Sherman 105 & Task Force Baum

[jgdpzr]

Rune,

I keep forgetting to play your scenario, but I will give it a whirl as I've always enjoyed your work immensely. Is the problem you allude to the fact that getting a victory as the US is practically impossible? I found that to be the case when I was playing around with a couple of battles with TF Baum. One of the battles is played on the same map as my Gemunden battle, although the forces and objectives (exit for the US) are completely different. The other map is based on the action on the shooting range hill. I could never tweak them properly to give the allies much of any chance to gain a points victory. I am guessing your battle is the same.

I look forward to meeting you August 6th. I just had my assistant tweak my training calendar to permit me to sneak away.

[Sarge Saunders]

Originally posted by jgdpzr:

Thanks, then I succeeded! As I said, I wanted to make it tough. I also wanted to make a scenario that if you didn't know how to use smoke well, you'd have little chance at success.

Smoked the bridge in completely. And it's a big bridge. There where no gaps. Then we all went across while my TD dueled with Axis TDs from across the river (without success). My arty helped the axis infantry along in their path backwards.

[jgdpzr]

Originally posted by Sarge Saunders:

Smoked the bridge in completely. And it's a big bridge. There where no gaps. Then we all went across while my TD dueled with Axis TDs from across the river (without success). My arty helped the axis infantry along in their path backwards.[/QB]

Yep, that's the way to do it. And yes, it is a long bridge. I'm sure it is not truly to scale, but I wanted to emphasize the challenge of the crossing.

Even though I designed the battle and knew exactly what I was facing, I was never able to get a really strong victory. As you discovered, those US TDs are out of their element trying to slug it out toe-to-toe with the German TDs.

[Sarge Saunders]

Originally posted by rune:

While fun, ignore the results and go with what is in the briefing. The report I had also stated they were priests, and I think I had that in the scenario, but I don't remember if I changed it to Sherman 105s. The amount of vehicles is accurate, and the German OOB is subject to debate also. If someone has a better OOB then the references I had, let me know and we can re-visit the scenario. Needless to say it is almost impossible to get the vehicles off the map safely.

Rune

Rune- I just looked at it and that is a very interesting allied OOB. Looks like you do have Sherm 105s, but also Priests and other more effective varieties of the Sherman.

Hard to imagine not winning with your Allied OOB. Unless the Axis has 10 Jagdpanthers....

It would be extremely interesing to find out a factual OOB. Your victory conditions are interesing. I need to play it to know for sure but surely there is a way to figure victory within the CM system. Maybe only exit points for prisoner vehicles which would allow the allied commander to engage with those nice shermans without losing double points to a knockout.

Maybe ask Jgdpzr about his sources for the After the Battle publication. This raid is so famous that surely accurate OOBs exist. Anyone?

-Sarge

[ July 17, 2002, 02:39 PM: Message edited by: Sarge Saunders ]

[jgdpzr]

Sarge,

The author of the piece in After the Battle details a very specific OoB. He notes, however, that there are a couple of minor discrepancies in the allied order that he was never able to fully clarify-- basically, the exact number of vehicles (+/- a halftrack or two), and IIRC there were a couple of questions regarding the type of vehicle(s) used by the medical personnel attached to the TF. These are relatively minor, however.

When I get home, I will post the specific volume number of this issue.

[Dirtweasle]

Jgdpzr, if you would'nt mind listing out the OOB that would be appreciated.

[rune]

Sarge,

Am at work, but what I have is listed to the jeep and HT from the book I put in the briefing. He went into great detail on the equipment and where it was destroyed.

The problem with it is I marked all the vehicles as the exit. It was the first time I used that setting, and have learned better. Using the desc in the briefing will give you a chance.

The German OOB I got from units in the area. Wasn't the most accurate things, but better then a pure guess. Yes, it is difficult to get that far. The Germans knew where the convoy had to go, and were waiting for them.

Look forward to meeting you on 6 August. Have been in touch with Blackhorse, and if everything goes as we plan, it wiil be a trip NOT to miss. The back lot, CMBB, and more... Anyone free on the 6th and can make it to the Patton Museum is welcome to join us.

Rune

[Sarge Saunders]

Originally posted by rune:

Sarge,

Am at work, but what I have is listed to the jeep and HT from the book I put in the briefing. He went into great detail on the equipment and where it was destroyed.

