WP in CMAK

[Quintusarrius]

IIRC Smoke was used offensibely (WP I am assuming?) was used by German armour during 'Market Garden' to flush out defending paratroopers in the streets of Arnhem. They'd fire an HE shell into a house to chew things up, then a smoke shell was sent in to set things alight.

I THINK my source is a veteran account from the 'World At War' series or a BBC Timewatch docu' on Arnhem.

I must admit, it would be a welcome addition to any future game.

[flamingknives]

I knew that I'd heard that somewhere, but didn't want to post it as I couldn't remember where.

Only one of the 17 Shermans seems to have used the WP ammo, obviousely there was no SOP to use this ammo. This supports the CMXX people's attitude on not including this type of ammo in the game.

All it indicates is that there wasn't any SOP to use it vs. enemy armour, but late war accounts of US forces in Italy and France describe the extensive use of WP and SOPs for use of the same, in mortar and handgrenade form, at least.

[Mr. Tittles]

Following are remarks made by infantry commanders at the conclusion of the Sicilian campaign regarding the mortars and work of the platoons of the 2nd Chemical Bn.

"...The chemical mortar is simply grand. In this battalion we are completely sold on them. We think the attached chemical company did a marvelous job. These mortars proved to be tremendously effective for all sorts of missions, especially against machine gun nests, strong points of resistance, prepared strong points, pillboxes, and targets in defiladed positions beyond the range of our regular mortars. They are accurate as the devil up to 3000 yards and more, and the pack a punch worth two 81mm's. We dropped one round on the corner of a house and killed nine Germans who were taking cover behind it. We think these mortars are the finest weapons we have seen. A German prisoner we got referred to them as "automatic artillery." Our battalion CO and also the regimental commander have recommended that these mortars be made organic with the infantry. We think they are just tops..."

- Captain Putnam, 3rd Bn, 179th Infantry

"...Despite the weight and ammunition problem, it is a magnificent and extraordinarily effective weapon. The mortar is most effective with white phosphorus and HE. The Germans are very allergic to white phosphorus anyway and we would root them out of their holes with well-placed rounds of phosphorus and, when we had them above ground, we plastered them with HE. We killed large numbers of them that way, and they sure dreaded the mortars. They are the equivalent of real artillery. We also used them in the assault coming ashore. I have said we used them; I really mean the supporting chemical troops used them. They did such a good job with us, we got to regard them as our own people. The prize package was one day when a chemical officer actually dropped a round of HE from one of his mortars into the open turret of a German tank..."

- Lt. Col. Wiegand, CO, 2nd Bn, 179th Inf

"...The 4.2 chemical mortars are marvelous weapons. After we had a platoon attached to the battalion, I was scared to death they would take them away from us and attach them to some other outfit, the demand for them was so great. The Germans were deathly afraid of them and the prisoners told us that they thought they were some kind of new secret weapon like an automatic cannon, because they had such tremendous effect and could be fires so rapidly. I do not recommend that they be made organic to the infantry. I much prefer that we have attached chemical troops as we had in Sicily. Their cooperation and proficency was all anyone could ask for. We shall always want a platoon attached to us, and we think that the best results are obtained by cooperative, attached units like we had. Without exageration, I would say that the 4.2 is the most effective single weapon used in support of infantry I have ever seen. We have yet to see an enemy position that was tenable when we fired on it with WP and HE from this mortar. They can reach into almostly perfectly defiladed positions, and their effect is devastating..."

- Lt. Col. Patterson, CO, 3rd Bn, 180th Inf

http://www.4point2.org/hist-2w.htm

I think that the most simplest of research finds information similar to the above as far as mortor use of WP.

