Night Combat

[F_Paulus]

I was finally able to get the search function to work for the forum, but was still unable to find a detailed discussion on this topic.

A friend and I were playing a night mission about a week ago. During the mission, I was playing as the attacking Germans and my friend the defending Americans. The scenario, by the way, is called 'Bruyeres'.

During the battle, on several occasions, my own troops fired on friendly squads when those squads ran into the field of fire, and on one occasion a whole platoon was cut to ribbons. It surprised me at the time because on one occasion the platoon that was fired upon by friendlies was firing from a flank position (not running into the field of fire). At some points in the battle, there seemed to be more friendly fire going on from my troops than otherwise.

I was talking to someone else about this scenario, and they said they thought that that was completely bogus. My question to the forum is: was this bogus? I'm sure that BTS used historical references when they coded this "feature" into night combat (i.e.-night time battle confusion, fatigue, friendly fire, etc.). Does anyone know of any historical references for this subject? I'd also like to know your opinion as to whether this sounds realistic or not. I don't doubt that BTS has good reasons for coding it this way, I just have no personal knowledge to use to defend it.

I'm sorry if this topic has come up before. If you know of other threads one can go to to read a discussion about it, please post the url.

Thanks,

Paulus

[Juju]

Imagine this: It's night, you're under attack/attacking, bullets flying everywhere. Suddenly you spot infantry on one of your flanks. You're tired, edgy, adrenaline is pumping wildly through your veins.

What do you do? Shoot first, and ask questions later, or vice-versa?

It did happen, and it does happen in CM. Admittedly, sometimes it seems to be a bit on the excessive side in the game. Especially if you're troops are bunched up.

[lcm1947]

While it's not happened to me I can see it happening. Now I will say I can't see it going on for very long, especially if they are close to each other like what, 300 yards and wouldn't think it could happen very much at all if closer. Course it would depend on how dark it was also like no moon or cloudy etc. The other thing is a lot should depend on the number of troops involved. I mean a couple of guys getting spooked and firing on friendly troops is one thing but a full squad or more doing it would, I believe , pretty unlikely. After all there should at least be a sergeant present in a full squad and the guys wouldn't get that spooked or at least shouldn't. I know it may seen like it could happen a lot and it certainly has happened but it's not the norm. Soldiers are well aware that friendly units are always on their flanks and rear and just don't open up without regards to other units. My opinion anyway. And this is one more reason why the game should have flares But I guess that has pretty much been discussed and it can't be done.

[Guest Babra]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lcm1947:

Now I will say I can't see it going on for very long, especially if they are close to each other like what, 300 yards and wouldn't think it could happen very much at all if closer. Course it would depend on how dark it was also like no moon or cloudy etc. The other thing is a lot should depend on the number of troops involved. I mean a couple of guys getting spooked and firing on friendly troops is one thing but a full squad or more doing it would, I believe , pretty unlikely...Soldiers are well aware that friendly units are always on their flanks and rear and just don't open up without regards to other units.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In 1982, two battalions of IDF Brigade 460 were engaged in a two-hour firefight with each other at the Ein Katrina crossroads in Lebanon. Conditions were slightly overcast, daylight, with good visibility. This happened despite C&C equipment far superior to anything available to any power in WW2. It was a simple enough case of mistaken identity, but escalated into a two-battalion engagement because once the other guy shoots back, you have no reason on earth to suppose that your first impression was wrong. Likewise, the people originally shot at have no reason to suppose they are not being fired on by the enemy. Friendly fire incidents are alarmingly easy, especially at night.

[Doug Beman]

And let's not forget the Apache-driver who, during Desert Storm, committed fratricide. What I read is that his GPS system wasn't calibrated correctly, and he drifted into a friendly-occupied area w/o knowing.

Course, I'm probably wrong about the reason. It's been a while since I read the report.

DjB

[JasonC]

The amount of confusion, friendly fire, and getting lost that goes on in night combat exceeds anything you see in CM.

