What’s it like to get hit in a tank?

[SgtMuhammed]

Speaking for myself, as I read the question I had a sudden flash of being there in the tank myself, and it went something like this:

(while mumbling prayer for self-salvation...) "...Holy Mary MOTHER OF GOD whatinhellwasthat?"

(The latter would likely be accompanied by squishing sound from suddenly wet tank crew seat.)

The first thing that went through my mind was whacking my driver up side the head to get his attention when the intercom went out. I guess that means he could answer better than I can.

[SgtMuhammed]

M.D.

You know when the A10 first came out they wouldn't show some of the films of it attacking tanks because they feared it would ruin the tanker's morale.

Climbing around any armored vehicle is an interesting experience. Even the light ones seem so solid with several inches of steel between you and the outside world. Then you remember exactly what people will be targeting you with and suddenly that armor seems paper thin.

As a grunt I loved AFVs for their firepower but at least I could get out of sight when the big bullets started to fly.

[Darknight (DC)]

I work with a guy who drove recce vehicles for the GGHG during their deployment to the Balkans in the 90's....he mentioned that you would feel very conspicuous being inside the vehicle on operations. The recce vehicles have to rely on their speed and spotting the enemy before he spots them (some high calibre small arms fire could penetrate the armour on those vehicles). I would suppose that being in a tank makes it feel very much like every eye on the battlefield is watching you.

[Ace Pilot]

Thanks for all the responses. The more I learn about what it must be like to be an infantryman or tanker in the army, the more I am in awe of what you fellows put up with and do. Many thanks to all of you for your service.

Originally posted by Sgtgoody:

Getting back to the question: The crew really can't tell a lot just from the sound of a glancing blow. They can tell if they have been hit by something serious as opposed to small arms but not whether or not something is broken. Basically you either hear a big bong or a loud crash and then try to find out what is still working or try to get out as quickly as possible or find out if there is an afterlife.

I find it interesting that it was so difficult to determine much from an incoming round. It does help explain why being buttoned up is such a handicap for tank crews. I presume this means that the emphasis for tank crews is to find the shooter when he shoots (or, even better, before he shoots) because you aren’t likely to find him based on how he hit you.

You mentioned that a crew could tell whether what hit them was dangerous to them. Do you know if they could tell if they were hit by a round that could be potentially lethal, but it was fired from too great a range? Or it struck at too oblique an angle? I’m wondering how much of the information we get from CM, was actually available or used by real crews. Did crews pull out a data card and say, "At this range, all that particular enemy tank can do is bounce rounds off of us, so we won't worry about the loud banging going on outside the hull."

[Sergei]

Originally posted by Ace Pilot:

I’m wondering how much of the information we get from CM, was actually available or used by real crews. Did crews pull out a data card and say, "At this range, all that particular enemy tank can do is bounce rounds off of us, so we won't worry about the loud banging going on outside the hull."

Probably, or at least in good circumstances, they had practised enemy recognition and had some idea of how good their armour was against different types of guns. Unless they misidentified that T-34 as a T-40...

We surely do have more information, but often the stat's give only a hunch of what's gonna happen when you hit. So it might not be so far off.

[SgtMuhammed]

The general rule is, "if they can see you they can kill you." What is hitting you now might not do it but who knows what might hit you next.

Yes we have a ton more information than was ever availible in RL. Crews tend to overestimate the amount of damage that has been done to them and to underestimate their chances for survival. After the Battle of the Bulge the Army went back and looked at the German tanks that had been knocked out by arty and air. They found that the vast majority had recieved only minor damage. Things like busted roadwheels and sprockets or thrown track and jammed turrets. These things are simple matters back in the motor pool but it is easy to see why they become life threatening, or are percieved to be so, during a fight.

*We set our scene inside a Panzer Kampf Wagen IV. It is late 1944 in the Ardennes.*

The tank is rocked by a large explosion and the sound of fragments and small arms hitting the hull. The TC has already been hit by a machinegun burst and now the optics have been blinded by a cascade of dirt and smoke.

