Fionn Posted December 6, 1999 Share Posted December 6, 1999 a 0.5 cal punching through 40mm of belly armour. You have got to be kidding me . Hell 40mm of top armour was enough to survive anything up to (and sometimes including) a 105mm artillery shell never mind a big bullet Also, do NOT mistake damage to drivetrains etc (which are outside of the armour protection) to penetration of the crew compartment. Frankly I think you're data is just wrong or misunderstood but I'd be very interested to hear more... As for pushing through bocage... Have you ever seen it in real life Rommel? I do not know WHERE you get your 5 feet high idea from. I have personally seen bocage in which the vvegetation portion was between 10 and 12 feet high and the earthen bank on which it sat was at least 4 feet above road level. KEY POINT: The vegetation was at least 10 feet tall ( 10 feet of pure vegetation) at that point and 4 to 5 feet tall vegetation just is not what I saw in the bocage. 4 to 5 feet is just a hedge. Bocage is NOT just a big hedge, it's something very different and until you've seen it it's difficult to comprehend HOW different it is. As for the wall... to make that wall act like bocage it would have to be about 6 feet thick, just like most of the bocage. No tank is going to go through that. It's the thickness which is going to stop it. ------------------ ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted December 6, 1999 Share Posted December 6, 1999 My previous post was written while Simonfox was writing his so I didn't see his. Will respond to it now though. Simonfox, one major reason you guys are all so harping on about Bocage not being homogenous etc just occured to me. You haven't seen the map editor. What you guys are talking about are "hedges". Bocage in CM is quite simply 10 foot tall virtually impenetrable thickets. That is realistic. What you guys want though are hedges which are tough to move through but not impossible. In Normandy, if you visit, you'll see that Bocage is impenetrable but Hedges are just like hedges anywhere else. In CM bocage is 10 feet tall, virtually impenetrable. In CM hedges are 4 to 5 feet tall and can be passed through by tanks. It only occured to me now that you were all asking for Bocage to have two separate characteristics.. 1 type would be huge and impenetrable (I'll call this bocage A) and 1 type would be smaller and penetrable ( I'll call this bocage . What BTS and I were saying is that Bocage B doesn't exist. In Normandy Bocage has a very specific meaning and that meaning correlates with Bocage type A. HOWEVER Bocage type B is already in the game except it's called "Hedge". I'll argue to my dying day that Bocage is impenetrable to tanks unless engineers clear the way or tanks have prongs. What you guys are asking for is NOT bocage (as it is understood by Normandy natives and the armies in the war) but merely big hedges (which are in). As for the underbelly shots... I haven't yet seen a tank die by an underbelly shot in any pictorial record (except from mines of course) and the whole bocage climbing thing is a no-no since they didn't climb 10 foot tall bocage ------------------ ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SimonFox Posted December 7, 1999 Share Posted December 7, 1999 So if we took one of these normal 4-5ft hedges which are penetrable by tanks and placed it on top of a low bank 3ft high which a tank could drive over would the tank be able to drive over the bank and through the hedge? Pity there is no smiley which corresponds to a smirk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted December 7, 1999 Share Posted December 7, 1999 SimonFox, that question is more than hypothetical, because the "bocage" simply is not just a hedge. You have trees in there, hundreds of years old, intermingled with countless thick bushes which are just as old. You could drive a car into this vegetation and it would be like driving into a stone wall. Maybe a tank could rip through this at full speed if it was level, but the mound under it just takes all the speed and force away. Besides the Rhinos, the US used dynamite to breach bocage. And don't think that TNT would blast a hole in there - not a bit, but it was enough to loosen the earth and the vegetation and make a penetration easier. Anyways, as somebody who has been to France several times and paid CLOSE attention to the bocage there (quite natural for a wargamer, isn't it), I just want to point out how really different real bocage is. And yes, I realized that it doesn't answer your question - I won't touch that with a ten foot pole Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SimonFox Posted December 7, 1999 Share Posted December 7, 1999 hehe Well Martin it was not the sort of question that requires an answer My point was that the discussion has been confused as to the points people were making. For a start impenetrable means incapable of being entered, which when applied to the hedgerow implies to my mind that the tank could not pass through the earthen bank, with which I am in agreement. The real question is whether it was impassable. As far as I am aware no one is suggesting that a tank could commonly or easily cross it. Nor is anyone suggesting that it could scale both the bank and the thick vegetation so there is no point belittling peoples' comments by allusions to tanks scaling 10ft obstacles. Basically I am perfectly aware of what a Normandy hedgerow is like as is pretty clear from what I have said previously. Also I have leaned my bike up against them quite a few times