Can AP shooting suppress AFV?

[Dave Fielder]

This may have been asked before ... but ... can units who have only Anti-Personnel (AP) shooting suppress armoured units? Played a game recently where we allowed infantry and MGs to shoot at AFVs, although they couldn't hurt the AFV without Anti-Tank (AT) rounds they could still cause suppression and then fall back effects. Is this correct?

[Steve J]

From memory you can as follows:

6+ to hit, the AFV then gets roll armour saves as normal, then any failed saves need another 6+ just to cause suppression, no hits.

This was to replicate the effect of AP fire hitting visions slots etc. I've also read of instances of small calibre HE being fired at AFVs to make them thing it was artillery hitting them, causing them to skedaddle from their positions.

Hope this helps?

[Heedless Horseman]

Don't know about Rules. But. from accounts... coming under ANY sort of Fire would indicate that AFV had become a visible Target... so do what? Pull back probably sensible. 'Something Evil,This Way Comes'.
Small arms fire would make Commander button up and could damage optics. Mortars, same. Depends on what 'suppression' rules import.
Reduced Situation Awareness... and Fear.

Interpret Your Rules... and if in a Group, Discuss.

[Steve J]

Another one I remember reading from the Normandy campaign, was that if the crew heard small arms fire, they expected that the infantry might be closing with AT weapons, such as bazookas, PIAT's etc. So sensibly they would tend to pull back hopefully out of harms way.

There is also this about how German infantry tactics could possibly 'attack' a T-34:

The infantry had access to armour piercing bullets. Riflemen were issued 10 rounds with S.m.K.H. bullets (Spitzgeschoss mit Kern, Hart, pointed bullet with a hard core). Machine gunners had 100 such rounds. On command from the section leader, riflemen opened fire with these bullets from up to 400 meters and machine gunners from up to 1000 meters, aiming at hatches and vision slits to force enemy commanders to retreat into their tanks. This tactic would not disable the enemy tank, but it could blind it.

[steve_holmes_11]

I can't speak for WW2, but later tanks were equipped with ranging machineguns.

There are anecdotes of less confident tank crews bailing out on hearing the rattle of machinegun bullets on the outside.
They "knew" what was coming next, and didn't want to stick about to experience it.

This allowed a cunning enemy to interdict enemy tank movement with its infantry machineguns.

[Big Insect]

You are correct Steve J.
You can use AP fire to attempt to suppress AFVs.

There is (apparently) a recorded case in Syria recently where a Insurgent HMG, using sustained close range fire from cover in a built-up area, not only activated all the reactive armour on the turret of a Syrian Gov. T62 but also it stripped off a lot of the external fittings, such as the aerials and smoke projectors etc, and the commanders hatch mounted HMG. With the reactive armour triggered or damaged the tank crew withdrew pronto as they were now vulnerable to close range ATW fire.

Mark

[Heedless Horseman]

Steve H. Not certain, but think the .50cal Ranging 'MG' was single shot use. I could well be wrong. Sounds a bit 'mythic'. But... as said, once a very dubious tank crew knew that they had become a 'Target'...

[Lord Kermit of Birkenhead]

The 50 cal Ranging gun fired in 3 round bursts, and was not counted as an MG. However I have seen a manual which in effect said ERA - use your 50 cal on it.

[Raider4]

The 50 cal Ranging gun fired in 3 round bursts, and was not counted as an MG. However I have seen a manual which in effect said ERA - use your 50 cal on it.

Why not just use the big gun?

[Heedless Horseman]

Why not just use the big gun?

Quite a lot less BANG! 

[Heedless Horseman]

Having watched vid of Chieftans, etc. firing, blast, etc. might indicate that after maybe a couple of rounds shoot... 'scoot' would be a preferable option. Ex Tankies, please correct! 

[Genom]

BKC IV Page 35 mentions it in the Calculating Firing Section, saying you can fire AP at Hard targets and AT at Soft targets, they will not cause casualties but can inflict suppression.

Just follow the normal process of To Hit, Save, Suppression, just don't remove unsaved hits.

[Dave Fielder]

Thanks all, very informative as usual.

[T13A]

Hi

My first 'trade' in the army was as a Chieftain gunner. The .50 ranging gun as mentioned above by m'lud Kermit, fired a burst of 3 tracer rounds after hitting a pedal on the floor of the turret (at the gunners feet). It was mainly used to estimate the range when firing High Explosive Squash Head (HESH) rounds from the main armament (which had a maximum range of 8000 metres if memory serves, the HESH rounds that is, not the .50 ranging gun). HESH rounds fired at a lot less velocity than Amoured Piercing Discarding Sabot (APDS) rounds (using 'half bagged charges' as opposed to a full bagged charge for APDS) and were less accurate, hence the use of the ranging gun as you didn't want to waste HESH rounds when ranging in. I do remember talk at the time suggesting that enemy crew might as well try to get out when hit by .50 ranging rounds otherwise they were as good as dead. Hitting a target with a HESH round or an APDS round is VERY SATISFYING, and yes they mainly did hit.

Any half decent crew commander would be very unlikely to fire more than 2 or 3 main armament rounds from the same position.

By the way one of the things I find very annoying with BKC is using the abbreviation AP for 'anti-personnel', AP IS 'armour piecing'.

Cheers Paul

 

[flamingpig0]

By the way one of the things I find very annoying with BKC is using the abbreviation AP for 'anti-personnel', AP IS 'armour piecing'.

Cheers Paul

 

You are not alone