Bil v C3K AAR – Germans v SMGs in Woods

[YankeeDog]

When I started this the intent was only to show these initial turns... my goal was not to stand toe to toe with Ken's troops but to illustrate a solution for engaging them in close terrain. Why fight on his terms?

Take it for what it is. But my goal was never to hold on to the woods, only to make Ken bleed while keeping my bleeding to a minimum.

If this wasn't valuable to you then I apologize for wasting your time.

Bil

Do keep going. I think some people are missing the lesson but maybe they'll understand better second read-through or something. What you are really demonstrating is as much a primer in how to execute a "hit and fade" defense in dense terrain in order to temporarily negate enemy numerical superiority and achieve a favorable attrition ratio.

What's your estimated casualty ratio so far? I haven't been keeping exact score, but looks like you've confirmed at least a dozen Soviets down for only 2-3 of your own. I'll trade a small patch of woods for that exchange ratio any day of the week.

Anyone who thinks it would be a good idea with the odds you are facing to simply sit there in a defensive line and "hold at all costs" doesn't understand the tactical problem. Even if the forces were reversed, and you had the Soviet SMGs in defense German k98s and MG42s, a stonewall defense would be a very bad idea in this tactical situation.

[sburke]

When I started this the intent was only to show these initial turns... my goal was not to stand toe to toe with Ken's troops but to illustrate a solution for engaging them in close terrain. Why fight on his terms?

Take it for what it is. But my goal was never to hold on to the woods, only to make Ken bleed while keeping my bleeding to a minimum.

If this wasn't valuable to you then I apologize for wasting your time.

Bil

Reading your stuff is never a waste of time, hope that wasn't what you were interpreting that as. My apologies if so. Was more curious to see how long you would be able to do so. C'mon Bil we were all hoping for a longer AAR because they are so well done. It's your fault, you have spoiled us.

[sburke]

Anyone who thinks it would be a good idea with the odds you are facing to simply sit there in a defensive line and "hold at all costs" doesn't understand the tactical problem. Even if the forces were reversed, and you had the Soviet SMGs in defense German k98s and MG42s, a stonewall defense would be a very bad idea in this tactical situation.

I don't think anyone has suggested that, we simply expected it to last a little longer.

[JasonC]

I think what Bil has shown is the right way for a defender to use his stance advantage and especially the information asymmetry that follows from stance. Which is a very valuable lesson and one that everyone can learn from.

He has shown convincingly that the stance advantage is *not* dependent on a cover differential, but can work when both sides have cover, because the disappearance of the cover differential goes hand in hand with a massive reduction in the info available to both sides - and in the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king.

I do agree, however, that said useful demonstration does not mean that rifle infantry can safely *hold indefinitely* an area of heavy cover against attacking infantry equipped with SMGs and superior in numbers, given the importance of SMG firepower --- and of numbers --- in such close range infantry "knife fights".

It is still very much worth underling that the defender's biggest edge is not that bullets fired at his men are more likely to miss or that the attacker will be forced to move in the open. It is, instead, that the attacker doesn't know where you are, and full use of that goes a *long* way.

[JasonC]

YankeeDog - yeah, I think 200 yards is actually about the limit of for effective fire from a PPsH. Maybe 250 at the outside, used in volume by lots of people e.g. The gun itself had sights with just 2 range settings, 100 and 200 yards. At 200 yards, the bullet has dropped 15 inches from its apex (assuming a 100 yard zero), and at 250 that increases to about 27 inches. At 500 yards that figure grows to more like 12 feet and you are "golfing", holding the gun way above the target and trying to "arc" the rounds in.

In practice, you would zero the sights for 100 yards, which puts the bullets only about 2 inches high at 50 and dead on at 100 using that range setting on the sight. Then the second range setting can put you "on" at 200, despite the 15 inches of drop, and you would just use that setting without further "Kentucky windage" beyond that point. At 250 you would have bullets hitting a foot low, but your target will have some size and you will be spraying some anyway and you can probably get hits that way. But at 500? Wildest stroke of luck...

[db_zero]

Early versions had sights that could be adjusted for 500 meters.

http://world.guns.ru/smg/rus/pca-41-e.html

When it comes to guns your going to get all sorts of info. Above its mentioned the AR15 platform with iron sights is about 300 meters, yet I've seen 600 meters stated. I've shot thousands of rounds from the AR and would tend to go with the lower figure.

Even with my Remington 700 tactical and variable scope a 600 meter shot on a human sized target is a challenging shot at least for me.

It could also be a case of the shooter not the gun as I'll be the first to tell you the guns are capable of better results than I'm capable of getting out of them.

I had a experienced sniper look at 700 and when I asked what the effective range of my rifle was he said 900 yards. I was stunned. In all fairness he may have mistaken it for a .308 version.

[pnzrldr]

Not sure we need to see any more. Next move is that Bil pulls to the flanks and back out, and his Russian SMG pursuers pop out of the woods into the cleared fields of fire for the MG-42 HMGs. Do we really need to see how that turns out? <wink!> Nice job Bil, and as usual, a great lesson!