[Mr. Tittles]

Third Army's nine chemical mortar companies expended 349,097 rounds of 4.2 inch mortars, including 189,095 rounds of high explosive and 160,002 rounds of white phosphorous. Chemical warfare supplies included 32,454 gallons of flame thrower fuel and 335,944 grenades.

http://www.angelfire.com/ma4/handsonhistory/ww2/3rd_army_history.htm

[Mr. Tittles]

The most common chemical grenade was the M15 White Phosphorous. Weighing about 31 ounces, using the M6A3 fuse with a 4.0 - 4.8 second time delay, the M15 had a burst radius of about 25 yards and burned for 50 to 60 seconds. Officially intended as screening, casualty and harassment, the WP could illuminate a suspect area for the gunners while still giving any enemy in the area other things to worry about. The Mk1 (middle right) was an Illuminating grenade.

http://www.pnwhg.org/1stid/grenades.htm

This WP grenade would burn for a whole CM turn.

[YankeeDog]

I must admit I'm a little disappointed that WP modeling won't be included in CMAK. From what I have read, WP was a very important part of the American arsenal, at least in italy.

One of the most important effects that WP has that even HE can't compete with is that it forces infantry to temporarily evacuate the area of effect. WP smoke is caustic and it also the smoke-generating reaction also generates a considerable amount of heat. As a result, it's the perfect weapon for forcing infantry out of a building, rough terrain, etc.

It's absence in the certainly isn't a game-breaker for me, but IMHO it will probably make it considerably harder for American forces to root German infantry out of dense terrain than was true IRL. From what I have read, it was pretty much SOP for the Yanks to use either Direct fire or Mortar WP in these situations.

Cheers,

YD

[dieseltaylor]

In the "angelfire" link

http://www.angelfire.com/ma4/handsonhistory/ww2/3rd_army_history.htm

"Third Army's nine chemical mortar companies expended 349,097 rounds of 4.2 inch mortars, including 189,095 rounds of high explosive and 160,002 rounds of white phosphorous. Chemical warfare supplies included 32,454 gallons of flame thrower fuel and 335,944 grenades" .....

"Third Army artillery fired 5,870,843 rounds of ammunition during the fighting."

I assume the distinction is made as with WP being a pecularly dangerous shell. I have no idea what percent the total 9 chemical companies made out of the Third Army's total fire support but presumably a very small proportion as WP was about 3% of shells fired.

Incidentally if looking through the threads you see how much was used ,by other forces, for a smoke screen and then how much was used to kill a sniper 160,000 shells does not seeem a huge amount.

As a German you would seem to be very unlucky to have been under it.

I do realise these figures do not relate to CMAK but is a general point regarding the likely commoness of WP mortar support.

[ October 21, 2003, 03:17 AM: Message edited by: dieseltaylor ]

[Mr. Tittles]

I think the numbers might support the following logic; 4.2 inch Mortors used a ratio of 19:16 of HE to WP. Comments by Commanders attest to its effectiveness in both a smoke producing and casualty causing agent. I would guess that 81mm and perhaps 60mm US mortors might have fired some?

I would wager some of the 5 million some rounds fired by the atillery might be WP also? I think perhaps your number crunch could use some more pencil sharpening.

Organization

Corps & Divisions of the 3rd Army

III Corps 31 Oct 1944 - 11 Feb 1945, 18 Apr 1945- 9 May 1945

V Corps 6 May 1945 - 9 May 1945

VII Corps 1 Aug 1944 - 5 Sep 1944, 21 Dec 1944 - 22 Apr 1945

XII Corps 1 Aug 1944 - 9 May 1945

XV Corps 1 Aug 1944- 24 Aug 1944, 29 Aug 1944- 29 Sept 1944

XX Corps 1 Aug 1944- 9 May 1945

AIRBORNE DIVISIONS

ARMORED DIVISIONS

INFANTRY DIVISIONS

1st 2nd 4th 5th 8th 26th 28th 29th 35th 42nd 65th 69th 70th 71st 76h 79h 80th 83rd 86th 87th 89th 90th 94th 95th 97th 99th

4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th 11th 12th 13th 14th 16th 20th 2nd French

17th 101st

I am sure a grog might be able to come up with a tube count of sorts. The bottom line is that your logic is flawed.

WP was a weapon used at the squad level and above. To ignore it is ahistorical. How it should be modeled should be addressed. This thread is not about WP mortor support but about WP as a weapons system. Many cut n pastes could do the same about infantry use of WP or tank/arty use.

[ October 21, 2003, 09:48 AM: Message edited by: Mr. Tittles ]

[Mr. Tittles]

Originally posted by YankeeDog:

One of the most important effects that WP has that even HE can't compete with is that it forces infantry to temporarily evacuate the area of effect. WP smoke is caustic and it also the smoke-generating reaction also generates a considerable amount of heat. As a result, it's the perfect weapon for forcing infantry out of a building, rough terrain, etc.

It's absence in the certainly isn't a game-breaker for me, but IMHO it will probably make it considerably harder for American forces to root German infantry out of dense terrain than was true IRL. From what I have read, it was pretty much SOP for the Yanks to use either Direct fire or Mortar WP in these situations.

That is the heart of it. It is very much like a flamethrower in its effect. But I contend that when it is fired from a rifled gun, it still retains a small HE effect with splinters as well. To not model it at all is a disappointment.

In North Afrika, it is not that big a deal to me but in Sicily and Italy it will be missed.

[Mr. Tittles]

Tony D’Arpino: I think Sergeant Warren used to have the right idea. I can remember him, God rest his soul, saying, I made tank commander for a couple of weeks, that’s another story, but he used to tell me, "Listen, if you ever become tank commander," he says, "never mind getting the high explosive shells. Get the white phosphorous." He says it does the same job and twice the damage.

Ed Spahr: Well, they’d have knocked us out quicker, I think, if I wouldn’t have fired white phosphorous that day. Because that one tank stopped.

Tony D’Arpino: Nobody got much white phosphorous until Sergeant Warren.

Ed Spahr: I hit him right in the front and that tank stopped because he thought he was on fire.

http://www.tankbooks.com/interviews/giffdarp2.htm

This interview includes another story about blowing away an ATG in a building with WP. tanker relates how he just found a couple of feet near the gun.

[ October 21, 2003, 11:02 AM: Message edited by: Mr. Tittles ]

[Mr. Tittles]

http://www.jodavidsmeyer.com/combat/bookstore/clay-pigeons.html

I remember reading in this book about 4.2 inch mortor fire. the author relates how the shells would break up into long (8-10 inch) splinters. One such splinter cut a german in half. These may actually have been splinters from a WP shell. I would doubt a HE shell would make such large splinters. These mortors were rifled and resultant splinters, whether HE or WP, would have an added velocity component to them from the spinning REGARDLESS of splinter size.

http://www.tankbooks.com/interviews/giffdarp2.htm

In the sherman vets account about shooting at an ATG and finding severed feet afterwards also supports the theory of rifled weapons firing WP producing splinters. There is quite a bit of energy in the spinning component of a shell.

I would suppose that 60mm and 81mm WP mortor shells to be equivelent to something between 20mm and perhaps a frag grenade as far as HE/splinter equivelence. But larger mortors (especially the rifled ones) and guns firing WP would have much more bang/splinters on the target end.

The infantry WP grenades would not have much blast/splinters at all. They did have quite a bit of WP though.

[ October 22, 2003, 04:37 PM: Message edited by: Mr. Tittles ]

[Mr. Tittles]

http://www.rt66.com/~korteng/SmallArms/60mm19.htm

This site claims a 11 meter WP casualty radius. the WP round for this mortor looks bigger than the HE by the way. I am assuming that this korean war weapon is the same as WWII though.

Also the 81mm

http://www.rt66.com/~korteng/SmallArms/81mm.htm

[ October 22, 2003, 04:51 PM: Message edited by: Mr. Tittles ]

[Mr. Tittles]

(5) Capabilities -- the average soldier can throw the grenade 30 meters. The grenade has a bursting radius of 17 meters. All friendly personnel within this 17-meter area should be in a covered position to avoid being struck by burning particles. The WP filler burns for about 60 seconds at a temperature of 5,000 degrees Fahrenheit. This intense heat causes the smoke produced by the grenade to rise quite rapidly, especially in cool climates. This makes the M15 grenade less desirable for use as a screening agent.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m15.htm

[Mr. Tittles]

Heres how to get rid of WP shells.....