I've read reports of night actions in Italy in WW II, and the idea that the troops knew everything that was happening so "close by" as 300 yards away is ludicruous. Often they did not know what was happening 40 yards away. Battalions in route march had the men physically holding on to the belts of the men in front of them to avoid getting lost. On at least one occasion, a battalion marching in that manner still managed to get completely snarled up, because the column twisted around and crossed itself. Units seperated by 200 yards remained lost until morning. Single squads scattered crossing open wheatfields.

As for friendly fire (FF), at night most of the firing (beyond 20 yards or so) is done at muzzle flashes, not targets physically seen. Sometimes movement is sensed, or noise besides gunfire triggers a first volley. It is rare that the shooter actually sees the men he is shooting at, at all or for more than brief glimpses (e.g. in the light of a shellburst).

Once a firefight is ongoing, FF happens very easily because many of the men are disoriented at any given point in time, and think any muzzle flash "ahead" of them must be enemy firing right at them. Units orient on the directions of loud noises and bright lights, from muzzle flash, tracers, flares, artillery detonations, or terrain fires. These are often not at right angles to the deployment of the men themselves.

The most common use of night operations was to infiltrate enemy positions, attacking at first light or just before. Small raids were also used, platoon sized or smaller to allow decent control. Defenders rarely left fixed positions, to avoid the confusion that would inevitably cause.

Some exceptional units proved more adept at night fighting, but they were rare. Their greatest edge in the action reports usually came from coolness, a willingness to hold their fire longer, while moving more confidentally. They still suffered dispersion and confusion, but the other guy's trigger happiness often identified their positions first.

Compared to the action reports, the CM experience is farthest off in one particular. Control of larger bodies while moving at night, especially moving long anything but a linear well defined terrain feature, is unrealistically good in CM. In reality, even short movements of sizeable forces caused large amounts of dispersion, men getting lost, units jumbled to the point of ineffectiveness, snarled orders, etc. Especially in the night were dark or when trying to move across any sort of difficult terrain.

The real life units sent small guide parties ahead of the main force in such cases, to mark out pathways and sometimes to physically guide the following troops, with ropes or sentries at regular and short intervals, etc. Even when the route of march was straight and they had a moon, or terrain features to follow (like, stay close to a river on the right bank). The guides often took -hours- to find and mark routes, while the follow on forces took hours to follow along them, over distances of only a mile or two. Advances over unmarked routes frequently led to the whole force missing the objective completely, and occasional encounters with previously unknown minefields at night almost always led to complete disaster.

[Sergeant Saunders]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lcm1947:

While it's not happened to me I can see it happening. Now I will say I can't see it going on for very long, especially if they are close to each other like what, 300 yards and wouldn't think it could happen very much at all if closer. Course it would depend on how dark it was also like no moon or cloudy etc. The other thing is a lot should depend on the number of troops involved. I mean a couple of guys getting spooked and firing on friendly troops is one thing but a full squad or more doing it would, I believe , pretty unlikely. After all there should at least be a sergeant present in a full squad and the guys wouldn't get that spooked or at least shouldn't. I know it may seen like it could happen a lot and it certainly has happened but it's not the norm. Soldiers are well aware that friendly units are always on their flanks and rear and just don't open up without regards to other units. My opinion anyway. And this is one more reason why the game should have flares But I guess that has pretty much been discussed and it can't be done.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

ICM - Not happen at less then 300 yards!!

Well I am currently playing a game with Night & Rain. Average LOS range is 98 meters. A few turns ago my four (4) Vet MG bunkers (12 HMG) opened fire on one of my SMG platoons, that was attempting to flank the Brits. The only fired once or twice apiece, but there was only 4 suviving members of the entire platoon. OUCH!!

[lcm1947]

So it seems we don't really fight the enemy as much as we fight and kill ourselves if I'm reading all these accounts right. Damn I never realized that this went on to the degree you combat veterans are telling. I wonder why in the world the public is not more aware of this what seems to be a big big problem. Now saying that let me just add one more thing. Anybody that truely thinks that you can't see more then 40 yards at night, this is the distance JasonC gave, but let's be fair and say 100 yeads, then I suggest you go out at night in the country where the fighting actually takes place. Not just go out in the night after being in your warm cozy little apartment and having your night vision all screwed up and tell me you can't see a person at 100 or even further, let alone a squad or bigger unit. Then if you really believe what you are saying I will - well - I will just give up on you or you have a vision problem and should go see a doctor. Guys, I know there have been accounts of this happening but it is rare and just because you read 10, 20 or 30 accounts of it throughout history doesn't mean it is common place. It's not. Some of you read too much and this is where you go wrong. Not saying reading is bad but when you actually relate life only from books you just aren't correct. I tell you this belief about soldiers running around shooting each other doesn't happen. Sorry I got carried away there for a moment but I just can't understand some of the stuff I hear from certain people and it's always the same people. Ok enough said.