The problem with it is I marked all the vehicles as the exit. It was the first time I used that setting, and have learned better. Using the desc in the briefing will give you a chance.

The German OOB I got from units in the area. Wasn't the most accurate things, but better then a pure guess. Yes, it is difficult to get that far. The Germans knew where the convoy had to go, and were waiting for them.

Look forward to meeting you on 6 August. Have been in touch with Blackhorse, and if everything goes as we plan, it wiil be a trip NOT to miss. The back lot, CMBB, and more... Anyone free on the 6th and can make it to the Patton Museum is welcome to join us.

Rune

Rune,

I'm close to the Patton Museum in Indiana and I shall check my calendar for the 6th. Been down there once before. Lots to gawk at! They have a Panther II Experimental mounting an 88mm gun.

I'll let you guys know.

-Sarge

[jgdpzr]

Originally posted by Dirtweasle:

Jgdpzr, if you would'nt mind listing out the OOB that would be appreciated.

No problem. When I get home I will list what is described in the article. Keep in mind, the detailed OoB exists only for the US, as the Germans they encountered were largely a hodge-podge of forces. The only exception was the description of the Hetzers and the forces that gathered to expel the task force from the shooting range hill, that action included a fairly thorough description of the German forces IIRC.

[jgdpzr]

Originally posted by Sarge Saunders:

I'm close to the Patton Museum in Indiana and I shall check my calendar for the 6th. Been down there once before. Lots to gawk at! They have a Panther II Experimental mounting an 88mm gun.

I'll let you guys know.

-Sarge[/QB]

Hate to sound like the pedantic type, but that vehicle has a late G turret with the standard 75L/70. It's still a wonderful specimen, the hull is the only one in existence IIRC.

[Kong]

I wonder if the effectiveness of the 105 is shock and psychological. I would think that a 105 round hitting your tank would rattle your brain a bit. Especially in a smaller vehicle such as the Hetzer. Would not even an HE round create alot of dust and shock inside the tank? I am sure the noise could be a bit frightening too. Thus wouldn't this make it difficult to respond well, such as returning accurate fire. I think my initial response as a TC would be to my driver to Reverse! I have always wondered what the experience is like inside the tank when taking hits, it can't be fun, even if you are in a beast like a Tiger or JagdPanther.

[Sarge Saunders]

Originally posted by jgdpzr:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Sarge Saunders:

I'm close to the Patton Museum in Indiana and I shall check my calendar for the 6th. Been down there once before. Lots to gawk at! They have a Panther II Experimental mounting an 88mm gun.

I'll let you guys know.

-Sarge

Hate to sound like the pedantic type, but that vehicle has a late G turret with the standard 75L/70. It's still a wonderful specimen, the hull is the only one in existence IIRC.</font>

[jgdpzr]

Consider yourself invited! And yes, it sounds like it will be great fun. I mean, a sneak peak at CMBB, and a special treat promised by Blackhorse should be reasons enough to make the trek. At the very least there is the very good chance we will get to tour the backlots, THAT is where most of the vehicles are.

Regarding the plaque, I could be mistaken but I think it says the vehicle was meant to mount the redesigned Panther turret with the 88L/71. It is my understanding that the protype turret and hull were never mated, however. Further, I believe there is still some small controversy regarding who mounted the late G turret. I believe Jentz says there is some confusion as to whether it was mounted once in allied hands, or if it was discovered that way in Germany. This mystery may have been resolved and I just haven't seen it yet, however.

[Sarge Saunders]

Originally posted by jgdpzr:

Consider yourself invited! And yes, it sounds like it will be great fun. I mean, a sneak peak at CMBB, and a special treat promised by Blackhorse should be reasons enough to make the trek. At the very least there is the very good chance we will get to tour the backlots, THAT is where most of the vehicles are.

Fantastic! The backlot sounds great. I had no idea there were that many tanks in storage.

Will check my calendar and my wife. Need tacit permission for such an endeavour....Getting off work should be no problem as I work out of my house.

Hope to see you.

-Sean

[ July 17, 2002, 04:23 PM: Message edited by: Sarge Saunders ]

[Renaud]

jgdpzr:

Your Gemunden scenario is a favorite of mine. Allied is quite a challenge. I also enjoy playing as axis and giving the allies +200% forces! That makes for a fun 'Alamo' situation and a lot of blasty mayhem.

