actual effects of losing tank commander

[fatehunter]

What are the actual effects of losing a tank commander?

Is the firing rate reduced, or worse spotting?

I mean independent of the leadership losses.

[agusto]

IIRC the most significvant effects are that spotting worsens if the TC is killed, along with your tank crews ability to endure incoming fire. They will retreat or bail out of tank earlier without their commander. Firing rate should stay the same (that is duty of the loader, and in your example that crew member is still alive).

[John Kettler]

agusto,

While the gun can indeed be loaded and fired at the same rate as before (barring a body over the breach or similar), I feel constrained to note that, unless the target happens to be almost exactly where the main gun's pointing, the actual effective rate of fire would have to drop. This is because the gunner now also has to find targets and get a precise lay on them, while looking through a very narrow FOV gunsight. Clearly, something's got to give in such a situation. I forget the thread, but I previously dug up multiple accounts of what it's like being in a tank when the TC's hit and killed.

Regards,

John Kettler

[fatehunter]

John,

Is there a reference to in-game effects?

[womble]

There's no reference document specifying the precise and complete range of effects that losing a commander might have. We know that tanks have detailed visibility models (gunner can only see what a gunner could see, for example), we see the vehicle's morale state degrade, in the same way any team's morale goes down when suffering casualties. Most anything beyond that you'd have to develop some sort of testing schema for, since combat observation is too uncontrolled to be able to separate out possible variables.

[poesel]

I have tested loosing the TC wrt spotting.

In a 5 man tank loosing the TC does not reduce the all around spotting ability. Spotting is however a bit slower (not terribly much - but this is a subjective impression). Loosing another man will make you blind to the back but no effect to front or sides (again: subjective).

[Oddball_E8]

agusto,

While the gun can indeed be loaded and fired at the same rate as before (barring a body over the breach or similar), I feel constrained to note that, unless the target happens to be almost exactly where the main gun's pointing, the actual effective rate of fire would have to drop. This is because the gunner now also has to find targets and get a precise lay on them, while looking through a very narrow FOV gunsight. Clearly, something's got to give in such a situation. I forget the thread, but I previously dug up multiple accounts of what it's like being in a tank when the TC's hit and killed.

Regards,

John Kettler

There should be no drop in the effective rate of fire.

Once the gunner has found his target, he can stick with it without a TC. The loader will load just as fast as he would with a TC.

What would drop is the time to aquire a new target (something spotted by, for example, the radioman or driver).

Spotting would also go down for obvious reasons.

But the actual effective rate of fire should be unaffected (since you only fire if you see the target, and if you don't see the target and is trying to find it, you are not actually firing anyway).

I think I understand what you mean tho. In that the overall effectiveness at engaging and firing at a target will be lower. Just not the actual rate of fire.

[John Kettler]

Oddball_E8,

I see I was inadvertently unclear in my explanation. Think of it this way. Treat the baseline condition as being a fully operational tank with full crew (with defined morale and fatigue states). In that condition, we define the fundamantal ability to find and shoot/service targets as being so many, X, per hour. If the TC eats it, the target servicing rate naturally drops, to X-, because it now takes more time to first locate, then engage the targets, for both tasks are now the gunner's. In turn, this means the gunner is either a) seat hopping to first spot, then engage OR trying to do both from his seat while far more constrained in his ability to spot targets. Either way, the combat efficiency of the tank drops significantly, because it simply takes longer to find and engage a target, though I don't know by how much, nor am I aware of such a study.

Here's a real example of the suddenly dead TC issue. Oda Miller, 3rd AD.

http://www.3ad.com/history/wwll/memoirs.pages/miller.htm

Vid coverage

Occasionally, the History Channel actually manages a) to present some and do it well. Happily, that's the case here. Oda Miller of the 3rd AD, whose account is here and harrowing, is one of those interviewed.

http://www.3ad.com/history/wwll/memo...ges/miller.htm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETHhxwcphso

Regards,

John Kettler

[Michael Emrys]

If the TC eats it, the target servicing rate naturally drops, to X-, because it now takes more time to first locate, then engage the targets, for both tasks are now the gunner's. In turn, this means the gunner is either a) seat hopping to first spot, then engage OR trying to do both from his seat while far more constrained in his ability to spot targets. Either way, the combat efficiency of the tank drops significantly, because it simply takes longer to find and engage a target, though I don't know by how much, nor am I aware of such a study.