The gunner orders the driver to pull back a little so they can sort things out. The driver slams the Panzer into reverse and proceeds to make a sharp turn to the left as the track on that side is not moving.

Of course no one is going to get out an look at the track so the decision is made to wait for things to calm down and then try to get back to friendly lines. Becaus e of the smoke a lull happens and the crew makes a break for it, dragging their wounded TC behind them.

Later investigation reveals that it was just a thrown track and a couple of roadwheels, an hour to fix at the most.

It happens.

[Ace Pilot]

Excellent post, Sgtgoody!

Originally posted by Lt Bull:

I have consider this myself before but more notably when I visited London's War Museum. There they have quite a few interesting displays that try to create atmosphere with sounds and lights etc.

When I saw the Jagdpanther there with the penetration holes on its side, and partly cutaway superstructure enabling you to peer inside the crew compartment, it got me thinking about a display. You could set up a display/virtual ride where the public were allowed to get in a tank and occupy all of the crew positions. The tank would perhaps be decked out with hidden speakers which broadcast re-enacted dialogue between of a typical WW2 tank crew engaged in action, perhaps interspersed with radio comm chatter with other units, engine sounds, the tank's own MG and main gun fire. Perhaps even the tank could be mounted on hydraulic jacks which simulate movement like one of those virtual rollercoaster rides and a film projected such that occupants looking outside the vision slots of the tank could see action unfolding around them.

I haven’t been to the Imperial War Museum in more than 25 years, but it was one of my most memorable experiences in London.

I’m torn by this idea of an interactive war museum. On the one hand, it's a great idea and I would pay good money to be able to experience something like this, along with WWII flight simulators, submarine simulators, PT boat simulators – well, the list goes on and on. But, on the other hand, I can also see such an exhibit being overrun by children and teenagers that have no concept of the solemnity of it all, and just see it as another exciting computer game. Maybe something as simple as requiring everyone under 18 to have a parent with them would ensure a proper level of respect.

So, Lt. Bull, do you have a site picked out to establish this interactive museum? Sign me up for a lifetime pass!

Ace

[Lt Bull]

Ace Pilot,

Im glad you like the idea however, I do not know of any museum that has anything like this. I really do think it would be a good idea. Considering the equipment and hardware required to set it up, I think it would be a significant investment but possibly a rather popular attraction. You would need to start off with a real tank of course. Probably a readily available semi-rusted Sherman whose crew compartment is not beyond the point of restoration.

I would expect the hydraulic jack setup would be commercially avialable rather than scratch built. Those hydraulic jack platforms are computer controlled. I would think it is possible to "record" the motion/vibration inputs on a real tank moving over terrain fitted with sensors and then save that input as jack input code. Having been on similar virtual rides which are mounted on hydraulic platforms, I am certain the experience of beign in a tank moving through and over all sorts of terrain (rough, roads, walls etc) could be realistically simulated.

The design of the device to simulate an AT shell impact and MG fire impact would probably have to be custom designed and built. I really do not know if the sound made by realistic impact of a typical 50mm or 75mm AT shell on the outside of a tank (say a Sherman) would generate sound levels (along with ambient engine noise) and vibrations inside the tank that would exceed the standard limits considered "safe" for "public amusement" style rides (as I am sure would exist). Perhaps they would need to wear authentic tanker helmets. Anyways, I think this dramatic feature would be the highlight of the ride.

I agree that there is a certain level of respect and solemnity required if such an exhibit existed. As I have said, it was not fun for those who actually risked and lost their lives in tanks. I know of the Warner Bros Movie World "Memphis Belle" ride so I guess a similar virual realistic tank ride wouldn't be that different or extreme a concept.

It would be a great engineering project to work on. Ahh, if I had the money

Lt Bull