TZEENCH Posted November 23, 1999 Share Posted November 23, 1999 How are the at guns going to be configured. Is it going to be a stactic placement for defence only? Will you be able to attach them to towing units (jeeps,2-1/2duce,esc) and move them into better spots? Or will they be moved by the crew by foot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted November 23, 1999 Share Posted November 23, 1999 Depending on their size, guns can be manhandled and/or towed by an appropriate vehicle. Appropriate means that you cannot tow an 88 with a jeep Another neat feature - after moving a gun, it is not allowed to fire for a certain time. This simulates the time it needs to place it properly and prepare it for action. The time you need to do it depends largely on the model of the gun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TZEENCH Posted November 23, 1999 Author Share Posted November 23, 1999 WooHoo, I didnt see any way to move them from the aars. Tnks Moon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted November 23, 1999 Share Posted November 23, 1999 That's not surprising, since it might not have been in by then. Don't forget, CM is still beta and as such is still under development. Some really cool new stuff just went in today, but unfortunately I can not talk about it (only tease you ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TZEENCH Posted November 24, 1999 Author Share Posted November 24, 1999 Dont be mean MOON, Will you guys be posting the new additions/changes, Or will we find out at christmas(HOPE ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted November 24, 1999 Share Posted November 24, 1999 Some guns, like the 88 Flak and Pak can not be moved without transport. Not even a wee bit Other guns, like the Pak40 and US 57mm can be, but not easily. Usually this was limited to picking up the "legs" and rotating the gun on its axis. On a flat, hard surface you can manage better, but not a whole lot. Effectively, once you have the gun in place that is where it will live or die for the rest of the scenario. If you are lucky you might be able to get some transport to haul it away under fire, but that is very risky. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dmeek Posted November 24, 1999 Share Posted November 24, 1999 What about moving larger guns in the campaign, where the same forces are going to maneuver over a large area? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dmeek Posted November 24, 1999 Share Posted November 24, 1999 oops, stupid question. I misread your answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boris Balaban Posted November 24, 1999 Share Posted November 24, 1999 Steve up might start the scenario with your gun hooked up and after you see were your opponent is defending or attacking then you can set up your gun(s)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted November 24, 1999 Share Posted November 24, 1999 Boris, Yes this can happen. ------------------ ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bamse Posted November 27, 1999 Share Posted November 27, 1999 Man ! I'm droling all over my shirt here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomm Posted November 27, 1999 Share Posted November 27, 1999 Yesterday I saw a documentary about the battle of Stalingrad (pretty depressing, by the way) and one scene I remembered was some guys dragging an AT gun (with tires) across building rubble. Now, the point is: they were not walking, they were runnning ! As fast as you could drag a push cart ! It looked quite nimble to me ! Regards, Thomm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K_Tiger Posted November 27, 1999 Share Posted November 27, 1999 Thomm, do you know the sort of gun?? maybe it could only be a 3,7 at or 7,5 IG18. The ohter guns weigth is over 1tonns, hard to run with it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomm Posted November 27, 1999 Share Posted November 27, 1999 Sorry, no idea ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted November 27, 1999 Share Posted November 27, 1999 Thomm, Gun weight varied between various guns. In CM a 37mm gun would be much more mobile than an 75mm PaK . If they were running then it would probably have been a 37mm (in other words tiny gun) . ------------------ ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeO Posted November 28, 1999 Share Posted November 28, 1999 OK, here's more from 'Caen: Anvil of Victory' by Alex Mckee that is that is right on topic. This book is based around dozens of eye witness accounts from both sides. Must say this extract surprised me. It comes from Hans Braun of Panzerjaegerabteilung38 (2nd Panzer Division) equipped with PAK40's: 'In our company we had five operational anti-tank guns left; their task was to follow close behind the attacking grenadiers, down the roads or paths, or across the patch-work of field...We pushed our guns forwards muzzle first, straining and heaving, to keep up with them. We entered a sunken road with high hedges on either sides, and tree branches overhead, which led to a small stream near the south-west corner of le Quesnay. After we had advanced 200 yards down it, shells exploded in the branches above our heads and there was a rain of splinters...While we were still bandaging the wounded men, we heard a very loud sound of engines, and there was a shout of "Anti-tank guns - forward!". I told the crew of the first gun to get it forward at the double...at last, my gun had arrived. It was already camouflaged as a bush, so we ran it directly into the gap in the stone wall (then follows an exciting engagement with a group of Cromwell tanks) ...In the north part of the town and in the adjacent orchards, the British infantry were still fiercely holding out. Here we cleaned up a shed, after pushing our gun through someone's backyard...' After this Braun's guns are forced to withdraw as an artillery barrage comes down, followed by Typhoons. If I had not read this testimony myself, I would probably have scoffed at the idea of guns the size of PAK40's being charged forward in close support of attacking infantry. Sometimes veterans' memories DO become confused years later (book published 1964) but this sounds pretty convincing! I suppose the nature of the bocage must have had something to do with these tactics. Guess the motto 'get ready to unlearn' holds true more than we think Mike O'Brien Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
