Mr. Johnson-- Posted June 7, 2001 Share Posted June 7, 2001 During my research for my battle of Prokhorovka sceanrio, I came across an example of Katiushas being used for direct fire against the lead elements of Leibstandarte's division. So will Katishuas be represented in scenarios or only as FOs? I'm sure it did not happen all of the time, but my book "The Battle of Kursk" by Glantz and House, says that it became common place over course of the 1943 Kursk battles. Also, will 120mm mortars be represented on the map in CM2? Will we have the option of using some of the indirect fire weapons at their minimal range from on map units? Because of the increased map sizes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalin's Organ Posted June 7, 2001 Share Posted June 7, 2001 I don't thik they'll be firing direct as in "over open sights" - these things just didn't have sights!! "Direct area fire" might be a better term (borrowed from a set of miniture rules) - ie they will not be firing at a single tank - they'll be firing at an area. That said what's the minimum range of the rockets?? 1 km+? I'd guess that they will not be modelled on-table in CMBB as they're really not in the right scale. I suspect 120mm mortars will be on-map tho' - they shuoldn't be too hard to put in - just "another gun/mortar", and they fall into the scheme of things range/usage wise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzer Leader Posted June 7, 2001 Share Posted June 7, 2001 How could "Stalin's Organ" pass up a thread like this, huh? I think the original poster just REALLY wants to see those cool rocket launching trucks in action. In all my reading on the East front, I have never heard of any direct fire with Katyusha's, but I have heard of a lot of minimum range fire. Is it as far as 1 km? Edited 'cause I'm dumb [ 06-07-2001: Message edited by: Panzer Leader ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offtaskagain Posted June 8, 2001 Share Posted June 8, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Panzer Leader: How could "Stalin's Organ" pass up a thread like this, huh? I think the original poster just REALLY wants to see those cool rocket launching trucks in action. In all my reading on the East front, I have never heard of any direct fire with Katyusha's, but I have heard of a lot of minimum range fire. Is it as far as 1 km? Edited 'cause I'm dumb [ 06-07-2001: Message edited by: Panzer Leader ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> It's probably more than that for indirect fire. The minimum range on MLRS is like 10-15 km. Different type of system I know, but it's still rocket artillery. I've heard stories of the germans direct firing my namesake against the Russians. I saw an interview somewhere with a guy who was in a Katyusha battery, where he talked about the germans mounting the nebelwerfer on halftracks. He said they would race to the front, stop, fire and run before counterbattery fire got them. He mentioned his battery mostly fired at night. I don't remember why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gyrene Posted June 8, 2001 Share Posted June 8, 2001 Could the Katiushas even depress the launchers low enough to be able to fire in a CM sized map? Gyrene Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzer Leader Posted June 8, 2001 Share Posted June 8, 2001 As long as I can hear the Stalin's Organ screaming into its detonation I will be happy. They seem out of place for on-map usage, though It would still be neat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blenheim Posted June 8, 2001 Share Posted June 8, 2001 I remember reading somewhere (Beevor?) that in Stalingrad they were used in direct fire across the river... by puttin the truck in a slope, so it could aim their rockets straight !!! So probably not really a common thing, really. It was done, but... well, not really designed for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunnergoz Posted June 8, 2001 Share Posted June 8, 2001 Might be easier to BACK INTO the target and let the back-blast level 'em! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Johnson-- Posted June 8, 2001 Author Share Posted June 8, 2001 Well in my book "The Battle of Kursk" it does say that they were being fired over open sights. Of course that could have been a misunderstanding by the Germans. But yeah I thought it would be very hard to code multply rockets flying across the battlefield. But would be a cool thing to see. I also wonder if German tanks will be able to have scenarios simulating them breaking into a rear area and causing massive havoc, ie shooting up trucks, guns, and Katiushas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalin's Organ Posted June 8, 2001 Share Posted June 8, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Panzer Leader: How could "Stalin's Organ" pass up a thread like this, huh? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Guilty as charged!! Tonight I'll get out my 1 reference work on WW2 rockets & see if it says anything about elevation/depression limits of the various mounts. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Edited 'cause I'm dumb <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Oh..I'm sorry....were you looking for a rebuttal?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skipper Posted June 8, 2001 Share Posted June 8, 2001 Of course, BM-13 was not designed for direct fire. However, occasionally they did it. On one occasion I've heard of, there was an attack by several german SPGs. BM-13 battery that happened to be at firing positions in view of those SPGs, unloaded at them and they retreated (none was KO'd, but I guess they were suitably impressed). On another occasion, BM-13 was used to blow up a bridge, through which german tanks were moving to a newly captured bridgehead. In both cases they needed to fire from a slope, because of positive minimum elevation of the rails. I've also heard that sometimes people dug sligtly sloped firing positions for these things - for direct fire, or less than minimum range fire. But there also was a specific order prohibiting such practice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gyrene Posted June 8, 2001 Share Posted June 8, 2001 ---WARNING! Dumbass comment follows! WARNING!--- Would it be possible to tie down all the rockets to the launcher, add wings to the truck and make a flying machine of some sort by firing all the rockets together? Gyrene Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted June 8, 2001 Share Posted June 8, 2001 If BTS declined to put rocket launchers on late model Shermans, a much more sensible proposition for direct fire, I personally am sceptical that they are gonna go for Katyushas in that role. Just my 2 kopecks, comrades. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalin's Organ Posted June 8, 2001 Share Posted June 8, 2001 The M-8 launcher (for 82mm rockets) elevated between 15 and 45 degrees, the M-31 launcher for the 300mm rocket 10-50 degrees. No figures for the 132mm one sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzer Leader Posted June 8, 2001 Share Posted June 8, 2001 You know, now that I think of it, I also remember reading in either "Stalingrad" or "enemy at the Gates" about the Katyushas that were on the rivers sloped shore for direct fire. Man how crazy and desperate they must hve been those days... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reichpapers Posted June 8, 2001 Share Posted June 8, 2001 Will the game also include the Panzerwerfer42? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chupacabra Posted June 8, 2001 Share Posted June 8, 2001 Weeell... in the first phase of the Angolan civil war, 1975-76, soldiers from the Movimento Popular de Libertacao de Angola (MPLA), the Angolan Marxist party, found that two men could carry Katyusha rockets fairly handily, and that they could be fired in direct roles by setting them up on tripods made out of sticks. Great for terror attacks into enemy-held towns - didn't matter what they hit, so long as they hit something. BTS, I insist that MPLA soldiers using man-portable, stick-fired Katyusha rockets be included in CM2! Or somefink. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted June 8, 2001 Share Posted June 8, 2001 I saw news footage of Russians direct-firing their modern equivalent of Katushas just a couple years ago. If memory serves, Chechin rebels took hostages in a Russian town near the border. The Russians soon declared the hostages were all dead (based on what info?) and proceeded to blast the town to pieces! artillery rockets are not exactly subtle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skipper Posted June 8, 2001 Share Posted June 8, 2001 > If memory serves, Chechin rebels took > hostages in a Russian town near the > border. The Russians soon declared the > hostages were all dead (based on what > info?) and proceeded to blast the town to > pieces! :confused: What was the name of that town? :confused: I know the story of that war better than anyone else on this BBS, and I can recall exactly two (2) incidents that even remotely resembles this (in the hostages taking part). None of those included any artillery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Heidman Posted June 8, 2001 Share Posted June 8, 2001 I would like to see a MUCH more extensive unit list. Even if they were not used very often (if ever) for direct fire, I would like to see most, if not