Mine Detection

[Soddball]

When Beevor's "Stalingrad" describes the preparations for Operation Uranus (Russian counterattack around Stalingrad to encircle the 6th Army) he states that before the attack, Russian sappers were ordered into no-man's land to clear the German front lines of mines and place path markers.

The ensuing artillery barrage tore up these markers and the tanks were forced to navigate through the minefield, receiving many losses. 3,500 guns were used in this barrage, and it didn't clear the minefield.

[Dirtweasle]

I seem to recall reading about the use of "Primer Cord", (or maybe called Primacord) to cause the sympathetic explosion and neutrilizing of minefields. Was the use of det-cord post WWII, or did it eveolve out of this era?

[Joe Shaw]

Okay, I'm not going to presume to comment on real-life minefields and clearing of them, but this is what happens IN THE GAME.

Engineers are unable to detect BURIED AT Mines at any time. The only way to detect them is to drive a vehicle over them. DAISY CHAIN AT Mines CAN be detected by just about anyone, IIRC.

Once a buried AT Minefield has been located, by driving over it, Engineers may then destroy the minefield by attacking it. The program depicts them as throwing demo charges at it to destroy the minefield. In fact it would appear that you don't even have to target the minefield. Just having demo equipped Engineers within range of a newly located AT minefield apparently prompts them to attack and destroy the minefield.

It is apparently NOT possible to pre-emptively attack a NON-LOCATED buried AT minefield (I cheated, I created the test scenario so I knew where it was). The engineers will fire their weapons (area fire) at the targetted spot but they will not attack with demo charges.

There is a thread somewhere, I couldn't find it right off the bat, in which BFC (I think) confirms at least the part about locating buried AT mines.

Joe

[ASL Veteran]

Originally posted by Clubfoot:

And I would contend that a few individuals contesting a fact does not make that fact "in dispute", it simply makes it's detractors incorrect. And I repeat: You can indeed spot minefields without stumbling through them. Run some tests.

It would make me incorrect if I was incorrect. However, I have no evidence that you are correct other than your strenuous statement of your position as a fact - for all minefields in CMBO of all types in all situations. Perhaps you have some test that you have run and you can send me the file for examination? If your position is proven as a fact I will be the first to admit I was in error. However, my tests all show that you are the one in error. Please note that there are others in this thread who share this view with me.

It seems like spotting mines is a little like spotting Bigfoot. I can state for a fact that I've never spotted either a Bigfoot in the mountains or a minefield in CMBO prior to stepping on a mine or driving over it, but there is always some guy living in a trailer up in the mountains who says that three Bigfoot attacked him by throwing huge stones at him.

I'm going to focus on reality as opposed to gameality (new word) from here on out . Unless you send me a file that proves your position, I will consider your statement of fact to be baseless and irrelevant. I'm sure there are others in this thread who will entertain a discussion about your fact though (perhaps Joe Shaw), so you may have better success discussing your fact with them.

[JonS]

Originally posted by easy-v:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by JonS:

IMHO, BTS' decision not to allow arty to destroy minefields, or wire for that matter, is right on the money

I have seen (and documented and posted on this board) that the engineers in CM clear minefields via HE (demo charge- see this thread for screen shot )

If a demo charge-armed squad can clear an AT minefield, then why not arty? Or is the "demo charge" actually modelling the bangelore torpedo? in which case, would a 1m wide breach through an AT minefield be sufficient to consider it "cleared"?</font>

[ASL Veteran]

Originally posted by JonS:

As for a minefield attacked by engineers in CMBO dissappearing altogether - the difficulty of representing gapped lanes through an otherwise intact minefield was deemed not worth the effort. Looking at it another way: once the CM engineers have cleared a path through the minefield, it has no further tactical utility since it can easily be crossed, and can therefore be ignored for further game purposes.

I think a legitimate question could be raised as to whether a minefield in CM could even have a path cleared through it that is both wide enough and long enough to be useful using a single demolition charge. True enough, the use of engineers and demolition charges in CM should be considered in the abstract - and it certainly works - but if you take the bangalore torpedo stats and do some calculations ... it raises some interesting questions. To blast a path that is 20 meters long and wide enough for a vehicle to pass through would take an awful lot more than one demolition charge. It would take deliberate breaching operations to clear a path through a CM minefield, or a lot more demos (and prep time) than one single demolition charge tossed in the general direction of the minefield.

