Tanks getting destroyed by medium mortars?

[c3k]

^^^

Agreed. But, then, did you just see the video of the Ukrainians (?) starting up the engine of the static display JSIII? There are tank engines, and then there are Soviet Tank Engines. Splash some vodka on them and they stagger forward another 20 klicks. Even if they're just a piston sitting on the dirt.

[Oddball_E8]

^^^

Agreed. But, then, did you just see the video of the Ukrainians (?) starting up the engine of the static display JSIII? There are tank engines, and then there are Soviet Tank Engines. Splash some vodka on them and they stagger forward another 20 klicks. Even if they're just a piston sitting on the dirt.

Still... that engine had all its parts attached

Trust me, I know about tough vehicles and tough engines... I am from the country of Volvo after all... You can practically run a volvo 240 into a brick wall and still drive away...

But if you happen to dislodge one of the fuel lines (like I did on my teachers car when training as a metal shaper) it won't do much at all...

[womble]

I think the problem might be that arty (esp, medium mortars) in the game is way too accurate.

If you put down arty with a spotter or command unit on a foxhole cluster, the shells will rarely land farther away than a few meters from the foxholes.

Is this a change in RT, or are you playing the "accurate arty" version? Cos that's simply untrue in games I play. On the rare occasions that I've called mortars on open-topped armour that's had the grace to stay put (thanks, AI ) I've had very little success. Sure, I've had the occasional success, too, but an offmap 81mm point strike is scattered over a large footprint, at least 100m long and 70m wide (if you fire off the entire ammo load). Maybe 15% land within "a few metres" and another 25% within "a few AS" (which will do little or nothing to armour). That scatter is pretty random within any given shellcount, so firing fewer shells in a mission doesn't mean you get a higher percentage on-target. Confirmation bias is rearing its ugly, obfuscating head, I fear.

Fire a big enough mission, or enough small ones at (a) static target(s), and sure, some foxholes will get turned into craters, and the occasional direct hit on an AFV will happen, but it's far from guaranteed from even a "Point-2-Heavy-Short".

[womble]

...run a volvo 240 into a brick wall and still drive away...

But if you happen to dislodge one of the fuel lines (like I did on my teachers car when training as a metal shaper) it won't do much at all...

In Sweden, they have you train as a metal shaper by crashing cars into brick walls? That would explain the stereotypical boxy shape of Volvos

[JasonC]

I was thinking of this, actually -

http://www.aviapress.com/engl/maq/maq35024.jpg

Yes there are wires and hoses that are functionally needed, granted.

[Vanir Ausf B]

Not as large as I think it would be in real life. Which is my point.

Then the question becomes: what do you think they would be in real life and why do you think that? The in-game mortar dispersion is based on actual firing tables.

[JasonC]

Vanir - I think we have been over this before, but range firing condition miss distances are not combat miss distances for any other weapon, and there is no reason to think they would be for mortars. Does every K98 put 95% of all shots within 2 inches of the point of aim at 100 meters? No. On a range they do, effortlessly (from any sort of rest etc). But that is not what we actually see bolt rifles do in combat.

The specific issue is that the actual point of aim of the mortar is not where the target actually is. The inherent dispersion of the rounds is centered on a point that itself "misses" the actual target location, by a range estimation error and a deflection error, and then creeps around as the mortar sinks in the soil from repeated firing, and the like.

That is why actual mortar fire in combat at 500 yards range emphatically does not put all rounds within 7 yards of the target. If it did, fire missions would be 2-3 rounds max by a single mortar. Instead, the practical firing procedures tell the gunners to get an over and an under, but once any round is within 25 yards, or even within 50, to just fire for effect.

[Vanir Ausf B]

Note that I said "based on" firing tables. I am almost certain that the in-game results are somewhat larger than what you see above, or are at least not consistently that good. I have not tested this recently to be sure, but I do know that the last time mortar dispersion was tweeked this article on errors was used as a reference, and Charles specifically stated that human error is factored in.

[Vanir Ausf B]

As for the effectiveness of 81mm mortar fire on tanks, I can't find any direct reference to armor penetration, but indirect evidence does suggest they would not likely have been effective against even Pz IVs although it's not clear if this is due to lack of armor penetration or difficulty in hitting the tank in the first place.

The closest thing I could find was penetration figures for US bombs air dropped from 5000 feet.

100 lb GP AN-M30

54 lb (24 kg) of explosive filler

250 lb GP AN-M57

123 lb (56 kg) of explosive filler

500 lb GP AN-M64

262 lb (119 kg) of explosive filler

1000 lb GP AN-M65

530 lb (240 kg) of explosive filler

2000 lb GP AN-M66

1061 lb (481 kg) of explosive filler

1 inch = 25.4mm

For reference, the US 81mm mortar shell, HE, M43A1 weighed 7.05 pounds and had 1.22 lbs of HE filler.

Panzer III top armor:

turret: 10mm

hull: 18mm

Panzer IV top armor:

turret: 10mm

hull: 10-15mm

Panther top armor:

turret: 16mm

hull: 16mm ausf A and D, 40mm front hull 16mm rear hull ausf G (are probably both 40mm in-game)

T-34 top armor:

20mm turret and hull

Tiger I top armor:

25mm turret and hull

Tiger II top armor:

40mm turret and hull

Indirect 25-pounder fire is, however, not effective for stopping tank attacks, but it can cause the tanks to "button up" their hatches. Reports of indirect fire's stopping tank attacks are believed to be erroneous interpretations of the repulse of reconnaissances in force.

-- Artillery in the Desert, Military Intelligence Service, Special Series No. 6, November 1942 Link

25lbr HE shell explosive filler = 1.75 pounds.

[John Kettler]

ParaBellum,

Offhand, I know of no case in which an 81mm mortar got a kill on a tank, as opposed to an OT SP. I do know of a case in which a British Mark VI Light on Crete took a direct hit on the turret hatch. Believe it blew it open and injured the TC's hand. There was a definite US 4.2" mortar kill vs a Panzer IV attack in Sicily or Italy. This was unexpected, but battlefield survey later found it had dropped through the open TC's tower and detonated within. Believe it's in the Chemical Warfare Service book in the Army Green series.

In CMx1, I got a down the hatch kill with a 60mm mortar round, much to the consternation of my foe. 105mm howitzer fire will kill a Panther if it hits in the right place. Got such a kill via closed sheaf Medium-Medium shoot in CMBN Demo. AI tank was sitting on VL, and I blanketed a small area. Tank didn't explode, but it was killed.

In John Salt's WO analyses for wargamers he shows that the British found Churchills immune to 25-pdr fire in live fire tests with crews in the tanks. This was great for getting close to/under to the barrage, but I do not envy the test range crews tasked to figure out whether this was a good idea.

Regards,

John Kettler