Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Just thinking.  I was surprised to learn we still use claymores.  Why not they are a great weapon.  You could remote detonate IEDs in SF, so I think it must be possible (??) to code US and Ukr units to set off claymore directional mines.  I know people will say well we already have AP mines but claymores shoot outwards and therefore could be set off to kill enemy units in adjacent grids or approaching, they wouldnt HAVE to step onto the grid.

Possibility for the game?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, claymores would be awesome in the game. Basically it would be combining the canister rounds in the game with IED function as you say. The thing is they just may be too deadly if available in numbers as they are in reality. As for the claymore being still on the battlefield it is so light, effective, and easy to set up I don't see it going anywhere soon in its deployment on the battlefield.

Edited by Vinnart
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well theyre deadly. But so are a buttload of other weapons in the game.  Plus you have to set the direction.  Perhaps make the team attached to it if killed its unusable. And it has a shotgun effect so beyond one tile range it'd be useless.

And they're awesome weapons. Plus we have canister as you say, itd be like a canister round shooting outta the ground at low level....

Edited by Sublime
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well theyre deadly. But so are a buttload of other weapons in the game. Plus you have to set the direction. Perhaps make the team attached to it if killed its unusable. And it has a shotgun effect so beyond one tile range it'd be useless.

And they're awesome weapons. Plus we have canister as you say, itd be like a canister round shooting outta the ground at low level....

Their effective range is much further than a single tile. The one live demo I saw had dozens of penetrations of targets at 100 meters.
Link to post
Share on other sites

The topic becomes complicated with the international moratorium on anti-personnel mines which the US didn't sign but is largely abiding by - with The Korean DMZ border being the one notable exception. I just looked in the game to make sure - Yup, US doesn't come with anti-personnel mines at all in the editor. Ukraine does, though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

MikeyD

 

In current war both UKR and Russian-backed troops widely use Soviet type "claymors" MON-50 and MON-100 (see in wiki if interest). Also very often use booby traps with hand grenades. Their usage so wide, that often way through bushes or tree plants, forests, abandoned buildings etc.  in frontline zone and close rear very dangerous for infantry and civilians.  

Edited by Haiduk
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sublime,

 

Suggest you take a look at this discussion on the Claymore, with particular emphasis on the coverage and lethality diagram. For starters, 5 AS is the lethal range of the primary shot pattern. Presumably, this is computed vs standing personnel, which is the baseline case for explosive ordnance tests.

 

Regards,

 

John Kettler

Link to post
Share on other sites

The topic becomes complicated with the international moratorium on anti-personnel mines which the US didn't sign but is largely abiding by - with The Korean DMZ border being the one notable exception. I just looked in the game to make sure - Yup, US doesn't come with anti-personnel mines at all in the editor. Ukraine does, though.

Does the Claymore qualify as a mine in the strict sense of the true function of mines as devices which channel forces, or deny territory or act as permanent barriers around hard installations. Really they are more an infantry "weapons system", emplaced in key locations temporarily, and designed to be used again. Unlike true mines which are usually buried and become "a friend to no side" when they are left in place and are a hazard long after a particular conflict is over. I think the Land Mine Moratorium was only dealing with "dumb land mines" IMO the Claymore does not fit that definition.

 

I understand the moral implications on the use of landmines throughout the world. As far as the game is concerned, I do agree that Claymores should be a part of the US Army weapon selection. Probably for the Russians and Ukrainians as well.

Edited by Nidan1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent post, you bring up a good point as to if this weapon should be in the game.

All this time and I had not even thought about the fact that they were not in the game. But I look at them as a weapon that for sure would be used in any real conflict that would be taking place.

I know for the real units I served in, we were given training to use them as part of our defense's when we were out in forward positions or on how to use then in the set up of defensive lines.

But I do wonder what the present day soldier is taught and if they are available for them.

As was mentioned, they do fall somewhat into a category that is outside a typical mine, so that is another interesting question. I am not sure what the US present stand on their use is.

But if they are still available, no good Sniper should ever leave home without them.

I always thought it was funny when I was in that we could use them but we were not allowed to use a shotgun type weapon of any type. Now think about that, does it make any real logic. (Or now with the automatic grenade launchers, really what is more improper as a weapon to inflict casualties).

So the claymore likely has potential use in any real conflict as I see it.

Also as a side note, I managed to get a chance at shooting a auto shotgun with a drum ammo clip while in Guatemala on vacation years ago. Now that is a weapon, I would love to have my hands on one. perfect close combat weapon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From my understanding, command detonated explosives do not qualify as mines under the various treaties to same, it's mostly directed against target triggered devices.  The concern isn't mines are especially terrible on soldiers, it's that mines don't understand cease fires or peace treaties and will still blow up someone even decades after the two warring parties have shaken hands and moved on.  Command detonated weapons lack the means to be triggered by random passer bys years later, and offer no greater threat than conventional UXO (indeed, very likely safer than a dud as the detonator is no longer connected at that point).

 

Claymores are still issued and employed.  They're generally employed under observation as part of an obstacle plan, or to cover dead space (like it's mounted oriented to fill what would overwise be a good bit of ground to get behind with ball bearings).  They're often used in more deliberate positions (such as firebases, or established fortified battle position) however given their small size, and (relative!) ease of recovery they're also used often for hasty defensive positions too (like as part of the bed-down location security plan on a long dismounted patrol, or to guard the flanks of a infantry platoon's hasty battle position).

