Wartgamer

A Time On Target is a Weight of Fire. Its a massive amount of Firepower applied in a very short period of time i.e. within seconds. And the dazed troops can stay in their trenches/bunkers. Doesnt matter, they are being out manuvered. The point is that the US was taking ground in WWII. Not attriting an enemy.

My own opinion of Jason's theory is that it is WWI-headed. It is not as applicable as he thinks. Take the case of the Battalion Commander that can call in a 10 Battalion concentration. He does not care about attriting anything. He does not even need to destroy that much. He can use his battalion to quickly followup such a devastating attack and sieze the enemy in a disoriented state. He captures the enemys. See? War ends without attrition. But the war was a race to Berlin and there was no time for WWI silliness. The hedgerows made 10 battalion concentrations dangerous to anyone and they negated such tactics. [ March 10, 2005, 06:02 PM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]

Since the US and British+Canadians numbers are very close, I would assume a half damage inflicted by these two 'forces'. Its about equal to the German 'damage' (not counting prisoners). I would say that US forces may have inflicted, on average, around 40K casualties a month on the Germans using all forms of firepower. Lets assume that 30K a month is artillery. This must be a period of intense artillery use and the number of shells fired must be fastly depleting war stocks and rapidly approaching the delivery rate. In other words, this is where Jason's theory is in swing. He claims that US used as much in the ETO theatre as the Germans did in the war. What number of shells a month were being fired? 10 million? 20 million? MORE?? Lets assume the US had 3000 tubes (lets count only large mortars and artillery pieces during this period). Each fires 50 rounds a day. Thats 4.5 million a month. Thats 150 rounds for one casualty. [ March 10, 2005, 02:32 PM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]

Yes it says killed. And I am also counting wounded also. I am assuming them from a 1:6 ratio also mentioned by the source.

Another source... CASUALTIES Most of the casualties occurred amongst a relatively small number of troops. Infantry made up only 14% of the British Army but suffered 90% of its casualties. For the soldiers in the front line, Normandy was as dangerous as the Western Front in World War I. Ground force casualties: D-Day to end of August 1944 (Source; Official History) Killed Wounded Missing Total British & Canadian 16,138K 58,594W 9,093M 83,825T US Armies 20,838K 94,881W 10,128M 125,672T Total 36,976 153,475 19,221 209,672 German Army (estimated) 240,000 200,000 prisoners [ March 11, 2005, 12:17 AM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]

Typical hedgerow. Note that just laying in the ditch on the opposite side of incoming fire probably gave you excellent protection. If you burrow into the hedgerow you get invulnerability to many forms of attack. [ March 10, 2005, 02:05 PM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]

One source... Germans losses, June – November 1944 (starting with Allies invasion in Normandy and before Germans fronts collapssed both at East and West): killed 214,000 54,000 So 54,000 killed for the whole western front. Perhaps assume 300-400K wounded. In 6 months facing US and British and others in ETO. I doubt that 100,00 K were inflicted by US against Germany in one month in Normandy. [ March 10, 2005, 02:06 PM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]

Yes and I do not believe that the Germans had that many casualties anyway. Anyone know if its around 10,000? Thats my gut feel. Which is an order of 10 off.

As far as 25 pdr vs 105mm.. The semifixed 105mm could be 'ready-zoned' so that they need not be 'assembled' as needed. Its a down time job and not applicable to rate of fire in a short term time frame. The semifixed 105mm may be a heavier total 'thrown-load' but its still a one part movement not a multipart drill. The need to ram the shell home and extract the rammer is a waste of motion. I have seen footage of 105mm fast firing and it is not 5 seconds between firing. This website claims its 12 secs between firing for 'intense'. I think not. http://nigelef.tripod.com/maindoc.htm#Rates%20and%20Times [ March 10, 2005, 12:07 PM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]

I suppose that Jason's ascertions could be put to a test if the following were known: D Day to D Day+30, how many arty rounds fired?, how many German casualties? If the US arty-mortar Battalions fired 10 million rounds, and it takes 100 rounds to make a German a casualty, were there 100,000 German ccasualties? The problem is that the US dropped tons of bombs, millions of bullets, rockets, tank rounds, etc. General Patton said it "Sure takes a lot to kill one German" Mortars/Arty are also not as permanently incapacitating as direct fire weapons. Many wounded are short term and long term 'repairs'.