howardb Posted November 28, 1999 Share Posted November 28, 1999 I'm building a 75mm PAK cannon... heh heh.. in plastic I also bought a PkwIVH. Haven't started on it yet and I'm wondering if I'll mess up the panzer skirts a little, we'll see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted November 28, 1999 Share Posted November 28, 1999 I think that if you read the extract again you'll see he didn't speak about pushing the gun at running pace. he talked about manhandling it forward so as to be close to the infantry if they hit trouble. I.e. They pushed it forward at a slow walking pace. This is realistic (although hellaciously tough on the poor 14th Company men) and can be done in CM IIRC. I wouldn't expect these things to be moved far though. They move short distances slowly (in a 30 minute engagement ).. This survivor was probably talking about a morning's work to advance it a few hundred metres you know? ------------------ ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rommel Posted November 28, 1999 Share Posted November 28, 1999 Wanted to post a response about running with a AT gun, I myself was trained in arty in new mexico and texas, first thing I ever fired,live wise was an old 75mm pack howitzer, I would suspect that the medium AT guns weren't much different than that gun, and with a crew of 5, we could get it running pretty fast in the grass, but then you read about the same gun being pushed inch by inch on iwo jima, all about terrain, as for the rubble picture, we could get that 75mm to literally bounced over rocks if we had a running start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattias Posted November 28, 1999 Share Posted November 28, 1999 For your reference: (Gefechtsgewicht) 7.5 cm PaK 40: 1425 kg 7.5 cm Gebirgsgeschütz 36: 750 kg 7.5 cm leIG 18: 570 kg (Mot. version) M. [This message has been edited by Mattias (edited 11-28-99).] [This message has been edited by Mattias (edited 11-28-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeO Posted November 28, 1999 Share Posted November 28, 1999 Yes, when reading these accounts its often difficult to get an idea of the time-scales involved. Even the veterans themselves often talk of their perception of time becoming distorted under the stress of combat In this instance, the following further extracts are the only time references: 'We had started at 4.30 in the morning. At 7.30, in addition to our losses in the sunken road, earlier, the commander of my second gun, Corporal Berger, was killed and two of the crew seriously wounded. We carried them into the nearest half-ruined house for shelter, and would have run into trouble but for the fact that some of the grenadiers who were helping us push the guns had searched it a few minutes before...At the end of the day, we were back precisely where we started from. But the next morning, our depleted companies advanced once more against le Quesnay, took it and pushed on to Briquessard...' In CM terms (30-60min firefights) this would certainly mean relatively short distances and most of the movement seems to have been across level ground, paths, roads, fields etc. under cover where the pushers could build up some momentum from the guns weight. 'Charging' was perhaps hyperbolism though Also, its clear that it wasn't just the 5-man(?) crews doing the pushing. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harold Jones Posted November 28, 1999 Share Posted November 28, 1999 This is a bit off topic. Has anyone seen the obstical course that the Royal Artillery run with 6 pounders. It's something of a traditional event that involves two teams manhandling the guns over a variety of obsticals and then firing several blank rounds at the end. I remember watching this on tv as a kid so I'm a little hazy on the details. The 6 pounders are not the anti-tank version but an older model mounted on old style horse drawn carriages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted November 29, 1999 Share Posted November 29, 1999 Mike, you hit the nail on the head Veterans tend to think in terms of "days", not 1/2 hour battles, when they talk. This is understandable, since it is all one long battle in their eyes, even if it is broken up into 1/2 chunks. Often you hear about a see-saw battle, where houses exchanged owners several times. You picture this happening all at once, but then read in another book that it actually happend over a period of 8 hours Very big difference in CM terms! Most AT/IG guns can be moved on their own power. Obviously terrain factors in heavily, as does crew experience I think, but it can be done. However, it is *very* slow! Some guns, like the Pak43 or Flak 36... forget about moving it at all without transport Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomm Posted November 29, 1999 Share Posted November 29, 1999 Some additional thoughts: The forces necessary to handle the gun can be divided into:the vertical force necessary to lift the legsthe horizontal force necessary to accelerate the gunthe component of the gravity forces parallel to the surfaceforces due to friction, roll resistance, ... Under ideal conditions (ideal center of gravity - right over wheels, horizontal surface, no friction) 1, 3 and 4 become zero. If a gun of a mass of 1500 kg should be accelerated to walking speed (5.4 km/h / 3.6 = 1.5 m/s) within 5 seconds, the necessary force to achieve the acceleration of 0.3 m/s2 would be 1500 kg times 0.3 m/s2 = 450 N. That means that you would have to apply a force equivalent to the weight of approx. 45 kg to the end of the legs. Anyway, if one would have the exact location of the center of gravity (I should use COG here, just as a cool abbreviation ), one could calculate the exact forces necessary to move the gun over a given terrain. Miniature models could be used to determine the center of gravity. Regards, Thomm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeO Posted December 1, 1999 Share Posted December 1, 1999 Harold, I think you must be talking about the Royal Navy Field Gun Competition at the annual Royal Tournament (last one this year...). Two Navy teams race across an obstacle course with their field guns - but these aren't 6-pounders, they are big ole 12-pounders. Across most of the course the guns are disassembled and then put back together at the end. The competition has run since 1907 and commemorates an event during the Boer War in 1899 when crews from HMS Powerful and Terrible transported their 12-pounders 100s of miles from the ships to relieve the siege of Ladysmith. When their oxen died they manhandled the guns the rest of the way over difficult terrain. See this site for more: http://members.aol.com/faafgun/ Cheers, Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts