Anti-materiel rifle against main battle tanks, Big guns against bigger tanks Options

[Oracle]

One of my players suggested using an anti-materiel rifle against main battle tanks by targeting their vision systems or weapons. Do think that would have any chance of success? What about reality?

[bibliophile20]

Qhen you say "anti-materiel rifle" I'm assuming that you're not referring to rocket launchers, TOW missiles, or bazookas--y'know, the stuff that's intended to take on tanks?

[Oracle]

No. I am referring to weapons like the M82. I know that these weapons can't penetrate tank armor.

[Austere Emancipa...]

That's one of those things that most RPGs just aren't fit to deal with. Generally speaking, I'd say resolve the issue as you think best fits your game, using a "dramatic called shot". Trying to expand on that into an actual rule concerning called shots vs. armored vehicles might be a bad idea, as discussed in a whole lot of called shot threads in the history of these forums.

In reality, it would definitely be possible to render several sensor systems of an MBT inoperable with an AMR. Their covers, though armored, might not stand up to a close range straight angle shots with dedicated armor piercing rounds from weapons in calibers like 12.7x99mm, and at the very least there has to be an uncovered spot. The obvious problem with firing directly at the lenses of thermal cameras etc. is that the sensors have to be pointing in your direction for the shot to be possible, so make sure you evacuate your firing position ASAP...

An MBT of the 2070s would have loads of different sensor arrays, however, and several of them would be extremely difficult targets. For one thing, they might be tiny and camouflaged, and you could only find and identify them through your scope if you were intimately familiar with the vehicle in question. They might provide such a tiny target area that engaging them except at close ranges (a few hundred meters, tops) when the vehicle is static. And no matter what you do, the crew would still be able to use simple lense arrays to peer outside their vehicle without the aid of electronic sensors.

Disabling the crew weapons on top of the turret would be easy with any AMR. It is theoretically possible to puncture the small parts of the barrel of the main gun with a 12.7x99mm SLAP round, but because of the shape of target I would bet against it. I doubt putting a hole in the bore evacuator (the bulge about midway on the barrel) would disable the gun. In other words, I can't think of any realistic way to stop the big gun from operating with an AMR.

All in all, AMR vs. MBT would make for a horribly one-sided battle.

You can see what sort of ordnance has busted up MBTs (in this case, M1A1s) in reality here at Wikipedia. There's one account of an M1A1 or A2 disabled (immobilized) with a HMG, lucky hits that set fire to fuel carried on the external equipment rack -- this would make the HMG crew responsible for it some of the luckiest Iraqi soldiers of the invasion, except that I doubt they survived to tell the tale

This post has been edited by Austere Emancipator: Mar 20 2007, 01:10 PM

[Ed_209a]

You might be better off with some kind of ordinance-scale paintball gun. Coating the tank in paint that is opaque to visible light and IR would render the tank just as blind.

[Eddie Furious Re...]

The vision blocks on today's MBTs are, for the most part, able to continue to function after recieving fire from such weapons as the M107. The trick is not in the toughness of the material, but the design of the system. You can put that bullet into a vision block, but it will be trapped and the vision block will still be useable, if it does not glance off at an angle. Also, using a scoped rifle will shortly lead to being suicidal if DARPA is as successful as I think they will be with the new counter-sniper systems. Basically a scanning microwave/laser that will detect the objective lense by its shape and refraction index and within a tenth of a second introduce Mr. Sniper to Mr. 25mm Counter Sniper battery.

Of course, I have to ask how many of you have seen a tank move? The vision block is an awful small target that can be bouncing up and jouncing left and shimmying right before turning left entirely all the while moving at speeds of up to 70km/h when you're trying to hit it from any range when there is a 60-ton tank coming your way. :eek:

[Ed_209a]

If you want to mess up a tank with an AMR, your best bet is actually to go after the trucks that bring it's ammo and fuel. Tanks use lots of both in battle.

[Fix-it]

most tanks in the 2060s-70s would use LIDAR, and milimeter-wave radar, both of which can be covered by ceramic or composite armor and still function.

so if you wanna go dramatic, i'm all for it. just thought i'd point out what the "SOTA" is.

[TheOOB]

I'm not sure how effective heavy armor would be in 2070, couldn't they just get a mage to cast invisibility on the tanks armor and manabolt the pilots?

[Ravor]

Well although I'm feeling too lazy right now to crack open my books and double-check, but I'm fairly certain that isn't a legal use of Invisibility TheOOB, if anything you'd simply have an invisible tank to deal with. *winks*

Besides with the new Warding FAQ any military worth their salt will have their front line tanks, ect Warded.

[Oracle]

The tank the team is confronted with is not a SOTA MBT, but a bit out of date. In the current situation it is not moving, but part of a road block. The teams sniper has a longarms dice pool (with edge) in the low 20s. So it's possible for him to hit even very small parts.

I will go with the "dramatic called shot". It's not too unrealistic and it will be something the players will like.

@TheOOB: An invisibility spell cast on the tank would just make the tank invisible - including its crew. I am not sure if that would be helpful... ;)

[Vvornth]

In reality this would be a near-impossible, near-suicidal undertaking. Which classifies it as a potentially classic RPG moment. It really depends on howover-the-top your campaign is.

[Cray74]

[The Jopp]

A few things:

Paint grenades: Renders standard visual aids and cameras useless

Jammers: High strength directional jammers would jam any signal from the tank including radio and radar.

Hacking: Find their hidden communication signal and have the hacker edit and spoof the information (SR4 page P225 Intercepting Wireless Signals)

[Kyrn]

Is there some reason a simple RPG or IED is inappropriate? I'm all for X-treme DRAMA! but I'd question the professionalism of someone (and anyone with 20 plus dice in any pool besides wanking qualifies as a pro in my book) using a square peg in a star shaped hole.

An RPG-27 will take out any MBT on the field today at a cost well under a thousand dollars. I don't foresee the relationship between cheap rockets and super expensive armor changing too much in the next...well, ever actually.

(Reference: Israel lost at least one Merkava Mk. IV [the most advanced and well-protected tank I'm aware of, as well as an all around cool idea] to an RPG-27 in the recent unpleasantness.)

As for IEDs, well anybody with a datajack can toss in a chemistry soft and whip up something without too much trouble, while a demolitions activesoft will make it even scarier. I'd probably recommend the demo activesoft for an MBT though.

Guerrilla tactics really are so wonderfully educational for runners taking on heavy opposition. The little buggers are just so resourceful.

[Kyoto Kid]