[JonS]

Originally posted by ASL Veteran:

I think a legitimate question could be raised ... stuff snipped in the interests of brevity ... a lot more demos (and prep time) than one single demolition charge tossed in the general direction of the minefield.

What if you treat one 'demo charge' as 'one set of engineer stores', which could be either a single demo charge, or a bangalore torpedo kit? When dealing with abstractions, it helps to think abstractly

[ August 02, 2002, 10:53 PM: Message edited by: JonS ]

[ASL Veteran]

Originally posted by JonS:

What if you treat one 'demo charge' as 'one set of engineer stores', which could be either a single demo charge, or a bangalore torpedo kit? When dealing with abstractions, it helps to think abstractly

Even if you take a whole Bangalore kit you would only get a 15 meter by 1 meter path (10 sections 1.5 meters long). It would take something on the order of 6 Bangalore kits to make a path 20 meters by 4 meters. It specifies that it takes four crew hours to prep and detonate a bangalore that is 100 meters long, so you could say that a shorter 20 meter long section would take 48 crew minutes to prep and detonate. This would give you a 20 meter by 1 meter path - sufficient for infantry to pass one way. You would then have to repeat this process four more times to get a four meter wide path - which still may be too narrow for a tank! If each 1.5 meter section is 9 pounds of explosives that would come to about 480 pounds of explosives for a 20 meter by 4 meter path with a prep time of 3.2 hours with one crew - probably around an hour if you had six crews!! :eek:

That's an awful lot of abstracting going on here!!

[ASL Veteran]

Some may now be asking – dang, what exactly is the procedure used when breaching a minefield using a Bangalore? Since I've had this FM collecting dust on my bookshelf for 17 years I figure that I might as well get the maximum use out of it now while I have the opportunity .

The M1A1/M1A2 bangalore torpedo is normally used by engineer or infantry forces when conducting a hasty or deliberate breach. It is primarily intended for the breach of antipersonnel minefields, but it will also clear a narrow lane through wire obstacles. Because of its limited amount of explosive, the bangalore is relatively ineffective for breaching lanes wide enough for vehicles to pass through. However, if enough bangalore sections are available, they may be laid parallel to each other to produce a wider lane. The sequence of the tasks outlined below would be followed for the deliberate breach when the maneuver unit was halted and had assumed defensive positions.

The unit leader recieves the mission and makes an initial estimate of the situation. Coordination is conducted with the operation element to secure critical support for the mission (such as covering fires, smoke, logistics, security, and additional personnel). The unit leader determines the number of bangalore sections required for the mission, as well as any additional supplies. The unit leader briefs personnel and organizes them into two teams to conduct the mission. The emplacement team draws and inspects the bangalores and special equipment. The reconnaissance team conducts a reconnaissance of the breaching site to confirm the size and location of the minefield, determine enemy activity, and identify key terrain features. The teams link up with the security element and conduct a rehearsal of the bangalore emplacement. A final inspection is made of equipment and personnel.

The unit moves with its support elements to the breach site. The emplacement team breaks down into two crews: a construction crew to assemble the bangalore sections, and a push crew to push the torpedo into the minefield. After emplacement, the torpedo is primed electrically or nonelectrically with a single blasting cap in the detonator well and exploded. If the minefield is very deep, the emplacement team may have to return to the far edge of the cleared path and emplace another bangalore torpedo to extend the length of the breached path. Once the lane is breached, unit members will begin to mark and clear any remaining mines from the breached path. The location of the breach will be reported as rapidly as possible through command channels to follow on units.

A hasty breach with bangalore torpedoes would force the elimination or modification of most steps involved with the deliberate breach. In order to successfully employ the bangalore torpedoes in a hasty breach, teams are predesignated and trained in their required tasks; materials are prepositioned and readily available; and rehearsals and inspections are previously conducted. In all likelihood, the limited time available for a hasty breach would only allow the execution of the last three steps described for the deliberate breach: conducting the breach; extending the lane, if necessary; and marking, clearing, and reporting.