In some accounts I have read, if the TC goes down a bit of musical chairs ensues. To wit as one example, the gunner assumes the role of the TC; the loader becomes the gunner; the radio operator becomes the loader. The assumption is that the crewmen have received some small amount of training in the new roles they are now assuming. Efficiency will almost certainly decline, but probably not nearly as much as in the scenario you have described.

Michael

[John Kettler]

Michael Emrys,

Though I don't have the file handy, if you go to Lone Sentry or other sites (tankdestroyer.net and such), there you'll find the online TD manuals, which do indeed talk about man down drills. There was some cross training, with the emphasis on keeping the TD in action, but you simply can't take the TC out of the loop and maintain full combat effectiveness, particularly if the TD must move as well while still being able to shoot. The problem becomes even worse when the TC is any sort of section leader, PL, or higher. There, the job is much more demanding, both in the communication department and in effectively fighting not only own TD but also others under command.

I wish I could find my earlier post detailing the various TC sniped or otherwise shot episodes, but I've yet to locate it and am presently half asleep.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Wodin]

John the thing is they are talking about what effects in the game..not real life. Maybe you get confused with the two or just like to real of info no one is really asking for.

Anyway it seems that it effects spotting and moral.

[altipueri]

I basically agree I think with John.

What you can do as a cool gamer sitting in front of your PC isn't what a couple of 20 year olds would do if their "Skipper's" brains are suddenly spread around the turret and his twitching body is oozing **** and piss and getting in the way of deciding whether to use smoke AP or HEAT or whatever.

[John Kettler]

Wodin,

When someone uses the expression "actual effects," as opposed to "in-game effects," I think it reasonable to conclude the question refers to real combat. If what you say about the impact of TC loss on in-game spotting and morale is correct, then it'd be interesting to know how BFC has implemented the "TC killed" response, since there are several ways to do it.

In turn, as I noted earlier, loss of the TC is going to have a number of impacts on the ability to fight the tank, never mind any higher formation. If, for example, spotting's affected, this will increase the vulnerability of the affected tank, since situational awareness will be degraded. Consequently, if a threat appears, the tank will now take longer than it did before to notice the target, thus delaying initiating the kill chain. That delay translates into a window in which the affected tank can be spotted, hit, maybe destroyed, but without the crew's recognizing the imminent danger.

This isn't particularly surprising, in that dueling theory shows that the tank which fires first usually wins. Also, extensive air combat analysis shows that 80% of the shootdowns occur against planes in which the crews have no idea the enemy's there.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Wicky]

A natural response from what I've read, and that the game mimics, is the driver puts the tank into reverse pretty pronto and gets out of dodge.

[fatehunter]

Gentlemen,

As the originator of this thread, I will be more specific,

What are the 'in-game' and 'in-game' only effects of losing a TC.

Do I consider the tank seriously degraded in ability with-out a TC.

[Michael Emrys]

...but you simply can't take the TC out of the loop and maintain full combat effectiveness, particularly if the TD must move as well while still being able to shoot.

I never disagreed with that. What I said was that what you described as the gunner moving into the TC's seat to spot and then back into the gunner's seat to fire was not the drill. I am pretty sure that if that ever happened, it was a one-off event. I agree that the vehicle would not operate at full efficiency—though I won't try to guess how much that would be degraded. I do think that the two most critical positions in the tank were the TC and the driver. There had to be somebody to fill both of those jobs. The TC to decide what to do next and the driver to get them out of harm's way if possible.

The problem becomes even worse when the TC is any sort of section leader, PL, or higher. There, the job is much more demanding, both in the communication department and in effectively fighting not only own TD but also others under command.

In that case, the new TC would contact the 2ic and inform him of the need to take over the platoon.

Michael

[Michael Emrys]

A natural response from what I've read, and that the game mimics, is the driver puts the tank into reverse pretty pronto and gets out of dodge.

I think you're right. From the accounts I have read, that was a pretty common response.

Michael

[Wicky]

Currently reading about Hobart and his 79th Armoured Division, and if the TC went down and if the remaining crew carried on successfully forward, or backed up and regrouped to rejoin combat it invariably meant a MC ... or they got blown up by tank/gun/mine/faust etc.

I think you're right. From the accounts I have read, that was a pretty common response.

Michael

[Wodin]

@JT..sorry was feeling abit grumpy the other day. I apologise.

[John Kettler]

Wodin,

Handsomely done. Accepted.

Wicky,

Intrigued! What's the book, please? Have been a huge fan of Hobart's Funnies since I saw how-to stuff on building them in Military Modeler. But before they come ashore, it's necessary to breach the seawall with the Grand Panjandrum!

Regards,

John Kettler