Jump to content

Soviet on-map big guns in the module for historical accuracy


Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, Haiduk said:

The fragment of book "Artillery in Great Patriotic War". Chapter 14. The last assault

So, on one of the streets of Berlin, the enemy fortified himself in the round form building with the walls up to 1,5 m thick. During a long time 152 mm guns fired at this building, but couldn't destroy it.

How can that be possible that a building cannot be destroyed with 152mm guns? Was it a Flak Tower?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

How can that be possible that a building cannot be destroyed with 152mm guns? Was it a Flak Tower?

No. Аs I posted above, FlackTowers had walls about 2,8 m thick and its resisted to 203 mm shells. Looks like it was some military fortification (maybe fortified barrack) of 18-19th century. Not only military, but usually administrative buildings of those times had built with stone or many layers of tough bricks and this gave big margin of safety. By the way, most tough old buildings and fortresses there were in Kenigsberg and Poznan, even big guns often can't completely destroy it and then assault-engineers did this work with hundreds kg of TNT.

Edited by Haiduk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You do have access to 203mm artillery in the game, its just not on-map. CM wasn't built for standing in place and pummeling at static fortification (though you can make scenarios that do it, if you want). I'm reminded of back in CMSF1 days when Steve said they were not modeling 'occupation duties' (a.k.a. Iraq), with its associated equipment, but combined arms tactical combat centered around an invasion scenario (or words to that effect). I expect on this topic he'd probably say their mission statement was never modeling siege warfare.

Edited by MikeyD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, MikeyD said:

You do have access to 203mm artillery in the game, its just not on-map.
...
never modeling siege warfare.

I know about 203 mm and higher сalibers as off-map, but this is not the same that you have a gun on the street. Also, as you read above, indirect fire suport in conditions of urban combat was very difficult or even impossible  and caused severe friendly fire effect.  

How it is possible to make the module about Visla-Oder and Berlin operations without "siege warfare"? This was major component and culmination of these operations! Red Army, moving to Berlin, was forced to nibble heavy Germans defense. 60 km of distance between Oder river and Berlin Soviet troops was overcoming about three months! I always respected BF for attention to historical details, but in this case, making the module about this period of war the same like previous periodes, where warfare conducted mostly on wide open terrains and resistance of the enemy in the cities (except some cases) was not so rugged, you are making big mistake. Special assault units and equipment vs. new heavy fortifications could be new interest feature of the new module and reflect historical reality. Instead you will issue next usual "tankfight" sandbox Germans vs. USSR ver.1945 with some other toys, but in this time almost devoid of the sense.  But if your conception of the game is just "meeting engagement", well I'm finishing to post next translated episodes about heavy guns and assault groups usage, this is havn't any sense and just wasting my time... 

 

Edited by Haiduk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd agree with Haiduk also. If the 203mm was on a SP chassis you would be able to use it in a direct fire mission the same way. If it was towed there it would have to be set up I understand but it wouldn't be used in every scenario just when a situation called for it. If Cm is going to model Berlin accurately, you'd have to have heavily fortified buildings that aren't always going to be breached easily. Of course the Russians used 152mm guns with success but I'm sure they weren't bringing up heavy caliber artillery like this if it wasn't needed. After all Hitler declared Berlin a fortress!  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Haiduk said:

I know about 203 mm and higher сalibers as off-map, but this is not the same that you have a gun on the street. Also, as you read above, indirect fire suport in conditions of urban combat was very difficult or even impossible  and caused severe friendly fire effect.  

How it is possible to make the module about Visla-Oder and Berlin operations without "siege warfare"? This was major component and culmination of these operations! Red Army, moving to Berlin, was forced to nibble heavy Germans defense. 60 km of distance between Oder river and Berlin Soviet troops was overcoming about three months! I always respected BF for attention to historical details, but in this case, making the module about this period of war the same like previous periodes, where warfare conducted mostly on wide open terrains and resistance of the enemy in the cities (except some cases) was not so rugged, you are making big mistake. Special assault units and equipment vs. new heavy fortifications could be new interest feature of the new module and reflect historical reality. Instead you will issue next usual "tankfight" sandbox Germans vs. USSR ver.1945 with some other toys, but in this time almost devoid of the sense.  But if your conception of the game is just "meeting engagement", well I'm finishing to post next translated episodes about heavy guns and assault groups usage, this is havn't any sense and just wasting my time... 

 

Haiduk I find these translations of the documents extremely interesting. Whether or not BF decides to include the big guns or not. shouldn't stop you from posting in this thread. This is great stuff man please continue!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, jtsjc1 said:

Haiduk I find these translations of the documents extremely interesting. Whether or not BF decides to include the big guns or not. shouldn't stop you from posting in this thread. This is great stuff man please continue!