[Guest Babra]

lcm1947, you can spot a guy in cover at 100 yards at night and tell if he's friend or foe? I want you on my side.

[F_Paulus]

ICM: I grew up around farmland, and I understand what you're talking about. Depending on the phase of the moon, etc, you can see pretty far. However, even in the best of conditions what is usually the clearest are large objects like trees, buildings, etc. at distances beyond 100 yards or so. On my uncle's farm, though, if there had been a squad of guys running along his hedgerow at 200-300 yards there's no way, even with a full moon, that I could tell who they were. I could probably tell that there was movement unless they were a SEAL team, but I know I wouldn't know who was there.

One of the things I brought up to this other guy last night was that most of these platoon commanders were probably not using radios to communicate moment by moment movements, especially during the heat of battle. It seems reasonable to me, that given the general state of confusion during any battle, that there may be some friendly fire. I was perplexed, though, that an entire platoon a couple of hundred meters off the flank of another friendly, in cover, would get slaughtered the way they did by friendly fire.

Babra, Jason C and Doug Beman all bring up some interesting examples. JasonC: I'd like to read some of the sources you've found regarding the night actions in Italy, etc. If you have a source on that, I would appreciate it.

This is a great discussion. Thanks for the replies.

Paulus

[Triumvir]

lcm1947, if you can see a guy moving tactically at 80m, I take my hat off to you. I've been out there in the field; I've done night exercises, and it is an utter _bitch_ trying to keep track of your own section, let alone the platoon around you.

Start factoring trees in, and visibility drops down to the nearest tree. Now add in adrenaline, deafening from the weapons going off all around you and fatigue because you haven't slept since you dug your firetrench...

When we did our night firing in basic, it was at 100m range. At 100m, on a normal night over a cleared firing range without any illumination, a man sized Figure 11 target can only be seen because of little blinking lights that simulate muzzle flashes.

I've done this stuff, practicing for the real thing. Jason has, and I'm pretty sure that Babra has; have you? It's not as easy as you make it out to be.

[Guest Babra]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lcm1947:

Guys, I know there have been accounts of this happening but it is rare and just because you read 10, 20 or 30 accounts of it throughout history doesn't mean it is common place. It's not. Some of you read too much and this is where you go wrong. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I like that last line Well, if it's not too painful for the eyes, here are the recorded statistics for Vietnam, broken down by month.

Friendly Fire Statistics

You will note that the US was losing approximately a battalion a month to friendly fire incidents. I would not call that a rarity. I would call that an unavoidable reality.

[ 08-18-2001: Message edited by: Babra ]

[lcm1947]

Very interesting figures on that site. Now what percent of those figures were during the daytime and actually done by small arms fire by other troops which is what we are talking about. We don't know or at least I can't tell just by those figures. That is why you can't believe everything you read. Without realizing it you may be misled or under the wrong impression. Now here is what I am going to do. I was going out tonight anyway to the lake. It is dark with trees, hills and brush. I will mark off 100 and 200 yards and check it out. I will let you know the results if you are interested. I know I am so it will be fun. Not to just see if you are all three wrong but to see if I am. I'll label the post tomorrow or Monday when I find out "300 yards at night". How's that sound?

[Guest Babra]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lcm1947:

Now what percent of those figures were during the daytime and actually done by small arms fire by other troops which is what we are talking about.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Probably a very small percentage. Most would likely be from artillery/airstrikes just as in WW2.

Good luck with your experiment, but I think you would have more luck with it if you had lots of people in camouflage sneaking about.

[lcm1947]

Babra wrote

__--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

lcm1947, you can spot a guy in cover at 100 yards at night and tell if he's friend or foe? I want you on my side.

