Use of Tanks in build areas. [Archive]

Javehn

11-24-2003, 02:18 PM

Ohh , you don't want to now , or more exactly , i don't want half of this forum to jump on me. :oops:
I myself tend to agree with you , but there are some cases , in which the usage of tank on urban territories , and build areas becoming possible , and even recomendable.
That's shure wasn't the case in Grozniy , new years eve 1994 , were 3 mechanized brigade enter the city in long columns. The losses in fighters, and in technic was huge , becose of wrong usage of the Apc , and tanks.

16 OBr SpN

11-24-2003, 02:20 PM

How do you think , is this realistic to use a tank in conflict that takes places inside build areas ? It has it's pluses , but it's also has a lot of problems . How do you think , is tank inside city can be called "elephant inside store " ?

There are many problems with a tank moving around the city.

1) Vulnerability to enemy RPG's and ATGM's, especially from the buildings. Tanks have a limited angle of turret's elevation which can be easily used against them. Ususally firing spots would come from basement, and/or top of the roof.

2) Should be accompanied by infantry, among them 4 people with machine guns to suppress firing positions.

3) Prior recon by the troops, before moving onto the area.

4) Keeping the distance.

5) Always move. Which is a fairly problematic issue.

6) Mines. Along with burying them under the ground, one can put a radio-guided AT mine with directed explosion. Just put it on the wall, 20-30 cm. above the ground and blow it up. Caterpillar taken out = easy target.

7) Put an AT mine above the level of tank. Wire the fuse, and hang it between two walls. Tank passes by, and hits the wire with its antennas. Radio, and aiming equipment taken out = easy target.

8) If a tank loses its mobility in the city without any backup, it becomes an easy prey.

Regards,
16 OBr SpN

duck

11-24-2003, 02:29 PM

Hey Javehn: Nobody on this forum wishes anyone ill because of their nationality or ethnicity. The debate just gets heated up sometimes.

To add to the subject: Automatic grenade launchers of the MK-19 type are important add-ons on the urban battlefield where artillery support loses lots of effectivity. They are great tools for suppressing infantry in urban settings and can be installed on armored vehicles.

Skaman

11-24-2003, 02:31 PM

Javehn, where are you from?

Javehn

11-24-2003, 02:44 PM

Why the hell tank , with 120 mm gun , with Brauning , 2/3 mg's need a grenade launcher ? it can make all the damage without it ...
Tank can act , alone without Infantry to cover and assist , but the tank should act this way :

1) to have certain "red line" - a circle with radius approximatly 10 or 15 metters from the tank.No one should get inside of this circle .There is also a "green line " and a "yellow line", for warning purposes .
2) Use of "Active cover" - in simple terms , shoot like crazy on everything you don't like.Something that looking like mine , shaped charge , and so on..
3)Ofcorse , the scanning method is important.All crue members should have they own sector of overwatch.
4)To use the tank only on wide roads , and long avenues without a lot of turnes in them , so the gunners sights can work more effective.To avoid at all costs short both in length , and width. When there is A turn , to "open" it with extreme caution

And so on , and so on ...

16 OBr SpN

11-24-2003, 02:46 PM

That's shure wasn't the case in Grozniy , new years eve 1994 , were 3 mechanized brigade enter the city in long columns. The losses in fighters, and in technic was huge , becose of wrong usage of the Apc , and tanks.

It wasn't about wrong usage of tanks. It was about going in without any recon. We sure know how to use tanks and how to counter them in the city. Chechens were utilizing our very own tactics against us. Many of chechen commanders served in Soviet military.

I can tell you, that our generals in their "wisdom" put us outside Grozny to block the city, and keep the chechen guerillas inside. We were called in along with the VDV only after the mess started at the Minutka square.
Spetsnaz was used as regular infantry - storming buildings and suppressing chechen positions.

Conclusion: No use of recon = no info = big trouble.

Javehn

11-24-2003, 02:50 PM

16 OBr SpN

11-24-2003, 02:59 PM

Da nu , russkiy bratan
Check this out , nice stories : http://www.artofwar.ru:8101
I think there are some stories there on English
However , the problem not only with recon , each brigade had it's recon unit that checked the objectives before the attack , it was the genios minds of marazmatic old generals that made the attack plan , that haven't been any different then ww2 . Ahead and attack..

Zdorovo!

