Re: Tanks

In a message dated 2/2/00 9:08:06 PM Central Standard Time,
kaladorn@home.com 
writes:

<< 
 ** you don't just suspect this has something maybe to do with
 A) The fact the infantryman is feeling pretty vulnerable while the
 tanker is fairly cocooned in his vehicle? I've heard of tankers feeling
 pretty vulnerable when they realized they were against an enemy that
 could kill their weapons system (the tank) relatively often and doing
 things like backing up, turning tail, running away, bailing out of a
 perfectly good tank, etc?
 B) The fact the infantryman is more likely to kill his targets where he
 can see them and the tanker is only killing other weapons systems?
 and
 C) The fact the infantryman is kiling his targets at closer range ergo
 its a far more personal experience? I assume tankers getting close
 assaulted by limpet mines, AT ordinance, and molotovs and with infantry
 aswarm their vehicle are more likley to deal with those threats than go
 out to "engage targets".
 
 The further you put a man from the direct feel of combat, the more
 likely he is to do his job without looking at what it is exactly
 (killing other people). Confronted with that immediacy, he can't deny
 it. Mind you, the downside is a fantasy sense of the situation which
 *might* get out of sync with reality. But you get the good with the
bad.
 So plane crews, tank crews, arty crews, etc. are more likely on a per
 capita basis to engage the enemy. But put any of them in the same
 situation the average grunt was in (stress wise, and in terms of seeing
 the foe) and they'd perform about the same I expect. And making a tank
a
 two man crew or even a one man crew won't remove their disconnection
 from the outside world - if anything, it'll heighten it (I don't think
 so... but it could) and that (according to my best guess) would make
 them MORE likely to engage a target and MORE likley to fulfill their
 primary role rather than worrying about saving their own ass.
 
  >>
couldn't agree with you more.