[slysniper]

Anyone who thinks it would be a good idea with the odds you are facing to simply sit there in a defensive line and "hold at all costs" doesn't understand the tactical problem. Even if the forces were reversed, and you had the Soviet SMGs in defense German k98s and MG42s, a stonewall defense would be a very bad idea in this tactical situation.

I have to disagree here with this statement.

Bill as always is showing us a good use of terrain and tactics.

But I feel that if the rolls were reversed, that the Soviet Smg'g can hold the line.

As I think I mentioned before, I just did it in a battle where I had a squad of smg's in the woods kill close to a platoon of men in a H2H battle and I only had part of the unit (a fire team) fall back because they lost a couple of men.

[GreenAsJade]

What you showed us was an immensely valuable display of how to trade space for time.

Just reposting this to make sure it's clear this isn't a waste of time!

It's a fascinating exercise. And one of the MOST IMPORTANT things I've learned from it (and my previous encounters with Bil) is this

Why fight on his terms?

In this example, the reason that the SMGs are "not unbeatable", is because the goal was set accordingly.

If you said to me "SMGs are not unbeatable in the forest", I would have thought you meant that you could hold against them. But the winning commander chooses his battle then wins it, eh!

GaJ

[slysniper]

Even with my Remington 700 tactical and variable scope a 600 meter shot on a human sized target is a challenging shot at least for me.

It could also be a case of the shooter not the gun as I'll be the first to tell you the guns are capable of better results than I'm capable of getting out of them.

I had a experienced sniper look at 700 and when I asked what the effective range of my rifle was he said 900 yards. I was stunned. In all fairness he may have mistaken it for a .308 version.

He was a little full of himself that day.

As a sniper, which all my shooting basically was with the Remington 700 with a free floating heavy bore barrel and shooting a .308 round.

He gave you incorrect info.

Now keep in mind, as snipers, we trained with that weapon out to 1000 yards (so you could say the effective range is 1000 yards - but it is not.)

For me and for most others I trained with. I would say 700 yards was the distance I felt convertible taking a shot at and knowing in all likelihood I would hit my target. At 800, you started seeing the variables play a lot with the bullet and you needed to really take them into account. by the time you get to 1000 yards. it is a nightmare to try and get a first shot on target unless you are lucky or very good at reading winds ( at every 200 yards), humidity. height variences, speed of target and so on.

Now with a normal rifle firing a round that is pretty hot, I would say in the hands of a good shooter, that distance is 500 yards. generally that it is convertible to make a accurate shot.

[LukeFF]

LukeFF - I have never bought the "heavy clothing" nonsense. I sincerely doubt that padded jackets ever stopped a carbine round, or even a pistol round. The experience shooter John George, who served in the pacific as a sniper, liked the M-1 carbine and reported never having any problem hitting or dropping people with it. Lots of soldiers did make the complaint, and clearly thought they were hitting without stopping. Some of those probably were not hitting, and others hitting but only wounding. But not because of an inch of clothing - that is an attempted explanation that does not pass physics 101, or ballistics testing.

Well geez, let's see here: Japanese troops wearing light clothing in the hot and humid Pacific being engaged at close range, vs. heavily clothed Chinese & Koreans being engaged at much farther ranges in the dead of winter. That, and I never said it wasn't a good weapon in WWII.

C'mon, you can do better than that.

[batteran]

YankeeDog - yeah, I think 200 yards is actually about the limit of for effective fire from a PPsH. Maybe 250 at the outside, used in volume by lots of people e.g. The gun itself had sights with just 2 range settings, 100 and 200 yards. At 200 yards, the bullet has dropped 15 inches from its apex (assuming a 100 yard zero), and at 250 that increases to about 27 inches. At 500 yards that figure grows to more like 12 feet and you are "golfing", holding the gun way above the target and trying to "arc" the rounds in.

In practice, you would zero the sights for 100 yards, which puts the bullets only about 2 inches high at 50 and dead on at 100 using that range setting on the sight. Then the second range setting can put you "on" at 200, despite the 15 inches of drop, and you would just use that setting without further "Kentucky windage" beyond that point. At 250 you would have bullets hitting a foot low, but your target will have some size and you will be spraying some anyway and you can probably get hits that way. But at 500? Wildest stroke of luck...

Note that PPSH41 have a flip rear sight set for 100 and 200 meters.

[JasonC]

LukeFF - you clearly have no idea what you are talking about. John George was one of the most expert riflemen to serve in the war, and he is not just relating narrow personal experiences, but assessing what worked and what didn't in all theaters. His recommendations, among others, influence Stoner and the design of the M-16 platform. Besides knowing how to shoot,and in combat, he also knows what bullets actually do. So do I - and the claim that a quilted jacket can stop a carbine round is nonsense. I am willing to demonstrate if you want to wear the jacket to test it...