RE: A question of Suppression

You wrote: 

>I think that small arms fire on a armoured vehicle still has the 
potential >to suppres by affecting the crews morale. Concentrated fire 
by small arms >could signal the possibility of bigger and nastier 
projectiles comming onto >target, or even bring on the fear of close 
action by nearby enemy infantry.
>A crew member inside a tank will not be 100% sure of where or how 
close the >fire is comming while buttened up in their vehicle. This 
brings on the >dreaded notion of the "Unknown Factor" which is when you 
just do not know >what could happen to you next. Just something for 
thought.

Of course, that's assuming he even realizes he's being shot at.  David 
Drake's account of the Battle of Snoul, in Cambodia 1970 is 
interesting.  After 14.5mm machine gun fire drove off the ACAVs and 
Sheridans, the Squadron Commander sent in his M-48 company, which drove 
through the villiage putting 90mm rounds into every structure.	 This 
either killed or drove off all the PAVN troops.  According to Drake, 
the noise of the engines was loud enough that tankers, who went in 
buttoned up, did not even hear the impact of the machine gun rounds.  
It all depends on situation.  If a tank is in the middle of a gunfight 
with enemy tanks, he won't give a rat's ass about a flake shooting at 
him with an AK-74, since the other bloke's tanks could kill him, and 
the AK can't.  If he's point on a convoy with the TC hanging out to 
cupola when some suicidal idiot opens up with an AK, then he might 
notice.  Of course, IMHO anyone who has nothing better to shoot at a 
tank with than his personal weapon should try something more 
constructive, like hiding or running away.

John M. Atkinson