Tank to Tank engagement ranges

[Badger]

After responding to -lynx- about the use of the gun stabilizer in the
Sherman, something began to bother me about the typical WWII engagement
range my 79 year old Sherman vet gave me.  Although some of you may think
that 1,500 yds is actually quite short, I was a little suspicious because
so much of my actual gunnery training in a Sherman M4A2E8 consisted of
practicing live gunnery at 1,000 yds or less, quite often moving.

So, I contacted Charles Lemons, who's the curator of the Patton Museum and
got some interesting feedback.

This information comes from The Range and Angular Distribution of A.P. Hits
on Tanks, Ballistic Research Laboratories, Aberdeen Proving Ground MD,
December 1951 (Project TB3-1224B, Memorandum Report # 590)

This study was an analysis of the range and angular distribution of
casualties and hits on tanks in WW II (NW Europe).  It notes number of
reported tank losses for 1st US Army, 3rd US Army, and the reports from the
British Army.

Mean engagement range for Allied tanks vs German tanks was 701 yards.
1st Army mean range was 760 yds
3rd Army mean range was 615 yds
British 2nd Army mean range was 644 yds

According to the charts 87% of all engagements resulting in casualties were
at more than 200 yds, 65% was greater than 400 yds.  However, only 2% were
at ranges greater than 2000 yds.

It was noted in the report that the range at which most encounters took
place was 330 yds - or half the average range.  It also noted that most
hits were on the front of the hull or turret for US Vehicles, but only for
little more than 1/3 of the British tanks was this true.

Several things were concluded during the study:

1.  Four of the five engagements between single tanks went to the
tank that fired first.
2.  One half of all casualties were caused by a single hit and the
average number of hits per casualty was less than two.
3.  German weapons could penetrate Allied armor, in most cases, out
to 2000 yds, whereas Allied guns could perforate German armor only out to
about 800 yds.

A Map study was also included for Northern Europe and it concluded that the
average range that a tank could see another tank from any random point was
322 yards.  The probability that a tank could see 1000 yards at any random
point in Northern Europe was less than .05  (less than 5%).  It was
concluded that tank engagements in Europe was controlled by the terrain -
thus limiting tank engagement ranges.

It also noted that in only 3 of 85 cases cited were the tanks actually
engaging the gun that knocked them out.  It also noted that in only 3% of
the cases were the tanks able to return fire before becoming a casualty.

Well, after hearing this feedback, I phoned gunner "Harry" back and asked
him, "are you sure about that 1,500 yds?".  He replied "that it was just a
guess from a very old memory, but that he remembers most times they were so
close you could easily read their turret markings, as well as there wasn't
a great deal of need to aim the sighting telescope reticule pattern very
often".     hehehe

That suggests real up close and personal bore sighting and I would suspect
from his visualization of turret markings that he over estimated the 1,500
yard range he provided me earlier.  His actual engagements were most likely
down in the ranges that were documented above by official army reports and
Harry's old memory is perhaps a little off.  God bless him anyway.  

So, what does that mean to AH (and most likely WWII Online) version of
tank warfare.  In my opinion, due to a lack of graphics scenery capability,
we're actually out by a factor of between 5-10 on ranges we're engaging
with tanks in this game.  It also validates -lynx-'s excellent point that
there's so much else in everything from equipment reliability to "mean time
between failure" rules that aren't handled in AH, or for that matter any
simulation.

So, I guess the answer is to simply treat it all as a game and enjoy what
it gives us, without trying to model the entire spectrum of planes and
vehicles to a level of realism that is unattainable with today's systems.

Regards,
Badger


[This message has been edited by Badger (edited 04-21-2000).]

[juzz]

Great info!  

Have you played Panzer Elite? If so, what did you think of it?

[Badger]

As a follow-up to my first message, I've been thinking about ways that HT could program the AH tank element of the game to better simulate true W.W.II tank to tank combat at the shorter ranges.  It dawned on me that the same hardware graphics limitations that do not permit us to paint vast forests, roads and hills, may be able to work in our favor.  Those same limitations also make it difficult to see vehicles on our small two dimensional pixilated screens, WITHOUT the aid of their icons and distance ranges showing.  So, perhaps it's as simple as HT programming (limiting) vehicle distance icons and ranges to showing up ONLY at less than 800 yards.  This would permit the element of surprise and ambush to be more effective, plus would cause the tank commander to have a much greater SA than he currently does.  I pick that range only because is corresponds approximately to the ranges given in the war department memorandum I posted earlier.  We could tinker with that distance to optimize for game play and the enjoyment factor, but I think it's certainly worth trying.  Maybe we could set up a closed test (beta) arena to validate the theory?

Any feedback?

I particularly would like to hear from HT or Pyro on the subject.

Regards,
Badger

[JFalk]

Badger, great idea on limiting vehicle range icons to less then 800 yards so there is more of a surprise element.  I think if your tank isnt moving it should probally be less.

Also with the ability to turn of ground clutter you are able to turn off all bushes and trees that block site, this should be addressed or looked into.

I admit, tank combat can be fine tuned some, I like your ideas

Falkowsk

[Kieren]

You would get the same effect reducing icon range to 2.0 or 1.5 and adding a bit more rolling to level ground. I don't think it would be good to have "phantom" tanks popping up, but reducing the icon range means you have to be on your toes and on the radio to confirm tank positions.

"This is Kieren. I'm at 8,8.5. I see dots NE my position. Any friendlies in that area?"

Right now, tanks are very small dots even in early icon range. You have to be at least 3.0 to begin to "see" them (without zoom).

[Dinger]

Great info Badger!  I'll play.
(Although ignorant of these things)
A random survey shows only 5% of the terrain in NW Europe to have visibility beyond that range.  Wouldn't that same 5% be where the turret-down Panzers hang out?
The info on median ranges is for Allied stuff which your own data demonstrate as being ineffective beyond 800 yards.  Wouldn't the German toys tend to have a slightly longer range?
Outside of that, I'm in agreement about the icons (partly 'cos I'm still sore at being waxed from 1800 yards when turret-down).  Perhaps 1.0k is either since it's a nice round number.
One detail you didn't throw in was range finding.  The longer the range, the greater the error both in estimating the range and in gun accuracy; I recall reading (excuse me if I've mentioned this before) a tale of a FFA tank destroyer in the liberation of Paris that crested at the Arc de Triomphe and spotted a Panzer at the Place de la Concorde.  The gunner, recalling his childhood education, remembered that the Champs Elysees was exactly 1600 meters long, dialed it in and nailed the puppy outright.  The story was presented as an amazing bit of accuracy.

[funked]

Thanks Badger.

I agree that the scenery is the key.

Limiting (or removing) icons seems like a good idea.

One other thing I would like to see is removal of the jumbo-size dot.  At extreme range, vehicles and planes are represented by an artificially large dot that is black instead of vehicle color.  Make this vehicle color and make it actual size instead of 2 x 2 pixels or whatever it is now.

But adding woods, buildings, bushes, ditches, etc. into the terrain is probably the way to go in the long run if the download size and CPU will allow.

[715]

Can you tank experts tell a beginner what "turret down" and "hull down" mean and why you want to be in those situations?  Thanks.

715A

[crabofix]

Nice information!

It is not only the aperance of the siluette on the tank that makes you discover it, theres movement glares, dust and SOUND. Ok If you have your engine running, you will not be able to hear it, but close it and listen, you might be able to hear it at 3 km!!
I heard about panz. on the eastern front 2knocking out tanks at 2500 meters, but it w2as armed with the 8.8cm!
This was the only advantage germans had against the russian T-34: Higher accuracy and
 longer shooting distance.
I have no prroblem spotting a person walking at 800 yards, thats for sure! A Big moving target as a tank produces, could probebly be spotted at atleast twice the distance.
Now, a tank that is not moving, is very hard to discover even at 500 meters!

AS the engine is shut of, and the tank is not moving at all (not even turret) the iconrange should crawl down to atleast 300-500, makin it possible to "ambush" by using the camoflage.

Lowering the iconrange to 800, will give the sherman all advantages in a tankbattle!


BORK, BORK, BORK!!

Crabofix

[Citabria]

just make enemy tanks/vehicles icons 800 yards but friendlies further out

[crabofix]

 

Originally posted by Citabria:
just make enemy tanks/vehicles icons 800 yards but friendlies further out

800 yards??? I dont know where you all live, but I am out sometimes, walking in the mountains. I have no problem spotting moving persons at 800 meters!! The problem is not the icon itself, its the way it is displayed: Above the tank. Hiddin behind a hill still dosīnt make your icon hide with you. As I said before, this could be the simulated "sound and exhaust" of a tank, but you should only be able to hear it with your engine shut down! If the other guy also is "off" the iconrange could crawl down to maybe 500-1000 yards.
Movement give you away in terrain, even the movement of a turret would make you to a spotted target.


BORK, BORK, BORK!!
Crabofix

[Badger]

Hi 715a...

 

Originally posted by 715:
Can you tank experts tell a beginner what "turret down" and "hull down" mean and why you want to be in those situations?  Thanks.

715A

The term "hull down" to a tanker, specifically the driver, means that your AFV when viewed from the front by the enemy will expose ONLY the turret silhouette to their gun's line of sight.  It is a cardinal sin for a tank to stop in the open unless there's absolutely no other alternative.  If one can't stop, then you should keep moving in order to deny the enemy's AT guns or other tanks a whole silhouette firing resolution .  When moving, you kept zigzagging as well, in order to alter the sight picture of anyone trying to lay their master weapon on you.  The Crew Commander (CC) normally hollered into the headsets, "driver, hull down, ridge to your left".  The driver would "jockey" and move to that general position where he from his periscope, was not able to see over the crest.

The term "turret down" to a tanker, specifically the driver, means that your AFV when viewed from the front by the enemy will expose NO silhouette to their gun's line of sight.  The CC would usually be standing on the turret floor with the upper part of his body exposed outside through the CC's cupola ring.  He would be using his binoculars to scan the ground to the front for targets and his next hull or turret down fire position.  Sometimes, depending upon the ground, he would stand on top of the turret viewing with his binoculars.  The turret down position was used to lay "indirect fire" (no line of sight) onto enemy positions, such as HE while support an infantry advance.

It was quite boring being a driver, since if you were doing your job taking up fire positions correctly, you couldn't see anything but the reverse slope of a hill in front of you, or a hard obstacle you had chosen to take up a hull or turret down behind.  As a Sherman driver, there was many a large fallen tree whose bark work I have studied extensively, while sitting for hours stationary in a hull down listening to the drone of the engines.    It was not uncommon for many drivers, including this old badger road kill, to fall asleep sitting in an extended hull or turret down.  The result would always be the CC sliding downward in the turret and moving his lower body forward to the driver's compartment from the rear.  He would then give a swift boot to the back of  the head and holler "wake up".  

It is important to note that when it was time to move forward from these fire positions, the AFV didn't simply drive forward over the obstacle that was being used as a hull or turret down.  A good AT or enemy tank gunner would sit patiently after he had seen you.  He would lay and sight his primary weapon upon you, waiting for that movement forward.  Why?  Well, simply put, as the tank moves forward, its front end will rise up high in the air when clearing the obstacle such as the ridge line.  The front mass of the vehicle would usually expose it's under belly and at that point they would fire.  To avoid this as much as possible and to deny that solid sight picture, one would "jockey" backwards from a hull or turret down, to the right or left a fair distance.  At that point the driver would build as much speed as possible, cresting the obstacle at a different spot then the original hull or turret down location, running like stink for the next hull or turret down position selected by the CC.  Note the fact that before you moved, you ALWAYS picked out you next fire position.

Hope this helps you somewhat 715a.

Regards,
Badger

[Pongo]

Good stuff again badger.
A study of the western allied armoured tactics and effectiveness in 1944-45 is valid of course only as it applies to a force fighting in that terrain with that level of supperiority in almost all areas, against an enemy of the type and equipment(and indoctirnation and elan) that they were fighting against!
The russian front would render different numbers and lessons, the desert a new set the Arab Israeli wars another set again.
Pyro is stuck with the terrain and equimpment and crew quality that he puts in.
Tanks here will always be engaging at closer to there theoritical max ranges(and beyond) then in NWE.
Casulties of all types in AH always approach or exceed 100%..

But..tanks need a way to hide.
They should put an "ambush" command in. that no matter the location makes a tanks icon dissapear entirly and changes the base colour of the hull to the colour of the back ground.
Have it not appear if it fires but give an appropriate weapon signiture. If it moves its icon shows up. If it moves slow..its icon shows at 2k, medium speed makes the icon apprear at 4k, fast speed makes it appear at 8k...
Ambush would take several miutes to accomplish.

------------------
Pongo
The Wrecking Crew

[Badger]

Thanks Pongo....

Some really great and innovative ideas there....<salute>

I hope HT notes the opportunity...

Regards,
Badger


[This message has been edited by Badger (edited 04-23-2000).]

[hitech]

We read all post. Just can't begin to comment on most of them.

HiTech