Re: Low Tech Scenarios

You wrote: 

>As an aside. I have a good friend who was a tanker (9 years combat 
experience >in T55s -100mm smoothbnore) during the Eritrean struggle 
for independence.

>at point blank? He said that whenever possible they would open up at 
point >blank. The shock effect against the enemy was much more 

>threats at once. Tank fire and infantry. (the terrain there ranged 

>One last war story. he related two engagements where they actually 
snuck into >the back of an enemy column and lit up a few tanks then 
escaped in all the >confusion. one was with a tank. The other was a few 
guys with RPGs.

>at point blank at night. Especially when the enemy was employing 
reverse slope >defense.

A _lot_ depends on terrain, equipment, and doctrine.  IDF doctrine is 
to engage at long range--but they aren't stuck with 1950s Soviet junk 
tanks.	They also have a higher ratio of tanks to infantry than 
Eritrean guerillas had, so depend more on tanks to kill enemy tanks.  
They make quite a point of long-range fire.  IIRC, some IDF Brigadier 
on the Golan hit a bulldozer at 5-6 miles, firing indirect.  But 
engagement range is _always_ limited by terrain.  If you can see that 
T-55 at 5,300 meters, you kill it then.  If you see it at 53 meters, 
you kill it then.  As for my Dirtside tables, they always are too damn 
cluttered to use a HEL at max range.

John M. Atkinson