CM Black Sea - Beta Battle Report - US/UKR Side

[pnzrldr]

A question about the sort of event where Lt Upham's Bradley got brewed up by the T90.

 

In real life, if you were suddenly caught totally exposed ( cover more than a couple of seconds away ) and outmatched ( IFV vs Tank ), would/could you pre-emptively bail out ?

 

Yeah, maybe.  Unlikely you would have time, but many Iraqi crews chose this route in 2003.  However, the 25mm is a very powerful gun.  In real life, if I hit that T-90 like LT Upham's crew did, I'd give it a 50/50 chance of disabling the vehicle.  A good gun or gun mount hit, a serious hit to the sights, a turret ring hit, drivers hatch, etc...  All are vulnerable to one degree or another on any MBT, even from the front.  I have friends who did just about exactly what Upham did in 2003 versus suddenly discovered T-72s, but with diametrically opposite results.  With 30+ hits, you get a lot of chances for a lucky hit.  You also have the strong possibility that the MBT crew won't hang tough to complete the engagement. 

[dan/california]

You did get the other half of that die roll with your Tugunskas at least once.

[Frankster65]

Excellent read pnzldr!  And now a chance to turn the tide.

[Buzz]

Right now, my tactical approach is...  roll Panzers vorwarts, and crush everything in my path…..

Bottom line:  Abrams alone, or dispersed are fairly lethal.  In wide open terrain, in pairs, they border on invincible.

 

I like the sound of it.... a satisfying sound of success

[sburke]

Right now, my tactical approach is... roll Panzers vorwarts, and crush everything in my path…..

Bottom line: Abrams alone, or dispersed are fairly lethal. In wide open terrain, in pairs, they border on invincible.

I like the sound of it.... a satisfying sound of success

See I would use expressions like that, but in my case the following turn I'd likely lose 2 Abrams to mines, a 3rd from a close range RPG another to a long range ATGM and my last would pop smoke running away screaming. The last sound in my ears would be that shout that went up from Ken Watanabe's men in Last Samurai after they killed all the Ninja's. Only it would be Russians shouting it.

Yeah, this one

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZAbEOCFlfU

Edited January 5, 2015 by sburke

[stikkypixie]

See I would use expressions like that, but in my case the following turn I'd likely lose 2 Abrams to mines, a 3rd from a close range RPG another to a long range ATGM and my last would pop smoke running away screaming. The last sound in my ears would be that shout that went up from Ken Watanabe's men in Last Samurai after they killed all the Ninja's. Only it would be Russians shouting it.

Yeah, this one

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZAbEOCFlfU

 

I never knew the Last Samurai had ninja's, going to have to watch that movie now...

[John Kettler]

pnzrldr,

 

In this wotthwhile T-90 piece on the FOXTROT ALPHA site, which has some very good defense coverage, there is a bit of discussion of how the T-90 has ERA on the turret roof. Does this buy the tank anything with a Javelin in top attack mode? Where, in fact, does the Javelin typically hit when in top attack mode?  Also, there is an embedded vid of a TOW 2B AERO ITAS vs a combat loaded T-72. To call this vid "spectacular" would be to understate it, but wouldn't the flight profile shown win the Arena sweepstakes vs a T-90?

 

Michael Emrys,

 

Thanks! Glad you enjoyed it. I strongly suspect a good bit of the style derives from the incessant coverage during GW I. It's wonder I didn't develop PTSD from the constant sturm und drang.

 

sburke,

 

I feel your pain! Be grateful such a nightmare as sewerage sludge isn't in the game. In Iraq, it Immobilized five Abrams for many hours.  In my long and painful history with the CM games (all the way back to January 2000), Murphy can absolutely be counted on to not only deprive you of your best toy or toys, but to do so at the worst possible time and in such a way it usually breaks the toy or toys. While you're in tournament play no less and doing a DAR! You'll be on dry ground and will suddenly bog. One of my "favorite" causes of hair loss. When you think you're safe and advancing screened by a veritable wall of  big trees  a shot will magically thread itself through an impressive woods (not kidding) and turn your mighty tank into flaming scrap. Naturally, with only one shot. Probably just as well BFC hasn't started modeling breakdowns, visionics and vetronics failures, hung rounds and the like. Else, we'd be in an even worse fix.