Counting the little people in the accompanying diagram I can see that a ‘crew’ would consist of around seven or eight men. Four men on the push team and three men on the construction team. There is also the guy doing the firing, but it isn’t clear if he is a member of either team, or if he is just supervising the others until he gets his moment in the sun.

I also have to wonder if any of the nations in CMBB even had an equivalent to the bangalore torpedo? Did they have any standard mine clearing explosive devices at all? I should think that the placement of a standard demolition charge would do little to clear a minefield since it wouldn't be shaped correctly to clear a path of any significant length. I suppose if you had enough standard demo charges you could clear a path, but it would probably take more standard demos than it would take bangalores (perhaps the path would be a little wider though?)

[Doug Beman]

I just ran a test involving US infantry and engineer squads, of varying experience levels, in open ground, each surrounded by piles of AP mines, with each squad given ~20m of safe area. No matter how long I let these troops sit still, nor how I moved them around inside their safe zones, they didn't detect any mines.

Then, I had them move across the mines at varying speeds, and it SEEMED to me the slower they were moving the less likely they'd find the mines "the hard way."

My feeling is, if we don't accept abstractions in clearing minefields and abide by purely historical conditions (which, from my reading, make mine-clearing a far more time/manpower-intensive operation than currently depicted or even possible within a CM battle) we wind up with invincible minefields. If minefields are invincible, they would pretty much ruin tactical balance.

DjB

[ August 03, 2002, 12:37 PM: Message edited by: Doug Beman ]

[Joe Shaw]

Originally posted by Doug Beman:

I just ran a test involving US infantry and engineer squads, of varying experience levels, in open ground, each surrounded by piles of AP mines, with each squad given ~20m of safe area. No matter how long I let these troops sit still, nor how I moved them around inside their safe zones, they didn't detect any mines.

Then, I had them move across the mines at varying speeds, and it SEEMED to me the slower they were moving the less likely they'd find the mines "the hard way."

My feeling is, if we don't accept abstractions in clearing minefields and abide by purely historical conditions (which, from my reading, make mine-clearing a far more time/manpower-intensive operation than currently depicted or even possible within a CM battle) we wind up with invincible minefields. If minefields are invincible, they would pretty much ruin tactical balance.

DjB

Oddly enough Doug, I just ran the same test using pretty much the same procedures you used and came up with the same conclusion. APPARENTLY (I hesitate to make blanket statements based upon my tests alone), the ONLY way to detect buried mines of any flavor is to set the suckers off! Here are the parameters I used in my test:

Elite US Engineers with demo charges

All constantly in command

Daylight, Dry, perfect weather

Open Ground

No Enemy fire

As adjacent to emplaced AP mines as possible

25 Turns motionless

No gaps in the ground coverage of the AP mines.

NO detections of AP mines occurred until the engineers moved and set off the mines. No detection occurred if the mines weren't set off, IOW, some squads moved through a minefield without setting off any mines and that field was not detected.

I also threw in some Daisy Chain AT mines just for giggles and those were spotted immediately after setup with no problem.

Again, once the mines were detected the Engineers would destroy them with (graphically) demo charges.

I'll be happy to provide the test scenarios to anyone interested, my email is in my profile. I'd be happy to be proven wrong or to have other parameters explored or to have anyone show me how my test was flawed. I hardly claim expert status (it's aginst the charter for CessPoolers to do that I believe), I'm just throwing together testing scenarios and reporting my results.

Joe

[zahl]

The notion that you can detect non-daisy chain mines in CM without setting them off is one persistent misconception. Several guys ran rigorous tests in many earlier threads with a wide array of scenarios, but were unable to demonstrate a single case of successful AT/AP mine detection.

Then invariably some folks come forth to claim that they see it regularly in normal game play. For my part, I've never seen it in 2+ years.

[ASL Veteran]

So what do you do if you don’t have a bangalore torpedo? Here is the method used to clear minefields using electronic detectors (and by a little extrapolation by probing alone)

Normally, mine detectors will only be used in a deliberate breach or to clear minefields after all covering fires have been suppressed. Mine detectors can be employed by all combat arms units.

The unit leader receives the mission, performs preliminary planning, and coordinates for required support. The unit leader then briefs personnel and organizes them into three teams – one to draw, prepare, and inspect the demolitions; another to prepare and inspect the mine detectors; and another to conduct a reconnaissance of the proposed breaching site. The unit leader inspects personnel and equipment. Teams walk through their tasks. If required, coordination is made with a security element. The unit moves to the mined area, marks the entrance, and prepares the mine detectors.

Organizing a sweep team will vary, depending on the mission. For route clearing, the normal configuration is eight soldiers in column. The number one soldier (mine detector operator) leads. Approximately 25 meters to the rear are the number two soldier (marker / prober) and the number three soldier (NCOIC). Twenty five meters to their rear are the number four and five soldiers (demolition team). Number six soldier (relief mine detector operator) and number seven soldier (radio operator) are 25 meters behind the demolition team. Lastly, the number eight soldier follows and serves as rear security. The sweep team configured in column is best suited to sweep routes in friendly territory that are not under constant surveillance, or to clear lanes in enemy minefields once direct covering fires have been eliminated.

If the sweep team is assigned the mission of clearing an entire minefield rather than a single lane, it is organized with several detector operators working in echelon, spaced 25 meters behind each other. This configuration would decrease the amount of time required to clear the minefield.

Although the actual conduct of an electronic mine detection operation will vary depending on the mission, the following principles should be considered:

Electronic detection in itself is not effective. A variety of detection methods are used along with the electronic detectors. Visual detection to direct the team’s efforts and probing to confirm the locations of the mines are essential.

Safety precautions must be observed. Team members, especially the detector operator, wear flak jackets and nonmetallic kevlar helmets, and maintain proper distances between each other. To maintain alertness, mine detector operators should be relieved every 15 to 20 minutes.

Caution

Continued detector operation by one individual results in loss of hearing sensitivity

Mine detectors are not operated closer than 8 meters from other detectors or electrical equipment because of possible electrical interference that may reduce reliability.

As probable mines are encountered by the electronic detector operator, their locations are confirmed and marked by the number two soldier. No attempt is made to move mines. Once mines are detected and marked, the demolition team places a 1 pound block of explosives within six inches of the mine. Based on mission requirements, the demolitions may be primed and the mines blown in place as they are detected. Alternately, upon completion of the entire clearing operation, all charges placed next to detected mines may be tied into a ring main and simultaneously blown in place.

If no demolitions are available, a hook and rope may be used to neutralize the mines. As mines are discovered, the hook is carefully positioned so it forces the mine onto its fuze when the rope is pulled. Personnel move to a safe, covered position prior to pulling the rope and detonating the mine.

Once all the mines have been neutralized, the unit leader checks to ensure all mines have been destroyed. The lane may be proofed by driving a sandbag laden vehicle in reverse over the route. The cleared area or lane is marked and appropriate reports made as rapidly as possible to higher headquarters.

[ASL Veteran]

Originally posted by Doug Beman:

My feeling is, if we don't accept abstractions in clearing minefields and abide by purely historical conditions (which, from my reading, make mine-clearing a far more time/manpower-intensive operation than currently depicted or even possible within a CM battle) we wind up with invincible minefields. If minefields are invincible, they would pretty much ruin tactical balance.

DjB

I don't know that they would be invincible, but it would certainly take some time - say more than 25 minutes at least to clear a path that is 20 meters deep. My impression is that using detectors would be comparatively quick at identifying the location of mines, but that the actual clearance of said mines would take some time. Also, you should be able to clear a path through an antipersonnel minefield by simply driving a tank through it. AP mines probably aren't powerful enough to blow off a track.

[ASL Veteran]

Ya know, the deeper I look into the subject of minefields the more I think this area needs to be revisited in future CMs. Take the actual mines themselves for example … there are two types of buriable AP mines listed in FM 20-32 for US use: Mine, Antipersonnel, Nonmetallic, M14 (Toe Popper); and the Mine, Antipersonnel, M16A2 (Bouncing Betty, Tomato Can Mine). The so called “Toe Popper” does what you would expect … blow off one man’s leg. However, the M16A2 – wow what a device!!

The M16A2 is a bounding fragmentation type mine. Once actuated, the mine is propelled out of the ground, rises to a height of about six feet, and explodes. The mine consists of a combination mine fuze (M605), a propelling charge, and a projectile, all contained in a sheet steel case. The mine is 8 inches high with fuze installed, and 5.5 inches high without the fuze. The fuze is screwed into the top of the case and extends through the center of the projectile to the bottom of the case where the propelling charge is located. The remaining space inside the case is occupied by the projectile. Earlier versions of the mine (M16 and M16A1) are also available for issue. The principle differences between the M16A2, M16A1, and the M16 are in the construction of the detonators and boosters. The casualty radius for the M16A2 is 30 meters :eek: , while the M16 and M16A1 have a casualty radius of only 27 meters :eek: . The weight of the M16A2 without fuze is 7.88 pounds which includes 1 pound of trinitrotoluene (TNT) for the main charge. The danger radius for friendly forces is 183 meters.

Holy Cow!! 30 meters will slag an entire squad and then some in CM if they are just walking along in the open unprepared!! Lest we think of the M16A2 as a new fangled device, a look at the German S mine from WW2 should show some similarities. According to the Handbook on German Military Forces:

b. S-Mine 44. (1) Description. The S-Mine 44 is an antipersonnel mine of the bounding type similar to the S-mine 35. The igniter well is toward one side of the cover plate, and the height at which the mine explodes is controlled by an internal pull igniter arrangement. The igniter is the combination push and pull type, and its neutralization demands extreme care. The employment of this mine is the same as for the S-mine 35. The lethal range is 22 yards, and the casualty range 110 yards.

I don’t know about you guys, but the minefields I use in CM have nothing buried in them that can cause this level of devastation! Heck, walking through one is almost okay since you will only lose a man or two if you are unlucky. I might think twice about walking through a minefield with a few of these babies in them though!! How about this beauty made by the Soviets:

The POMZ-2 stake mine resembles a fragmentation hand grenade mounted on a stake. The mine contains six rows of metal fragments (the body) propelled by a 75 gram explosive charge. The mine is not internally threaded to accpt a fuze. The newer version, the POMZ-2M is of post World War 2 design and utilizes a modified fuze well which is threaded to accept externally threaded fuzes. Also, the rows of metal fragments on the POMZ-2M are reduced to five. The lethal radius of the POMZ-2 and the POMZ-2M is about 25 meters. The POMZ-2 is normally employed in groups of at least four mines equipped with tripwires; however, it can be employed singularly. The earlier models used the MUV pull fuze. The newer POMZ-2M uses the externally threaded MUV-2 fuze.

These devices are probably powerful enough to represent as individual weapons when emplaced as booby traps in buildings or set up outside with tripwires.

If I keep this level of posting up, I think I'll catch Michael Dorosh's total in no time

[WWB]

I second the "no mine detection without taking casualty" motion.

I ran some tests a while back, and it did not happen save someone getting hurt.

WWB

[John Kettler]

ASL Veteran,

If you think "S" mines are bad by themselves, then just imagine the havoc a German mod caused. Seems they reworked the mines to burst groin high. Word of that got around in record time and caused the troops major morale problems, to the point where they wouldn't even enter areas likely to harbor such mines.

Regards,

John Kettler

[JonS]

Well, it seems more than a few folk here have trouble rationalising the way CM treats mines. Fair enough - its a game, and the way the game treats certain things will never be to everyones liking. As a counter-example (i.e. something I'm not happy with but which others are)I can think of artillery, for starters.

In addition to the way engineers deal with artillery, I think the actual minefileds themselves are fairly abstracted. For starters, I don't picture them, in my mind, as being exactly 20m x 20m. Furthermore, I don't think of them being of uniform density throughout their area. In fact, I rather think of them as hasty minefields - sort of like a Real Life™ daisy chain. Creating a major minefield (like breaching it) is a serious operation, and somewhat 'outside the scope.'

