krm Posted July 13, 2000 Share Posted July 13, 2000 I have just now come accross something in CM which has confused me a little. I fired up a scenario that uses some of the big guns - 14inchers. One spotter, 3 'rounds'. I think to myself, 'hehe, goodbye Sven'! So I target my enemy, and call down a barrage. After 6 minutes of bombardment by 14inchers, the target (wooden MG bunker) remained unscathed. So I decided to do a little test. I know that, following the gold demo, the effectiveness of artillery against bunkers was reduced. By how much I have no real world experience, but here are my results. The following test was run *6* times! -Flat map, one hill, one which I placed the following: 3 x 88mm Pillbox (regulars) 3 x 75mm Pillbox (regulars) 3 x Mg Pillbox (regulars) 3 x Wooden MG Bunkers (regulars) 500 metres from this, I placed *6* 14inch FO's. All were elite, with full ammo loadouts (12). Furthermore, I put 12 TRP's -one on each pillbox. The results, after 26 minutes of bombing by 6 14inch FO's, were NOT one bunker destroyed. Not even wooden bunkers, nor were the crews at all rattled (FOW Off). No shell landed more than 20metres from its target. The hill looked like a mountain of mud, but the pillbox crews had suffered not one casualty or damaged gun. Think back to VOT where 105's would take out that 75mm Pillbox, and 81mm Mortars would handle the wooden MG Bunkers. Now, not even 6 14inch FO's can stop them. I have no idea how effective naval gun fire was in WW2 on similar entrenchments, but I would have though that at least the wooden bunkers would be bye bye's. IMHO, bunkers are now too resilient. ------------------ I'm always in the ****, it's only the depth that varies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boris Balaban Posted July 13, 2000 Share Posted July 13, 2000 Any direct hits? If not I can see why they were still intact. The crews are another question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott C Posted July 13, 2000 Share Posted July 13, 2000 I just did the same experiment, but I included a dozen batteries and a dozen fighter-bombers. Results - a direct hit will kill a wooden bunker, but not any of the crew (though after they bail is another story). However, concrete pillboxes can survive at least 4 direct hits with no effect whatsoever. Conclusions? Artillery is 100% incapable of killing fortifications (with the exception of large caliber arty vs wooden bunkers, and even that is wasteful since it requires a rare direct hit). The only thing it can do is smoke, and the only, repeat only, ways to kill pillboxes are flamethrower, DF HE through the slit, or an infantry close assault. Nothing else even scratches them. Is this accurate? I don't know for sure, but it seems unlikely to me - I mean, a shell landing in front of a pillbox should send shrapnel through the firing port, and thus eventually knock it out. MG and perhaps small arms fire from the front should also be able to do the same, it seems to me. ------------------ Questions, comments, arguments, refutations, criticisms, and/or sea stories? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarmo Posted July 13, 2000 Share Posted July 13, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Scott C: Results - a direct hit will kill a wooden bunker, but not any of the crew (though after they bail is another story). However, concrete pillboxes can survive at least 4 direct hits with no effect whatsoever. (plink) Is this accurate? I don't know for sure, but it seems unlikely to me - I mean, a shell landing in front of a pillbox should send shrapnel through the firing port, and thus eventually knock it out.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Very unlikely. And a good point about the shrapnel. You really used 14" guns also? There should be nothing left of a wooden bunker or it's crew! And even concrete one should have it's roof flat against the floor after one. Just IMO's again, I've never around when a arty barrage falls down Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott C Posted July 13, 2000 Share Posted July 13, 2000 Yup, 12 batteries of 14". ------------------ Questions, comments, arguments, refutations, criticisms, and/or sea stories? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Zulu1 Posted July 13, 2000 Share Posted July 13, 2000 I ran a similar test but was using 240mm and 155 batteries against German armor, Tiger VI's, Panthers, AT guns etc. Result, all German armor/equipment was destroyed or abandoned. Direct hits destroyed the tanks, near misses disabled them and eventually they were abandoned by the crews. I think this is pretty realistic based on stories that I've read about what big guns did in Normandy. As far as bunkers, IMHO, it would take a number of direct hit to damage or destroy a bunker. Read about naval bombardments in the Pacific. After 3 or 4 hours of heavy bombardment, the Marines came ashore and basically none of the Japanese bunkers were destroyed. A big gun is not all that accurate firing at long range. The hit ratio on ships is suprisingly low, and a ship is a lot bigger than a bunker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PvK Posted July 13, 2000 Share Posted July 13, 2000 Sounds like maybe they tweaked too far. BTW, are the crater sizes for the big guns accurate? I watched some 12" hits and it gave me the impression of a god-sized ice cream scoop - enormous craters. Not sure if they actually have a terrain type or elevation effect, though. Just curious. PvK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott C Posted July 13, 2000 Share Posted July 13, 2000 Incidentally, if anybody cares, it takes at least a 105 to kill a wooden bunker - 75mm, 81mm, and .50cals are ineffectual. ------------------ Questions, comments, arguments, refutations, criticisms, and/or sea stories? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarmo Posted July 13, 2000 Share Posted July 13, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Zulu1: As far as bunkers, IMHO, it would take a number of direct hit to damage or destroy a bunker. Read about naval bombardments in the Pacific. After 3 or 4 hours of heavy bombardment, the Marines came ashore and basically none of the Japanese bunkers were destroyed. A big gun is not all that accurate firing at long range. The hit ratio on ships is suprisingly low, and a ship is a lot bigger than a bunker.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yeah, they were not accurate. Maybe they're too accurate in the game. But a hit from one of those should knock out a bunker anyway. Against armor the guns seem to work as well as I'd expect. How much concrete there is in a typical bunker anyway? Steel frames? The game gives 500 mm armor for a pillbox. Is it the conrete thickness? How does that compare to steel thickness? Some 20 cm? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pillar Posted July 14, 2000 Share Posted July 14, 2000 How come a 50 Cal can penetrate light armour but not wood? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Peltz Posted July 14, 2000 Share Posted July 14, 2000 Books dealing with the D-Day invasion have indicated that bombardment against hardened targets on the beacheads were not effective for the most part- the exception being Allied destroyers at Omaha Beach that steamed suicidally close in to shore and pumped literally thousands of rounds into the positions from point-blank range...and even then the 5" rounds were not always enough to destroy the targets. One destroyer, fired 1500 5" rounds alone, and returned to port with her ammo lockers empty. At Tarawa, the targets were so low, and the trajectory of the big rifles was so flat, that most of the rounds went over the island and into the water on the other side. I think the game portrays the use of artillery accurately enough...I think one of the better uses of the super calibre guns would be for making instant foxholes for the attacking infantry to hide in when attacking...especially if you only have a few rounds to use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Formerly Babra Posted July 14, 2000 Share Posted July 14, 2000 I think they've got the arty versus bunkers right. I was appalled at how easily they were taken out in the demo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krm Posted July 14, 2000 Author Share Posted July 14, 2000 Babra - I agree about the demo, but this seems over the top. In the test I did there were several direct hits, but not one casualty. Even if the shells are not sufficient to totally destroy the bunker, I can assure you that if a 14inch shell landed 1 metre to the right of my bunker, I wouldn't be hanging around to see if the next one came through the roof. Let alone if you have six batteries firing at you, all with pin point accuracy (I used TRP's). ------------------ I'm always in the ****, it's only the depth that varies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pillar Posted July 14, 2000 Share Posted July 14, 2000 How come a 50 Cal can penetrate light armour but not wood? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarmo Posted July 14, 2000 Share Posted July 14, 2000 How thick were wooden bunkers? I'm under impression, that normal rifle bullet would penetrate a normal tree at close range. So .50 cal should easily go through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Posted July 14, 2000 Share Posted July 14, 2000 Bunkers seem right to me. During Overlord they pounded the coastal batteries with everything they had (including numerous squadrons of aircraft). The overall effect was not as expected, so some bunkers had to be taken up close and personal by the Queen of Battle... Nasty beasties these bunkers, even for da mighty 14"... Fred ------------------ "I got signals, I got readings, in front and behind of us!" - PFC Hudson on LV-426 mission Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarmo Posted July 14, 2000 Share Posted July 14, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fred: During Overlord they pounded the coastal batteries with everything they had (including numerous squadrons of aircraft). The overall effect was not as expected, so some bunkers had to be taken up close and personal by the Queen of Battle... Nasty beasties these bunkers, even for da mighty 14"... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Were all pillboxes made the same? I'd guess germans could anticipate coastal bunkers to eventually fall under naval bombardment, and would build them accordingly. Were there MK I, MK II and so on models? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IntelWeenie Posted July 14, 2000 Share Posted July 14, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jarmo: Were all pillboxes made the same? I'd guess germans could anticipate coastal bunkers to eventually fall under naval bombardment, and would build them accordingly. Were there MK I, MK II and so on models?