 

Regards,

 

John Kettler


 

Edited January 5, 2015 by John Kettler

[JSj]

In this wotthwhile T-90 piece on the FOXTROT ALPHA site, which has some very good defense coverage, there is a bit of discussion of how the T-90 has ERA on the turret roof. Does this buy the tank anything with a Javelin in top attack mode?

 

The Javelin has a dual warhead to defeat ERA, so this will not make any difference.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FGM-148_Javelin#Warhead

Edited January 5, 2015 by JSj

[akd]

But Relikt ERA has some anti-tandem capabilities.

[John Kettler]

Here's something which hasn't been discussed. Which is that ATGM equipped BMPs and such have two separate ATGM combat modes--from the AFV and also dismounted, rather like having a ground mount on a WW II US tank or halftrack's .50 BMG. This adds significant tactical flexibility and gives two shooters, rather than just all the eggs being in one easily smashable place. If not already in the game, I submit this capability really ought to be there. 

 

JSj and akd,

 

Appreciate the info, however contradictory. 

 

Regards,

 

John Kettler

Edited January 6, 2015 by John Kettler

[antaress73]

the top armor of the T-90 would be no more (and I'm very generous here) than 100mm equivalent of RHA. Even if ERA makes the Javelin lose 80% of his penetrative ability... 30% of 600mm is 120mm.. more than enough. From what I understand, ERA doesnt stop a plasma jet cold. It diminishes its penetrative ability by a fair margin. On the frontal armor (and often side armor) of a Main battle tank, this is often more than sufficient to save the tank if the round is not a Tandem warhead. As for Relikt, maybe it does have some anti-tandem capabilities but is it enough to protect the top armor against a 600mm penetrating missile ?... I doubt it.

Edited January 6, 2015 by antaress73

[dan/california]

When your done slathering armor on the poor beast it still has to be able to move, or its tactical utility is poor.  You can't max out all around and meet that criteria, its been a problem since the beast in question was a real horse.

[pnzrldr]

Gents, still discussing the relative merits of TOW-IIB vs. Kontakt or R5 roof mounted ERA on the beta boards.  My take is:  TOW-IIB uses EFPs which should not cause the ERA to function in most circumstances, and therefore it is only adding a couple dozen mm's to the RHA equivalent on the roof - which John Kettler's vid clearly shows the TOW-IIB overmatches.  Concur that Jav works even better.  It has a... significant dive angle that really helps out, but its baseline penetration and tandem function mean it should work great.  I also believe that both of these missiles likely overmatch ARENA APS, for similar reasons.  The ARENA pops up an explosive cartridge from a band around the vehicle turret, and then radar cue tracking both the cartridge and the projectile cues it to detonate downwards so that its cone-shaped frag pattern intercepts the projectile, causing predetonation.  For the record, this method of intercept can leave substantial 'residual' penetration, meaning ARENA is unsuitable for non-heavily armored targets and flank/rear successful intercepts might still challenge the vehicle's base armor.  However, if you think of the protection offered by this system, it should essentially look like a set of conical mountains, or pointy teeth arrayed around the vehicle.  Obviously, a projectile that attacks from above the cartridges apogee would defeat it (like Jav).  Further, one coming in a couple meters up on a flat trajectory stands a fairly good chance of making it 'between the teeth' or in between optimum projectile coverage.  Small chance the a missile might be disrupted by the cartridges' blast effect alone, but I believe TOW-IIB would frequently if not routinely defeat this system.  This is an educated guess on my part, and not based on any hard or (God help me) classified data from the office.  Take it or leave it.  

 

Going to be another night on finishing my post.  Other demands competing for my attention tonight.  May post another video, without text, but may not.  More to follow.  

