[Giving incorrect information about Finland]

What incorrect information? I most certainly enjoy palaeolithic conditions and booze.

[Arty spotters on vehicles]

Originally posted by Marko Litmanen:

To my disappointment it is not possible for a artillery spotter to call arty support while embarged on a vehicle.

I'm not perfectly sure about how things were 60 years ago but I know for sure that finnish arty (flames to the other thread please ... )has been capable to do it for several decades now and without any modern gismos. So please you who know better historic facts please tell us all about it.

I believe that other armies used that kind of FO. We would not. It is not precise to my understanding. Probably wonderful for armoured or mechanized units, because it might be the only way to direct fire.

For example a supply convoy with embarked spotter can call in arty strike very rapidly staying in his staff car. It's annoying to disembark and re-embark ...

Rapidly yes, but without good precision I believe.

[Missing and incorrect information on Finland]

Originally posted by tero:

And the US Army is on record about how the Germans did learn from Finns the proper use of mortars in woods by trailing the mortars 200m behind the units and use a trailing line to indicate distance to the mortars from the FO unit. When targeting the FO would simply add 200 (or what ever the distance was as indicated by the line) to the distance and the mortar fire would be spot on the target.

If that's what they learned, then I must say that the lesson is only half-learned. Proper combined action between light mortars and infantry doesn't require the mortars to be exactly behind. The distance and direction from the FO must be elastic and based on circumstances. But basically, that's how lyhytkanta works, which is most excellent for fast infantry action.

[Missing and incorrect information on Finland]

Originally posted by Sardaukar:

That achievement we definitely think as victory.

I don't. I feel shameful that we lost, but that might be even more arrogant.

Every eyewitness account says that when Finnish artillery was available and was used, it was quite decisive. Plenty of references have been quoted but I don't recall any sources to oppose that.

Best eyewittness that I recall is one red officer who after the war was amazed that when our fire was so accurate and dense why didn't we shoot more and completely wipe them out. In one day of bombardment in Taipale, soviet artillery dropped the same amount of shells as the finns did in the whole winter war in that location. Fortunately that lesson was learned.

No matter what I do can convince people who has their mind set opposite. I could even drag actual members of Arty Corps FOs and Infantry during 1944 to testify and people would still complain. Go figure.

It's hard to convince people. If you told them that the basic confrontation was a finnish company against a batallion or regiment of russians and we continued to beat the opposition, they wouldn't believe that. We are most certainly victims of our national propaganda or something.

[Missing and incorrect information on Finland]

Originally posted by tero:

I had a crack FO gets a 6min delay when shifting fire from TRP some ~100meters. For example. Does not seem to be overly better than the one I mentioned.

Yes, 6 minutes is a bit slow, but still realistic. My problem is that sometimes the fire is shifted in less time it takes the shells travel in the air.

If you can show conclusively the average responce time under all conditions (including the topographical preparations) and regardless of the organizational level for Allied and German ordnance types was 1min into non-TRP locations anywhere in the map then so be it.

This is exactly the main point here. If someone is to bombard a location with that speed, it's going to be a half-blinded. I'd like to hear the level of precision there was in the american/whatever army too. If you people could tell me the exactness figures and we could compare them? Starting from the facts that in what precision did your FOs submit data for a battery, how exactly did the battery know its location and how accurately was the north known.

Furthermore, only one TRP should be a spot where the battery is set at the beginning. It takes time to redirect even if you have your calculations made. This could be too minor a detail.

I know this. I know better than that. The experience level is not the issue. Overall, my elite überFinns are elite enough. It is just my elite Germans get preferential treatment while my elite überFinns get the shft.

I'd take this as batteries firing without too much care. I wouldn't need speed but better accuracy.

(BTW: registered targets could also include friendly positions. Friendly positions as well as TRP's were noted on the fire plans for safety reasons and at times fire was called in on friendly positions to contain break ins or to facilitate counter attacks. Since the exact general location of the friendly positions was known they can be said to be TRP's).

