Jump to content
gunnersman

MT-12 100 mm Anti-Tank Gun...mostly harmless?

Recommended Posts

http://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/t-12.htm

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-12_antitank_gun

 

It looks like it is only good for ambush and light armor. The sabot looks like it will barely scratch the paint on the front of any modern MBT (or anything late in the last century). The HEAT round is not much better. The only thing it has going for it is the missile it shoots. I don't see this gun lasting long on the modern battlefield. In the manual it seems to have an abundance of AP rounds.

 

Only regular optics? No laser range finders? I guess that's a plus. No one knows your about to shoot them if they have laser warning system. Better make the shot count.

 

It looks like a poor mans AT weapon. 

Edited by gunnersman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Poor man's option or not, at least it's an on-map artillery piece which is handy for scenario design purposes! Eg. a tank platoon that has broken through and is wreaking havoc in the rear echelon...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree it is useless against tanks, but an APFSDS round fired against Bradley or Stryker (or Russian equivalents) would probably hurt. I guess reactive armor won't help much and the projectile is way too fast for APS. However, I estimate the combat life expectancy of this gun would be about five seconds after opening fire. You just can't miss it with modern optics and thermals once it fired,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the real world they're mostly tasked with light artillery support these days. The gun in AT mode wouldn't really need laser rangefinders at the ranges its expected to operate at. The sabot round holds a pretty flat trajectory. Its survival after the first shot would probably be nil but then again you can say the same thing about a T72. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a poor man's AT weapon.   Modern warfare tends to be a 'come as you are' warfare because gone are the days of factories pumping out X number of tanks or aircraft per day like in WW2.  Modern equipment is so complex and so expensive that it takes months to produce and will take considerable time to replace when lost.  

 

The MT-12 is a product of a mind set typical of Soviet thinking of throw nothing away, it may have use somewhere, even if it is just training reservists.  In a 'Come As You Are' war, such weapons will use in third echelon units and as replacement weapons when the higher priced and more capable weapons get attrited to the point that it is either use the older piece of equipment or do without.

 

Let's face it, a Abrams is going to laugh in the face of a MT-12, because it is going to do very little to a Abrams.  But to a Hummer or a not upgraded Bradley or Stryker, the weapon is still dangerous.

 

That said, I am not going to be a happy soldier if I am told that WW2 era anti-tank gun is going to be my AT weapon to face off with modern tanks with...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, while not in game I  think it could probably kill a T-55, or T-62.  Last year during the Maiden protests the protesters got a hold of some of these and put them in the barricades.  I imagine that at the close ranges of a street battle it has a chance to knock out nearly anything the Ukranian government would send down the street.  HEAT rounds could probably threaten tanks without ERA defenses as well.  Still it is a museum piece and it doesn't look like something you move around very easily, but it can still kill people.  Soviet designed armored vehicles that aren't tanks, such as BMPs, BTRs, SPAAGs etc would all be easily knocked out.  The wiki article says that it can fire a guided missile which could possibly disable a Western tank.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean, there aren't that many things on any given battlefield that are a real threat to an MBT, by proportion - but then MBT's are rarely the largest proportion of things on the battlefield, so there's that. I suspect the main use of ATG's in CMBS (if they have one) will be for dealing with BMP's, and they should be more than capable of that.

Edited by domfluff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea, my first thought was it will be used when you least expect it (More accurately whenleast expect it). I will have played several scenarios never seeing it (editors choice). Then I will play THAT one scenario: It will be used in a non-open terrain or suburban/urban environment, in some keyhole, sniper position, merely 100 meters away from my Bradley/BMP or building full of infantry and BOOM!  Thanks Mr Hardenburger! :blink:

Edited by gunnersman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MickeyD : Well a t-72b3 is survivable against older tanks thé ukranians field .. Saw many hits deflected by kontakt-5 in chrisND's game. Not so much agaibst thé Abrams but it could still hurt if well used. The APS equipped one will also fare well against Bradleys. Also vas IR blocking smoke so shoot.. Pop one up and redeploy under cover of smoke.

Edited by antaress73

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems to me IFVs will be more common on CMBS fields than any MBT, therefore even an apparently old and moldy 100mm gun will be a very useful asset, even if it can take one single target out before being oblitarated, it surely is less expensive than another IFV.

Edited by Kieme(ITA)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It bears remembering that even the front of an Abrams can be penetrated over some small portion of lucky hit locations by fairly modest AT weapons.  The MT-12 will knock a hole in the side of, well...  anything.  It will knock a hole in the front of anything that is not an MBT.  Advantages over an ATGM are ROF, TOF, flexibility and cost.  Disadvantages are weight/mobility, range, precision and penetration.  

 

Optimum tactics for ATGs on modern battlefield against opponents with MBTs are to position for 'keyhole' shots.  Look for highly complex terrain - urban streets, heavy woods, gullies/wadis, etc... where you can position the gun to shoot along an extremely narrow arc.  Ensure you have at least one nearby observer team to let your crew know when something is approaching so they can be truly ready.  Have a preplanned escape route, because you might only get one shot!  However, at NTC, I've seen an MT-12 equivalent (Towed 2A45M) take out more than 10 vehicles w/o being detected.

 

Against formations w/o MBTs, we shift to more normal considerations of cover/concealment and fields of fire.  Still vulnerable to suppressive and precision fires, but nothing in LOS should live long against you.  Brads/Strykers are vulnerable over their entire 360 degrees.  If placed in teams of two for mutual support, and firing against formations from ambush ("Wait for the Whites of their Eyes!") they should do butchery.  However, thermal optics may make ambush positioning impractical in some instances.  If so, revert to keyhole ops. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there's nothing harmless about something that can fire a few kilograms of High explosives or a solid shot of tungsten or steel composite at supersonic speeds at you.