[gunnersman]

Yeah, maybe.  Unlikely you would have time, but many Iraqi crews chose this route in 2003.  However, the 25mm is a very powerful gun.  In real life, if I hit that T-90 like LT Upham's crew did, I'd give it a 50/50 chance of disabling the vehicle.  A good gun or gun mount hit, a serious hit to the sights, a turret ring hit, drivers hatch, etc...  All are vulnerable to one degree or another on any MBT, even from the front.  I have friends who did just about exactly what Upham did in 2003 versus suddenly discovered T-72s, but with diametrically opposite results.  With 30+ hits, you get a lot of chances for a lucky hit.  You also have the strong possibility that the MBT crew won't hang tough to complete the engagement. 

Interesting anecdotes. 

I never realized the potential of the Bushmaster.

I was a Gun Captain for the Navy version (Sea Snake ) a loooong time ago...I never knew I had that much power in my hands. 

 

This has been a fun thread. Keep up the good work.

Thanks!

[John Kettler]

pnzrldr,

 

Very much appreciate the weapon performance info and your insights. Since the Abrams is your thing (fervently hope so!), perhaps you could explain to me why the turret undercuts around the gun mount and the pronounced gap between the turret and the hull aren't Grade One shot traps, not to mention what happens when something clobbers the driver's hatch and keeps going right up under the turret?

 

gunnersman,

 

25mm tank kills during ODS. My understanding is that these were all flank shots.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Fighting_Vehicle

 

"The tungsten APDS-T rounds proved highly effective in Desert Storm being capable of knocking out many Iraqi vehicles including several kills on T-55 tanks. There have even been reports of kills against Iraqi T-72 tanks at close range."

 

In a StrategyPage thread in which our very own flamingknives appears, we learn that the Bradleys were firing DU, not tungsten. This squares with my recollections from the time. Flank kills on T-62 and T-72 out to about 1 km. 

 

Regards,

 

John Kettler

[Fetchez la Vache]

pnzrldr, thank you for a very interesting AAR! Modern-era war-games have never appealed much to me before probably because I thought it was a bit too 'clinical'. But I think this AAR (and your side of the story in particular) has kindled enough of an interest that, instead of giving it a miss, I will probably get CMBS. The little insights and details you are giving a modern-era 'n00b' like me are kicking off something. Many thanks.

 

Now, some more explosions please... :-)

[Michael Emrys]

30% of 600mm is 120mm.

 

Ehhhh, 30% of 600mm is 180mm. Just for the record.

 

Michael

[Splinty]

Bradleys in Desert Storm were very definitely firing DU rounds. When my unit got to Saudi Arabia we got them in port when our Brads arrived, we had never seen them before and were very impressed. During the ground war we were getting kills on BMP 2s and MTLBs and not even knowing it. The DU rounds would pass straight through the enemy IFVs, so our gunners learned to paste the enemy vehicles with DU and finish them with HE. The DU would knock them out and the HE would set them on fire so everyone else know they were knocked out.

[sburke]

Bradleys in Desert Storm were very definitely firing DU rounds. When my unit got to Saudi Arabia we got them in port when our Brads arrived, we had never seen them before and were very impressed. During the ground war we were getting kills on BMP 2s and MTLBs and not even knowing it. The DU rounds would pass straight through the enemy IFVs, so our gunners learned to paste the enemy vehicles with DU and finish them with HE. The DU would knock them out and the HE would set them on fire so everyone else know they were knocked out.

Lol we need that in CM. It is one thing that weirds me out a little when my AFV knows exactly when an enemy vehicle is no longer a threat. I get the game needs it to function. Still it would be kind of interesting to have that doubt.

Edited January 6, 2015 by sburke

[Splinty]

I have noticed you sometimes will get a target that will show as intact for a few seconds until the crew visibly abandons it or it starts burning, but that's as close as the game will come to what I said above.

[antaress73]

Ehhhh, 30% of 600mm is 180mm. Just for the record.