Lets face it - the number and size of minefields thsat you usually come across in CMBO battles means that its usually far easier to just walk around them, rather than to bother even attempting to clear them (unless its a A-Tk mine covering a defile).

So, putting it all together we have engineers that have the ability and equipment, and minefields that aren't very extensive or well developed. With that combination, I can quite accept the way its modelled.

YMMV. As I say, that's the way I rationalise it, and I am in no way going to insist that you see it my way

Be cool

JonS

[Marlow]

ASL vet, a few comments. First on the time to set up a bangalore. Even with a quick instruction course, I could set up a section of several segments relatively quickly. The 4 hours for a 100m section is either very conservative, or reflects the dificulty of preparing such a long section. Experienced engineers should be able to clear a 20m path in a lot less than 48 minutes. (also, parts of the bangalore can be prepared prior to battle, thus reducing time to place the charge).

On the 30 meter casualty radius. Such a mine would not be expected to take out everyone in that radius, it is instead the radius in which casualties can be expected. Take a look at the casualty radius for a hand grenade (IIRC, often in the 10 to 20 meter range, with a much larger "danger radius" in which casualties are possible).

[Bruce70]

Then invariably some folks come forth to claim that they see it regularly in normal game play.

I would like to apologise for being one of those "folk". I mistook a dasiy chain mine for a AT mine field. I was under the impression that daisy chain mines were marked as such instead of the generic AT label. My tests confirm what everyone else is seeing, ie no spotting (before detonation) of any mines bar daisy chains.

As a side issue, I notice that engineers do not require demo charges to clear daisy chain mines, which makes sense I guess.

[ASL Veteran]

I think things are fine the way they are for now. I just think that they can go a lot farther with minefields and engineers than they have so far. The level of detail for engineers and minefields - and other obstacles for that matter - is about as basic as it can be. We should be able to clear wire using demolitions shouldn’t we? From what I’m reading, it would be a lot easier to blast a path through wire than it would be to blast a path through a minefield.

Thanks for the info Marlow - I don't know if you were using live ordinance with the bangalore or not, but I'm sure the specified time includes some "I'm sweating cause it's live ordinance" time in it. Even taking the most radical and carefree time though I should think that it would take more than 10 minutes to prep and detonate one (which should include the possibility of friendly casualties since you are throwing safety to the wind). Then you still have the problem of the actual amount of explosives required to get the job done (six bangalore kits for a 20 by 4 path). Oh, and I can appreciate the point you made about the lethal radius, that’s why I included the “in the open unprepared” part as a qualifier. Even some models of simple ‘blast mines’ have a lethal radius if they are large enough, and you don’t want to be near an AT mine when it goes off – those babies have as much as 20 pounds of TNT in them (three times as big as a demo charge)!! Even so though, the S mine is much more lethal than anything in a current CM minefield which seems to only consist of “Toe Poppers”. CM AP minefields are hardly daunting to enter. I checked both the Handbook on German Military Forces and the Japanese version of the same and they did both have their own version of the bangalore torpedo. Of course, I can’t determine when they entered service though.

As far as how you set up a minefield .... a standard pattern minefield is set up using clusters of between 1 to 5 mines each. These clusters are set up along both sides of a center strip at regular intervals. Depending upon the density desired, a 20 x 20 CM square would contain between 14 and 70 mines within it, (actually that would be in a 25 x 25 square, but close enough) and it assumes that all your clusters have mines in them. If you include clusters with no mines, I suppose you could have between 1 and 70 mines. So, if your image of a minefield is one where mines are just laid out in a massive blob covering a 20 meter square, the image is a little off . There is actually a lot of space between the clusters (relatively speaking of course). Perhaps I can post the exact method of laying the mines if anyone is interested.

As far as Hasty minefields go:

The purpose and composition of a hasty protective minefield are discussed on page 45. Hasty protective minefields are recorded on DA Form 1355-1-R, a reproducible copy is at Appendix E. The first step in emplacing a hasty protective minefield is conducting a thorough leaders reconnaissance of the proposed minefield area. Mine locations which cover likely avenues of approach, enhance key weapons systems, and cover dead space areas that are identified. After the reconnaissance, the mines are emplaced but not armed. As the mines are being emplaced, an easily identifiable reference point (RP) is established between the minefield and the unit’s position. From the RP, the mines are visualized as running in rows parallel to the unit position. This procedure simplifies the recording and makes retrieval quicker and safer. By international agreements, the row closest to the enemy is designated row A, while succeeding rows are row B, C, D, etc. Procedures for recording a hasty protective minefield are explained on pages 62 through 65. In the illustrations shown, only two rows are appropriate (row A and row . The ends of a row are indicated by two markers which are labeled with the row’s letter and the number 1 (for the end of the row) and 2 (for the other end of the row). The marker should be an easily identifiable object, such as a wooden stake or steel picket.

A hasty minefield probably would be less dense than a standard pattern minefield since you are just setting up rows rather than strips with clusters, but it doesn’t necessarily have to be less dense – or any easier to breach for that matter. If you have determined that the depth of the minefield is 20 meters you still have to breach 20 meters regardless of it’s density. One thing of interest that I got from “FM 7-7 The Mechanized Infantry Platoon and Squad” is that it hints that it is okay to pass through a minefield if the mines are located but not cleared. So if you have the probers out and you have identified the mines by marking them, as long as your troops don’t go near the marked mines everything should be fine. That would certainly cut down the time to pass through a minefield I would think.

Minefields should be relatively easy to spot if you are actively looking for them in a specific location. I’m thinking that there should be some sort of ‘search’ command added in the future for this purpose (and anything else you might want to look for). Units using the slower movement command “Sneak” could also be considered to be automatically searching for minefields as they move I guess.

[easy-v]

Originally posted by JonS:

Well, it seems more than a few folk here have trouble rationalising the way CM treats mines. Fair enough - its a game, and the way the game treats certain things will never be to everyones liking. As a counter-example (i.e. something I'm not happy with but which others are)I can think of artillery, for starters.

In addition to the way engineers deal with artillery, I think the actual minefileds themselves are fairly abstracted. For starters, I don't picture them, in my mind, as being exactly 20m x 20m. Furthermore, I don't think of them being of uniform density throughout their area. In fact, I rather think of them as hasty minefields - sort of like a Real Life™ daisy chain. Creating a major minefield (like breaching it) is a serious operation, and somewhat 'outside the scope.'

Lets face it - the number and size of minefields thsat you usually come across in CMBO battles means that its usually far easier to just walk around them, rather than to bother even attempting to clear them (unless its a A-Tk mine covering a defile).

So, putting it all together we have engineers that have the ability and equipment, and minefields that aren't very extensive or well developed. With that combination, I can quite accept the way its modelled.

YMMV. As I say, that's the way I rationalise it, and I am in no way going to insist that you see it my way

Be cool

JonS

For the most part I agree.

CM is a game, and some aspects need to be abstracted.

I can live with the way mines are treated as they are now, but in the light of information people are posting in how difficult it is to clear a lane through a minefield, I think people are expressing the opinion that the abstraction is perhaps oversimplified.

And that is my point.

[ASL Veteran]

But what about cold weather operations for minefields?? Let’s have a look:

Employment of mines in cold regions poses special problems, the principal one being emplacement. Normally, burial is recommended for conventional mine emplacement. In cold regions, this can be extremely difficult because of the frozen state of the ground. The freezing water in the soil causes it to have high strength and penetration resistance so that digging times are greatly increased if not impractical.

(digging tips skipped)

To assure detonation of buried pressure actuated mines, the mine should be placed in a hole shallow enough that the pressure plate is clearly above ground. Spoil from mine burial used to cover the mine should be a maximum of 1 centimeter deep.

