Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!know!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!att!cbnews!military
From: bcstec!shuksan!major@uunet.UU.NET (Mike Schmitt)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: U.S. Ground Vulnerablity
Message-ID: <1990Sep14.042909.2079@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 14 Sep 90 04:29:09 GMT
References: <1990Aug22.025624.16870@cbnews.att.com> <1990Sep6.154922.26471@cbnews.att.com>
Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker)
Organization: The Boeing Co., MMST, Seattle, Wa.
Lines: 31
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: bcstec!shuksan!major@uunet.UU.NET (Mike Schmitt)

In article <1990Sep6.154922.26471@cbnews.att.com>, hnkst2@unix.cis.pitt.edu (Hanhwe N. Kim) writes:
> 
> 
> From: Hanhwe N. Kim <hnkst2@unix.cis.pitt.edu>
> 
> The people on this thread who seem to trust the missile armed
> infantryman against tanks should realize the psychological
> effects of armor upon the guy in the hole. 50 tons of steel
> with a BIG gun, supported by artillery, and flanking infantry
> is damn scary.

  Not necessarily.  Ask a tanker what he fears most.  He'll probably answer
  with, "First, missile firing helicoptors, second, dismounted infantry."
  Which is why armor advances with supporting infantry - to protect the 
  tanks from dismounted infantry.  

  While with the 1st Brigade (Mech), 1st Infantry Division - we established
  "Anti-Tank Hunter Killer Teams", trained in anti-tank tactics, tought not
  to fear tanks, and equipped with Dragons, LAWs, and how to create tank-traps,
  and use 'field expedient' anti-tank devices.  Properly trained and equipped,
  will reduce the 'shock' effect of tanks.


  A more recent historical event with missile-armed infantry vs tanks:
  An Loc, Vietnam.  LAWS vs T-55s.  (I'll do some more research - standby.)

  mts