Normally, when disposing of high-explosive munitions by detonation, we tried to position them is such a way so as to contain and direct the explosion into the ground, to reduce the amount of shrapnel flying about. However, with WP the idea was to explode it into the air, where it all ignites and burns itself out. If exploded into the ground, some of the WP would blow into the soil, not burn, and later work its way to the surface and ignite. In this instance, we finally solved the problem by placing the warheads along the side of a large crater and exploding them sideways across the crater, thereby keeping the amount of shrapnel at a minimum while exposing the WP to the air. We could only do small numbers of warheads at a time, and it took quite a while to clean up the mess. Our biggest problem was that exploding WP is quite spectacular, leaving long white trails of smoke in the air, even when done sideways across a crater, and we found it difficult to keep spectators away, especially Vietnamese children, who never seemed to realize the danger of exploding munitions.

http://www.zianet.com/tmorris/vn.html

[ October 22, 2003, 05:15 PM: Message edited by: Mr. Tittles ]

[Mr. Tittles]

Infantry assaults up the mountainside proved ineffective. As did artillery, since nothing but a direct hit on a cave opening was of any use and there was little of that in shooting at the well-camouflaged side of a mountain. But the 4.2 is an area weapon and its crews were facile in the use of WP as a wound-inflicting weapon.

White phosphorous on bare skin bores deep holes into the wound consuming for its continued combustion oxygen from the surrounding flesh. At Clark Field the enemy was bare-footed or barely sandaled. Thus there was no absolute need for direct hits on cave openings. Barrages at night to light up the neighborhood splashed WP particles all over. Captured documents revealed that the enemy considered WP our most devastating weapon and that it so enervated and devitalized their troops in the mountain caves at Clark Field that their stronghold was soon overcome. Thus by virtue of the 82nd's 4.2, the major obstacle north of Manila in the western sector of General Douglas MacArthur's “return” was wiped out.

...also...

This matter of accuracy was vital where the targets were draws or close-in approaches to our defensive lines, or for defilade fire areas, or enemy positions against which we were to provide close support of an Infantry assault. The 4.2 was favored by the infantry in any situation, because it had “pin-point” accuracy compared with other heavy weaponry and, with its high angle of fire, was the best high explosive delivery system for jungle warfare, to say nothing of its spectacular WP capability.

Infantry mortars of 60mm. and 81mm., smoothbore weapons, were not nearly as accurate as the rifled-bore 4.2 and provided only 28% to 52% of the firepower per round. Artillery rifles and howitzers, because of their relatively flat trajectory, were practically useless in jungle warfare. The same can be said of tanks regardless of size, except for mop-up operations after roads and bridges could be developed.

http://www.4point2.org/hist-82-p4.htm#Chemwarfare

[ October 22, 2003, 05:27 PM: Message edited by: Mr. Tittles ]

[Mr. Tittles]

The following is a regimental dump list from US Army in Italy

MG30 cal 150-200K

30cal Garand 75K (8 round clips)

.45 25K

60mm 1500

81mm 1500-2000

81mm smoke 600

Grenade frag 1000

Grenade offensive 500

Smoke pot WP 150

Grenade yellow 200

Colored signals 300

Grenade rifle 500

Bazooka 300

This is a maintained level an could be taken as a usage level of sorts.

Interestingly, 60mm smoke was not mentioned. 81mm snmoke was mentioned. I would assume this to be a WP round. Other parts of the report mention that 81mm heavy HE was also used in addition to the light 81mm HE round. Rifle grenades must have been popular.

The report mentions smoke pots WP; would these be M15 handgrenades?