riding in Normandy. What I am trying to rationalise is the dichotomy between the statement that they could not be crossed at all and the numerous accounts of tanks crossing Normandy hedgerows. The way I have done this is to accept that by and large they are impossible to cross but that there were probably spots where the hedge bit was a bit thinner and the bank a bit lower where they could be crossed on occasion and that is what these guys are talking about in their accounts. These being distinct from the normal openings used by the farmers. I should also add as a general observation that the hedgerows seemed to me to be a bit more consistent along the roads and paths. As for this underbelly business. Well, quite frankly whether or not you have ever heard of an instance of it is largely irrelevant. It is a concern quite widely remarked upon in accounts of the Normandy campaign so it must have had some basis. In fact the fear of it occuring was probably enough to make it effectively rare anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Compassion Posted December 8, 1999 Share Posted December 8, 1999 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>a 0.5 cal punching through 40mm of belly armour. You have got to be kidding me . Hell 40mm of top armour was enough to survive anything up to (and sometimes including) a 105mm artillery shell never mind a big bullet<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Don't underestimate a .50... Not only a big bullet, but a DAMN big bullet. Also, in my P-47 example, we are talking about *8* converging streams of .50. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Also, do NOT mistake damage to drivetrains etc (which are outside of the armour protection) to penetration of the crew compartment. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The account I've read (and this is not about all fighters, but about the Jug in particular, so I couldn't comment about fighters in general) clearly indicated taking that tank out, not disableing. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Frankly I think you're data is just wrong or misunderstood but I'd be very interested to hear more... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The book I mentioned is was written by William Hess, who is well known in WWII air circles and has written many accounts of individual plane types and their contirbutions to the war. He notes the general practice of bouncing rounds into the underside of armor (and the specific instance of Tigers, since bullets just bounced off any other way) and IIRC at laest a few full blown brew ups, though that could be anecdotal. Of course a brew up does not necessarity indicate piercing the armor, but could be hammering hard enough to cause heavy spalling into the wrong places (engine compartment, a lucky spall into a shell while it's being handled). As for the general question of belly shots? I may have been a little overzelous in a later post where I mentioned possible hits with single .50's or 20mm AAA as that indicates that momentary visibility to these single guns could cause the kind of hammering that it would take. Got a little carried away with that one . With that in mind, as far as CM is concerned, I'm fully willing to defer as I haven't seen many accounts of CAS as close as even the longest ranges in the demo (and not many in the promised large maps other than in prepared assaults against specific targets during large scale assaults). It was great to see in games like CLose combat, but I don't think that CAS has a place in CM... at least not unitl CM 6: Kuwait City! Clay- [This message has been edited by Compassion (edited 12-08-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted December 8, 1999 Share Posted December 8, 1999 Simonfox, I'm gettin exasperated now since I've CLEARLY STATED MANY TIMES that the vegetative portion of BOCAGE (not hedges) is ALSO impenetrable to tanks without attachments.. WHAT about that sentence is so hard to understand? The bits YOU are talking about would be HEDGES and NOT BOCAGE. Simply put a big piece of bocage and then a few metres of hedge in to create your passable terrain in your scenarios. There's no problem with that but the rest of what you say doesn't hold up to contemporary accounts IMO. *sigh* I guess this is one of these things we'll just have to agree to disagree on . You'll never convince me tanks could drive through bocage. Personally I think what you are saying they drove through are mere hedges and not bocage. Clay, The 0.5 cannot penetrate 40mm.. Even through material stress it can't penetrate 40mm unless fired at that point for an excessively long time (not possible in a strafing run BTW before you grasp that straw ). I think that quite simply the fliers saw a the tank stop, maybe some smoke coming from it and say "YES, I knocked it out" where all they've actually done is damaged the drivetrain and cause some of the oil etc there to vaporise and ascend in a black plume. I have yet to see a single case in which a tank was brewed up by MG fire in any book. I've seen numerous cases in which drivetrains were damaged or destroyed and the tank had to be abandoned though. Also, Chuck Yeager, in his autobiography writes of he and his wingman strafing two Tigers and expending ALL the ammo from the P-51Ds ( 6 x 0.5 cals IIRC) without damaging or destroying the Tigers ALTHOUGH he writes that whenever he tells the story he says that BOTH Tigers were destroyed by the strafing since it makes a better story I think that last paragraph also has a big bearing