When burial is not possible, mines must be placed on the surface. Heavy snow cover may reduce the effectiveness on both buried and surface laid mines by causing them to be bridged. Mines laid in deep snow should be placed as close as possible to the surface and supported by boards or compacted snow. Prior to emplacement, an even layer of grease should be applied to the fuze, the threads of the fuze well, the threads of the arming plug, and any other seals to prevent water from entering the mine and freezing. The mines may be placed in plastic bags prior to burial. In some cases, a layer of ice may form over the top of the pressure plate. Testshave shown that although the load required to break the ice is slightly higher than that required to activate the fuze, thin layers of external ice will have little effect on mine functioning. Tilt rod activated mines are less susceptible to ice formation and snow burial and should be used whenever possible in cold regions. Magnetic fuzed mines are not significantly affected by snow conditions, although cold weather will decrease battery life. When tripwire actuated mines are employed in snow, the length of wire should be about 10 meters with a slight amound of slack left in the wire. The tripwires should be supported approximately 46 centimeters above the ground to avoid degradation by snowfall.

Camouflage of a minefield in cold regions is difficult. Mines should be painted white when snow is expected to remain on the ground for extended periods of time. All tracks should be swept away or deliberate tracks made to give the impression of a safe area.

So what’s a tilt rod actuated mine, some grogly type might be asking :

The track width fuze is usually pressure actuated and requires contact with the wheels or tracks of the vehicle. This type of fuze will normally produce an M-Kill.

The full width fuze, normally a tilt rod or magnetic influence fuze, is designed to be effective across the entire width of the target. This fuze is usually employed in conjunction with an SFF warhead to produce a K-Kill when the mine is straddled by an approaching vehicle. When a full width fuze is activated by contact with the wheels or tracks of the target vehicle, an M-Kill usually results because most of the energy is absorbed by the wheels or tracks.

Hmmm, so did they have Tilt Rod actuated mines in WW2? From "Handbook on German Military Forces"

(2) Tilt igniter, KiZ43 (Kippzunder 43)

Description. The tilt igniter is designed to fire whenever the tilt rod is moved in any direction. This tilt rod is on top of the igniter, which contains a sliding pressure piece, pressure spring, hollow striker, striker spring, and two retaining balls. The detonator assembly assembly includes percussion cap and detonator. An extension rod, 24 ¾ inches long, is connected by pushing the sleeve over the tilt rod.

Operation. The igniter is armed by removing the safety pin. When the tilt rod is moved in any direction, the tilt rod base is tilted inside the igniter body, depressing the pressure piece, thus freeing the striker. A lateral pressure of 15 to 23 pounds on the end of the tilt bar will fire the igniter. Use of the extension rod reduces the pressure needed to to explode the igniter to 1 ½ pounds.

Those gamey Germans – they have all the toys!!

[ASL Veteran]

I have just finished testing something I suspected about CMBO – and that is whether vehicles set off AP mines. They don’t. Not only do they not set AP mines off, but they don’t even detect them either. I took a Kubelwagen and a JagdPanther and drove them across 40 American AP minefields of various densities (some minefields were stacked on top of each other) and not a single mine was either detonated or discovered. This should definitely be addressed I think. An AP mine could do some damage to a Kubelwagen for sure. It would probably do nothing to a tank, but the tank should at least set it off.

Interestingly enough, the “Handbook on German Military Forces” has a lot of info about German minefields – and they use a much simpler pattern than the US used in 1985. The Germans don’t use clusters off a centerline strip, but basically set up mines in linear strips with the individual mines slightly off center on either side of the center strip (as opposed to clusters off center). The part about German minefields that caught my eye was this part:

A number of anti-tank mines are laid in the forward edge of antipersonnel minefields to prevent armored vehicles from detonating the main belt of antipersonnel mines. The forward edges of minefields of all types often are sown with explosive charges placed in wooden boxes fitted with pressure fuzes. These act as both antitank and antipersonnel mines, and discourage the use of detectors to locate the mines.

So I think that tanks driving through an AP minefield might have been an accepted practice for quick clearance – just watch out for the AT mines mixed in!! There is also a definite role for dummy minefields – both in 1985 and 1939 – and I hope that they can be included in the future at some point.

[Marlow]

Originally posted by ASL Veteran:

Thanks for the info Marlow - I don't know if you were using live ordinance with the bangalore or not, but I'm sure the specified time includes some "I'm sweating cause it's live ordinance" time in it.

They were live, and it was a blast (pun intended).