[Mr. Tittles]

Combat Stats

http://www.4point2.org/hist-87A.htm#statistics

Days of Combat - "A" Company

From 6 June 1944 to last commitment 27 April 1945 326 days

Total days tactically employed 317 days

Longest sustained period, 20 July 1944 to 5 Dec 1944 139 days

Total days of rehabilitation and maintenance 9 days

Rounds Fired - Battalion

HE WP Total

Total 109,604 74,406* 184,010

*includes 484 rounds of FS

Highest daily expenditure (19 March 1945) 206 5,376 5,582

Rounds Fired - "A" Company

HE WP Total

Total 37,053 16,115 53,168

Highest daily expenditure (27 Nov 1944) 563 969 1,532

Highest monthly expenditure (Nov 1944) 7,852 3,029 10,881

Number of days expenditure exceeded basic load 7

Rounds Fired - "B" Company

HE WP Total

Total 21,984 17,151 39,135

Highest daily expenditure (19 Mar 1945) 186 1,711 1,897

Highest monthly expenditure (Mar 1945) 1,187 6,274 7,461

Number of days expenditure exceeded basic load 5

Rounds Fired - "C" Company

HE WP Total

Total 26,990 20,781 47,771

Highest daily expenditure (23 Feb 1945) 96 1,578 1,674

Highest monthly expenditure (Dec 1944) 5,081 1,884 6,965

Number of days expenditure exceeded basic load 7

Rounds Fired - "D" Company

HE WP Total

Total 23,577 20,359 43,936

Highest daily expenditure (19 Mar 1945) 20 2,417 2,437

Highest monthly expenditure (Mar 1945) 844 6,208 7,052

Number of days expenditure exceeded basic load 5

[Mr. Tittles]

In the spring of 1944, the Field Artillery Board compared the new M4 with the older M3 in a series of tests against targets in shelter trenches and open fields. In percussion, ricochet and low-angle time fire, shell fragments from the M3 scored more hits than fragments from the M4. In high-angle time fire, both projectiles produced about the same number of hits. As a result of these tests, the CWS halted the production of the new shells, and thereafter used them only when there was a shortage of the M3 shell. About 67,000 new M4 shells were manufactured, in comparison with the more than 6,400,000 of the M3 type.

Smoke shells made up a large fraction of the service's output of mortar ammunition. Authorized smoke fillings included white phosphorus (WP), a solution of sulphur trioxide in chlorosulfonic acid (FS) and titanium tetrachloride. "The American white phosphorus ammunition was outstandingly good," wrote Generalleutenant Ochsner after the war. These shells threw up a large volume of dense white smoke that was useful as a marker or as a smoke screen. Burning chunks of phosphorus flying through the air frightened enemy soldiers. Phosphorus could ignite dry underbrush, hay, paper and other combustibles and thereby serve as an incendiary. And, finally, the agent could cause casualties among enemy troops by inflicting burns. Mortar squads fired quantities of WP second in volume only to HE. Over three million WP shells came from filling plants in the United States, more than all other mortar shells, excluding HE, combined. In comparison, the service procured only one-third of a million FS smoke shells, and none containing titanium tetrachloride.

The German army would have been happy to have had the same plentiful supply of WP as the American army, but Germany lacked the raw materials for producing phosphorus, and its army had to depend on inferior Berger mixture or on sulphur trioxide.

http://www.4point2.org/mortar42.htm

[Mr. Tittles]

All of the above posts were made by simple searches on the internet. I am sure access to a good library could yield more.

I would contend that for the case of the US 4.2 inch weapon, the WP shell was a major player and had effects beyond its obscurant role. To not include it in a game about Sicily and Italy is not historical. The availability of the WP shells and demonstrated use of them as offensive weapon seems apparent.

[Mr. Tittles]

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/docs/AMMO972/sld016.htm

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/docs/AMMO972/img016.jpg

Here is a typical cross section of a WP artillery shell. Note the central burster charge.

[ October 23, 2003, 02:32 PM: Message edited by: Mr. Tittles ]

[Mr. Tittles]

Notice the splashes in the picture. One appears to be a airburst and is driven down along the path of the projectile. The other splash appears to be a ground burst with the splash driven upwards. Notice the streamer effect. The WP material is being shot out from the spinning shell outwards and forward fronm the velocity of the shell.

If a rifled gun like the sherman 75mm fired a WP with a point detonating fuze, the effect on target would be similar but more parallel with teh ground. hitting a point target like a building or an armored vehicle would, in effect, blast the WP into the target.

[Mr. Tittles]

In the Hurtgen Forest the 29th often-times was called upon to lay down fire a mere 50 or 100 yards in front of U.S. infantrymen, and it was during this epic struggle that the Germans fearfully named the crack artillerymen "The Beast of the Hurtgen Forest." Three rounds - - one a high explosive, another an air burst, and the third a white phosphorous shell - - all fired at the same coordinate, comprised the "The Battalion Hot-Foot."

http://members.tripod.com/~msg_fisher/hermitage.html

[Stalin's Organ]

How does use of WP sit with the Geneva Conventoin - then and now?

[Mr. Tittles]

The Geneva Convention specifically prohibited WP in CMAK, then..and now.

But the first 'conventions' were in the 1860s or something. They would have had to have had WP at that time, I suppose, to get a convention against it. But I doubt they could pour it into those cannonball holes.

More than likely, your quest for Geneva conventionitus will be fulfilled by researching the added conventions after WWI. Something in the late twenties. Everyone knows they frowned on gas and chemical warfare. Gas being sniffed vapors that make you all dead and blind and sick and chemicals make you itchy and peel and stuff.

WP is more akin to nicely toasting someone with a flamethrower. Very conventional and sporting. It does give the recipient a nice smoke cloud to aid his getaway with.

[ October 23, 2003, 09:35 PM: Message edited by: Mr. Tittles ]

[Mr. Tittles]

Section 8. Grenades

Grenades were used extensively by all Infantry units with excellent results. The fragmentation

grenades were very effective for close-in fighting, for stopping hostile assaults, mopping up pill boxes and MG positions, and for clearing houses. In the attack and on patrols, Infantry soldiers habitually carried atleast two fragmentation grenades.

The fragmentation rifle grenade was also very effective, and with a little training soldiers became very proficient in its use. It was used against groups of personnel in the open, against MG positions, and in clearing houses by firing through open doorways and windows. Frequently it was used in conjunction with AT [Anti-Tank] grenades in attacking occupied houses; AT grenades were fired through doors or windows

and the rifle grenades fired close to the house to inflict casualties as the occupants came out.

The AT grenade was effectively used against armored vehicles, pill boxes, houses, and dug-in gun positions. This grenade had a terrific concussion effect as well as penetrating power. In one instance the use of AT grenades broke up a three tank attack on a company position at a time when artillery support wasnot available.

[p. 176]

In another instance a light tank was knocked out and the crew killed by hits from two AT grenades.

The smoke (WP) [White Phosphorus] grenade was very effective in clearing the enemy from caves and dugouts, where at times fragmentation grenades would not do the job. On occasion they were used as incendiaries. Some preferred the WP grenade to the fragmentation grenade for general use.

The offensive grenade was used very little when fragmentation grenades were available. Troops

found the fragmentation grenade would do the same job as the offensive grenade and do it better.

Section 18. Use of Smoke Shell for 81mm Mortars

Smoke shells were used extensively with good results by many units. However, this type of shell

was not available in abundance and was somewhat heavy to handle. Generally no more than the normal

allowance for basic load was on hand. The smoke shell was usually used to register on targets, but since the smoke and HE shells were not of the same weight, some difficulties were encountered. It was felt that a smoke shell of the same weight and shape as the HE light would greatly facilitate fire adjustment. It was

difficult for forward observers to distinguish between the Artillery and mortar smoke shell. Many time Artillery and mortars were trying to register on the same target at the same time, and it was difficult to distinguish which was which since the Artillery and mortar OPs were not together. Different colored smokes

available for registration would obviate this difficulty. In some instances smoke was used with success to screen the movement of patrols and tanks. In addition smoke shells were used to orient Infantrymen as to their objective, and also to set fire to inflammable material, such as hay stacks.

From

A Military Encyclopedia

Based on Operations in the Italian Campaigns, 1943-1945.

[p. 169]

Chapter Four

INFANTRY

[ October 24, 2003, 10:41 AM: Message edited by: Mr. Tittles ]