The much publicized ammunition shortage became evident with orders which rationed ammunition strictly, (105mm was zero). However, the Group obtained two 88’s and two German 150’s with plenty ammunition These were manned by the idle 105mm gun crews. Also the three forward observer tanks in each armored battalion were used as batteries, since the 75mm ammunition was still available. While in the Champey area the Group established a schedule of three movies per day in a large wall tent and the battalions were allotted quotas each day. On the 31st of October the Group moved... This seems to show that 105mm ammo was getting scarce before the Bulge even.

155mm could certainly be used as direct support but many accounts describe its divisional control having missions like counter-mortar. The German mortar fire was a rightly feared threat for an attacking Army like the US. So while 155mm may be available, it may also leave suddenly. Also, the designer has mentioned that arty ammo use will play into victory conditions. So you shoot your wad and it 'costs' you. I am not sure how currentyou are on the recent cmx2 topics. [ March 10, 2005, 10:48 AM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]

The problem with the US 105mm shortage was that it took the teeth out of many advantages that Dupuy mentions. The majority of the US Battalions were 105mm. The actual rate of fire capability was achieved by 105mm. Just like the Soviets making a Booboo with too many tanks and not enough fule/logistics; Perhaps the US brought too many guns to the party without enough ammo? Not as catastraphic but still it was a problem. I have also read that the US artillery was very fireplan happy and used the heavy stuff in non-support roles. They made lots of holes everywhere based on where they thought the Germans were. Not everyone of the listed Battalions were shooting at Germans in holes in the front lines. They were engaging crossroads and killing an MP with a Battalion of 8 in howitzers, firing at a location they thought that a German battery was at, etc. The most effective calibers in CM are the 150mm, 155mm range. The 120mm mortars and Russian 122mm calibers are also effective. 105mm are OK, vanilla effectiveness, enough to get the job done. But the new cmx2 will be smaller in scope. While it may be unrealistic to have a US company without some indirect fire capability, Having a 155mm battery in support against a non-entrenched enemy would be devastating. [ March 10, 2005, 09:17 AM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]

I do not think that Jason has no merit. But he has to realize that in many situations, the means to resist many artillery shells is not as difficult as it was for the French in DBP. The hedgerows were an example. The use of hilly/mountanous terrain another. Rubble is yet another example. A collapsed building does not always 'go to bricks'. It also leaves nice walls flat on the ground that can be tunneled under. The fact that artillery 'tonnage', that the enemy 'paid for', caused this nice thing to happen should not be lost on the reader. If what Jason is saying has anything to do with CM, then I think it is that the player SHOULD expect artillery to murder troops in the open, but it should not cause as many casualties during the actual length of time a scenario represents (when a defender has cover). It should also make troops, whatever the circumstances STAY in 'decent' cover while under arty. The actual movement to other terrain must be justified by much better cover. I see troops leaving trenches when being fired at now, where do they think they will get better protection? [ March 10, 2005, 08:48 AM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]

I honestly concluded at the end of World War II , when I soberly considered what I had accomplished, that I had moved the forward observers of the artillery across France and Germany. In other words, my battalion was the means by which field artillery observers were moved to the next piece of high ground. Once you had a forward observer on a piece of ground, he could call up ten battalions of artillery and that meant that you had won the battle. (DePuy as quoted on page 88 of Danny S. Parker's Battle of the Bulge) There were 224 battalions that were organic to the 61 Infantry, Armored, and Airborne Divsions. The 260 non-divisional artillery battalions included 3 75mm Prcht Bn 16 Armored 105 mm Bn 37 Towed 105 mm Bn 72 155 mm Howitzer Bn 17 4.5-inch Gun Bn 38 155mm Gun Bn 37 8-inch Howitzer Bn 5 8-inch Gun Bn 15 240 mm Howitzer Bn 1 Captured Enemy Wpns Bn 19 Field Artillery Observation Bn Just for reference.

