C1.55 Effects on Abandoning Crew D5.5

[aslwynn]

AFV hit by a Mortar and, iaw C1.55 it is Immoblized on a K IFT roll.

When the crew abandons the vehicle after it fails its D5.5 Immob Task Check, does it (again?) suffer the effect of the IFT roll that forced it to abandon?

 

[jrv]

AFV hit by a Mortar and, iaw C1.55 it is Immoblized on a K IFT roll.

When the crew abandons the vehicle after it fails its D5.5 Immob Task Check, does it (again?) suffer the effect of the IFT roll that forced it to abandon?

No. The now non-inherent crew was not attacked by the original attack.

JR

 

[mgmasl]

Maybe residual if any from the mtr..

 

[jrv]

Maybe residual if any from the mtr..

Surviving PRC are not attacked by the residual of the non-residual attack that killed the vehicle, nor separately by the residual that was the cause of the destruction of the vehicle, D5.6. They might be attacked by residual if it was already present but did not cause the destruction of the vehicle.

JR

 

[von Marwitz]

Surviving PRC are not attacked by the residual of the non-residual attack that killed the vehicle, nor separately by the residual that was the cause of the destruction of the vehicle, D5.6. They might be attacked by residual if it was already present but did not cause the destruction of the vehicle.

JR

Right. While surviving PRC are not attacked by the Residual that killed the vehicle, in a situation that seems in a way similar, things look very different:

A Rider gets shot at and fails his MC while the vehicle is unharmed. He has to bail out and take another MC. In the very moment the bailing out Rider touches the ground, the transforms from Rider to Infantry and is attacked once more by the Residual that caused his first MC/Bailing Out.

von Marwitz

 

[Vinnie]

If that were an OBA concentration, would they be attacked under the "becoming more vulnerable" rule?

 

[mgmasl]

Surviving PRC are not attacked by the residual of the non-residual attack that killed the vehicle, nor separately by the residual that was the cause of the destruction of the vehicle, D5.6. They might be attacked by residual if it was already present but did not cause the destruction of the vehicle.

JR

Is the same rule applied to crew abandoning an immo vehicle because a failed TC?

 

[jrv]

Is the same rule applied to crew abandoning an immo vehicle because a failed TC?

I don't believe so. Failing an Immob TC [D5.5] is not a CS DR [D5.6]. In most cases a unit taking an Immob TC will have been hit on the Vehicle Target Type, which won't leave residual anyway.

JR

 

[mgmasl]

HE attacks using VTT doesn’t leave residual?

 

[Vinnie]

HE attacks using VTT doesn’t leave residual?

It is left by HE shots.

If the attack includes a To Kill DR vs a vehicle, Residual FP is created in the same manner [EXC: If AP (unless fired by a MG), ATR, APCR, or APDS was used, or if a Dud (C7.35) resulted, no Residual FP is created

 

[jrv]

HE attacks using VTT doesn’t leave residual?

In most cases an HE attack vs an Immobilized vehicle won't cause an Immobilization TC. If it does probably AP would kill the vehicle outright, so why use HE? There are odd cases where the weapon does not have AP, naturally. I count those as "not most cases."

JR