Tanktowers should blow off

[DingBat]

Just to take an different view, rather than catastrophic kills, which are essentially eye candy (but nice), I've always wanted to have some tank kills provide little or no visual indication of the kill. It's not always possible to see that your shot has killed the tank. German tankers used to have a policy of shooting until the target burned.

This actually affects gameplay as it would be the gunners choice of when to move on to a new target. It would result in wasted shots against already dead tanks. It might even be possible to "play dead" for short periods of time.

 

[Lt_Kettch]

Add it to the to-do list for RO2

 

[Feldwebel Crin]

Just to take an different view, rather than catastrophic kills, which are essentially eye candy (but nice), I've always wanted to have some tank kills provide little or no visual indication of the kill. It's not always possible to see that your shot has killed the tank. German tankers used to have a policy of shooting until the target burned.

This actually affects gameplay as it would be the gunners choice of when to move on to a new target. It would result in wasted shots against already dead tanks. It might even be possible to "play dead" for short periods of time.

I always liked that part of CM:BB, the tankers would keep firing at a knocked out tank if its effects weren't immediate. It sometimes cost me (and the enemy) a few tanks. There were also some times in RO (specifically, Black Day) during which I "played dead" in a tank. Several times I could get off a shot to the rear this way.

 

[Madeyes]

Just to take an different view, rather than catastrophic kills, which are essentially eye candy (but nice), I've always wanted to have some tank kills provide little or no visual indication of the kill. It's not always possible to see that your shot has killed the tank. German tankers used to have a policy of shooting until the target burned.

This actually affects gameplay as it would be the gunners choice of when to move on to a new target. It would result in wasted shots against already dead tanks. It might even be possible to "play dead" for short periods of time.

This would be soo much better if the dead tanks stayed in the game. Especially when the crew bailed out. Luckily the Sherman had a petrol engine so would burn even on a hot day let alone an 88 shell hitting it. Just to make thing easy for the germans

 

[2fisted]

Just to take an different view, rather than catastrophic kills, which are essentially eye candy (but nice), I've always wanted to have some tank kills provide little or no visual indication of the kill. It's not always possible to see that your shot has killed the tank. .

I vote yes on this. With the tank either sitting still, smoking still, or on fire. It would add a suspense element to the battle. But should be just a husk of a tank, that can't be re-entered.
That said, I always said it would be cool to see a tank brew up & turret pop off every now & again.

 

[Mormegil]

Just to take an different view, rather than catastrophic kills, which are essentially eye candy (but nice), I've always wanted to have some tank kills provide little or no visual indication of the kill. It's not always possible to see that your shot has killed the tank. German tankers used to have a policy of shooting until the target burned.

This actually affects gameplay as it would be the gunners choice of when to move on to a new target. It would result in wasted shots against already dead tanks. It might even be possible to "play dead" for short periods of time.

Only work if Death Messages were off by default, which I'm a big fan of.


So it's pretty much been settled that a round hit by itself can't knock off a turret.

If you think about this, this makes absolute sense due to physics. I forget which of Newton's laws states that an action has an equal and opposite reaction. So if a round has enough kinetic energy to blow a turret off an opposing tank, it would have even more energy reacting against the firing tank's turret (the round looses energy as it flies through the air due to friction).

Theoretically, if the firing tank was about as well built as the opposing tank (that will have it's turret knocked off), the firing tank would be as likely to loose it's own turret when firing. Granted we're talking overmatched tanks, but you would think the stress of repeated firings would be eventually screw up the turret bearings/seal.

Same reason why in movies, it's BS that pistol fire would make people fly back when hit. That amount of energy means the guy firing the pistol should also fly back (unless he has a magical recoiless gun - but I don't see any blowback).

I dedicate this post to the late Mr. Wizard.

 

[K Rohm]

The reason Soviet tank turrets are so relatively easily blown off is because for the most part they are simply dropped into the turet ring without proper securing mechanisms; it's just faster from a manufacturing standpoint and was standard Soviet practice until fairly recently. Notice all the T-55 and T-62 turrets from the various Gulf Wars laying off to the side? When a US tank gets hit, the turret generally doesn't come off because our designers have elaborate securing rings and such- and of course this adds to the manufaturing time as well as adding more weight.

If I'm not mistaken, much of our post-war turret design benefitted greatly from German designs, part of which was the turret retaining systems.

Of course, I could be completely wrong. Your Mileage May Vary.

 

[Elysium]

I think this is the same T-34 tank that Recce posted that showed it's entire front blowen off. Interesting read though.
http://images.search.yahoo.com/sear...peg&no=19&tt=44&oid=b37ea19966ff9dc4&ei=UTF-8

 

[Kipper]

I am really going to have to be the first to mention the saying "The T34 tips its hat to a Tiger?"

 

[Recce]

Notice all the T-55 and T-62 turrets from the various Gulf Wars laying off to the side? When a US tank gets hit, the turret generally doesn't come off because our designers have elaborate securing rings and such- and of course this adds to the manufaturing time as well as adding more weight.

I haven't heard about that design feature, but I had heard about the blow-out panels on the Abrams.
I hate to quote Wiki as a source, but it's the morning and I have to leave for work. "Fuel and ammunition are in armored compartments with blowout panels to protect the crew from the risk of the tank's own ammunition cooking off if the tank is damaged."

