A tank is worth how many infantrymen on the battlefield? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion



Message

the_iron_duke -> A tank is worth how many infantrymen on the battlefield? (11/4/2016 5:10:25 AM)

How many infantrymen/riflemen is one tank worth on the battlefield? It's a bit of an abstract question and depends on lots of things. Let's say we are talking about one medium tank, like an M4 Sherman or Panzer IV, in Second World War Europe.

By my rough calculations, a single medium tank costs more than the weapons of five rifle companies - a thousand men or more. Obviously, it's not that simple as military units are not lifeless piles of weapons.

So what, in your opinion, would be the combat value of one tank as a quantity of riflemen on the battlefield?



Zap -> RE: A tank is worth how many infantrymen on the battlefield? (11/4/2016 5:33:27 AM)

How I would calculate that would be the average of infantry kills an M4 Sherman PanzerIV gets on a whole. Is there any other way to measure this?



bcgames -> RE: A tank is worth how many infantrymen on the battlefield? (11/4/2016 5:48:52 AM)

One company of tanks equals ~four companies of infantry as viewed from a larger, more inclusive, combined arms equation. So 1 tank = ~2.4 infantry squads (~36 squads/~15 tanks). But...maybe...the moral is to the physical as three is to one...so alea iacta est with large modifiers yields a different, less conclusive result.



warspite1 -> RE: A tank is worth how many infantrymen on the battlefield? (11/4/2016 6:01:18 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: the_iron_duke

How many infantrymen/riflemen is one tank worth on the battlefield? It's a bit of an abstract question and depends on lots of things. Let's say we are talking about one medium tank, like an M4 Sherman or Panzer IV, in Second World War Europe.

By my rough calculations, a single medium tank costs more than the weapons of five rifle companies - a thousand men or more. Obviously, it's not that simple as military units are not lifeless piles of weapons.

So what, in your opinion, would be the combat value of one tank as a quantity of riflemen on the battlefield?
warspite1

But as you say, its not that simple. For example, as well as the tank, it depends on the battlefield. A tank in open country is possibly going to be worth more than a tank fighting in a built up urban area. What would a commander want more in the Western Desert and what would he want more of fighting house to house, floor to floor in Stalingrad?



wings7 -> RE: A tank is worth how many infantrymen on the battlefield? (11/4/2016 12:52:56 PM)

I don't know how many but the Infantry is still "Queen of the Battle"! [:)]



Poopyhead -> RE: A tank is worth how many infantrymen on the battlefield? (11/4/2016 2:16:45 PM)

quote:

So what, in your opinion, would be the combat value of one tank as a quantity of riflemen on the battlefield?


One could just add up all the tanks and infantry used in WW II and then make a calculus, but this would largely be pointless. Historically, infantry in a phalanx or legion ruled the battlefield for centuries. After the introduction of the stirrup, cavalry were king for a millenium. Then the addition of a combination of pike and missile units (longbows to muskets) made a sort of rock-paper-scissors tactic. All of this failed in WW I when a machine age army could more easily exhaust a nation's wealth before it could break a defensive position. This led to two forms of combined arms armies. In one, "leg" infantry supported by slow tanks that were little more than pillboxes on treads and set piece artillery barrages would gradually reduce enemy trenches. In the other, a combat team moved at speed to create the blitzkrieg. Infantry and artillery in trucks, half-tracks or eventually on armored vehicles moving quickly with fast tanks could concentrate rapidly on a small front and overwhelm a defender. These would then out run the slower combined arms forces, destroying their command and control and sewing chaos. The slower forces would be sent to support locations that had already been lost. In this case, the tortoise never beat the hare.

A Panzer Division, or a Guards Tank Corps or an Armored Division are a team of tanks, mechanized infantry and mobile artillery with the support forces of engineers, signal, medical and so on also motorized. These are the thoroughbreds of lightning warfare. The Germans in kampfgruppen and the U.S. in Combat Teams could tailor a force as mechanized infantry or tank "heavy" depending on the mission for even greater flexibility. If you want to hold ground against an attack or that you have taken in an attack, Infantry Divisions that can dig in and go to ground do that best. So, you need enough Infantry Divisions to hold the length of the front and enough Armored Divisions to provide the mobile force for offensive or counter offensive operations. That is the value of each.



MakeeLearn -> RE: A tank is worth how many infantrymen on the battlefield? (11/4/2016 2:30:22 PM)

Which way is the wind blowing?



A tank is worth how many infantrymen on the battlefield? A good analysis subject for a book.



ncc1701e -> RE: A tank is worth how many infantrymen on the battlefield? (11/4/2016 10:32:18 PM)

Vast subject. Depends on the AT weapons available for the infantry units.
Depends also on the weapons inside the tank. Is the ammunition has some effectiveness against men or just other tank?

But, I would say a tank alone without support against a rifle squad is already in trouble.



the_iron_duke -> RE: A tank is worth how many infantrymen on the battlefield? (11/5/2016 7:38:43 PM)

I found a good source. Here are the results of a survey of 109 NATO field grade officers, asked to assess the relative combat values of various different categories of weapons sytems and in various terrains. The study the table is from was released in 1993, so it's probably of greater relevance to the military of that time, although I think it still has a level of applicability to the Second World War-era battlefield.

[img]http://i.imgur.com/lcGBZO4.png[/img]
- Assessing Combat Power: A Methodology for Tactical Battle Staffs - Major Allen D. Raymond (1993)

In the terrain that it's best-suited for - rolling/open terrain - a single tank is estimated to have the combat value of 1.76 infantry platoons. So, roughly, a rifle company being worth two tanks.

I think this probably doesn't tell the full picture in terms of a tank's value. A rifle company's strength will, I think, be pretty much all combat power, since it has only basic mobility and no armour. A tank, on the other hand, has the mobility to conduct strategic manoeuvres way beyond a rifle company's capability and, potentially, in game terms, to attack multiple times in a turn. Also, a tank's armour will surely form part of its combat value score, but, in more general terms, it will make a tank a lot less vulnerable to bombardment, such as by artillery or air power. So I think that, if these things are taken in to account, a rifle company might then be worth a single tank, rather than two.



Poopyhead -> RE: A tank is worth how many infantrymen on the battlefield? (11/5/2016 9:43:01 PM)

Here is a link to a scan of the original document (which is again a staff paper only):
http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=ADA259261

"However, the methodology can be
used to sketch a general picture of opposing strengths, and in
this regard is better than no method at all."

The measure of a science theory is it's ability to predict an outcome accurately. This document's values do not predict the outcome of 73 Easting I posted above.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.125