6.999 Russian Multi-Applicable Vehicle Notes - Note J

SteelDragon

Recruit
Joined
Sep 14, 2011
Messages
14
Reaction score
2
Location
Independence, MO
Country
llUnited States
Per 6.999 Russian Multi-Applicable Vehicle Notes - Note J, "This AFV may possibly carry smoke dischargers (sD). Use rule D13 [EXC: they are usable only once per scenario]."

Does this mean that you get only one attempt to use the smoke discharger per scenario, whether you are successful or not?

Or, can you keep attempting to use the smoke discharger and after you are successful, you can not use it again for that scenario?
 

clubby

Elder Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2015
Messages
2,236
Reaction score
527
Location
CA
Country
llUnited States
Yeah, I would take usable to mean actually discharging smoke.
 

nathan brown

Infrequent Flyer
Joined
Mar 3, 2006
Messages
164
Reaction score
16
Location
Australia
Country
llAustralia
You can also get smoke when the Tank is done (with SD) when the tank is really done if your hard up and need cover. (Boom!)
 

von Marwitz

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 25, 2010
Messages
9,859
Reaction score
3,090
Location
Kraut Corner
Country
llGibraltar
You can also get smoke when the Tank is done (with SD) when the tank is really done if your hard up and need cover. (Boom!)
I know it is possible to destroy your own vehicle but can you deliberately elect to turn it into a burning wreck as opposed to merely a normal wreck?

von Marwitz
 

Gordon

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2017
Messages
647
Reaction score
555
Country
llUnited States
No - D5.411 only allows "turn it into a non-burning wreck".
Which seems odd (warning realism argument) considering tossing a couple grenades onto a pile of shells in the turret/hull would probably do quite nicely.
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,319
Reaction score
5,401
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
Which seems odd (warning realism argument) considering tossing a couple grenades onto a pile of shells in the turret/hull would probably do quite nicely.
That would be a subsequent attack. You don't toss the grenades in while you are still getting out.

JR
 

Gordon

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2017
Messages
647
Reaction score
555
Country
llUnited States
That would be a subsequent attack. You don't toss the grenades in while you are still getting out.

JR
Po-tay-toe, po-tah-toe. Somebody's got to toss 'em in and run like hell. Last guy out, or somebody goes back.
:sneaky:

I'd also add, that the above (to my mind) only applies to a voluntary bail-out and destruction of the vehicle. To quote The Chieftain during a "highly emotional event" like "Oh bugger, the tank's on fire" the focus would be on getting out. But then again, problem solved.
 
Last edited:

Michael Dorosh

der Spieß des Forums
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2004
Messages
14,188
Reaction score
970
Location
Calgary, AB
First name
Michael
Country
llCanada
Which seems odd (warning realism argument) considering tossing a couple grenades onto a pile of shells in the turret/hull would probably do quite nicely.
That would require standing orders that permitted you to burn the vehicle.

https://www.canadiansoldiers.com/procedures/tankstandingorders.htm

Canadian standing orders above may be of interest. Crews abandoning tanks were required to discharge the fire extinguishers on exit. As for destruction by the crew:

14. POLICY CONCERNING DESTRUCTION OF TANKS. The decision to destroy a tank will invariably be made by the Squadron Leader. No tank will be destroyed unless absolutely necessary in order to prevent its falling into enemy hands. The tank can be set on fire by breaking the gas lead from the homolite and setting the petrol on fire or by any other means the crew commander desires.

Not sure what the Russian policy was, but I'd suspect crews were held 'very' accountable for their actions. I'd think most militaries would be more concerned about recovering and restoring AFVs than in burning them at the slightest provocation. It was common to repair knocked out tanks that didn't burn - the ones that did burn were not salvageable. And all the armies put a lot of effort into those salvage efforts.

Not sure how the above worked in practice, but it appears the squadron leader (a squadron was four troops of four tanks, equivalent to a tank company in other armies) was the only one permitted to order a tank destroyed. I would suspect it was only done in last ditch defensive stands or situations where recovery seemed hopeless.
 
Last edited:

nathan brown

Infrequent Flyer
Joined
Mar 3, 2006
Messages
164
Reaction score
16
Location
Australia
Country
llAustralia
Driving them round near late war German Inf will usually do the trick quite well I find....
 

dlazov

Elder Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2004
Messages
7,545
Reaction score
870
Location
Toledo, Ohio
First name
Don
Country
llUnited States
In the US we called it spiking the gun. We would use a thermite grenade, placing it on the breech block. The only time we ever did this was against abandoned T-55/62s by order of our platoon leader (Lieutenant), they were not our own but we did not want the original occupatants to recrew them.
 
Top