Alexandra
Posts: 546
Joined: 12/7/2000 From: USA Status: offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by kgvm:
Just reading Artillery in the Desert (see the 88mm Flak-diskussion) there is an interesting statement on page 31: "Indirect 25-pounder fire is, however, not effective for stopping tank attacks, but in can cause the tanks to "button up" their hatches". If even the heavier 25-pounder shell is not effective, I very much dought that a mortar shell will be better. May be a lucky hit say 1 : 1000?
Here's the difference. We'll use UK weapons for both parts of this example. The 25#s are heavy arty, say, oh, a battery of the Royal Horse Artillery. They're probably a good distance from the fight, we'd call them off board for SPWAW, and so the odds of a direct tank hit are, indeed, low. However, they can strip the infantry support away and supress tanks.
However, the 3 inch battaltion, and 2 inch company mortars, are, in all likelhood, right on the battle field and can see the tanks, and, so have higher chances to hit them on that vulnerable top armor because the gunners can see the tank's movements and make adjustments.
In my own SPWAW experience, I've rarely seen a mortar kill on a tank that wasn't direct fire. But direct fire mortars are often tank killers.
Alex
_____________________________
"Tonight a dynasty is born." Ricky Proehl, then of the Saint Louis Rams. He was right! Go Pats! Winners of Super Bowls 36, 38 and 39.
|