk" menovering for position and a shot at a vernerable spot such as the engine. i am not suggesting human wave assaults such engaugments would be like any other undertaken using cover and concelment and the jugement and training of those envolved
not pretty not safe , hell no i never want to do it but it has been done and it has worked but im sure the participants know 1 of the 99 types of stains surf removes .
"Interesting that most of the above described anti tank weapons are rarely used as AT weapons and are more in line with urban ops and anti personnel roles."
the situation in chechney http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/rusav.htm , an analisis of russian combat losses and rebel tactics in short 20 men would be broke down in 4 man teams of sniper/marksman mg gunner 2 rpg the mg /sniper would open up on the support infantry who in many cases got into there afv to burn then the rpgs would engauge the armour from bacements Russian main armament co- ax were unable to depress or nearby roofs where they were not able to elavate yes casualties were high and it took multiple hits some where about 8 to knock out a mbt but the Russian losses were high too 225 armoured units of which 62 were mbts in first 2 mounth and the withdrew to the outskirts and leveled the place with FAE eventually zsu-23s armoured AA vehicles were added to tank units to suppress basements, the Russians learned to fear panzer sheck Faust long before they reached the streets of Berlin in the varid terrain of Poland Prussia Rumania against trained tank destroyer units so it wasn't just urban ops. a us airbore unit decimated a albeit nderstrenght ss division in germany 1945
the use of drain pipes against abrams and bradley ifv in iraq have resulted in a tarishing of the abrams indestructable image and when you concider that the iraqi insurgents fanatics are useing Iran Vs Iraq 1980s surplus much of which fails to detonate and one would ask what the newer Russian model rpgs would be capable of
yes the rpg 7 has become the poor mans artillery and older model warheads are no longer capable AT weapons and probably for every 1000+ used in the anti personnel / building / bunker role in Chechnya Iraq or any where else 1maybe used vrs a tank same is true of shrawws 84s and other drainpipes they should not be discounted as useful anti tank weapons, most landrovers are used my mums to bring there kids to school in rural Dublin X but this doesn't mean that when mucky Mick the farmer goes chasing sheep in one it isn't useful offroad.
"to be deduced........waste of time waste of life ...unless you have the required support"
tank vs. unguided at
to be deduced by a infantry head ........ a secondary option, my live is the emperors to spend how he sees fit banzii, ... adapt improvise and overcome the way of the infantry
well that's my too cents anyhow its gone a bit off topic sorry to come quickly, perhaps I have been trodding mud too long with walter mitty u decideme time to now where did i leave the keys to my lepord II and my singar
Comment