The problem with barrel wearout needs to be explained. Its not that they may need a few barrels replaced. Its the rapid occurance of the problem in many weapons systems at once. Lets take the case of a guns firing 50 rounds per day. After 200 days, on average, you have many guns ALL approaching the 10,000 mark. So suddenly, you have a swamp of orders to move the barrels up (displacing other needed supplies), the urgency of replacing barrels (cant be like changing a tire if you think about it) and lack of striking power. This happens to many weapon systems. Tracks on tanks, engines, etc. The US found this out and as good as any weapons system is, it is a fact of life. The funny thing is that with tanks, due to total write offs, you have a mixed age group. But arty hardly ever gets as mixed an age group and they all 'age' at the same approximate rate. Ballparking things here but lets say the US fired 20,000,000 105mm rounds from D Day till end of the year, that would mean about 2000 barrel changes. Having a rotating fleet of 105mm guns themselves could aleviate this but its still a logistics nightmare. [ March 10, 2005, 07:31 AM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]

'Semi-fixed' is the phrase you are looking for. Balls-out loading speed for the 25-pr - using seperate loading ammo - is as high or higher than US semi-fixed 105mm. It also induces less fatigue amongst gun crew. So the 25 lbr crew must load the projectile, ram it home, load the 'powder' (or is this in a brass cartridge?) and then close up and fire? Is the US gun a single warhead/cartridge (fixed or not, they are one man load)? The loader throws this in and thats it? Is the US gun autoclosing once the shell is thrown in? Does the spent cartridge auto eject? I have read that US crews could actually rapid fire the 105mm much faster then they should have. With seperate loading ammunition, there must be a limit as far as keeping up with one piece ammunition. I have seen video of 'Frech75mm' and German le18 infantry guns firing and they appear to achieve a shell every 2 seconds (maybe slightly less). This should overheat a gun if kept up but it probably wasn't (maybe just showing off for the camera). I believe that a US 105mm could achieve 12 RPM or more. [ March 10, 2005, 07:05 AM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]

I suppose that one could compare the time/weight/expense of making ammunition and making fortifications. But even Jason must realize that one would need a virtual direct hit with the 105mm to take out the reinforced position. The need for almost direct hits for trenches and so on. Even the silly exercise of a single gun firing indirect at a single reinforced position under direct observation might reveal a quantity of shells being needed. The gun will just spread the shells around from round to round at some point and there is no more 'correction'. In fact, I often read about arty using single shells to call for FFE's. The single shell is observed, and corrections made off that shell. The fact is that same gun could fire another shell and it could land 50 yards away with no correction at all. Jason's premise is that no one is going to do anything about it. The counter battery people stay still, the troops at the target stay put, etc. If you are out of direct observation, heavily camoflaged you reduce Jason's numbers by a factor of 10 I bet. If you are on a reverse slope, the long/short errors get magnified for arty (not so much mortars) and the effect is further diluted. My point about the US ARMY, which I think MIGHT have brought enough shells given Jason's premise, found itself using great quantities, as well as using an air force for support along with huge amounts of armor/TD in direct support. One of the things about the Hedgerows is that they are somewhat 'already delivered tons of material'. If you just dig a decent single man position (allows man to occupy 'burrow' and be under the level of the earth) into the side of the hedgerow, he has excellent temp cover. Arty hitting the other side is defeated by the thickness and root structure. If given a day, the position could be all but proof agaist anything but absolute direct hits by high angle 105mm or 155mm. Adjusting arty in the bocage was a pain. Much of its effects are wasted because the enemy is in a parallel position and your longs and shorts are just a waste. I think the US did just what Jason is suggesting, and certainly brought prestigous quantities of ammunition, and still found itself scraping around at the end of the war. If anything, this shows that what he is saying is only true to an extent. The DBP example is WHY you do not allow an enemy to shoot down your throats especially when you have no real counter response and your troops are not under decent fortifications. IF the french had some counter response (lets say TAC air) and a good detection system AND good cover for everybody, then they may have destroyed the VM faster than they could rebuild the arty weapon structure they labored into place. Edit: It just occurs to me that shooting almost any weapons system 'downward' increases its accuracy. This can be understood as the opposite of trying to shoot targets on a reverse slope. As I said before, the longs/shorts are magnified in error. But when firing from a higher position downward, you are shrinking this same error. Also, the VM may actually have been using the arty in a direct fire role. In many cases, the guns firing at the targets, had direct observation of the result. So they were not diluting by battery but applying precision by single adjustment! [ March 10, 2005, 06:35 AM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]