 

Michael

 

I meant 20%

[pnzrldr]

pnzrldr,

 

Very much appreciate the weapon performance info and your insights. Since the Abrams is your thing (fervently hope so!), perhaps you could explain to me why the turret undercuts around the gun mount and the pronounced gap between the turret and the hull aren't Grade One shot traps, not to mention what happens when something clobbers the driver's hatch and keeps going right up under the turret?

 

gunnersman,

 

25mm tank kills during ODS. My understanding is that these were all flank shots.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Fighting_Vehicle

 

"The tungsten APDS-T rounds proved highly effective in Desert Storm being capable of knocking out many Iraqi vehicles including several kills on T-55 tanks. There have even been reports of kills against Iraqi T-72 tanks at close range."

 

In a StrategyPage thread in which our very own flamingknives appears, we learn that the Bradleys were firing DU, not tungsten. This squares with my recollections from the time. Flank kills on T-62 and T-72 out to about 1 km. 

 

Regards,

 

John Kettler

 

Think about ballistics - at most operational ranges, enemy projectiles do not arrive at the tank at 0 degree angle of incidence.  They are almost universally plunging to some small number of degrees or another.  Further, the Abrams armor does not deflect rounds - sabot or HEAT - it absorbs them.  So 'shot trap' is a null function.  The turret ring is vulnerable because the weight/functional penalty for covering it with the same protection level as the rest of the vehicle was impractical.  Driver's hatch/compartment roof, turret hatches/roof, are exceptions, in that they may offer some degree of deflection based on their design intended to maximize angle of impact for incrementally plunging ballistic projectiles.  However, armor has to be thin somewhere - we cannot afford to build / operate tanks with perfect spherical protection schemes. 

 

Perhaps you missed my point on the Bradley - regardless of what any online references say, I have two friends whom I spoke with about their combat experiences in Iraq during the initial invasion.  One of them I was talking with less than a week later, in Baghdad proper.  Both told me they had personally, with their own vehicle DESTROYED at least one Iraqi T-72 (admittedly, older export models) with crews still inside, from the front, with Bradley 25mm fire.  One fired a very long burst of 25mm APFSDS (essentially emptied his ammo storage bin) from almost direct front at very close range - couple hundred meters.    I think he told me 21 hits, with 3 or 4 penetrations at vital spots.  No secondaries, but the inside of the vehicle was wrecked.  One crewman KIA, two unaccounted for.  I recall he mentioned at least one penetration of the turret near the top/roof line.  I know he actually destroyed 2 T-72s, but don't recall if the second one was with a missile or not.  The other friend's account I don't recall in as much detail. He said he dusted the vehicle off with HE, apparently suppressing it effectively, then switched to AP firing at about 400m from oblique front.  Results uncertain, other than he said he penetrated the front of the vehicle enough that it went 'Bang!' like the one in your TOW-IIB video.  He didn't get the post-engagement examination that my first friend did.  Both were firing DU cored M-919 rounds.  Take it or leave it. 

[antaress73]

modern sabot doesnt deflect,,, not like the conical shaped hard shots of WWII.

[antaress73]

 

 

Further, the Abrams armor does not deflect rounds - sabot or HEAT - it absorbs them.

 

Against an opponent like the Iraqi army where 95% of the shots by tanks missed even at close range its okay. But against a modern and even semi-competent armored opponent with lots of battle tanks wouldnt that be a problem for armor integrity if you're hit many times without penetration by powerful sabot rounds ?  sending the tank to the rear for lenghty repairs ? If you have one or two badly damaged tanks that's manageable but many of them would put a strain on the logisitic system and further delay their reintroduction into active service.  

Edited January 6, 2015 by antaress73

[Justicar]

Against an opponent like the Iraqi army where 95% of the shots by tanks missed even at close range its okay. But against a modern and even semi-competent armored opponent with lots of battle tanks wouldnt that be a problem for armor integrity if you're hit many times without penetration by powerful sabot rounds ?  sending the tank to the rear for lenghty repairs ? If you have one or two badly damaged tanks that's manageable but many of them would put a strain on the logisitic system and further delay their reintroduction into active service.

If you are getting hit, you are doing something wrong. Armor that works is great, but you still want to avoid having to rely on it.