.com.unity Forums
  The Official e-Store of Shrapnel Games

This Month's Specials

Air Command 3.0 - Save $10.00
Raging Tiger: The Second Korean War- Save $7.00

   







Go Back   .com.unity Forums > The Camo Workshop > WinSPMBT
Notices


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 14th, 2018, 01:05 PM
SaS TrooP's Avatar

SaS TrooP SaS TrooP is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Wodzisław, Silesia, Poland
Posts: 293
Thanks: 11
Thanked 181 Times in 63 Posts
SaS TrooP is on a distinguished road
Default Swedish data on British crews and tanks

Check this out as for reference, but I am warning you... this is not looking good for the Brits XD

BAOR - how bad was it:
http://tanks.mod16.org/2016/09/26/th...ow-bad-was-it/

Strv 103 vs. the Brits:
http://tanks.mod16.org/2015/04/02/re...the-baor-1973/
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to SaS TrooP For This Useful Post:
  #2  
Old June 14th, 2018, 03:42 PM
Aeraaa's Avatar

Aeraaa Aeraaa is online now
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 331
Thanks: 72
Thanked 124 Times in 86 Posts
Aeraaa is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Swedish data on British crews and tanks

Yes, I've seen this document in another forum. IIRC, British servicemembers said that the early 70ies weren't a particularly good period for the British armed forces in general.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old Today, 05:42 AM
Wdll's Avatar

Wdll Wdll is offline
Major
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hellas->Macedonia->Thessaloniki->City Center->noisy neighbourhood
Posts: 1,078
Thanks: 117
Thanked 38 Times in 30 Posts
Wdll is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Swedish data on British crews and tanks

I read the reports.
Interesting.
First I want to ask something about Swedish tactics and the 103. It says more than once that Swedish tank tactics were of a very aggressive moves, especially to isolate smaller/weaker units, etc. Was that something that they came up with before or after the 103 entered their army? I am finding it difficult to comprehend, how that tactic would work with a tank/tank destroyer, without a turret. As far as I know the tank was created/designed to use hull down positions, shoot/ambush the incoming Soviet forces and retreat when necessary. How did they hope to use it so aggressively I can't understand.

As for what it says about the British forces. Considering the very different terrain that the British forces would fight on, than the Swedish, it kinda makes sense. While the forests and hilly terrain of Sweden would be appropriate for tanks to be relatively close to each other, having to face the onslaught of Soviet artillery in open fields, it makes far more sense to have your tanks spread out.
I won't go into more things.

Accuracy of the gunners and all that, I don't know.
__________________
That's it, keep dancing on the minefield!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old Today, 06:21 AM
Aeraaa's Avatar

Aeraaa Aeraaa is online now
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 331
Thanks: 72
Thanked 124 Times in 86 Posts
Aeraaa is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Swedish data on British crews and tanks

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wdll View Post
First I want to ask something about Swedish tactics and the 103. It says more than once that Swedish tank tactics were of a very aggressive moves, especially to isolate smaller/weaker units, etc. Was that something that they came up with before or after the 103 entered their army? I am finding it difficult to comprehend, how that tactic would work with a tank/tank destroyer, without a turret. As far as I know the tank was created/designed to use hull down positions, shoot/ambush the incoming Soviet forces and retreat when necessary. How did they hope to use it so aggressively I can't understand.

This is my own opinion, so take it with a grain of salt.

In general, Swedes seem to emphasize combined arms at all levels (even in the game, they are one of the few armies that has integrated infantry at company level without any cross attachment) of units. That means infantry is probably well trained in fighting together with the tanks and can be used when the situation demands it. When attacking a tank platoon in a restricted area, it will be the infantry that will be more dangerous to enemy tanks, since it is hard to spot, and a well-placed LAW side hit will be sufficient to deal with them. 103s will not attack the enemy directly, but will try to find the best terrain in which they can engage the armor as it withdraws, or deal with any potential counterattacks.


In addition to that, it says in the article that Swedes emphasized getting local odds and defeating the enemy quickly. That means that probably they were routinely able to quickly mass a company against a single defending platoon (or even less), attack from unexpected directions and overwhelm them. Rinse and repeat as needed. This was made easier by the fact that the British spread their platoons far more than the terrain demanded. Also, emphasis on the quickly assemble part; if they took too long in this step, they would be spotted and get their teeth knocked off by artillery.