From what I know the only recon we had, was the information from Zavgaev's people. But their info was sketchy and generals instead of looking at it, decided to go ahead. Zavgaev's people warned us several times, that chechens were listening to our radio communications. Guess what those generals did? They ordered CHANGING the frequency!!! How dumb is that?
By the way, tanks were entering the city in marching formation (походный марш), not in combat formation!

Regards,
16 OBr SpN

Javehn

11-24-2003, 03:06 PM

Thats what i said bratan , they entered in columns.
Columns are formation ,when no enemy are expected , and the speed is important . Very bad formation to use inside city .It takes to blow to first and the last , and all the column is out ...

Operation Ivy

11-24-2003, 03:36 PM

Javehn are u a tank fan? woot ....but tanks are made for open spaces where it has huge advantages over infintry exc exc, but the second it goes into that urban enviornment it loses all the advantages it has in the open,and its not very hard to miss a tank while its driving in a narrow street,one shot to the back engine and it could be knocked out :|

WARPIG

11-24-2003, 03:53 PM

Tactically speaking the tanks are completely wrong in that environment. If there is a immovible obstacle or the tank gets pinned into a tight area.. a foot soldier can walk right up to it and affect dammage. The weapon systems are useless. If they are used in a support role outside a build up area then yes they can be helpful. US tanks depend on their speed and range. We often engage enemy before they can even range us and are able to move faster than they can target.
Speed, cover and firepower are crucial to urban warfare as well. Small, fluid, heavily armed, fireteams are the most effective. Having a good APC for cover is good for transport and cover unless the city is mined or the enemy uses RPG's a lot. Also the MK-19 is not used ad much in urban applications either. A 40mm grenade in a closed space is just as dangerous to the shooter as it is to the target.
Armor has it's place in urban combat but tanks are definately not it.

WARPIG

11-24-2003, 03:55 PM

OH.. and I apologize for harassing you about your English... I assumed you were english speaking and just bad at it.
Sincere apologies. :oops:

duck

11-24-2003, 03:59 PM

Why should the MK-19 be dangerous to friendly troops? Those grenades only have a´small killing radius, they can be used very close to own troops.

Royal

11-24-2003, 04:13 PM

Why should the MK-19 be dangerous to friendly troops? Those grenades only have a´small killing radius, they can be used very close to own troops.

Any fragmentation grenade has a lethal radius. Therefore any grenade is lethal. Correct me if I'm wrong, but lethal means dangerous (and then some).

WARPIG

11-24-2003, 04:13 PM

OK.. I shoot a couple 40mm HE rounds into a window of a building.. 2nd story.. the first one or two take out the room..to include the floor and the last on or two rock the foundation. That building comes down on me or the ground troops using that building.
What about trying to hit snipers on a roof. I over shoot and the people (civilians,friendly units) on the other side get fragged.
What about the shrapnel from the HE rounds to those around the target. Urban warfare is close.. Grenades are bad for that.
An M203 or like weapon one at a time. Deliberate and controlled. A MK19 barrage can be a twitch reaction to a target and have pretty extreme consequences.

BTW MK19 is the main gun of the Squad of MP's that I lead. We switch to saw and 50 cal when we get into built up areas.
Don't forget.. all buildings are not concrete. A house of wood and drywall won't hold up well against 40mm HE.

Javehn

11-24-2003, 04:19 PM

Warpig Wrote :

Tactically speaking the tanks are completely wrong in that environment. If there is a immovible obstacle or the tank gets pinned into a tight area.. a foot soldier can walk right up to it and affect dammage. The weapon systems are useless. If they are used in a support role outside a build up area then yes they can be helpful. US tanks depend on their speed and range. We often engage enemy before they can even range us and are able to move faster than they can target.
Speed, cover and firepower are crucial to urban warfare as well. Small, fluid, heavily armed, fireteams are the most effective. Having a good APC for cover is good for transport and cover unless the city is mined or the enemy uses RPG's a lot. Also the MK-19 is not used ad much in urban applications either. A 40mm grenade in a closed space is just as dangerous to the shooter as it is to the target.
Armor has it's place in urban combat but tanks are definately not it.

Well , you right , after all. 3 Armor main characteristics are : 1)Fire power 2)Manouvre 3) Armor . Those 3 can't have any use inside of build areas , and are good for open fields .
http://www.waronline.org/IDF/pictures/Army/Merkava-3/pages/image2.htm

Javehn

11-24-2003, 04:26 PM

:bash:
Where is the damn picture ???
http://www.waronline.org/IDF/pictures/Army/Merkava-3/pages/image3.htm/465.jpg

IDFM203

11-24-2003, 04:34 PM

here let me help you out a bit...you meant this picture??

http://www.waronline.org/IDF/pictures/Army/Merkava-3/images/465.JPG

shalom :D

duck

11-24-2003, 04:34 PM

WARPIG, you're right about the different structures, and I believe everyone who has had the chance to study urban warfare is familiar with that matter. What I still like about automatic grenade launchers is their superior range, often good optics and psychological effect. That "thump-thump-thump" is different from any cal machine gun and can be used to pin down defenders right before an assault on a building.

Javehn

11-24-2003, 04:38 PM

Yes , that one , idfm, thanks . Damnit , how the hell you did that ?
:( :( :(

And by the way , 40mm on the tank is not such a good idea. Tank is a fully lowded weapond platform, starting from mg's , 50 cal , 120 mm gun with heat , sabot , splesh and so on ammo, it has enough weaponds.For the targets u mentioned 50 cal can be used very well . 50 cal rounds are also HE explosives.

IDFM203

11-24-2003, 04:45 PM

Yes , that one , idfm, thanks . Damnit , how the hell you did that ?
:( :( :(

. magic ;) ….heheh :D

No I don’t know why but with waronline you have to first point the mouse on the picture then you click the right button then you clivk on properties then you click everything in the address (url) line then you go to the address bar on top and paste it there and then click it and when it open its page you then copy the address from there and bring here in between, like this.

I hope that helps

shalom :D

Operation Ivy

11-24-2003, 05:06 PM

And by the way , 40mm on the tank is not such a good idea. Tank is a fully lowded weapond platform, starting from mg's , 50 cal , 120 mm gun with heat , sabot , splesh and so on ammo, it has enough weaponds.For the targets u mentioned 50 cal can be used very well . 50 cal rounds are also HE explosives

I take u like and know tanks woot .....i found a new friend :hug: :hug:

Javehn

11-24-2003, 05:07 PM

I think me too ...

Operation Ivy

11-24-2003, 05:33 PM

Now all u gotta do is put a tank in your avatar so we can crush those monkeys woot :P

Javehn

11-25-2003, 03:03 PM

Now all u gotta do is put a tank in your avatar so we can crush those monkeys

Yea , let's crush those bastards !
Gunner , coax , troops , fire and adjust ...

http://www.steelbeasts.com/albums/Dread/Night_fire.sized.jpg

How about that ....

Operation Ivy

11-25-2003, 03:42 PM

woot woot Now u just gotta make a smaller pic and put it in your avatar! :D

Jack Mehoff

11-25-2003, 03:53 PM

:lol: No comment

http://www.waronline.org/IDF/pictures/Army/M-109/images/845.JPG

Javehn

11-25-2003, 03:55 PM

Hahaha , ok

Never the less , how do you explain this picture ?

http://www.waronline.org/IDF/pictures/Army/Merkava-3/images/465.JPG

It's shure very different then this picture :

http://armor.kiev.ua/Battle/Chechen/Grozny2.jpg

Interesting , why ?

IDFM203

11-25-2003, 03:56 PM

rofl rofl

Jack, out of all the awesome pictures on that website you gravitate and find that one...figures ;)

Shalom :D

martinexsquaddie

11-25-2003, 06:31 PM

one word MILAN bye bye tank

16 OBr SpN

11-25-2003, 11:03 PM

I think that's a tank destroyed in Grozny and probably photo is taken before 2nd Chechen campaign.
No?

Building in the background seems very familiar. If it is ideed Staropromyslov district of Grozny, then that building is long gone. Snipers were using that deserted building as a hiding spot. Guys had to blow it up.

Regards,
16 OBr SpN

hedgehog

11-25-2003, 11:27 PM

Has anyone heard or read anything in regards to tactics learned in Iraq about the use of battle tanks in an Urban environment. ex. the sighting system on the M-1 apparently has a minimum distance ~ 200m before it can actually aim..
Deployment of troops .. so their lungs don't collapse from the overpressure when the tank fires
Developments of shells using less propellant ie become more like a Howitzer..
Employing frag grenades in the smoke launchers on the side of the tank (against enemy infantry- I think one of the European tanks uses them)
Integrated mortars on the tank to attack the next street over.. etc.
Comments? Your ideas for future designs?

