How effective were...

[JasonC]

I've read everything you are citing a score of times and had years before you brought it up.

[Clavicula_Nox]

So, I was recently playing a scenario in which a battalion of Panzergrenadiers supported by a platoon of Stuh42s and Panther Ds assaulted a couple battalions of dug-in US infantry and armored infantry. My primary means of AT were a couple platoons of 57mm AT guns, which were marginally effective against the assault guns, and completely ineffective against the Panthers.

Predictable, my AT guns were knocked out in the opening salvos, and the Panther platoon continued to approach my hidden infantry company. I felt I had the perfect chance when the turn ended with 2 Panthers displaying side shots to a company's worth of bazooka men. With a maniacal giggle, I gave the target commands. The end of the turn saw both Panthers damaged to the point that their crews dismounted and were wounded or killed once on foot.

Both Panthers were taken out by rifle grenades, not bazookas. Is this insanity? Should I leave my bazookas at home from now on and just make sure my dogfaces are fully stocked on rifle grenades?

[John Kettler]

Clavicula_Nox,

Every American 57mm AT gun was provided with a small stock of APDS by the British prior to D-Day. Their use figures in the Dom Butgenbach fight detailed in AGAINST THE PANZERS by Karamales and Vannoy and in the earlier SAIC study on which it's based. Fascinating details are here.

http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=47318&highlight=saic

As you can see, the U.S. 57mm AT gun firing APDS wasn't to be trifled with! That said, when playing as the U.S., I always bring bazookas to the fight, given any choice in the matter. Bazookas are heavy weapon section assets, but rifle grenades are organic to the squad, thus easier to come by when needed.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Clavicula_Nox]

Yeah, like I said, the 57s did great against the Stuh42s and some Stug IIIs a little further into the battle, but they didn't make a dent against the Panthers. Out of a total of 5 Panthers, 3 were disabled, 2 to rifle grenades, and 1 to an "unknown" cause. I looked over and saw some guys jumping from the tank, but wasn't able to see an obvious reason.

Still, why are my rifle grenades infinitely more effective than my bazookas? It seems counter-intuitive, if that's just how it was then okay that's fine, but I just don't think rifle grenades should be knocking out Panthers when 57mm AT guns aren't.

[John Kettler]

Clavicula_Nox,

What ammo were your 57s firing? From the description, I'm guessing AP, let alone T or DS. As for why your bazookas got no kills and your rifle grenades did, I'd say chalk it up to the anything's possible side of these marvelous simulations. Of course, you could rationalize the bazooka problem away by saying most of them were early models, had (historically valid) igniter problems and failed to fire, but the game couldn't represent this. The igniter problem was solved in later models by copying the magneto system the Germans used in their Panzerschreck, itself the German take on our bazooka.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Clavicula_Nox]

They were using AP rounds, I don't know if CMAK gives the option for any other round, I would have to look in the unit editor to see. I dunno, but so far, in several run throughs of 2 different battles, my rifle grenades consistently score more kills than my bazookas. Makes me fear 1944 US riflemen for whenever I command troops against them.

[John Kettler]

Clavicula_Nox,

As expected, regarding 57mm ammo type. This article is good, but errs big time in failing to note that at least some U.S. 57mm M1s were supplied with small amounts of British 6 pdr. APDS, as cited in AGAINST THE PANZERS.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordnance_QF_6_pounder

Here's some field firing test information on the 57mm M1 vs a Panther. No APDS or T was used.

http://efour4ever.com/57mm.htm

Per this, the British could've also provided T ammo. Pity the penetration data are from so far away!

http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/Molins.htm

Stop press! U.S. veteran confirms T ammo issued to U.S. 57mm M1 crews in March 1944 (should read 1945 to conform with late in the war statement). Note all that he ever had for AP ammo before then.

http://boards.historychannel.com/thread.jspa?threadID=218317&start=15

Are you sure your rifle grenade kills are ranged weapon attacks, rather than some artifact of close assaults? If the former, then I'd say you're just having an odd range of statistical outcomes.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Clavicula_Nox]

Are you sure your rifle grenade kills are ranged weapon attacks, rather than some artifact of close assaults? If the former, then I'd say you're just having an odd range of statistical outcomes.

Absolutely. I don't know what the range of close assault would be, but these are kills coming from squads that are at least 60-70m distance from the tanks. In the first example, the infantry were maybe 20-30m away, but inside of a building and given no movement orders.

[Andreas]

Squads within 30m or so will attack enemy vehicles on their own using close assault (shown as a grenade flying against the vehicle), with no orders given. If they are in cover (house), they are more likely to attack.

All the best

Andreas

[McIvan]

Squads within 30m or so will attack enemy vehicles on their own using close assault (shown as a grenade flying against the vehicle), with no orders given. If they are in cover (house), they are more likely to attack.

All the best

Andreas

Forty metres, not thirty. Maybe thirty nine. But the closer you are, the more likely they will close assault. Morale state plays a big part.

[Clavicula_Nox]

John, do you know of anything that would indicate the US began to issue HE ammunition to 57mm gun teams? I'm particularly interested in the ammunition being issued to the Airborne divisions for Market-Garden.

[John Kettler]

Clavicula_Nox,

The History Channel 57mm thread I presented earlier has multiple veteran and as told by veteran accounts indicating that HE was not only available for the 57mm but was in heavy use by GIs in Europe. The 304th Regiment of the 17th ID battle history reports the antitank company's main role was firing HE in infantry support. The posts are fascinating and reference many additional sources you could consult.

http://boards.historychannel.com/topic/World-War-Ii/Us-Army-57mm/218317&start=0

The Wiki shows the U.S. authorized HE T18/M303 shell for the 57mm in March 1944

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordnance_QF_6_pounder

This availability is confirmed on page 250-251 of the Army Green book THE ORDNANCE DEPARTMENT: On Beachead and Battlefront, which says of June '44

"The reserves of infantry and artillery ammunition that had been accumulated in June were rapidly depleted. On 14 July Bradley began to restrict the amount of these types that could be fired....."

In speaking of Ordnance Colonel Medaris and his ammunition officer, Colonel Ray, the book notes

"They had predicted long before the invasion that such types as 57-mm. HE and 81-mm. mortar ammunition would be needed in quantity, but both were scarce. No 57-mm HE

except the little they could borrow from the British was on the Continent."

From this alone, it's clear that the round was not only stocked but its use was so heavy as to exceed Army expectations. Would imagine it was standard issue with the Airborne for Market-Garden, premised on both the relatively small quantities needed and the high priority attached to the operation.

Regards,

John Kettler

[John Kettler]

Clavicula_Nox,

Turning now to the vexed rifle grenade issue, page 161 of the ordnance book I just cited, in talking about early bazooka experiences at Gela, Sicily and afterwards says this.

"The work of the bazooka in the landings and throughout was watched with great interest. One Ordnance observer claimed that bazzokas accounted for Pzkw IV tanks on four occasions; another claimed a Pzkw VI Tiger, though admittedly the Tiger was knocked out by a lucky hit through the driver's vision slot, On the other hand, many officers preferred the rifle grenade to the bazooka as a close-range antitank weapon."

Should also add that the elsewhere mentioned Green series TORCH volume has a previously unknown to me case of successful rifle grenade attacks which stopped French light tanks counterattacking the U.S. landings in a small French controlled port.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Clavicula_Nox]

Thanks for those links John, they help out a lot.

[John Kettler]

Clavicula_Nox,

Glad to help!

Regards,

John Kettler