Tanks vs Mecha - for the Real World

[slade the sniper]

Incendiary weapons are sorely missed these days

There have been many times I have wished for a flame thrower...especially mounted on an armored platform.

I remember a symposium I attended with some Russian officers about the Gronzy/Chechniya campaigns and they were very adamant about "you will want flame weapons in an urban environment!"

-STS

[Jefffar]

That's why the Russians made this beauty.

[batlchip]

I'm aware of the croc but I was not aware of the japanese tank.thanks for the info jefffar.That is one ugly tank.

[Jefffar]

Yeah, the TOS-1 is one of the uglier modifications to a T-72 out there, but it is an indirect and direct fire armoured launcher for FAE and Incendiary rockets - great stuff for clearing buildings and bunkers.

As for the amphibious Japanese tanks check out the Type 2 Ka-Mi and the Type 3 Ka-Chi. The Japanese were apparently working on some other models, one that behaved more like a submarine and another more heavily armed and armoured successor to the Type 3.

[Jefffar]

Hey, tanks are becoming more powerful again.

YUMA PROVING GROUND, Ariz. --- Raytheon Company, General Dynamics and the U.S. Army completed the first Mid-Range Munition cartridge integration test. The autonomously fired round struck the threat target from a beyond-line-of-sight range of 5.2 kilometers (about 3 statute miles).

MRM is a gun-fired, precision-guided projectile that provides beyond-line-of-sight engagement capabilities to brigade combat teams.

"This was the first completely autonomous imaging infrared-guided shot in the history of the MRM program," said James Riley, Raytheon Missile Systems' vice president for Land Combat. "MRM's beyond-line-of-sight capabilities will give Future Combat Systems brigade combat team soldiers, and potentially BCTs equipped with the Abrams tank, the ability to engage the enemy out of contact and win battles while minimizing friendly casualties."

The test verified two primary modes of operation: designate and autonomous. In designate mode, the round was initially guided to the target with a laser designator before switching to imaging infrared seeker guidance. In autonomous mode, the round was fired in the general direction of the target before the IIR seeker searched for and acquired the target.

Interesting weapons, the killer part of the munition is either a tandem HEAT warhead in a top attack profile or what is basically a rocket propelled APFSDS round. Either of those will be pretty dangerous to a tank and lethal to anything else they hit.

[slade the sniper]

I love weapons designers!

I wonder how long it will take to make it's way down to the line units.

As for the increase in lethality, it will push engagement ranges out to 5km for "sort of" direct fire engagements...

So we can begin targeting (at the BCT-internal level) from 30km to bayonet range. The more indirect fire assets we have, the better off we will be.

The biggest points of interest with regard to tank development, in my opinion, are:
Electro-Thermal Enhancement
bigger guns (140mm and up)
Active armor systems (of various types)

I think in 15 years the heavy armor role will be far more lethal than any game could have imagined 15 years ago...

-STS

[Jefffar]

Well the 140 mm guns stopped being worked on because the appearance of tanks capable of taking the 120 mm hits just hasn't happened. For now upgrading the 120 mm from L44 to L55 configuration seems to be the only oomph needed.

[glitterboy2098]

actually, the apparent trend in tank guns seems to be the reverse, moving back towards smaller guns. for example, the original FCS tank design only had a 25mm cannon. now, admittadly it was a railgun firing 25mm kinetic impactors at hypersonic speeds...

i could see future research going into lighter material versions of the modern 105mm to 120mm guns, as well as improved armor materials with even better protection from shaped charge warheads. lighters guns would allow for either lighter tanks, faster tanks, or more armor, while improved HEAT-resistance helps protect the tank from RPG's and anti-tank missiles.

[Jefffar]

The problem with the 25 mm railgun is it looses one of the great capabilities of modern tank guns - the ability to blow apart structures and fortifications with high explosives.

[Peacebringer]

Been there, done that.

We played a few games using Cyperpunk 2020 Maximum Metal rules for Mech combat. Cyberpunk tries very hard to mimic reality. We used expanded walker rules. They only had mini-mechs, because they concluded that there's no material strong enough to support a 50 foot robot. We bent the rules about and had a mech battle. First off, you can see mechs coming for miles. They're huge, whereas our tanks and powered armor were small and in concealment. On mech even failed to ever find one of my tanks that was firing at them. Mech can take a ton of damage. I was blowing out compartments, knocking out weapons and missile systems and still, the thing was moving. A good hit to a leg, and the thing is toast. It's only prayer is to find the attackers and destroy them before they eventually destroy it. A good way to win was to make called shots to the cockpit. They will usually stop a mech, even if you only get one good hit. A 120mm DPU round will tear through that, not necessarily killing the pilots, but either wounding them or knocking out the control systems. Also, from the air, mechs are history. One 1000lb bomb and it's a goner.


Once, we played a Battletech Mercenary game in which we used money to purchase our army instead of Tonnage. For ever mech the other players could buy, I could buy three tanks or aircraft. So, they had their company of 12 mechs, and I had over a battalion(50) of tanks. It was about four tanks for every one mech. We slaughtered the mechs. And mind you, this was using Battletech rules, which is slanted towards mechs.


I've also heard of coordinated Innersphere, 2025 artillery strikes, that is, 6-8 artillery pieces, being able to disable Clan Clusters with the use of small, two man spotter teams hidden on the map.


In the end, mech's advantage is fear. Imagine using Mechs in the First Gulf War. But once you get over that and know what your doing, Mechs are really a waste of military resources, like the German Elephant tanks.

I imagine a third world dictator using a mech to parade around the country side, stomping on villages that oppose him, until the rebels use their 105mm howitzers one day and put an end to the Mechwarrior Dictator. (ponders thought, that can work)

http://i43.tinypic.com/16lfqbl.jpg

[Jefffar]

Interesting that such a mecha oriented game would put such a realistic mecha vs armour scenario.

Of course for some reason it ignores that the armour should have had better protection, but that's another story

[glitterboy2098]

Interesting that such a mecha oriented game would put such a realistic mecha vs armour scenario.

Of course for some reason it ignores that the armour should have had better protection, but that's another story

well, in battletech vee's can pack heavier armor and weaponry than an equal mass mech, largely due to "suspension factor", the design of it's motive system so it can use a less powerful (and thus less massive) engine for the same movement.
but their offset by some limits. vee's can only go up one (6 meter) elevation level at a time (unlike mechs, which can do 2), tracked vee's can't enter heavy woods, wheeled vee's can't enter woods at all.
likewise Vee's, due to their less compartmentalized design, have a (fairly balanced) chance of getting a critical hit on every shot, not just those that get through the armor. these hits use a Vee criticals chart, which is mostly motive system hits that slow it down.

so they can be bricks with sledgehammers, but have less all terrain mobility and are more likely to be mission killed through track/wheel/hoversystem damage.

[Jefffar]

Interesting, I agree with the heavier arms and armaments and the vertical terrain reduction vs mechs, but mechs have so many more areas where things can go wrong that are not well armoured - critical should be much easier against them.

[green.nova343]

Interesting, I agree with the heavier arms and armaments and the vertical terrain reduction vs mechs, but mechs have so many more areas where things can go wrong that are not well armoured - critical should be much easier against them.

Should be, but the rules (as pointed out earlier) are biased to favor the 'mechs because the game itself is designed for mech-vs.-mech fights, so some of the realism went out the door.

[glitterboy2098]

it used to be worse. under the old master rules or compendium of warfare, tanks had more chances of getting taking critical hits, the chart was facing generic with exploding ammo or fuel as the most common result, and getting hit with Inferno missiles (napalm spewing rockets) was basically an insta-kill. (a side effect of the fact vee's don't have heat scales)
under the new total warfare, facing counts for both chances of taking a critical and for the kind of critical damage that can hapen, the common result is reduced mobility, and inferno's just inflict extra critical hits. (so getting hit with a swarm of Inferno SRM's is more of an "insta-mission-kill" now)

thankfully inferno's have a tendancy to blow up in the ammo bins (making them harder to use), and aren't tourney legal now.