all, military ahrdware available for no other reason that to give scenario designers more flexibility. Plus, I like my wargames to also function as good databases for unit information! Hell, that is one of the best things about ASL. There unit descriptions for just about every piece of hardware used by every nationality makes for good reading. Anyone else ever curl up with Chapter H on a cold winter night? Jeff Heidman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JunoReactor Posted June 8, 2001 Share Posted June 8, 2001 Excuse my ignorance on the matter but I've been curious for a while now. Just what is the advantage of the Katyushas? After seeing the wonderful accuracy of the Nebelwerfers (sp?) in the game, given German superiority in rocketry in general, I cannot understand why they were such useful weapons for the Soviets who had tons of field arty anyway.... Besides, they must have been a nightmare to keep supplied. Only advantage I can think of is the high mobility of trucks they were mounted on, but those things must have gotten heavy and considering the lack of paved roads in Russia, their mobility must have been quite worrysome during the mud seasons... So, were they cheaper to operate than tube arty? What's the rationale behind Katyushas? ?!?.... thanks... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Johnson-- Posted June 8, 2001 Author Share Posted June 8, 2001 Well since the russians will have it, it will probably cost like 20 bucks per batt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted June 8, 2001 Share Posted June 8, 2001 About the Chechin Katyusha thing, it was widely covered on ABC news (BBC reporter?) and the standoff lasted quite some time. I recall it wasn't a Chechim town but but a Russian cross-border raid. The rocket artillery was called on as a last resort after the infantry was unable to advance on the town. Can't recall the town's name, the old video clip is somewhere in my tape collection. Video of rockets firing, camera pans to follow the horizontal flight path, then Boom! The rockets slam into the town about a mile downrange. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skipper Posted June 8, 2001 Share Posted June 8, 2001 > Just what is the advantage of the Katyushas? Rate of fire and, sometimes, surprise factor. It is one thing to spend half an hour under a barrage of a battery of 152 mm howitzers. It is quite another to when as much HE lands on one's head simultaneously. Germans were ahead of everyone in ballistic missiles, but MRLS was a soviet invention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted June 9, 2001 Share Posted June 9, 2001 Mr. Johnson and troops, I have also raised this issue and requested this feature be included. For the record, I checked David Isby's WEAPONS AND TACTICS OF THE SOVIET ARMY: Fully Revised Edition where on page 287 under "Obsolescent MRLs" it lists the BM-13 as having a 132mm round with a weight of 42.5 kg, a max velocity of 350m/sec and a max range of 9 km. Elevation is +15-+45 degrees, traverse 20 degrees. Reload time is 5-10 minutes. Armed with this info, some of our resident physicists and ballisticians should be able to compute minimum range. I'd guess it'll fit on an enlarged CM battlefield, which we've been promised for CM2. As far as using Katyushas in direct fire engagements goes, here's what the authoritative (both authors held Ph.D equivalents in military science; G. Biryukov was a major general (artillery) and G. Melnikov a colonel) ANTITANK WARFARE by G. Biryukov and G. Melnikov says: "Antitank efforts were also enhanced by participation of all artillery in the repelling the enemy's attacks, including antiaircraft and rocket artillery. For example, when the nazi troops broke through to Stalingrad across the Don river and there were no Soviet troops in their way, whole regiments of rocket artillery were rushed forward and with a hurricane of fire from open positions wiped out the attacking enemy motorised and mechanised troops. One of the most brilliant actions was fought by Captain (now Colonel) Plotnikov, commander of a battalion of Katyushas of the 18th Rocket Launcher Regiment. Other rocket launcher regiments (4th, 5th, 79th, 86th, 51st, 93rd, 99th and 85th) also delivered massed direct fire (emphasis mine) in full (or battalion) strength to repel the massed armoured attacks of the enemy at Stalingrad, on the Kursk Bulge and in a number of other operations." I would very much like to see this capability included in CM2. Not only is it historical, but exciting and visually spectacular as well. Not to mention immensely pucker factor inducing to the recipient! How about it, BTS? Regards, John Kettler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts