question about area fire with tanks

[arpella72]

I'm reading a book about the Six Day War in the Sinai desert between Israel and Egypt.There is a report from an israeli tank commander about how they had to cross a dangerous kill zone facing an egyptian line of defence and how they got through firing constantly all their weaponry(MGs and guns) to all directions.

I wonder if its posible to do so with the new game upgrades,making the tanks to advance and shooting while shifting right,left and center in order to try to overhelm the enemy.

[Vanir Ausf B]

That's been possible all along. Just use a lot of waypoints with attached target commands.

[Lt Belenko]

Wasn't that called the Death Star maneuver in the CMSF forum?

[Vergeltungswaffe]

Death Blossom

[George MC]

How to do it from the CMSF forum:

http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=82035

[dieseltaylor]

If effective gyro-stabilised guns were available in 1940-45 it would be brilliant but historically wrong.

[arpella72]

If effective gyro-stabilised guns were available in 1940-45 it would be brilliant but historically wrong.

During IIWW(at the beginning at least) the British tank crews where instructed to shoot on the move thought it wasn't an accurate fire.Here comes the quote:

The choice was then between firing at the halt in the open,which gave good accuracy-but also gave the enemy an excellent target;or firing on the move,which decreased accuracy but also presented a harder target for the enemy.The RTR(Royal Tank Regiment) had a long standing preference for the latter solution.

from Worl war II desert tactics,by Paddy Griffith.Osprey Publishing.2008

[Sublime]

I've read it was extremely common for US tank crews at least in Germany in early 45 to spray machine gun fire at buildings as they blew through towns. Recon by fire. Ive heard multiple accounts, generally the first tank would point ahead, the second fire on the left side, third on right side, etc. or something like that.

[Childress]

During IIWW(at the beginning at least) the British tank crews where instructed to shoot on the move thought it wasn't an accurate fire.Here comes the quote:

The choice was then between firing at the halt in the open,which gave good accuracy-but also gave the enemy an excellent target;or firing on the move,which decreased accuracy but also presented a harder target for the enemy.The RTR(Royal Tank Regiment) had a long standing preference for the latter solution.

from Worl war II desert tactics,by Paddy Griffith.Osprey Publishing.2008

Just like super-agent Jack Bauer in '24', who, when cornered by unseen bad guys and compelled to get out of Dodge ASAP, used two hands to spray bullets in every direction: suppressive fire.

[Michael Emrys]

If effective gyro-stabilised guns were available in 1940-45 it would be brilliant but historically wrong.

Rommel instructed his tankers to do it while penetrating French lines in 1940. According to his account, it proved effective. In situations like that, the fire doesn't necessarily have to hit anything in particular, it just has to make a lot of noise. Enemy troops realize that they are being outflanked and even if they aren't getting hit, they imagine somebody is and it could be their turn next. A lot of warfare is psychological and the enemy's psychology is one thing that Rommel always played to.

Michael

[dieseltaylor]

arpella72 - You are correct - but then UK tank tactics were not of the best : )

Actually the real reason they could do that was the 2pdr was aimed by a shoulder brace so that the gunner was the stabilisation method. More accurate and responsive than a mechanical system but still not accurate. Also with 80 rounds for the tiny Matilda stowage/usage was not a problem

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Loading_Valentine_tank_2_pdr_gun_IWM_E_9766.jpg

Once guns became bigger and more powerful this was simply impossible as the weight and inertia in the gun became too great - not to mention the recoil.

Longer gun barrels also presented problems when moving and a search of literature will find examples of damaged barrels during movement - famously three Tigers at once. Now consider in the heat of battle firing at an angle to movement with the barrel jumping up and down as the tank bounces along. Just not going to happen.

[Sailor Malan2]

The Russians also fire(d) on the move. There are 2 factors here: to fire on the move and hit/effect a single hard target (tank) is unlikely with WW2 technology. However, a platoon or something of tanks, all firing on the move at the forward edge of a wood or suspected position will produce a 'poor man's barrage'... individual rounds have the same % chance to hit what was aimed at, but a rather bigger chance to hit the wood!

As well as a morale effect on the defenders (Rommel's finding above), I would imaging there was a slight benefit on the firer too. One of the harder things to do in combat I believe is to recieve fire (or fear it) without firing back. Fining on the move at least reduces that factor... another reason why the Russians did it I think.