Edited by antaress73

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Optimum tactics for ATGs on modern battlefield against opponents with MBTs are to position for 'keyhole' shots.  Look for highly complex terrain - urban streets, heavy woods, gullies/wadis, etc... where you can position the gun to shoot along an extremely narrow arc.  Ensure you have at least one nearby observer team to let your crew know when something is approaching so they can be truly ready.  Have a preplanned escape route, because you might only get one shot!  However, at NTC, I've seen an MT-12 equivalent (Towed 2A45M) take out more than 10 vehicles w/o being detected.

 

 

 

 

 

Did that just ruin someones day?  Or their career?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People can poke fun all they want at the MT-12, but I'm not in their number. It doesn't take the ability to effect a frontal killl for an ATG to ruin your day, especially if it's a whole battery firing. For starters, I'd imagine a 100 mm HE frag round hitting the gun would be bad, and the possibilities of serious combat capability damage are rich in the event of any sort of hit which exposes optics/electro-optics, weapons stations, LWR and such to blast and frag effects. For sure, the poking fun will be hastily reassessed when/if (not sure whether it's in) this vicious cephalopod comes into play. MT-12 would be a Category C weapon. I have some vague recollection there was a later 115 mm ATG. If so, that would be Category B.

 

Regards,

 

John Kettler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would not count them out just yet....

 

One of the biggest surprises for me in Shock force was just how effective SPG-9s turned out to be (not the technical mounted ones though, these were useless). They were the true unsung heroes of many a redfor AT defense. They are basically, longer ranged, more accurate RPG-7s with a decent rate of fire while being slightly less mobile. With some clever or evil placements they could ruin the day of entire bluefor vehicle columns of anything less than an MBT. Think in alleys between buildings, behind houses, or behind reverse slopes looking sideways.

 

I suppose the MT-12 could be employed in similar roles. They are even less mobile than SPG-9s (probably considered static for all intents and purposes). However, they have an even bigger punch and according to the manual significantly more ammo than SPG-9s. They K model also can fire an ATGM. How useful would that be remains to be seen.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chazz,

 

The jihadists in Syria have put up videos showing RRs as big as 82 mm (explicitly includes SPG-9) being fired from inside largely intact buildings. In one case, the resultant backblast did knock over the very near camera, but other than ringing the bells of those involved, appears to have harmed no one inside.

 

Unambiguous proof you can fire an SPG-9 indoors. Note particularly the men nonchalantly moving about in the room after the RR has fired.

 

 

B10 fired from rather more open (you'll see) building environment)

 

 

Very breezy upper floor M-60 RR vs T-72

 

 

Twilight attack vs Syrian Army building from an insurgent held one. Twilight engagement and uses 14.5 mm, 23 mm and unspecified RR. Spectacular visuals (tracer in several colors) as it starts to get dark. Here's the dilemma. Watch vid with sound on and able to hear gunfire, explosions and the usual incessant Muslim declarations of faith OR turn off the sound and lose most of the immersion factor?

 

Still haven't found the vid in which the backblast blew over the camera, but maybe someone else can find it.

 

pnzrldr,

 

Your casual invocation of the 125 mm 2A45M as being "similar to the MT-12" rocked me back quite a ways. You're talking about going from a WW II design (ex-naval rifle, I believe) 100 mm gun to a very modern 125 mm hypervelocity smoothbore, the same gun as that on the T-90AM. Would say the MT-12 is similar in that they are both ATGs and can guided projectiles, too. Would also note the 2A45M/Sprut-B is the self same vicious kraken I previously mentioned and can pack up quickly and drive itself out of the firing position, where the MT-12 requires a prime mover. Am heartened, though, to read that OPFOR at NTC has the Sprut-B, for that'll definitely keep BLUFOR on its toes.

 

Regards,

 

John Kettler 

 

P.S.

 

Why is it that only about half the embedded vids I provide display correctly, yet I use the exact same embedding method?

Edited by John Kettler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

P.S.

Why is it that only about half the embedded vids I provide display correctly, yet I use the exact same embedding method?

 

Total conjecture, but perhaps there's a limit of 2 per post ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Baneman,

 

You may well be onto something! Contrariwise, at a site level, isn't the embedded vid count the embedded count? There may well be technical reasons for a per post limit, but might it also be for aesthetic reasons? After all, it might be both daunting and offputting to be confronted with a post occupying a foot or more of vertical space. With the vid goodness of YT and similar, an enthusiastic investigator could, under the right conditions, go hog wild while presenting grog goodness to fellow CMers. In such a case, it would be quite different visually from the days of visible text links. 

 

Regards,

 

John Kettler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also note that to embed a video the link should be just pasted into the body of the reply. If you use the url button it will appear as a link and not be embedded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

One of the biggest surprises for me in Shock force was just how effective SPG-9s turned out to be

 There's a video up on Youtube somewhere of ISIS(?) holing an Iraqi M1A1 Abrams with an SPG-9. The tank was on an overpass, I recall.  Hit it squarely in the rear turret bustle ammo compartment. No 'BOOM' but smoke was pouring out of the hole, the tank was no doubt put out of action if not properly 'destroyed'.

 

Usually ATGMs would be the preferred weapon but Arena has a nasty habit of knocking down incoming ATGMs. Its not going to knock down an incoming long rod penetrator.

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...