 

[K Rohm]

Yes the M-1 series has blow-out panels in the top of the turret above the ammo bin; being relatively thin, they keep all the explosion pressure away from the crew in the event of enemy fire or what have you. During my time in M-1's I can tell you I was VERY grateful for having the doors to the ammo bin slam shut each time a round was removed; fortunately I never had the experince of having to bail out of a wounded tank, but I know if it had come to that I WOULD have been alive to have done so!

OTOH, in older Soviet designs (again, I pick on the T-55 series) their ammo was stored pretty much everywhere it could be fitted, with much of it in racks beloe the turret floorplates! No wonder they delved into automatic loading systems!

To be fair, though, even Tiger 1's stored some of their ammo in the crew compartment as well, along with most other WW2-era tanks; that's one reason you see such catastrophic kills in photos. Crew protection was, at best, a secondary consideration--

 

[Gunwing]

Yes the M-1 series has blow-out panels in the top of the turret above the ammo bin; being relatively thin, they keep all the explosion pressure away from the crew in the event of enemy fire or what have you. During my time in M-1's I can tell you I was VERY grateful for having the doors to the ammo bin slam shut each time a round was removed; fortunately I never had the experince of having to bail out of a wounded tank, but I know if it had come to that I WOULD have been alive to have done so!

OTOH, in older Soviet designs (again, I pick on the T-55 series) their ammo was stored pretty much everywhere it could be fitted, with much of it in racks beloe the turret floorplates! No wonder they delved into automatic loading systems!

To be fair, though, even Tiger 1's stored some of their ammo in the crew compartment as well, along with most other WW2-era tanks; that's one reason you see such catastrophic kills in photos. Crew protection was, at best, a secondary consideration--

too true. The tanks of WW2 were of the power and armor era. Tanks in modern times are all about crew safty, armor, power and speed the medium of these four features is where most tanks sit today. With added crew protection, and safty being a primary thing in tank design, speed being next, and firepower/armor being a ballance.

 

[Lemur]

I've tried searching that photo or at least page where I read about 152mm round tearing turrets off the tank, but with no luck.
Only found this photo, but I'd say this time KV-2 hit the ammo storage.

A memoir comes to mind where JSU-152 did that to a panther:
http://www.iremember.ru/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=85&Itemid=19


There is no photo of it and it does not really say why the turret flew off the panther. The early panthers had a "shot trap" between the turret and the hull, so that might allow a huge HE round to lift the turret, I suppose. Still, catastrophic damage inside the tank from ammo explosion is the most propable cause for it.

 

[dogbadger]

The reason Soviet tank turrets are so relatively easily blown off is because for the most part they are simply dropped into the turet ring without proper securing mechanisms.....

If this is indeed even partly true, and I can easily believe it, then I imagine the thicker the turret armour was the more chance there was this could happen. A bit like kicking a football into windows that aren't well fixed to the frame- thin glass would break, but thick may be pushed through. Maybe.

...along with most other WW2-era tanks; that's one reason you see such catastrophic kills in photos. Crew protection was, at best, a secondary consideration--

The M4 Sherman had that reputation, though this was addressed with the A3's wet ammo stowage and larger hatches - after the US started using it extensively themselves... just kidding folks, that's not really fair.

To Dingbat- I would like to see some or all the crew killed by internal flying parts caused by massive non-penetrating impact. The tank itself may in fact remain fully operational.

 

[=69.GIAP=STALJ]

This is not a T-34 btw it's a Mickey Mouse

LMAO I didn't even realized it until you told us

 

[ozgurak87]

well that post was for recce not for you

 

[elak]

Hi!
I have read some stories about tankbattles during WW2 and in all of this stories it was common that the towers were blown off. At least when a Tiger shot a T34 or smaller tanks. Is this a hard nut to crack graphicaly? Many with me would really love if the towers could blow up if you hit at the right spot.

Would be cool, but not as important. The game gives you good feedback on when you have blown up an enemy tank. What would be interesting, and important to add, is the weak spot of all tanks right where the turret is joined with the rest of the tank. It is a universal weak spot on all tanks since it contains moving parts that, by necessity, will be less protected than the rest that is covered with armor plating.

 

[Fedorov]

Only work if Death Messages were off by default, which I'm a big fan of.

I would like something in between, an option to disable deathmessages, but only for tanks, because in real life you can tell easier if you make a kill, because your real vision is much better than what you can see in a high res 19" screen, so they are arguably necessary, but in real life sometimes you cant tell if you kill a tank or not no matter if yous eyer are better than your screen or not, because you cant know what happening in the inside

apart from that, I think that multy posibilities of tank deaths, including, killed crew, disabled turret, burning, tank blown up, turret flying off, etc etc, should be made more by chance than hitting diferent spots, I cant imagine so many spots modelled on a tank without lagging the server like crap

 

[comrade14andrei]

LMAO I didn't even realized it until you told us

It's what the Germans called the T-34, the "Mickey Mouses" were the 1942 model i believe

 

[Grobut]

Turrets beeing blown into the air was not as common as people might think (it certainly happened! but its not like it was 3 tanks out of 4 that met their end that way), when reading memoirs or watching interviews with vets on Discovery, there is a natural tendancy to tell the best storries, the guy has probably shot a lot of tanks, most of them just fell quiet or started smoking, but a few, something spectacular happened, like the turret beeing blown into the air, or a spectacular failure of the armour, and thouse are the kills that he will remember, and tell about.

Thats just how we work, the spectacular is more interesting and memorable than the mundane, and that is also why anecdotal evidence is not considdered a good source.