Only if there's been time to make calculations. Even if you know the correct position of a goal, it takes some time.

The ability to direct multiple batteries by a single FO was an added bonus of the korjausmuunnin. It was every bit as useful in facilitating and speeding up the fire direction when directing single batteries. It was/is not used by the FO at the FO location, it was/is used at the battery calculation team. I saw it being used this spring during my refresher training and the procedure is something like this: the (not necessarily called in by the FO) target spot is pinned on the map overlay, the rotary dial is set and the firing solution is read from the edges. A light mortar battery can do a 180º turn around and gambit on the new target in under 2 or 3 minutes.

2 minutes is the optimal time even if the battery is travelling and the fire command comes. For 120mm it takes that 2 minutes if ready. For any given target, not just TRPs. The procedure you explained takes wind and other sorts of ballistic adjustments into consideration, which are not small. A mortar shell thrown to 5km can easily be blown 200m away by wind.

After butting heads on this with Andreas among others I learned for example the Germans and the Allies in France did not have accurate 1:20 000 maps of the area of operations available to them while I knew the Finns had such maps.

What?!? No maps? How the hell did they operate?

And I trusted the tape measure approach of the US Army was being taken into account when you did the modelling. I bet you had not even heard of the existence of the korjausmuunnin at that time.

Would you care to illuminate me about this tape measurement thing?

I knew the artillery procedures of both the Allies and the Germans differed from the Finnish one. Since the CMBO model was made to model these there was nothing major to gripe about apart from the barrage shell fall pattern, fire type and density.

Certainly differed, but how much is the question. I most certainly would like to know if the proper directions were established from the sun or stars and to what extent.

[Missing and incorrect information on Finland]

Originally posted by Foxbat:

Thanks for the answers.

You are welcome.

That's what I was wondering about, I have read only translated russian sources and they either don't mention it at all or mention the return of Pechanga to russia.

I did not know if the people there considered themselves to be russian, and were thus living under "occupation" by the Finns (although occupation in finland would probably be preferable to "freedom" in the soviet-union).

Russians were only concentrated in few big cities in whole of Carelia, Murmansk and few others. The people there were Carelians, poor people who have been but assimilated through forced collectivism and relocations.

Whenever they went anywhere the germans sure seemed to have had a habit of destroying any goodwill among the civilian population by random acts of terror and destruction...

This particular act wasn't that random if you think of that. Simple, efficient but unnecessary burning had some military purposes. Also, it was the end of 1944 and they were quite disillusioned after old comrades had to turn weapons against them.

I understand and I don't, yet this was hardly in level of what some other people had to participate in.

My own country was quite pro-german before the war, and probably one of the meekest under occupation yet we've had to suffer quite barbaric acts against civilians, not to mention the looting and destruction that went on in the final years of the war. Here too the germand are remembered with great resentment.

Yes, I don't know the details of your country, but the war is hell for those countries that have to be the stage for operations. Germans surely weren't the only ones to commit malevolent acts.

[ October 20, 2002, 10:59 AM: Message edited by: Vilho Nenonen ]

[Missing and incorrect information on Finland]

Originally posted by Foxbat:

I'm surprised no-one brought up the battles between russians an germans in Finland. What do Finns think about that?

As Kallimakhos told us, the german mountain corps was ineffective and only through much time they understood that you get killed if you wet your boots in winter. Our troops had to save them many times. But to be fair to the germans, there were quite heavy formations protecting Murmansk and the railroad could move supplies and reserves with speed that they hadn't.

And how did the local population feel about their "double liberation"? (from german occupation and the "finnish yoke" that had laid on their shoulders for decades), the massive relocations on the Isthmus are well known, but were the "inhabitants" of Petsamo equally eager to run?

You mean in the Lappland? What liberation?Basically, those people were finns, so the question is quite meaningless. Some lapps, but they are of our tribe so there's not that much 'yoke' as you might suggest.

German 'occupation' was quite beneficial to the native finn population there and when our troops had to wage some war against germans, the men and women up there were quite angry at first.

But then, when the germans started to burn the place down (after the soviets suggested that we needed some help in throwing them out and we had to really shoot them), the population didn't feel that good. Today, they are remembered with some resentment as the burners of Lapp.

And to answer to your question if the finns living in Petsamo evacuated themselves when the russians came, the answer is yes. I mean, who in their right mind would want to travel Kolyma?

Kallimakhos:

On the other hand, In 1944 German army gave decisive support on defending Finnish shores agains Russian amphbious attack.

And not to mention the agreement that brought grain and weapons to our country. I am grateful for that.

[Missing and incorrect information on Finland]

Jon, thanks for the reply, I'll try to explain my writing.

Originally posted by JonS:

Vilho,

you asked the rest of the world not to get ticked off with the überFinns, then proceded to exhibit exactly the same annoying behaviour as the rest of the überFinns. To wit:

Well, I tried to be quite polite and modest. I tried to say that there's a proud man in every men.

Fair enough, talk about what you know.

That's what I intend to do.

Well, they've explained it, and others have responded to it. It did get a bit heated (and still is in some cases - get a room you two!).

Is there room for civilized discussion or is my attempt futile?

Quite the collection of national slurs there. Well done. Do you have any info on other nations proceedures, other than your 'beliefs'?

That depends obviously on how you define word info. Apart from various historical books I have discussed with people who have used russian artillery in modern days and all they have told me confirms my 'beliefs'. And I didn't knew I slurred anyone. I wish we had guns and ammo to throw day long bombardments.

But I do not have any russian or american or other national manuals of that time period. Do you?

True, but so what? The rest of the world has the odd mathematician too you know, who can be used to work out simple proceedures for their gunners. Also, the rest of the world isn't too proud to use TRPs.

I was just trying to establish the fact that our artillery emphasizes accuracy and timing. I didn't believe that you just throw stuff up. Everyone uses trp's as far as I know, the question is how much time and energy you use to get it exactly there.

And the Commonwealth FOs. And the American FOs. And the German FOs. Should the Finnish FOs get special treatment do you think?

No, I don't think. Did I say so? If I did, then that was a mistake. I was just trying to work on that slightly annoying bit in this simulation.

Or should you all just use the same cludgy work arounds that have been the norm in CM for the last 2+ years, knowing that it can't be changed with the current engine? And, of course, wait with bated breath for [angelic voice]The Rewrite[/angelic voice]

Very sarcastic. I am not familiar with this scene that much. I just told what I felt was wrong in the game.

Which is of course why the military world has totally rejected the radio, and moved to a tactical communications system based totally on land line.

I'll redefine my claim. Line is better in terms of reliability and use. Radio is certainly better for highly mobile forces. I assumed that everyone understood that. Still I continue to claim that the line is more reliable and generally superior to the radio. Today the problem is electronical warfare and in WWII period is the basic 'do I get the contact' in given circumstances. Or do you disagree?

No - hang on a sec, that's not right ... hmm, what could it be? Either a) Vilho is right, and the armies of the world are collective dumbasses, or vice versa

So are you implying that I am a collective dumbass? Never been accused of that. Gotta put it in my CV.

In certain situations landline may be as good as radio, but it is tactically not mobile enough. In WWII radio was not as reliable as current radios, and under certain circumstances not as reliable as wire, but given the problems with landline (cut by enemy arty, cut by friendly arty, cut by vehicles driving over it, cut by footsloggers tripping over it, gnawed by rats, etc, etc) to say it was flat out better than radio is too much.

Is it in terms of reliability? You mention problems that can be avoided mostly (only the enemy shells are quite unavoidable], no line that we still build here has to suffer from vehicles and men that much. You probably know that the line isn't just drawn there.