_____________________________________________

I don't believe I said I could tell the difference between friend and foe at 100 yards. We were talking about soldiers firing on friendly troops at night and how much that happened, were we not? Please show me where I said I could tell the difference between friend and foe. Matter of fact I just reread my post and don't see it. Matter of fact here it is again.

______________________________________________ lcm1947

Member

Member # 2981

posted 08-18-2001 11:36 AM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

While it's not happened to me I can see it happening. Now I will say I can't see it going on for very long, especially if they are close to each other like what, 300 yards and wouldn't think it could happen very much at all if closer. Course it would depend on how dark it was also like no moon or cloudy etc. The other thing is a lot should depend on the number of troops involved. I mean a couple of guys getting spooked and firing on friendly troops is one thing but a full squad or more doing it would, I believe , pretty unlikely. After all there should at least be a sergeant present in a full squad and the guys wouldn't get that spooked or at least shouldn't. I know it may seen like it could happen a lot and it certainly has happened but it's not the norm. Soldiers are well aware that friendly units are always on their flanks and rear and just don't open up without regards to other units. My opinion anyway. And this is one more reason why the game should have flares But I guess that has pretty much been discussed and it can't be done.

--------------------

[lcm1947]

Triumvir asked me:

_____________________________________________

I've done this stuff, practicing for the real thing. Jason has, and I'm pretty sure that Babra has; have you? It's not as easy as you make it out to be

_____________________________________________

Yes, I've done it. I was also in Viet Nam.

[eba]

I ran into the friendly fire issue in a recent QB. Night battle. One US squad turned and fired on another US squad approaching from the right flank. I'd never seen that before and was surprised to say the least. Using the LOS tool, I determined that the "target" squad had moved just along the edge of the "firing" squad's maximum LOS in the darkness. Translated into real-world terms, that means that the first squad never got a good look at the second, but just knew that someone was moving in on its flank. Seems realistic to me that a few loose shots might be fired in the confusion of battle. Nice touch, I think.

[Guest Babra]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lcm1947:

Matter of fact here it is again. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Matter of fact, that's not the post I was responding to with that comment.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Yes, I've done it. I was also in Viet Nam.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Then I'm frankly amazed that you think it's so rare.

[JasonC]

Soldiers hide. They also tend to stay in cover. Go out on a reasonably dark night and play hide and seek with a few of your friends, with them remaining motionless or moving at a creeping pace, in trees or around buildings in the dark. You will come across plenty of times when things are going on 40 meters away and you don't know a thing about them.

[Guest Babra]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JasonC:

You will come across plenty of times when things are going on 40 meters away and you don't know a thing about them.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I recall one instance in particular when I was literally standing on a guy. Fortunately, the guy behind me spotted him after I'd moved off. 100m my ass.

[Triumvir]

lcm1947, with all due respect, what were you doing in Vietnam? If you were an infantryman and you could spot and identify enemies between 100 to 200m in the field, you're a _far_ better infantryman than I ever was.

On a moonlit night, with people stumbling about in the open, maybe. When they're moving tactically -- ie actually using vegetation for concealment, not for convenient pitstops -- all I can say is good luck trying to tell if they're friendly or not.

As for a sergeant being in command of a squad, if the sergeant decides they're enemy, what then?

[Charlie Rock]

The assumption that has been posted is that someone will see that a fratricide is in progress and shut it off.

In reality the opposite is true. If one soldier in one squad shoots at a soldier in another, the entire squad will probably return fire. Better safe than sorry. In nighttime and confusion, fratricide builds upon itself. Confused soldiers will happily and enthusiastically join in with all available firepower if their buddy starts shooting first.

As far as movement--there's a host of modern night vision gear in the world today, but most good units move ducks in a row, column style, until the last 300 meters from the OBJ until they deploy. Take yourself and a hundred of your closest friends and try to move in a wedge or on line in the dark. Won't happen.

I would say nighttime frat is underrepresnted a great deal.

Shot out,

[ParaBellum]

During my army days we once had a night maneuver using the MILES gear. My group was equipped with night-vision goggles and we sneaked into the supposed position of an "enemy" company to do some recce.

We woke them up using some grenades and shooting some bursts.