 

I learned how to set one up when I was a cadet, although it was merely on a training claymore (all the firing circuit, none of the delicious candy filling), believe it's still taught to recruits*.

 

They're a neat tool that'd be a cool addition to all the various countries currently modeled in CMBS.  I think it'd be best to package them with the uncon module that's been hinted at given the similarity with other command detonated devices.  

 

 

*Not likely Cadets though as summer training has gone way more touchy-feely and less tactical.  Can't train combat leaders of the future to fight and all I suppose.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

panzersaurkrautwerfer,

 

Though I saw nothing about it in the write ups I mentioned, I'd swear I read some accounts from the Vietnam War in which Claymores with trip wires were used to waylay VC/NVA forces pursuing Spec Ops troops who were blown. Would imagine that slowed down the pursuit tempo considerably!

 

Regards,

 

John Kettler

Link to post
Share on other sites

panzersaurkrautwerfer,

 

Though I saw nothing about it in the write ups I mentioned, I'd swear I read some accounts from the Vietnam War in which Claymores with trip wires were used to waylay VC/NVA forces pursuing Spec Ops troops who were blown. Would imagine that slowed down the pursuit tempo considerably!

 

Regards,

 

John Kettler

 

Yes, they can be rigged  with a trip wire also.

 

We would use that at locations we could not monitor when set in our hides.

 

We also practiced quick placement for a hasty retreat so that we could slow down or kill pursuit while we tried to get out of dodge.

 

 

Of course most of my training was designed for 2 - 6 man teams, so having something to help provide defense or cover blind spots was very important

Link to post
Share on other sites

In my experience we rarely, if ever,  set up a claymore for trip wire detonation. We used them on ambushes, and for defensive protection of our nighttime positions. They were always in the command detonation mode.

 

On night ambushes, as a combat engineer it was my job to set up some sort of improvised tripwire device(s) that would trigger an ambush when someone walked through the area. We did not do this indiscriminately. We truly hoped that civilians would not be walking through the area at night, especially an area of active engagement. I now would like to tell an interesting story. In May of 1967 I was involved in Operations , supporting the 3rd Marine Regiment south of Da Nang in South Vietnam. One night I went out on an ambush patrol and I set up a daisy chained string of c ration cans stuffed with C-4 and machine gun links. I set this up around sunset and placed two separate trip wires, as well as a wire running back to our positions attached to a mechanical detonating device we called a "clacker" To make a long story short, the night was uneventful, and at dawn I went out to retrieve my handiwork and found that all the cans and devices that I had emplaced were gone. Obviously someone watched me set everything up, and quietly and efficiently removed each can and wire without either making a sound or triggering the devices. The implications sent chills up my spine, and from that day on, I either avoided using ambush triggers entirely or set them up in darkness.

Edited by Nidan1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: tripwires

 

I don't know much about engineer laid, or even infantry stuff, but in the Cav end of things we never trained or maintained the equipment to set it off with a tripwire.  It's a lot handier if you can scoop it up and take it with you vs needing to be defused.

 

Re: Nidan

 

Screw that noise man.  I'm glad our local insurgents weren't that sneaky, or that clever.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

wow Nidan. that sucks too because it wasntt your fault at all but those almost definitely got used on US or ARVNs..

Did you ever have experience or hear abour VC/NVA turning claymores around to blow up in US troops faces when clacked?

Edited by Sublime
Link to post
Share on other sites

It was an urban legend kind of story, but we always thought it could be a possibility. However claymores were not set in that far from our foxholes at night, usually about 20-25 meters out for safety. 

 

There was so much un-exploded ordnance lying around that the VC had plenty of high explosives to make mines and booby traps.

NVA had factory manufactured stuff.

Link to post
Share on other sites

god man i really wish you.d let me help you finish your novel and help you or record your memoirs it.d be a shame for all those experiences to be lost to history. you could talk for hours about it to me. try and stay up tonite old man ;) i wont be home until outta work in another couple of hours but the next several turns will probably decide our battle. It may already be decided i fear. You do realize that high quality Soviet lrrp teams do not surrender to imperialist lackey dogs right? have you thought about our next *real* battle?

Link to post
Share on other sites

lmao. good one shame you had to retrieve them. splinty, panzer, would you guys say talking to other GIs etc that the taliban is a more formidable foe than the iraqi insurgents were? from america shock and awe looked alnost easy though if your a person who knows about military history you knew it wasnt. whay were impressions of the iraqi military and fedayeen? especially interested if people thought the Iraqi army sucked more in 03 than 91 or vice versa

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was told during during Cadet Basic Training that we no longer use trip wires "because if we forget about them they become an IED threat to civilians." I got the impression they only detonate them with wire, but that could be more in theory than in practice.

And as a random fact, I was 15 meteres away from one when it went off. Behind cover and in the opposite direction of the frag cone, of course. So not all Cadet training was touchy feely...we got to blow some stuff up!

But yeah, I got the impression that the CBT of 1985 and CBT of 2015 were two wildly different things, for better or worse.

Edited by Currahee150
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...