Sure. But for the French at DBP there were no reverse slopes to get behind. They were down in a valley, a bowl actually, where the enemy held all the high ground. In retrospect, it was a stupid position to get in, but the French did not suspect the true capabilities of the VM to move and supply artillery. Michael </font>

If they won. The Germans had to isolate the Soviets, They should have converted the 'white' Russians and others against their former masters. They might even have tried to 'give up' France by saying it was a neutral country and sue England for Peace. Keeping the US factories out might have worked.

That and Company Commander are on my read (reread) list.

I suppose the Soviets did not want to lose the best territory they had. They could have tried a fighting withdrawl but if they could not supply Tank Corp with fuel/ammo, a distributed defense would have been more of a logistical nightmare. The Germans did bite off more than they could chew and the success of early 'quickees' had gone to their heads. Both sides, in retrospect seem stupid. The Germans could have tried to stop at a major river and sue for Peace. Stalin would not have gone for it because he knew the Germans would just try it again. If the Germans had tried to Allie with the Turks instead of the Italians (gave Libya back to Turkey), perhaps they could have had another invasion route int the Soviet Empire. The inability to stop the US and other countries from supplying the Soviets is as abad as not totally mobilizing. Hitlers last thoughts were "Perhaps in the long run, I was just too nice to the Germans". he was not the strict German father he should have been.

I've read about this also; I think it was discussed by some US Army vets at the Trigger Time forum. Very interesting, if odd, way of laying out a section or platoon. Seemed to me that the interlocking fields of fire are great, if everyone in your platoon is alive; but once one man gets killed, others may not even know about it due to their restricted vision.... </font>

In fact, the US expended about as much ammo in the west in a year, as the Germans did on all fronts for the whole war. Ammo is made out of money and moved by logistic links which are made out of money. I assume artillery ammo? Are there any online sources to that? I recall that the Germans made terrific quantities of 105mm (100 million?) but how much actually gets fired may be anyones guess. I suppose the US units may be actually well documented. Arty use is tracked very closely from what I understand. I have seen photos depicting US 105mm ammo as being fixed cartridge. Very easily loaded. I have also seen German 105mm being seperate. Was the US the only one to do this? 25 lbr? Soviet 122mm? Also, not all ammo is made out of money. Tungsten being a prime example. If you can't use it, don't matterhow much money you have. Same for phosphorous shells. You need the raw materials or someone that will sell them! Also, logistic links are time and not just money. The US had to make, transport, load, ship, unload and distribute all that ammo. One wonders why they could not get the French to quickly set up 81mm mortar ammunition factories.. Oh wait, what am I saying? They were too busy bottling liquor. [ March 09, 2005, 08:59 AM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]

2nd Looey=ButterBar