So the (ideal) attack would go on like this: A British tank platoon with an infantry section attached would suddenly come under mortar barrage with HE and smoke rounds. Very soon, an infantry force at least 3 times their size supported by armor from good positions would attack from unexpected directions. Due to casualties and being completely surprised, the surviving British forces would withdraw...only to get whacked by 103s that were on this ridgeline to their flank. The whole thing will be over very fast. The attackers dig in and get ready to repel any counterattacks.


Here's what the source itself claims:

"These passages (particularly 1:28) should be enough to give at least an overview of the Swedish doctrine: focusing fire (both tank gun and artillery fire) from good positions and concentrating forces in small areas were seen as crucial components of success. Contrary to what you might think, Swedish armor officers were doctrinally very aggressive and taught to attack in almost every situation to gain and retain initiative. Concentration of force and especially of fire was seen as absolutely essential on all levels, and the observers complain a lot about how the Brits don’t do this, or don’t do it enough (the wide deployments usually prevent focusing fire within the platoon)."
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old Today, 06:44 AM
Wdll's Avatar

Wdll Wdll is offline
Major
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hellas->Macedonia->Thessaloniki->City Center->noisy neighbourhood
Posts: 1,078
Thanks: 117
Thanked 38 Times in 30 Posts
Wdll is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Swedish data on British crews and tanks

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aeraaa View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wdll View Post
First I want to ask something about Swedish tactics and the 103. It says more than once that Swedish tank tactics were of a very aggressive moves, especially to isolate smaller/weaker units, etc. Was that something that they came up with before or after the 103 entered their army? I am finding it difficult to comprehend, how that tactic would work with a tank/tank destroyer, without a turret. As far as I know the tank was created/designed to use hull down positions, shoot/ambush the incoming Soviet forces and retreat when necessary. How did they hope to use it so aggressively I can't understand.

This is my own opinion, so take it with a grain of salt.

In general, Swedes seem to emphasize combined arms at all levels (even in the game, they are one of the few armies that has integrated infantry at company level without any cross attachment) of units. That means infantry is probably well trained in fighting together with the tanks and can be used when the situation demands it. When attacking a tank platoon in a restricted area, it will be the infantry that will be more dangerous to enemy tanks, since it is hard to spot, and a well-placed LAW side hit will be sufficient to deal with them. 103s will not attack the enemy directly, but will try to find the best terrain in which they can engage the armor as it withdraws, or deal with any potential counterattacks.


In addition to that, it says in the article that Swedes emphasized getting local odds and defeating the enemy quickly. That means that probably they were routinely able to quickly mass a company against a single defending platoon (or even less), attack from unexpected directions and overwhelm them. Rinse and repeat as needed. This was made easier by the fact that the British spread their platoons far more than the terrain demanded. Also, emphasis on the quickly assemble part; if they took too long in this step, they would be spotted and get their teeth knocked off by artillery.


So the (ideal) attack would go on like this: A British tank platoon with an infantry section attached would suddenly come under mortar barrage with HE and smoke rounds. Very soon, an infantry force at least 3 times their size supported by armor from good positions would attack from unexpected directions. Due to casualties and being completely surprised, the surviving British forces would withdraw...only to get whacked by 103s that were on this ridgeline to their flank. The whole thing will be over very fast. The attackers dig in and get ready to repel any counterattacks.


Here's what the source itself claims:

"These passages (particularly 1:28) should be enough to give at least an overview of the Swedish doctrine: focusing fire (both tank gun and artillery fire) from good positions and concentrating forces in small areas were seen as crucial components of success. Contrary to what you might think, Swedish armor officers were doctrinally very aggressive and taught to attack in almost every situation to gain and retain initiative. Concentration of force and especially of fire was seen as absolutely essential on all levels, and the observers complain a lot about how the Brits don’t do this, or don’t do it enough (the wide deployments usually prevent focusing fire within the platoon)."
This could potentially work against the British forces which were trained to fight against the Soviets. That's my point. The British continued (in the exercise) to use tactics that they would use against the Soviets in central Europe.
__________________
That's it, keep dancing on the minefield!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:31 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2018, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.