on the evidence from vets ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers [This message has been edited by Fionn (edited 12-08-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SimonFox Posted December 9, 1999 Share Posted December 9, 1999 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I'm gettin exasperated now<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Join the club. You have obviously missed the point of my penultimate post though Martin seems to have got it . Perhaps I was being a little subtle. I'm perfectly clear as to your concept of bocage and by and large it concurrs with my own. I just objected to your characterisation of my and others comments as implying that tanks could cross a 10ft high obstacle, which we certainly did not say. Fionn says: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I've CLEARLY STATED MANY TIMES that the vegetative portion of BOCAGE (not hedges) is ALSO impenetrable to tanks without attachments<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The use of IMO or 'I beleive' wouldn't go astray here making it less of a pronouncement. I say: Based on the available evidence it is my opinion that that the vegetative portion of BOCAGE (not hedges) is MOSTLY impenetrable to tanks without attachments As for how this can be accomodated in the game that is really irrelevant as we were not really discussing that anyway. Even so I feel that by and large the solution you suggest is workable. Yes, we will have to continue to disagree while you persist in your opinion that the vegetative portion of Normandy hedgerows were homogeneous with respect to the density of the vegetation. Principally because in my opinion this does not explain the contemporary accounts I have cited. I am uncertain as to those to which you allude. I was not interested in an argument, though happy to do so , just a rational discussion directed towards the available evidence. The endless circuitious debate regarding the definition of bocage was largely a side issue in my opinion because it was not directed at rationalising the available evidence.... [This message has been edited by SimonFox (edited 12-09-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted December 9, 1999 Share Posted December 9, 1999 I don't think the vegetative portions were homogenous. I just think that anything which would let a tank through without implements etc is properly termed a hedge (in real life) and NOT bocage. Hence, my distinction between hedge and bocage being basically dependent on whether or not a tank could pass through it. ------------------ ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Compassion Posted December 9, 1999 Share Posted December 9, 1999 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Also, Chuck Yeager, in his autobiography writes of he and his wingman strafing two Tigers and expending ALL the ammo from the P-51Ds ( 6 x 0.5 cals IIRC) without damaging or destroying the Tigers ALTHOUGH he writes that whenever he tells the story he says that BOTH Tigers were destroyed by the strafing since it makes a better story <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Ok ok.. I yeild . I tried looking up other accounts and perhaps some official histories, but iother than the Hess book, and that was probably from anecdotal eveidence, I couln't come up with anything. I expect you may be right. The line of events you came up with sounds like it could look like a kill from the air. Clay- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SimonFox Posted December 10, 1999 Share Posted December 10, 1999 OK well we seem to have come to an understanding of each others point of view though I wouldn't call our definition of bocage or hedgerow the same Perhaps you can now understand my comment about a hedge on an earthen bank. Since CM doesn't simulate underbelly shots then whether you use hedge or some other terrain to simulate vegetative thinness doesn't matter. But in reality I would expect that there is a difference between the vulnerability of a tank crossing an average thick hedge vs a thick hedge on top of a 3-4 ft high earthen bank (which I would characterise as low density bocage). I would suspect that this extra vulnerability is expressed as a fear of underbelly exposure. I would also expect that tanks with longer guns might have had to reverse the turret to cross such an obstacle in order to avoid impaling the ground (a pretty amusing spectacle I would think and I have at least one account of this happening to a Firefly) making them even more vulnerable. This might also explain why there are few German accounts of crossing such obstacles since they generally had longer guns? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted December 10, 1999 Share Posted December 10, 1999 SimonFox - funny that you mention that. It's even worse - I remember reading several accounts of German tanks being restricted to roads only and completely unable to cross the bocage! This in fact supports Fionns point of view (which happens to be mine as well), i.e. tanks without special equipment (which the Germans didn't have/use) cannot cross bocage hedgerows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SimonFox Posted December 10, 1999 Share Posted December 10, 1999 Now Martin, you trying to stir up trouble again Let's be precise in our language here. It does not support your point that tanks cannot cross hedgerows (definitions aside) it just supports my point that those with long guns (ie mostly German) didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts