HE Effectiveness

[Sanok]

Was small-caliber HE, say 50mm and lower, as ineffective in the real war as it is in CM?

[JasonC]

Grenades are a bit undermodeled probably. They could suppress longer and over a wider range.

Against squads, the light mortars are if anything more effective in CM than they really were, because they achieve greater accuracy against target modeled as 2m objects, when really squads etc are more dispersed.

Tank guns 45mm and 50mm are a similar story. I regularly panic squads in trenches with a minute or two of direct 50mm HE, something I doubt they could realistically come close to doing. You get a big bonus in CM for putting the round at the exact 2m square.

The stuff smaller still, 37mm and 20mm, is about right - weak as HE in the real deal and in CM. The faster firing stuff should arguably suppress more like MGs do, but not because the shell explodes very much. (There are simply enough of them to hit on the fly). For tanks, MGs were the main infantry killing weapon before the guns got big, 75mm big.

One place all the flat trajectory HE is undermodeled though is hitting guns "on the fly", especially when slopes are involved. Direct hits on guns weren't all that much harder to achieve than direct hits on vehicles. The game instead requires HE to hit at the foot of the gun, a narrower target in the vertical dimension - and then has only modest effects on gun crews. If you hit a 2 pdr's gun shield with a 50mm tank shell, directly, you'd take it out for sure.

[Profhist]

Grenades are a bit undermodeled probably. They could suppress longer and over a wider range.

Maybe. Grenades aren't really that effective in the open, though they are loud.

Under fire, lobbing them into small trenches probably wouldn't be easy. Easy if your in a parking lot in shorts and a t-shirt throwing at an empty hole, but with webbing, a rifle, enemy fire, in the prone position, minor ground contours...I'll bet it was pretty rare to get a 'swish' on the first throw.

[Wartgamer]

Depends on the grenade also. Japanese grenades were best used for suicide. German stick grenades were not particulary great either (without a frag band). US grenades were particularly dangerous (old pineapple type). They could chunk out large frags that would fly way beyond any throwers capability.

[Wartgamer]

One place all the flat trajectory HE is undermodeled though is hitting guns "on the fly", especially when slopes are involved. Direct hits on guns weren't all that much harder to achieve than direct hits on vehicles. The game instead requires HE to hit at the foot of the gun, a narrower target in the vertical dimension - and then has only modest effects on gun crews. If you hit a 2 pdr's gun shield with a 50mm tank shell, directly, you'd take it out for sure.

I disagree entirely. Direct hits on most ATG that are dug in is very dificult and the real target is the vulnerable crew.

[flamingknives]

Originally posted by Wartgamer:

Depends on the grenade also. Japanese grenades were best used for suicide. German stick grenades were not particulary great either (without a frag band). US grenades were particularly dangerous (old pineapple type). They could chunk out large frags that would fly way beyond any throwers capability.

But then the large chunks are few and far between.

[Pak40]

Originally posted by Wartgamer:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />One place all the flat trajectory HE is undermodeled though is hitting guns "on the fly", especially when slopes are involved. Direct hits on guns weren't all that much harder to achieve than direct hits on vehicles. The game instead requires HE to hit at the foot of the gun, a narrower target in the vertical dimension - and then has only modest effects on gun crews. If you hit a 2 pdr's gun shield with a 50mm tank shell, directly, you'd take it out for sure.

I disagree entirely. Direct hits on most ATG that are dug in is very dificult and the real target is the vulnerable crew. </font>

[Wartgamer]

Not really. The US pineapple grenade would blow the top and bottom off in large chunks. Its really a defensive grenade.

http://www.rt66.com/~Korteng/SmallArms/grenades.htm

[Pak40]

sorry, double post.

[Wartgamer]

Guns are often KO'd without a crewmen being lost. I have one opponent that does this all the time without LOS to the actual gun. He positions a HE firing menace to be able to area target close to the gun. The ATG can not directly target back. In many cases, the gun is KOd.

[Wartgamer]

Pak40

The 75-mm antitank gun is mounted on a split-trail carriage, with torsion springing; this springing is automatically cut out when the trails are open. The light-alloy wheels are fitted with solid rubber tires. An unusual feature is a detachable third wheel, which can be fitted on near the trail spades, to permit easier manhandling. The gun has a double baffle muzzle brake.

Additional details about the weapon are as follows:

Over-all length in traveling position _ _ _ _ _ 19 ft. 2 in.

Over-all height _ _ _ _ _ 54 in.

Weight in action _ _ _ _ _ 3,350 lbs.

Length of barrel _ _ _ _ _ 10 ft. 6 in.

Length of recoil _ _ _ _ _ 35.43 in.

Elevation _ _ _ _ _ +22 degrees.

Depression _ _ _ _ _ 5 degrees.

Traverse _ _ _ _ _ 65 degrees.

The very common Pak40 is 54 inches tall.

Notice that the gun barrel is actually towards the top of this height. In most cases, it can be readily reduced in height and presents a small target that most hull down tanks can not present.

And in those rare instances where the ATG is on the top of a ridge and the enemy tank is below trying to knock out the ATG, well, this is nearly futile. Half of the rounds that the tank shoots will fly past the gun and therefore not even hit the ground. Rounds that land short are often way to short because even a small error is magnified in this situation. An exact hit on the ground right next to the gun is needed in order to knock it out. This is one of those cases where you really need to be able to hit the gun directly.

Strangely enough this reflects reality and was an actual tactic used by the Germans!

[ June 16, 2005, 12:56 PM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]

[PLM]

Makes sense to aim at the gun if your optomistic for a direct hit.

[Wartgamer]

The US tank gunnery manual suggests using HE on delay. A direct hit will destroy the gun and a short will have the following effect..

http://img114.echo.cx/my.php?image=airburst0wb.png

http://img114.echo.cx/img114/5416/airburst0wb.th.png' alt='airburst0wb.th.png'>www.ImageShack.us" /></a>

[Pak40]

Originally posted by Wartgamer:

Guns are often KO'd without a crewmen being lost. I have one opponent that does this all the time without LOS to the actual gun. He positions a HE firing menace to be able to area target close to the gun. The ATG can not directly target back. In many cases, the gun is KOd.

Sure, this happens some of the time but that's not my point, or Jason's for that matter. Plus this is a fairly rare situation where the tank has to have a near perfect position where it can see the ground near the AT gun but not the AT gun itself.

If the AT gun is visible then the tank will have to target the gun, yet he can't hit it directly. It's kind of ironic and it makes little sense to me.

[Pak40]

Originally posted by Wartgamer:

Strangely enough this reflects reality and was an actual tactic used by the Germans!

Yes I know. But my point is that in reality, in this situation you could at least have chance to shoot the gun directly rather than try your luck landing a round on the ground near the gun. Do you at least agree with that?

Your point that the guns could be dug in is understood. However, to use an analogy:

Tank guns represent a very small portion overall sillouette of the tank yet there are gun hits in CM all the time. So why can't we directly hit AT guns or even well dug in AT guns?

[Wartgamer]

Don't directly target the gun then (even in LOS) area target right next to it. Thats my point.

In reality, with HE on delay, the ATG that IS struck will not slow down the shell enough and the burst will be beyond the crew. BUT it WILL almost guarantee that the gun is damaged and some crewmen struck. This is due to the nature of the close grouping that a crew uses.

When a HE shell on delay strikes in front of the gun, it will either be so far forward that it will bounce up and detonate over the gun (like the pic) or very close and then strike the gun itself (another winner).

So aiming at the bottom of the gun shield is actually the best bet.

[ June 16, 2005, 02:56 PM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]

[flamingknives]

Originally posted by Wartgamer:

Don't directly target the gun then (even in LOS) area target right next to it. Thats my point.

That may be your point, but it doesn't stop it being a problem with the current game engine that ought to be fixed or somefink for the next one.

You're using an engine exploit to get around it, and even that doesn't work too well as a crest or poinr just behind it is too hard to hit.

[Wartgamer]

The current engine does not allow remanning of guns anyway. So an abandoned gun is also a 'destroyed' gun. In the future, if guns can be remanned; then yes, the gun should be treated as a target.

In the case of a Tank having just AP, you may have a point, but in the case of HE, its a bit moot.

[ June 16, 2005, 03:06 PM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]

[flamingknives]

Not for small HE.

[Wartgamer]

Most small HE did not have delay option. If they struck short, they exploded immediately (no bounce). Even a shield hit from a small HE (I am talking 37mm and less), that detonates immediately may not KO the gun or harm much of the crew.

[Wartgamer]

Another reality is that its very difficult to tell if the ATG is indeed KOd. With a vehicle, it will burn and therefore guarantee destruction once on fire (typically).

An ATG 1000 meters away will just fall silent. Is it abandoned? Is it in damaged beyond repair?

True FOW would remove what people here are asking for. Some ATG are so narrow that they will fall into the variance of shot distribution of width.

[Pak40]

Originally posted by Wartgamer:

Don't directly target the gun then (even in LOS) area target right next to it. Thats my point.

But if you're in LOS of the gun the target command "snaps" the the unit when you get close to it. In order to target the ground you have to be several meters away from the gun, which then reduces the effectiveness of HE, especially with small HE.

And lets say you get lucky with with your first shot targeting the ground next to the gun and it is knocked out. Then the rest of the turn your gun is wasting valuable HE on a dead target. But, hey you're showing the ground who's boss!

This is just a minor flaw in the game, but hopefully we wont have the problem in CMx2.

[JasonC]

Guns in CM are sillouette zero. Which is false, empirically.

By that I mean, to hurt the crew you need to hit the ground directly next to the gun. But the ground directly next to the gun is a target without height. It is therefore instrinsically difficult to hit with flat trajectory fire.

This is always a factor, though it is most noticable when the gun is higher than the tank. Then the tank has to fire a shell on an ascending trajectory to hit the gun. But a shell on an ascending trajectory will not hit a target with height zero above the ground.

There will be two ground intercepts not one, if the aim is perfect for the flat trajectory to pass through the point on the earth where the gun is located. And the first of them is closer to the tank. Ergo, the round hits the slope well ahead of the gun.

If on the other hand the tank is above the gun, then the target can at least be discriminated. But it is still "shorter" than it ought to be. If the tank were directly above the gun, 90 degrees in the air, the direct hit area would be 2m.

As you bring the tank down to level with the gun, the cross section declines as a sine function. At flat, if the gun were a laser beam a hit would become impossible at zero angle. Because the shell instead falls very slightly over a typical range, there is a tiny chance of a direct hit on a flat trajectory. Keep rotating, bringing the tank below the level of the gun. Now the remaining chance disappears, as the fall of the shell is "used up". Once the slightly arched shell path passed below the arch of the earth between tank and gun, a hit becomes impossible.

All, when "hit" is defined as "elevation zero directly next to the gun". Change that to "elevation 1m where the gun is", and a hit becomes dramatically easier. The sine of zero is zero. The sine of the angle made by 1m of height is not - at 500m you need to be within 2 mils on the elevation but that is all.

There is another factor that makes guns appear more robust in CM than they actually were in reality. HE did not actually need to land beside the gun to hurt the crew. The actual spread of fragments from a high velocity shell is not circular. It is strongly forward. A hit in front of the gun would spray fragments at the gun, quite efficiently. The entire crew scarcely fits behind the gun shield, which is quite thin anyway, and they can't manage the ammo from there (for any appreciably number of shots, at least).

In CM practice, multiple tanks with full size HE (75mm and up) readily take out ATGs soon after they open up. But single tanks with small HE are not at all favored. And if the gun is above them and just behind a crest, they can shoot at it for ages and not get it. In fact, it is easier to KO a concrete pillbox via a firing slit penetration than it is to take out an ATG just behind a crest. The ATG is in reality a larger target than the slit, and the crew distinctly less protected.

You know something is funky when taking a 75mm PAK *out* of a concrete pillbox makes it *harder* to knock out...

[Pak40]

well said Jason.

[Wartgamer]

I suppose Jason is saying that HE shells of 75mm caliber should be set for superquick? He seems to argue against delay it seems.

He is correct about HV shells landing basically 'flat' on the ground. The nose of the shell will 'shoot-forward' as opposed to shooting its load into the ground like most artillery shells will (coming down at an angle). Actually the 'clover-leaf' pattern is very pronounced since the 'sides' also 'lean' forward.

But the nose of the shell is dominated by the fuse itself. I do not believe that the fuses are made of steel like the rest of the shell.

The shield on a 75mm pak40 is also double walled and sloped away from incoming fire.

The US manual calls for using delay on HE except for troops in the open. That is when SQ is used. It also calls for rounds to be stored on default as delay (the most usefull setting).

When firing HE on delay, it is very evident where the round strikes the ground (shell scrape ejecta) and where it detonates (not only the burst but the actual beaten ground where the fragments strike). I have seen video of this. It would be an observable event that would allow corrections. Example: First round strikes in front of ATG and explodes beyond gun 50 meters. Fire next round at shorter range to bring air-burst closer to ATG crew.

In most cases, the crew is going to get under cover as soon as any major HE detonates near it. Any shell burst directly in front of them or over them. Air bursts will continue to cause casualties, destroy exposed ammo, etc.

[ June 17, 2005, 08:43 AM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]