Then we watched the fun through the night vision goggles...

There was a tough firefight going on betweentwo groups of the same company!

Took quite some time 'till the shooting ended...

From our position we could hear lots of "beeps" from the MILES system signalling casualties onTHEIR side.

[Bobbaro]

My combat experence in darkness is limited to peace time training long ago, observing reinactment stuff and just wandering around in the dark out in various terrain including open fields bordered with trees and shrubs, thick woods with heavy brush motts, swampy woods, broken woods and gullys, rocky hilly terrain with trees and juniper thickets, well you get the idea.

My night training exercises were a compass course and a night firing exercise. Both nights were moonless. Forty meters seemed to be about my limit for seeing figures. In night firing none of the targets were visible to me and likely at about a fifty yard range. Any chance to see anything was spoiled by muzzle flash. One shot and forget seeing. Illumination is such circumstances is essential to aimed or semi aimed fire. You lose enough track of vertical angle to lose a lot of firepower into shorts or the air. On the defense firing stakes would help the other coordinate.

I have followed a squad sized body moving tactically on a lane in low moonlight under a broken tree canopy. In the shadows they disappeared. Just 20 yards back I had great difficulty seeing them. Idenity of was impossible.

Adding the emotions of battlefield circumstances to such a mix would obviously produce distortions of great magnitude.

A very large factor would be training and experience. Units in continueing hard contact usually were badly depleated and if brought up to strength had numerous green replacements.

Even in those rare few units that committed to training in night fighting expertise (Wolfhound Div?), a night engagement with out a period of training in reserve to bring replacements up to speed would seem to be compromised.

Such organizations faced a widespread high level bias against employing their talents. But, when turned loose their skills reportedly paid off well. I wish their methods were laid out in explicit detail. All that I have read, even by participants were generalities.

Stumbling around in dark peacetime tasks provide enough problems to give me confidance in much greater one is war. I just spent some time this past week pullilng porquepine quills out of a imprudant dog that did that number while on a leash. Were it a booby trap the quills in my shoe give ample testimony to my likely battlefield fate. Not only does darkness increase friendly fire incidents, but also accidents of simple innocence and involving ordinance as well.

I wonder if we have an example of the AI producing friendly fire from FO's. If so that would be a singular incident of imbalance in targeting for the game engine.

[JasonC]

WW II armies did a lot of stuff at night, and more as the war progressed. Two favorities were relief in place along the front line, and night road marches, especially if the enemy had the edge in airpower. Withdrawl could combine those two more or less, with a small covering force taking over a section of front, the main body pulling out, followed several hours later by the covering force.

Other common uses of the night were patrols to keep out enemy and to gather intel; small inflitration patrols meant to hide by daylight, remain motionless for a day, and return the following night to report what they had seen; and infiltration "attacks", where a more serious body of troops (company or battalion) tried to get into the enemy position unobserved during the night, in order to attack at daylight from favorable ground, or force an enemy withdrawl. The of those was also used for night breakouts from encirled positions.

None of the above needed to involve night *combat*, in order to be effective. Sometimes they would, of course - patrols encountering each other, or an infiltration or breakout attempt that is discovered and stopped by a firefight. The usual case was a sharp fire fight followed by loss of control one on or both sides. Often with static overalll positions, or nearly so, from the first trigger pull.

Attempts to launch major attacks at night were made also. Sometimes successfully, sometimes not. The dominant factor in successful cases was achieving surprise; or sometimes defenders would panic and bug out.

For those interested, there are some documents on some of this stuff available on the web. The first is about documented cases involving the use of armor at night -

http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/documents/237ACY.htm

This next one is a training document, but includes some descriptions of particular actions used to illustrate things. It was put together after the war by German officers interviewed by the US.

http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/books/wwii/104-3/fm.htm

Unfortunately, I can't find the big lessons learned document on the Italian fighting I mentioned earlier in the thread. Someone posted a link to it on this forum a while ago, but I don't seem to still have it. I tried looking at the command and general staff college (cgsc - I think it may have been in their "combat studies" section) and army war college, but got dead links or sites down (or firewalled, perhaps). If anyone has a working, updated link to the cgsc I'd appreciate a URL.