[avollant]

O the whole topic, if tanks are such a perfect vector, why are we still trying tio developpe a walking system? Answer because we are stupid!!! Seriously, tanks are good but they still have their limitation. A walking vehicule might have a chance to go plces where a tank wouldn't be able to follow... at least not as quick as desire.

So far, I've seen Battletech quote as an example, yet B-Tech is not the best system to get your reference at. On another extreme scale, there is Warhammer 40,000 with their Adeptus Titanicus whose on the same level.... anyway. IMO if a walking system come to light one day, the chance are they will settle in a niche or fonction that will be their own. The best example of this is Heavy Gear (by DP-9). The "Gears" are acting like super infantry that make the blunt of any military operation but will still have a great difficulties to take a single tank down.

So if such a thing as a walking vehicle is made, it will probably be used in conjonction with other branch of the military and not independantly.

A good example of this analogy are the horses: vehicle are by far superior to horses but... there are area where a good horse is better than any vehicles...

[Tiree]

A good example of this analogy are the horses: vehicle are by far superior to horses but... there are area where a good horse is better than any vehicles...

And it's Green!

[glitterboy2098]

the main difference in reality is that none of the legged vehicles being worked on are combat units.

in development we have legged robots to carry ammo and supplies (which is loosing out development wise to the wheeled MULE drones), legged logging machines (not very popular), and we did some work with legged trucks at one point.

the Big Dog pack-robot has an advantage over a wheeled or tracked vehicle in terms of scaling rocky ground, though the MULE drone can carry more, and is faster cross country. the legged logging vehicle (a john deer product, oddly) can get into stands of trees where a wheeled vehicle can't, and is a major improvement over doing it by hand, like most loggers still have to do. but it's so expensive it still isn't common.

and the legged trucks were built with the same kind of idea as the big dog pack-robot, to allow a truck to carry cargo across rough ground a wheeled vehicle can't get across. but it proved too expensive.


most research into walking robots has been civilian work, with the goal of making what are basically human assistance androids, powered armor, or as studies into motion. none of it has been planned for any sort of combat role.

there have been many armed robots proposed, but they have all been flying, tracked, wheeled, or built into boathulls.

[Jefffar]

Perhaps so, I'm not going to read up on it. My gut tells me that tanks or even destroids are sitting ducks for beyond visual range attacks, unless they have an equal amount of electronic support (radar etc...) that would enable tracking and engagement. The biggest difference in the our forces and Saddam's was air support. Seems the Robotech game has always been set up in the same manner.

Yes, both tanks and robots are going to have to worry about the various armour killers out their in the battlefield (other armoured fighting vehicles, ATGW, aircraft, infantry anti-armour weapons, etc) but the tank's design makes it more survivable in a high threat environment than a humanoid-style robot.

The 30 seconds figure mentioned above was the lifespan of a tank that has been detected, with their lower silhouettes, the tank is harder to detect than a robot, which means that last 30 seconds is going to start much sooner for the robot than for the tank. This means the tank has better odds of getting the chance to perform it's mission. Also, with their thicker, better shaped armour, a tank has a better chance of surviving a hit and allowing the crew to escape or keep fighting than a robot does.

Yes, in a modern war casualties among armour units are going to be high, but machine for machine, you're probably going to see a lower loss unit in tanks than in heavy robots.

[Jefffar]

Of course that spins us off into a thread about why a conventional fighter will do better than a veritech fighter - at least in the role of fighter.

[Beatmeclever]

Of course that spins us off into a thread about why a conventional fighter will do better than a veritech fighter - at least in the role of fighter.

After all, to use the Battletech line of reasoning, LAMs were great as aerospace vehicles, but they were easily damaged in their mech configuration and could lose the ability to transform quickly in mech-to-mech combat.

My favorite attack used a heavy mech to lure the opponent's LAM in and then swarm with battle armor once he was on two feet.

My point would be that as long as you keep your Alpha in jet mode you are fine; once you set down to claim your newly won territory, my infantry will wipe your @$$ all over the field of battle and they will be supported by an armored division that was hidden in the trees behind you (didn't see them there because they had been shut down so you wouldn't see the heat signatures)

Even if you do survive to make the long walk back to base, your maintenance crew hates you for even thinking about transforming and landing. The mech (especially the variable fighter idea) is NEVER going to be superior to the tank or the non-variable aircraft. It costs too much to maintain.

[glitterboy2098]

Battletech is a poor example since it presupposes weapons with extremely poor accuracy and ridiculously short ranges.

actually, that got addressed in the latest version. talked about how the ranges in the ground part of the game were reduced for playability, and that it represented basic "blackbox" ECM and stuff. it also specified that the ranges from the aerotech side of the game (where even a machinegun can shoot a kilometer or more. and most shoot dozens in an atmosphere, or hundreds to thousands in space) are the "true" ranges, and even presented rules for "true scale" weapon ranges in the advanced optional rules, which boiled down to "if you can see it, you can shoot it, even dozens of miles away". so it's available, but since it makes manuvering all but pointless, i doubt it will see much use in normal games.

[Peacebringer]

LAMs in Battletech rock!!!

I've taken out 100 ton clan mechs while using a 50 ton LAM.

First, I bomb them.

Then, I switch to L.A.M. where I get something like 15 jump points for movement. I hid behind a mountain and then when I won initiative, I flew out behind the clan mech and fired my weapons, then retreated next movement phase. It took 78 turns and all night. But I did it.

[glitterboy2098]

LAMs in Battletech rock!!!

I've taken out 100 ton clan mechs while using a 50 ton LAM.

First, I bomb them.

Then, I switch to L.A.M. where I get something like 15 jump points for movement. I hid behind a mountain and then when I won initiative, I flew out behind the clan mech and fired my weapons, then retreated next movement phase. It took 78 turns and all night. But I did it.

sadly, the above also means you were playing it wrong.
LAM's can't carry bombs (their mechs), and that 15MP isn't jump, it's VTOL style movement only.
i've made the same mistakes as well. trying to defend the LAM's on the battletech boards got me learning their rules pretty closely.

generally though, Btech's LAM's are less effective in ground combat than mechs, less effective in dogfights as fighters, less effective in atmospheric combat than VTOL's, and way less effective than a properly built tank....

[green.nova343]

LAMs in Battletech rock!!!

I've taken out 100 ton clan mechs while using a 50 ton LAM.

First, I bomb them.

Then, I switch to L.A.M. where I get something like 15 jump points for movement. I hid behind a mountain and then when I won initiative, I flew out behind the clan mech and fired my weapons, then retreated next movement phase. It took 78 turns and all night. But I did it.

sadly, the above also means you were playing it wrong.
LAM's can't carry bombs (their mechs), and that 15MP isn't jump, it's VTOL style movement only.
i've made the same mistakes as well. trying to defend the LAM's on the battletech boards got me learning their rules pretty closely.

generally though, Btech's LAM's are less effective in ground combat than mechs, less effective in dogfights as fighters, less effective in atmospheric combat than VTOL's, and way less effective than a properly built tank....

It could probably carry bombs in its "Aerospace Fighter" mode (although probably not too many -- IIRC, something like 1 bomb for every 15 tons of fighter mass, so a LAM maxes out with 3 bombs). As for LAM movement, I think it's MP = Jump x 3, which meant the slowest "canon" LAM has 15 MPs, with the other 2 getting 18. And as long as you don't have to change elevation too often, & remember to land, you're still talking about making even the speed-demon mechs look like they're standing still -- although walking speed is cut down (something like MP = Walk / 3).

Still, though, the rules for LAMs were rather complicated, which is why they ended up making them Level 3 (i.e. pretty much illegal for any tournament play)... & then they topped off by scapegoating the Clans to get rid of them (as a result of the big art licensing issue).