One?

11-26-2003, 01:15 AM

How do you think , is this realistic to use a tank in conflict that takes places inside build areas ? It has it's pluses , but it's also has a lot of problems . How do you think , is tank inside city can be called "elephant inside store " ?

You people should live outside the US and europe for a while. I mean seeing a tank in a city is nothing new to me or IDFM203. Hell in lebanon they used to fire a 150mm howitzer across the street.

Operation Ivy

11-26-2003, 07:47 AM

Your ideas for future designs?

I just think that the Abrams should fire a anti-infintry round, sorda like a like giant shot gun shell :P

Javehn

11-26-2003, 09:22 AM

Hedgehog wrote :

Has anyone heard or read anything in regards to tactics learned in Iraq about the use of battle tanks in an Urban environment. ex. the sighting system on the M-1 apparently has a minimum distance ~ 200m before it can actually aim..

Gunner's optic sights in tank , and the gun tube are not on the same place. For that , The gunners optic will look at slightly different place then the gun will be pointing , and there is a correction to gunners sights made my computer .... At 200 metters and less , the computer no longer can correct this difference , and the gunner's aim would be different then the real gun pointing.This is called parallax effect. That doesn't mean the gunner cannot longer fire the gun , it means that he will just miss ...

One wrote :

You people should live outside the US and europe for a while. I mean seeing a tank in a city is nothing new to me or IDFM203. Hell in lebanon they used to fire a 150mm howitzer across the street.

Hmmm, really , is that what is going on there ????

Ivy wrote :

I just think that the Abrams should fire a anti-infintry round, sorta like a like giant shot gun shell

There is Anti infantry round , called flechett , but it doesn't have much use (not effective) in build areas (except the fact that it's forbidden by Geneva convention , but also 5.56 rounds , and depleted uranium rounds ..) All use of tank rounds inside the city making a huge collathoral damage , so the use of them must be calculated ...

Javehn

11-30-2003, 07:20 AM

Check this out :

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/3-06-11/fig7-19.gif
Penetration of Tank HEAT Round .
Damaged building by Tank fire.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/3-06-11/fig4-1.gif[/img]
Tank in direct fire mission supported by infantry.In urban fight , direct fire is very important , and much more effective then indirect fire.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/3-06-11/fig4-3.gif

Why does tank needs infantry support ? Becose of this , many dead spaces . Some forces used AA gun to effect dead terrain on a high houses.

So so so , SSUP WITHAT ?

UoUo

11-30-2003, 08:24 AM

How do you think , is this realistic to use a tank in conflict that takes places inside build areas ? It has it's pluses , but it's also has a lot of problems . How do you think , is tank inside city can be called "elephant inside store " ?

You people should live outside the US and europe for a while. I mean seeing a tank in a city is nothing new to me or IDFM203. Hell in lebanon they used to fire a 150mm howitzer across the street.

Never saw a tank in my city....

Durandal

11-30-2003, 09:13 AM

Tanks do one of two things in a city...

Destroy the city or get destroyed. So, I guess it all depends on what you do. If you are interested in some Stalinistic invasion of Europe where damage to the infrastructure is not a concern then using tanks in an urban environment is fine.

However, if you would like to keep the city you are invading on good terms, then it is probably better to send in troops, trucks, and wheeled APCs. The more specialized in Urban Warfare the better.

Now, on a couple point.

A grenade launcher is an indirect fire weapon. I tank has none of these weapons. The Russians came out of their little tank tragedy in Grozny with several lessons.

Troops are ALWAYS needed to protect tanks.

Tanks are not the most ideal vehicle in an Urban environment.

The need for more lightweight indirect fire and CQB weapons, like sub guns, shotguns, and grenade launchers.

I really wish I could remember the title of the military article or the source but I cannot.

Not that I probably need to. The last (nearly) 100 years of Armored combat has proven tanks suck in urban combat.

PsihoKeke

11-30-2003, 10:28 AM

Check this out :

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/3-06-11/fig7-19.gif
Penetration of Tank HEAT Round .
Damaged building by Tank fire.

The building on the right picture is certanly not damaged by tank fire. I think this is picture from 1993 bombing in Saudi Arabia.