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Going back to ASL (again), there were pillboxes (concrete and wooden) that had different armor values. I would like to see something like this in CM since most pillboxes WEREN'T the same, but constructed to fit local conditions. I see no other major problems with the current pillboxes besides the crews not being pinned/shaken more often. A 8" blast may not kill them, but their ears sure would be ringing! ------------------ "Belly to belly and everything's better" - Russian proverb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cward Posted July 14, 2000 Share Posted July 14, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jarmo: How thick were wooden bunkers? I'm under impression, that normal rifle bullet would penetrate a normal tree at close range. So .50 cal should easily go through.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I have read that A .30 cal AP round (black tip) fired from a garand will go through a phone pole.. More stuff.. Most of the casualties caused from bombardment were caused from shock damage. there are many accounts of bunkers on d-day being hit by 14" guns and not having more than divits of concrete removed. HOWEVER, when these bunkers where cleared the men inside were bleeding from eyes, ears, nose and usually babbling incoherently from the shockwave.. AND, in the sigfreid line, the us troups would pull shermans to within 25M of the rear iron doors and fire away, some times not even denting them, this lead to rolling in a priest or other 105-155MM gun to fire direct HE at them, or at the hinges surrounding the guns.. but after they get them open there is often no will to fight left in the troops inside.. AND, lets not forget, the bunkers and such are not really to scale, and are much smaller than they appear, not taking into account direct hits of course. so a close hit is probably just like a direct hit. IMHO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Los Posted July 14, 2000 Share Posted July 14, 2000 I have used 14" Naval bombardment and found it to be somewhat inaccurate (quite realistic) but horribly devestating to whatever it falls on (inc. my own troops) and that includes bunkers. After all the yelps for a beach assault during testing I created "Dog Red" (should be on Madd Matt's site CMHQ) just to show that a good beach assault scenario could be made with little problems and it was played a lot and the 14" were found to be quite devestating. Los What was the skill of your test FO? [This message has been edited by Los (edited 07-14-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Posted July 14, 2000 Share Posted July 14, 2000 Something sounds *very* wrong with the bunkers in that test. First off, I seriously doubt a wooden bunker would structurally stand up to multiple blasts from 14 inch guns landing just a few feet away. I just don't see any way they could take that kind of a pounding, even if very well built. Secondly, even if they could, the blast wave coming through the firing slits (for shots that landed in front, many of which would) would utterly devastate the guys inside. Even if they were alive they would be useless in a fight and should be considered casualties, and thus the bunker would become abandoned. Looks like there needs to be some serious fine-tuning on bunkers in this regard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OsinO Posted July 14, 2000 Share Posted July 14, 2000 O/T: Did you know that in Vietnam, snipers used .50 caliber guns as snipers? Im reading 2 great books: Insed the Crosshairs: Snipers in Vietnam by Michael Lee Lanning and Dead Center: A Marine Snipers Two-Year Odyssey in Vietnam There is pictures in both books and one of them shows a .50 caliber gun with a scope on top. OMG I was like WOW! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Peltz Posted July 14, 2000 Share Posted July 14, 2000 I have a video tape documentary of the Canadian fighting on the Scheldt Estuary in late 1944... a tour of the actual battlefields as they are today was part of it. Some of the concrete bunkers shown had walls 6-9 feet thick, and reinforced roofs 15 feet thick. The main command centre (NW corner of Walcheren) was also located some thirty feet underground... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eridani Posted July 14, 2000 Share Posted July 14, 2000 I must say that pillboxes now are how I expected and think they should be. I was VERY supprised how easily they scumbed to arty in the demo. From what I understand (note, my WWII is fairly limited) most of the pillboxs in world war two were taken out by firing slit penetrations or the rear-door taken out. Definately not by ARty, I think it was proved time and time again that arty was not effective at knockign them out. I WOULD expect crews in pillboxes to get shocked by nearby explosions though... simple concussion would leave them dazed on unable to fight for a few seconds/minute. -EridanMan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Posted July 14, 2000 Share Posted July 14, 2000 I agree that bunkers in the demo were way too easy to kill. But I'm talking about near misses in front of the firing ports from massive artillery blasts. There is no way that would have little or no effect on the guys inside (not to mention throwing chunks of metal all over their guns). Something has to be off in the damage modeling on these bunkers/bunker crews when they take large HE blasts at close range in their firing slit arcs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts