infantry in tanks

[paulo]

I had an infantry squad riding in a tank- it was fired on by rifle and machine guns- the tank wasn't damaged but it destroyed the squad in the tank- how is this possible? I've also seen this before. Thanks

[Suhiir]

I had an infantry squad riding in a tank- it was fired on by rifle and machine guns- the tank wasn't damaged but it destroyed the squad in the tank- how is this possible? I've also seen this before. Thanks

Infantry don't ride INSIDE a tank, there's no room.
They ride ON the tank.

So it's very easy for a machinegun to kill them, and of course a tank is (usually) bullet proof so it may get suppressed but would be otherwise unharmed.

Of course there are exceptions, the Israeli Merkava for instance.

[Imp]

Riding tanks into battle is a dangerous pastime, I would not advise it

[Aeraaa]

The really weird part is having fully enclosed APCs surviving a close assault and their passenger squad being wiped out.

[Imp]

Not really they either tried to unload to protect it & were killed as in a tight group getting out the exit or an RPG or whatever penetrated the passenger compartment killing everyone but causing no major structual damage to the vehicle.

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Paulo,
On a topic that ended in a player getting "banned" and that just got resolved a couple of years ago, just to be sure, since you said "inside a tank" those troops weren't "inside" a MERKAVA by chance? I only ask, as you didn't identify the OOB or MBT that was used. If the MERKAVA was used there might be an issue here, otherwise Suhiir and Imp well covered the topic with their replies. See any of the following Israeli OBB UNITS 055-057 the unit pics show the internal troop carrying capability.

Regards,
Pat

[paulo]

OK, thanks for your answers- and no it wasn't a Merkava

[DRG]

OK, thanks for your answers- and no it wasn't a Merkava


Then they were on the outside of the tank not in it.

I know it can be confusing becasue for both APC's and MBT's when you "load" the infantry symbols disappear but the reality is, if its a tank, they are on the outside, bunched up and fully exposed to fire.

Don

[paulo]

thanks again

[Kenny]

During WWII,the Soviet Army never had a priority for APC's and therefore the only way a sizeable infantry could really keep pace with armored advances was to have a couple infantry squads mounted on the outside of each T-34 and KV tank if possible. Their role was to dismount the tank when on first contact closing in on the enemy. Many never got the chance as German machinegunners weren't stupid and focused a lot of their fire on advancing Soviet armor.

In any case,their life expectancy was exceedingly short........................:eek:

[Suhiir]

Up until the M60 series US tanks had "grab bars" for infantry to hold when riding on them (actually did it myself once in the mid 70's).

However the M1 series has no such provision.

As you saw in-game and as many folks have said. Get off before you're fired on else you're mince meat.

[gila]

So the rule here is,never ride on tanks unless in the "safe rear area" but they could also be hit by arty although less likely.
Modern warfare desant is not used much anymore.

[Kenny]

The MI tanks have no provision carrying infantry and for more than just the obvious reason of the existance and proliferation of modern mechanised IFV's in the US Army order of battle. That jet engine generates so much heat that any soldiers on the back deck would quickly be "Spam on top of the can".

Even an older AFV can generate mucho heat radiating from the vehicle's back deck. On an M551 A-1 Sheridan,we used this principle to cook our food. Not a friendly environment for an infantryman looking to hitchhike.

No separate stove needed at chowtime.:D

[Aeraaa]

Dont know about you guys, but I use my tanks to carry infantrymen a lot (for several reasons, there arent enough APCs, their dedicated APCs have been knocked out, a tank is close by and time is of the essence). My grunts dont have it easy with me in command...:D

[Mobhack]

The MI tanks have no provision carrying infantry and for more than just the obvious reason of the existance and proliferation of modern mechanised IFV's in the US Army order of battle. That jet engine generates so much heat that any soldiers on the back deck would quickly be "Spam on top of the can".

Even an older AFV can generate mucho heat radiating from the vehicle's back deck. On an M551 A-1 Sheridan,we used this principle to cook our food. Not a friendly environment for an infantryman looking to hitchhike.

No separate stove needed at chowtime.:D

If you look through the forums, then you should find the link to the USA field manual item on carrying a squad on an M1 tank that I found. (Basically they all sit on top of the roof as I recall). Stabiliser had to be turned off as well IIRC.

So - official manual item written, but in practice it is not done for various practical reasons. Like having access to more than sufficient APC probably.

[Kenny]

I've got no argument with that.

Just like the M551,on top of the turret is the only way to carry a passenger and not have them fried. This practice was highly discouraged back then,and I'd guess pretty well is today.

Short of a dire emergency,modern armies don't need tanks to serve as supplemental APC's.

[Suhiir]

Just goes to show any real grunt will put up with almost anything in order to ride rather then walk for a while :D

[Aeraaa]

Short of a dire emergency,modern armies don't need tanks to serve as supplemental APC's.

Not always:

http://i548.photobucket.com/albums/ii331/Blue387/DM-SD-04-11399.jpg

[Kenny]

Short of a dire emergency,modern armies don't need tanks to serve as supplemental APC's.

Not always:


Our course not always,as nothing in life is a certainty. There is always going to be the exception to every rule. I don't know the cimcumstances behind this image. Who knows,maybe a roadside IED knocked out the squads vehicle. Yeah,I'd take a lift,too. Maybe their engine over heated,and they didn't want to be stranded in no-mans land? Beats walking in a hostile enviroment AFAIC.

I stand behind my original point.