HE Blast Effect on Tanks

[sand digger]

Is this modelled? The tables show only HE armour penetration figures.

Its particularly relevant during that period when the Matilda shrugged off German AP and Mk III's and IV's used reverse gear a lot whenever one lumbered into sight. I was thinking that a 150mm HE dropped on a Matilda would shake it up a bit.

But would it? According to CMAK.

[Soddball]

Big HE (25pdr, 105, 150) often causes smashed tracks , gun damage, and sometimes forces crew bailing. Heavy artillery (if you can get it in the right place) will also knock out tanks.

[Lucho]

You can force the enemy AI to change position when you put area fire near (under, in front of) it. Sometimes it will reverse, or more strangely, run a little distance and face into another direction so that you will have its side or rear to shoot at.

The AI seems to "smell" area fire, because it will redeploy its units (also infantry).

[Bogdan]

It's probably me but the AI likes to place its tanks and vehicles in a place my AFV cannot spot directly :mad:

The trick I found was to area fire just in the vicinity of the desired target (I'm not speaking about artillery indirect fire here). If no ammo shortages, the AFV which area-fire will use its HE rounds.

During a Quick Battle, a nasty little BA-64 was sitting behind a small patch of trees. My StuG III can see on the right and on the left, but not directly to the russian car. An area-fire order made the StuG firing HE shells and destroy the vehicle with indirect fire. IIRC, this method might also work with tanks, but only to make minor damages, such as an immobilization.

[Lucho]

I used this trick to lure enemy vehicles into my waiting tanks´ guns.

[Jack Carr]

I have lost unbuttoned tanks to large caliber artillery shell hits.

I lost a PZ IVH the other night playing against the AI. The tanks were advancing and suddenly the shells started falling about half way through the turn and I heard the boys in black cry out and then abandon their panzer.

[Macphail]

pussies

[PzTwt]

Bogdan makes a good point here. I had a coupla Sherms that were unable to move due to a covering StuG (yes, it was an uber-StuG). 5 turns of area fire (in the StuG's general vicinity) later, out pops the [regular] crew - hey presto: 1 abandoned assault gun.

This technique works best against lighter skinned vehicles, but occasionally is effective versus thicker armoured targets...

[Vixen]

I have knocked out a Tiger with direct hit on the top with American 155mm and immoblized a pair of closly spaced King Tigers with a 122mm Russian barrage. I've killed numerous lighter tanks/open topped vehicles with artillery before too.

In a lot of scenarios its not a bad idea to throw arty at tanks becuase if are carrying riders so you might get a 2 for one deal. Damage (or if really lucky, kill) the tanks and tear up the infantry.

[Pzman]

Yesterday I was using 5.5 inch arty to stop an infantry attack when a Pz.IV came along. It didn't even get off a shot at my boys. It was ko'd by a direct hit from the arty.

[sand digger]

Thanks all, sounds like its worth a go when playing German in that era then. Nothing else seems to work, the 88 excluded, while other towed AT guns usually can't get close and survive long enough.

IIRC there is a photo around of a MkIV in the '41 Tobruk area with its turret blown completely off by HE, so they say.

[cmfan]

Yeah, nothing is impervious to artillery/mortar HE except maybe for concrete bunkers.

[The Hooded One]

Generally speaking, though, you have to remember that tanks being knocked out by indirect artillery fire were extremely rare. At the back of the manual for Talonsoft's West Front game they reproduced a British study made late in the war which showed that only 3% of all tank losses were due to artillery, a figure which included both direct and indirect HE fire. So the figure for indirect fire alone must have been pretty insignificant. (This study didn't include open-topped vehicles, IIRC).

[Falcon988]

I've seen tanks knocked out by heavy artillery. Mind you though, not for a long time. The most recent example I can think of is a Sherman hit by 150mm at Carentan in CMBO.

The most usual effect of heavy artillery is immobolization (which alone makes it worth the ammo). That and it very often kills unbuttoned tank commanders and rattled the crew. During a CMBB battle last August I had a perfectly good Tiger take a direct hit from 105mm around Kursk. CO dead, and it just was not very effective for the rest of the battle.

Furthermore, a few weeks ago I was playing an Italy battle where I led a group of Shermans into action against some ATG's. They delayed my assault for quite a while, and it wasn't until later that I discovered the ATG's had -long- run out of AP ammo, but had been firing HE. It was a bluff, but a very effective one. Plus one or two tanks had their guns damaged by the ATG's so it wasn't completely worthless.

Conclusion? Tanks are monsters and you should use everything at your disposal to destroy, incapacitate, or even distract them.

[Beta1]

you do occasionally get KOs abandons withe the 105-150 stuff but try dropping 200+ stuff on them and see what happens!

I remember one game where I used a low experience FO (I think a russian 305mm?) to whack a group of tanks that had attacked my line rather too close to a TRP. one turns fire KOed/abandoned a pair of tigers, forced the others to retreat and totally shredded their supporting infantry. I love TRP/big arty defenses And of course you can always use the same TRPs to boresite some AT guns.

[l.cassidy]

Hi all!

Along this line, try the "HSG - A Tiger by the tail" scenario! It's availbale at "The Scenaio Depot". Ok, it's a CMBB scenario...but's it's fun to see a Sturmtiger open up on a bunch of Russky tanks! :cool:

Cheers,

L.Cassidy

[sand digger]

Originally posted by The Hooded One:

Generally speaking, though, you have to remember that tanks being knocked out by indirect artillery fire were extremely rare. At the back of the manual for Talonsoft's West Front game they reproduced a British study made late in the war which showed that only 3% of all tank losses were due to artillery, a figure which included both direct and indirect HE fire. So the figure for indirect fire alone must have been pretty insignificant. (This study didn't include open-topped vehicles, IIRC).

There is a danger in reading much at all into such reports, simpy because it is not known how much artillery fire was directed at tanks in the first place.

You would also need to know what a tank loss actually was. One that was irrepairable? I'd guess that most tanks disabled by HE fire could be repaired because the hull etc would usually be left intact.