I agree too - this sort of fascinating miscellany is what keeps me coming back to this forum.

(Well, that and @Bud Backer's comics...)

Edited by Freyberg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I thought this documents will motivate BF to add some new features in the new module or separate pack and can be useful for players, but looks like this is now have a sense just for historical knowledge, if you want to continue...

So, last time I finished in the place, when a tank was hit with faust. I am skipping translation about half of the page, just retelling that author describes further how 152 mm SP-gun moved to this building on 50 m, but after several shots also was hit with faust, the crew abandoned vehicle [look at this again, 152 mm several times hit the building, but even after this, walls didn't collapse and enemy troopers kept capability to fight]. The author complains that assault group commander  didn't give even though 3-4 SMG-gunners for covering of vehicles. Because of this, that building was assaulted whole day instead to do it faster. 

And now I'm continuing translation:

The guns of 11th and 9th of our brigade were deployed on the open fire position on Zeidelstrasse street. The task to our battalion put the artillety commander of 295th rifle division. He pointed just about the place for gun deployment and the target also just about. It was necessary to communicate with commaners of battaliones and companies of 48th and 38th rifle regiments of 295th rifle division for [correct] target receiving. When the target was received, our guns, of course, without any covering from our infantry side, were set up in firing positions and opened fire. The effect of fire was exclusively large, but the infantry didn't take advantage on this. Jr.lt Malakhov, command platoon leader of 11th battery [spotters is usually appointing from this unit] was sent to the infatry to notice that we will fire at such-and-such target, be ready to attack, but give a sign, when we must to cease fire. But jr.lt was met rudely, nobody was preparing for an attack. The building was ruined, but didn't seiz, because in rubles enemy soldiers settled again. 

With darkness falling, the artillery commander of 295th rifle division col. Zhokhin ordered our 11th battery to change firing position. For escorting he sent a major, who completely unawaring what's going on ahead, ordered to drag the gun. He was warned that there impossible to pass - the tanks interfered - they agglomerated ahead and couldn't drive further because of the faust-shooters influence on them. Thus, the gun standed amid the tanks whole night and up to 12-00 of the next day. Near the tanks, lt Kirichenko had saw the commander of 416th Guard rifle division and ask to give opportunity to move forward. Mayor-general answered: "There is no special need on your gun, so let it stand". Then, lt.Kirichenko appeal to the colonel Zhokhin with similar question and he answered: "For now let the gun stand, if necessary, open fire from where it stands". Subsequently, we was forced to maintain firing position on this place. At the moment, when the gun was prepared to combat, the representative of Zhokhin arrived with demanding to change firing position in the area, where again it was impossible to drive.  The question had to be settled with col.Zhokhin. Thus, we opened fire at 19-30 instead 2-00. 

From the foregoing in must be concluded that for the leadership over direct fire [high-power] guns it is necessary to appoint not the [infantry] battalion commander, which somtimes doesn't imagine what is that 203 mm howitzer and thinks it can be rolled out manually whereever as him see fit, but appoint the artilleryman, who has complete not only grasping, but also and knowledges of how to use one or another system.

To be continued...   

Edited by Haiduk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...Continuing...

I'am skipping part 3. "Effectiveness of the gun on direct fire", author just repeats own previous words that the fire was exlusevly effective, but success depends on coherence in actions of artillery and infantry. Again he says that infantry often was too slow and thus, success of their combined actions was only in the fact of destruction of the building, but not in immediate seizing its by infantry after ceasefire.    

4. The actions of the enemy and his artillery.

About actions of enemy artillery in street combats it is never to say because it was almost never used [in other exapmple, which I posted above, the battery of B-4 suffered losses from enemy indirect arillery fire, so there is shouldn't to make conclusions only by one report]. The enemy relied mainly on the actions of own SMG-shooters and faust-shooters. It should be noted big effectiveness of panzerfausts using in street combats, because there is full opportunity to use its in any conditions and eefect is large as weel as firing at the tanks as at the personnel. But this sort of weapon is effective only in case of adjusted fire. When our infantry fully use own automatic weapon and provide reconnaissance, the enemy has mach more less oportunity to conduct adjusted fire and fausts turn out not so scary as it is painted. It is should be noted the exclusive tenacity of the enemy defense, especialy in last 4-5 days and maximal of own fire assets using on the contact line. 

To be continued...  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wanted to note that during the Cold War the Russians rated the effectiveness of an artillery piece in DF as 10 x that of one using a covered firing position, that, is, employing indirect fire. The mighty Msta-S SPH routinely trains for DF work, and there is a somewhat famous defense themed Russian TV show in which one suffered an embarrassing failure when firing on a civilian car on the range. The projectile struck the car roof so obliquely the fuze didn't hit anything, causing the shell not to detonate, but to instead ricochet, winding up in a ravine some distance behind it, where it did explode. The little sedan was intact briefly, with only some localized roof damage, before it was re-engaged and obliterated with the second shot.

Regards,

John Kettler

 

Edited by John Kettler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...continiuing

5. Organization of [artillery] reconnaissance.

Organization and conducting of artillery reconnaissance was difficult due to inability to select a place for observation points (OP), from which one could observe the enemy in own sector and action of own infantry. For appropriate coverage of battlefield  in the sector of [our howitzer] batalion there was need to send per 2-3 forward observation points at the head of command platoons leaders and the chief of reconnaissance, which dislocated in [infantry] battalions and companies and conducted reconnaissance as well personally, as also used data of infantry, because often the battlefield couldn't be seen  - in one house is our infantry, and in another, standing next to it - the enemy; or in the same house both our infantry and the enemy and the command conducted though the telephone or radio, and if both were abscent - with foot meesengers. 

Main OPs selected on the frontiers of closest [infantry] OPs, also on the roofs of high buildings. Personnel of OPs covered in the cells of these buildings. Howitzer battlion HQ dislocated at the main OPs. With advancing  of the infantry, the forward OPs moved follow the infantry, and the main OPs occupied their previous positions after forvard OPs established a proper battlefield observation on new place. 

Features of artillery using in the battles for city were:

a) The need to have the wide network of mobile observation points and close connection with infantry, otherwise artillery fire was "blind" and hadn't any effect, but there were victims of friendly fire. 

b) because of after the infantry captured next several buildings, there was appeared a need to change OPs as well as firing positions for guns at the direct fire. Thus, personnel had to be kept always in readiness to move forward. If you delayed, fell behind, don't know the situation - start over to lookeing for own infantry and the enemy.

c) almost complete impossibility to use an artillery from closed positions for indirect fire (if these positions are in the city and fire at the city), beacuse the fire is possible to conduct only at the enemy defense depth, and latter doesn't spot iself, so to shot for nothing, you do not give any effect.

...to be continued...

 

               

Edited by Haiduk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...continuing

Conclusion.

1. It is advisable to use high-power guns on direct fire only at the targets, which can not be destroyed with fire of lesser artillery systems.  There are happens, that the brick buildings were stiched through and the 203 mm rounds exploded itself out of the building.

2. In conditions of the city with narrow streets it is necessary to calculate the requirement of barrels and calibers, because they drew together  so many guns into one street, and tanks also to them, that they only interferred each other, but didn't bring any benefits. Moreover, this entailed excessive losses of equipment and personnel. Where one 76 mm gun could handle, several 76 mm guns, 1-2 152 mm and 203 mm howitzer could be seen. Neither drive along such a street, nor pass. This hindered both the movement of tanks and the supplies of ammunition to infantry. 

3. When using high-power guns on direct fire, it's necessary to interact with infantry more closely, and infantry chiefs nust look at this not as a favor of their part to artillerists, but as a means of facilitating of fulfillment a combat task.    

4. Infantry chiefs must be commanders of the assault groups, but for assist to them it should be appointed aretillery commanders, who can deploy and use correctly, given means of [artillery] support.

5. When using high-power guns on direct fire it's necessary to detach the means of their cover, because such guns absolutely defenseless against enemy fire assets. Hense there are losses take place, especially in the phase of prepararion of firing position and removal from position, when the gun doesn't fire. A lot of time is spent on the aforecited. 

6. For more or less effective using artillery fire from closed positions it's need close connection with the infantry and its information as weel as correct targeting. When firing in the depth [of defense], it's necessary to use aerial reconnaissance. 

7. The main type of communication in urban combat can be telephone communication, since communication lines are short, there is complete possibility to bring it up. The radio communication in a presence of large agglomeration of walkie-talkies and other interferences [channels and frequencies mixing, reflection and blocking from walls etc] can be only backup means in the work.

THE END.    

_____________________________________

So, what should be assumed for modelling of this guns using and on the strenght of circumstanses of street combat, pointed above :

1. There are very strong buildings existed, which were little vulnerable or invulnerable for usual artillery, represented in CM.

2. Indirect fire support of infantry is very hindered. Big probability of friendly fire.

3. Radio communication "from spotter to the guns" and between inf.HQs and units can be interfered like in modern EW conditions due to report above

4. Guns should be set up as "deployed" at the start of scenario

5. Guns can be pulled manually with slow speed ot with tractor

6. The shot of such gun must to inflict a short-time panic or suppression of any personnel, which find out themselve ahead the gun along the street.

7.  Guns use concrete piercing ammunition, so this is not wunderwaffe to destroy all buildings in scenario. It is must be not so effective against usual buildings (slitched through), but only against special "strong" buildings, which also need to include.

 

Edited by Haiduk
Link to comment
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
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
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...