[Morale - strange behavior]

[Morale - strange behavior]

2 minutes ago, George MC said:

I’m playing a CMRT PBEM at the moment which is Tank heavy fir the Germans. Crew experience is generally regular with some veterans and an occasional green crew. 
 

I’ve had crews bail out of two tanks that have taken hits. In one case (veteran crew) no casualties. When I managed to get em on board a few turns later the gun and optics were damaged and unusable. Other tank crew bailed after taking hit which Kia two crew members. Crew remounted some turns later. Again vehicle had system damage equating to mission kill. 
 

ive had other tanks bouncing hits (Panthers) and crews have stayed put. So I’m not seeing anything that to me is off. 
 

in my mind of a tank I’m is hit and fills the tank with smoke and chaos I’m unlikely to hang about and see what happens. Anecdotally I’ve read if crews bailing when a tank is hit thinking it’s brewing up only to find once outside it’s ok and then remounting. 
 

so in my experience in CMRT I’ve not seen anything unreasonable with experienced crews bailing out of tanks. 

Fine. I will check this point again on what damages actually occured to the tank (as when its dismounted no info is displayed) which cld explain the crew reaction. 
To support what u said, in april 45 on the front of the 9th army in the Halbe pocket, a Tiger 2 experienced waffen SS crew bailed out after being hit and having smoke inside the tank. They realized after a few minutes that actually the fire wasnt lethal to them but chaos had happened to others near their tank. They climbed back. See story attached

 

[Morale - strange behavior]

Interesting video definitely. Check also this link which analyses Nicolas Moran’s presentation: https://www.mathscinotes.com/2015/07/sherman-tank-myths/

One unclear or debatable statemement was about the Shermans used to kill panthers and tigers in italy but not in normandy (for the panthers part). What was the difference? And probably it could only mean on the side. 
My point was not to say shermans or TDs had paper armor, actually it was even better than box shaped Pz IVs, but to say that even the sloped 80 mm armor was overmatched against an 88 or 75/L70 round. And the crews knew that of course. So its not just anecdotal evidence to say that when facing panthers or tigers (or believed to be with Pz IVs) they tried to take them from the side and in some occasions use phosphorus shells when available. I read about similar tactics used during operation Nordwind in Alsace in 1945. 
i opened this thread because I was surprised by how quite often German crews (their status was veteran, i rechecked) of well armored crates wld bail out when hit at distances of 6-700 m with no mentioned damage (not even armor spalling) . And same as when you mentioned the excellent training of modern US crews which ruled out bail outs for nothing, u could argue that Tiger and Elefant crews were also elite, hand picked from the best combat proven crews, which was not the case for the other tanks incl. Panthers, where green crews were more than often the norm in 44/45. 

 

 

[Morale - strange behavior]

21 minutes ago, IICptMillerII said:

The Sherman wasn't a death trap or a tinder box. This myth has been thoroughly put to rest many times over.

if u put aside the Jumbo, are you saying that Shermans and TD's could easily sustain a front shot from a Tiger or Panther with their crew confident in their asset? My father was a Sherman M4 leader in 44 and 45 in the French 2nd armored division. he told me many detailed accounts of encounters with Panthers (like in Lorraine during the battle of Dompaire for instance). When they knew Panthers were ahead of them, believe me they did not think their front armor weakness was a myth spread in forums when they faced them. they tried to out maneuver them instead and pepper them with phosphorous shells on the engine plate so it would burn out the tank inside from the air intakes, most efficient tactics apparently. Just a comment, no resentment  

[Morale - strange behavior]

10 minutes ago, IICptMillerII said:

German tanks were not invincible, and the German tankers certainly did not think so. Further, national origin has nothing to do with it, training and experience does. Many German tank crews bailed out of their tanks prematurely because their replacements were green, untested, and poorly trained. It didn't matter if they were in a supposed "uber-tank" or not. The crews bailed regardless. 

Sure its not a question of nationality but training, seasoning and trust in your gear. So yes, many German tank crews bailed out like any other unexperimented ones of any other countries (example panzer brigades hastily assembled in sept. '44 with unexperienced crews, with the wrong assumption this could be compensate the quality of their tanks). But u cant deny also that when u are in a well armored AFV u have more confident in your future than not (why so many drivers have big SUV's when they can afford it rather than european size cars, especially women? no worries, not trying t open another topic here lol).

In the case of Tigers (i, II) and Elefants, most of the time the crews were the "creme de la creme" (training, leaders, combat experience), it is a fact.

One question for you, as you are a 91 vet: did Abrams A1 or Bradley crew often bail out when hit by enemy fire?

Before I bring more input to this thread, I will share the specific parameters of the cases when bailing out occurs in my battles (crew experience level, AFV type, enemy gun, hit facing etc).

[Morale - strange behavior]

Fine and this explains why they were quick to abandon ship. But do you think the same reasoning can apply to WW2 German regular or vet crews in well armored tanks (Tiger 2, Elefant, Panther even) as during most of the war their tanks werent exploding all around them. What about the Sherman (non Jumbo ones) or TD crews when their tinder boxes got easily brewed up around them? Would have they behaved like the Iraqis for the same reasons? I havent read anything on any panick bail out because of this.

[Tank Gun Damage]

Yes i fully agree with u

[Tank Gun Damage]

And an example of rare side shot on a Ferdinand barrel:

[Tank Gun Damage]

13 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

Much of the game seems realistic, but this is one of the things I don't like.

Getting a gun knocked out frontally happens all the time in the game, but I have never seen any WW2 photos of such damage. Only pics of shots that clearly hit the barrel from the side.

This is what should happen when hitting the barrel from the front:

 

 

Oops sorry picked up the wrong pic

more seriously here is the lucky shot ftom a 57mm churchill in tunisia. But was deemed to be very exceptional. And in fact neutralized the driver inside and smashed the radio set, prompting the crew to bail out. The gun was still functioning

[Tank Gun Damage]

13 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

Much of the game seems realistic, but this is one of the things I don't like.

Getting a gun knocked out frontally happens all the time in the game, but I have never seen any WW2 photos of such damage. Only pics of shots that clearly hit the barrel from the side.

This is what should happen when hitting the barrel from the front:

 

 

Here is what a lucky front short by a 57 mm can do sometimes: 

 

[Morale - strange behavior]

16 minutes ago, IICptMillerII said:

The behavior modeled in CM is accurate and realistic.

Good to see u so sure of this. End of the thread then?

[Morale - strange behavior]

*uranium depleted rounds of A10’s or hellfires

[Morale - strange behavior]

Yes agreed about the Iraqis bailing out wuickly. But maybe can it be considered in this case that they might have known about the mighty penetration power of the western tanks on their own obsolete T72’s. Also they may have considered the lack of punch their 125 mm guns had on their western counterparts, as the Iraqi shells were a downgraded version of the original russian ones. And back to WW2, the germans didnt have to worry too much about uranium depleted rpunds of hellfires shot at them...

[Morale - strange behavior]

U think they never idled and checked the horizon before revving? Then u can hear the distant sound of engines if u are on the prawl i guess. And this is generally speaking how also u could guess, with distant engines sounds echoing, if the enemy was assembling tanks for some attack.

but u are right: even a tiger cld be penetrated by a 57 mm, like tiger 131 in tunisia. Ridiculous myth about their plate top armor i guess here

[Tank Gun Damage]

Another game trick is, when u believe wht just happened cant be true, is to replay the turn after having saved it of course prior to the incident, till things happen more realistically

of course only when playing against the AI...

[Tank Gun Damage]

Yes we all use game tricks. Well using malfunctioning tanks to distract the enemy was used sometimes in real like by the Germans in winter 1941-42 when one of their camps where a few Pz IV’s were positioned were attacked at night by a few T34’s. One or two the the 4-5some PzIV’s were damaged and cldnt fire. No crew inside. The Russians did not know of course and the challenge was to destroy the actual tanks without getting urself unnecessarily exposed by aasting time on dummies. This was even an ASL scenario i played...

nevertheless, doesnt change the fact that these gun killer front hits with even rather small calibers are over represented....

 

 

[Tank Gun Damage]

I always noticed the high frequency if gun damage by hits in several scenarios. I sometimes use heavily armored gun-damaged tanks forward (instead of back to the dressing station) as a diversion for the enemy fire so as to lesser the number of hits on my remaining good order tanks. 

[Tank Gun Damage]

Interesting definitely! Brings to me 2 comments: 

1. being hull down mathematically increases the probability of turret/gun/mantlet hits as its the only part of the tank that can be aimed at

2. again... 500 m gun hit... means muzzle brake or recoil opening in the mantlet. 3 such hits in 2 min... do u find the sim realistic? And how come the gun crew can know, other than by seeing a damaged muzzle brake (good luck if u can at 500 m away), if the hit on the mantlet disabled the gun?

All this tends to confirm the bias of the sim. it should treat gun damages from hits more as exceptions

Even from the side gun hits were rare.

 

[Morale - strange behavior]

Just now, bruno2016 said:

Same was true with the British or Canadian tank crews in Normandy when they heard the caracteristic noise of a Tiger engine in the distance. They tried to divert, even before the 1st round was fired. What to think about a Woverine crew when facing an Elefant or Tiger? I wld assume they start considering the situation before the opposing German crews do...

IMHO, the simulation of crew behavior does not take enough into consideration the level of protection and punch the crew benefits from in a given tank whenever a hit does not incur any damage and of course the experience level. In the same game many times Elefant or Tiger experience crews bailed out for no obvious reason to my opinion. If you doubt what i say, plz check out the order of battle of Forest of the Wild Beasts that i just played. And i noticed the same pattern in many other games. 

[Morale - strange behavior]

On 6/4/2020 at 10:29 PM, MikeyD said:

I'm reminded of the story of how Kubinka gained possession of an Israel Merkava MBT for its museum. Lebanon, sometime in the 1980s. A Syrian Gazelle helicopter appears on the horizon, the Merkava crew immediately panics, bails and runs away. The Syrian army drives the tank off and eventually hands it over to Russia.

Same was true with the British or Canadian tank crews in Normandy when they heard the caracteristic noise of a Tiger engine in the distance. They tried to divert, even before the 1st round was fired. What to think about a Woverine crew when facing an Elefant or Tiger? I wld assume they start considering the situation before the opposing German crews do...

[Morale - strange behavior]

Thanks gor all these replies. I get the point that when the crew, as opposed to the player, does not see what hit them, they may lose their stance and get the hella out of here. But I have read opposite stories too, like in Kursk a Tiger having been hit more than 30 times by 76.2 mm rounds, got its tracks damaged and still was able to make it back several kilometers to its lines (with a crew inside, ok? Lol).

In the case of the Elefant i was initially mentioning and to reply a few comments above: the crew was experienced, like most Elefant crews. It was in contact with its HQ as... there were only 2 Elefants distant from 100 m of each other, with a red command line in between. Yes the crew wasnt seeing the wolverine 700 m away... but cant it be considered that, when hit with no serious damage (no armor spalling etc) even accurately, an experienced crew with a live commander can figure out the round which hit them wasnt that big and they shldnt panick? In the Forest of the Wild Beasts, its end Feb 1944 moreover, no APCR for the 76.2 mm till July of that year... so a 76.2 mm round hitting the front armor wld just be sthg like knocking at the door for an Elefant, i guess. Just like the 37 mm against T34’s in 1941. 
Last point not answered by any of you: the  amount of time a crew “panicks” (even if experienced) like minimum 5 min before slowly going back to its senses, runs away like a beheaded chicken, even if in the LOF of nearby enemies instead of ducking. Really?

 

[Tank Gun Damage]

4 minutes ago, com-intern said:

Hull down is worse for German heavy tanks since their armor will naturally block most shots. One of the primary issues that seems to cropping up is that the gunner of a tank has too much information once an enemy is spotted leading to rounds hitting center mass and center mass of a hull down vehicle tends to be the gun.

Part of my suspicion due to playing SABOW in the past and more recently Warthunder. Is that the gunner has a sort of "perfect idea" of what he is shooting at. You never, at least that I can recall, get those situations where the gunner sees a portion of the enemy vehicle and is unable to decipher the center of mass. Think of those shots through heavy forest that we occasionally see posted on the forum. People ask "how can they see through that" and while I don't doubt that the enemy could be seen it more likely is just a portion of the vehicle. Whereas in CM the gunner instantly knows the entire vehicle profile. Another example would be poor weather where you may be able to identify a portion of a vehicle but lose the rest of it in the heavy fog/rain/etc... In CM it appears that the gunners don't have these marginal target acquisitions and instead spot the whole vehicle.

If anyone has gone hunting a decent amount you will likely have experienced similar situations. I've had to let more than a few Deer get away because while I knew exactly where they were I couldn't be sure of a clean shot.

if i read u correctly, u are talking about hull down cases. in my experience, what i report is in open ground. I am just re-playing for instance forest of the wild beasts, CMFI. with the germans. rings a bell? i got a tiger on the main road whose gun got disable by a lurking m10 at 700 m distance. in the same scenario but this time in an open field, another tiger got its gun damaged by a front shot from a 57 AT gun at 700 m too. and in 10 min interval, not after 3 years of replaying ;-). and thats just an example. 

As to seeing thru the woods, yes i read all the threads and thats really crazy. In my own example, in a tournament game, had two 76 mm shermans positioned for the past 10 min along the exit edge of a wood, waiting to give flank shots to advancing panthers coming thru the trails of that same wood, some 3-400 m away. These shermans had some light wood in between them and the trail, giving some natural camo. Guess what: when one of the panthers barely popped up from the woods, it immediately spotted my 2 shermans before they cld even see it and react and brewed them up! hence the delusional expression "shermans on the prawl" lol

[Tank Gun Damage]

often it happens at the first hit, regardless, not only for the german heavies or when u are hull down. its a general pattern 

[Tank Gun Damage]

but dont take me wrong, i like war thunder for ... the show it gives in youtube like 10 king tigers vs 50 shermans etc...

 

[Tank Gun Damage]

and here i talk about CM2 which is supposed to model real life ...