My basic experience with radios you used in Vietnam is only confirming my believe in line. Operating those things is like creating magic sometimes. I don't believe that WWII radios were better.

This I can agree with. However, I can also live with what we've got now and wait for [angelic voice]The Rewrite[/angelic voice]

Perhaps so. I like the game as it is.

timing issues snippedYeah, but its a game. Coinsidering the amount of abstraction already in the arty model, this is minor.

Do you really think so? If an FO has to correct fire, it should take more than few seconds to hit the target properly. Calculations have to be made, adjustments on guns and then the time that the shell travels. A 120mm mortar shell going up and down can be almost a turn in the air before hitting anything.

Perhaps not a big problem, but a thing to point out imho.

After 10 years in artillery, these problems just don't feel too insurmountable.*

There are lesser things that people seem to fight over in this forum.

But since you have personal experience, would you wish to discuss on artillery procedures? I'd like to know few basic things like how do you establish the position of firing unit, basic directions et cetera.

* For example - if you want to have one FO with access to more than one bty, just figure out how many btys you want to have sccess to, and add that many FOs. Also, add a note that they should all move around together, and fire at the same target. Visually it might look a bit odd, but do you want the effects in the game to be right, or do you so strenuosly object to having a 10-man FO party (eg, 5 x CM Spotters working together) that you refuse to consider it?

Cumbersome. I'd like to have three FO teams and direct any given fire to anywhere in the field from any of those teams. Removes me from getting an authentic experience, but isn't too great to stop playing.

[ October 20, 2002, 09:09 AM: Message edited by: Vilho Nenonen ]

[Missing and incorrect information on Finland]

Greetings to all. Great game. Yes indeed.

Yet there are few things I'd like to see corrected here.

The artillery/mortar indirect fire procedure on the whole needs much tweaking imho, not just finnish artillery. But I'll concentrate on the finnish issue here. My fellow finns here have tried to explain our system of indirect fire, but perhaps not in the best way.

First of all, the system originated by gen. Nenonen was a system based on accuracy not on speed. I believe that the russians and other nations could throw shells into air much more rapidly. But not that accurately. Russians had like 1000 guns for every front km, so why deal with the number crunching?

Trigonometric calculations based on the FO point (won't go into too much detail here)and its relation to the target were/are kinda hard to calculate in comparison to corrections made in shooting distance and arc. Belive me. Yet if these calculations have been made beforehand (as the trp handily does), the response speed is merely based on the discipline of a firing unit.

Also, the structure of our FO hierarchy made it possible for a single FO to target different artillery units. So the current system, where a FO person has but one unit behind his orders is totally inappropriate for finns. This was a major factor in those days and still gives us great deal of flexibility (how is it in your armies nowadays?).

So I propose a slower but more accurate finnish indirect fire, plus the flexible FO organization.

Secondly, is there a difference between phone and radio FO? Haven't played this game too much yet. But if there is, I'd say that the phone is always much more efficient _if_ the line is drawn into the front line. I know from a personal experience (as far as these things can be experienced without real combat) that the line goes as fast as the FO. Radio is a poor substitute for a line.

But the main problem is the indirect fire procedure on the whole. Like the time that the shells are in the air doesn't seem to be in the calculations. Corrected shells find their way in less time it takes them to travel in the air, not much time to make adjustment calculations or redirecting the weapons... Not to mention many other minor tweaks that I have in mind. After two years in a mortar company, these problems just don't feel too right.

And finally, let's not go into a quarrel over this computer game. We finns are proud of our forefathers as are any nation that I know. Please accept that as natural phenomenon.

Yet as far as I can tell, there aren't too much hybris in these suggestions that some have made. Few minor corrections based on the fact that we know better what kind of equipment or organization we used in the WWII. I belive in you, when you tell us about your history.

But again, thanks for the great game.