I have a couple of small-to-midlin sized scenarios I've been wanting to get a 2nd opinion on. Would you (or others) be interested in giving them a go? They are designed with the single player experience in mind, though tweaking the force ratios could possibly result in a decent multiplayer.

Ren

[jgdpzr]

Originally posted by Renaud:

jgdpzr:

Your Gemunden scenario is a favorite of mine. Allied is quite a challenge. I also enjoy playing as axis and giving the allies +200% forces! That makes for a fun 'Alamo' situation and a lot of blasty mayhem.

I have a couple of small-to-midlin sized scenarios I've been wanting to get a 2nd opinion on. Would you (or others) be interested in giving them a go? They are designed with the single player experience in mind, though tweaking the force ratios could possibly result in a decent multiplayer.

Ren

*blush*

Thanks for the kind words.

Cranking the US up 200% will certainly create a target-rich environment for the Germans, that's for sure.

Feel free to send me a scenario. If you have a couple, send me the shortest, as I am quite busy with a multitude of things pulling me in several directions. But I'd be happy to give one a whirl and send some feedback.

[jgdpzr]

OK, here's more information on the After the Battle issue I have been referencing. The issue is #91, printed in 1996. "The Hammelburg Raid" is the title piece on the cover, with a photo of one of the EZ-8's knocked out on the firing range. (For those not overly familiar with the raid, one of the bitter ironies for the Task Force was that the place they chose for a bivouac the evening after freeing the prisoners happened to be a German firing range--think of it as one big freakin' TRP!)

The author of the article is Karel Margry and it is a rather extensive piece, spanning forty or so pages.

The following is the OoB of Task Force Baum, as described by the author(p.3):

-C Coy of the 37th Tank Battalion with 10 EZ-8's;

-A platoon of 6 Stuarts from D Coy of the 37th;

-A platoon of 3 "105mm M7 self-propelled assualt guns", organic to the 10th Armored Infantry Battalion;

-A Coy of the 10th Armored Infantry Battalion in 27 HTs, some of which carried supplies, another served as a tank maintenance vehicle, and one was used as the 10th's S-4 vehicle (radio);

-Recon platoon of the 10th consisting of 9 men in 3 jeeps;

-5 other jeeps carrying Baum and others.

The points of discrepancy lie in the exact number of jeeps and men. Some say that there may have been only four jeeps. There is also some indication that the jeep supposedly used by the medical personnel may have been an M29 Weasel. Also, the exact number of men is in dispute. The number has been quoted as 293 in at least one source, 307 in at least one other.

So, according to this author, not only were there no Ferdinands, or Jagdpanthers, or Tigers (that has been claimed as well, apparently), there were no Sherman 105's involved either.

[ July 17, 2002, 05:57 PM: Message edited by: jgdpzr ]

[Sarge Saunders]

Thanks Jgdpzer. That is very interesting about the M7 SPHs instead of Sherm 105s. Makes a difference still. In that case, I think I would rather engage TDs with my EZ8s instead. Very odd encounter in the book.

Incidentally, I found out I have a trip to Michigan planned for the week of the 6th.

So can't make the Patton museum. Someone please take some photos. I'd be happy to help in posting them.

Cheers,

Sarge

[jgdpzr]

Just a note to anyone who has recently downloaded Gemunden, I just sent in an updated version (version 4) with a minor tweak that should improve the play. It should correct a minor flaw in how the ai plays out as the Germans. You may want to hold off playing the battle until the new version is posted (even though the synopsis lists it as version 4, the zip file on the site is still v3, wait until it has been updated to v4). Or I can email you a zipped copy if you prefer.

[ July 17, 2002, 08:58 PM: Message edited by: jgdpzr ]

[M Hofbauer]

Originally posted by JasonC:

As for the rate of fire being 5-8 rounds a minute, that is also perfectly believable. The rounds were already prepped. There was no particular reason for the ROF to be that much slower than a 75. CM undermodels them in that respect, certainly, giving more like 3 rounds a minute (which would be right for 150mm with 100 lb shells, but not a mere 105mm). It just isn't that much harder to load a 33 lb shell instead of a 12 lb shell. Either is easy to lift, as any swing by the dumbell rack at your gym will demonstrate (if you haven't done it). Maybe an extra second or two, but not twice as long.

Jason,

I beg to disagree with yourview that seems to be that the Sherman 105 fired regular HE cartridge ammunition just like any other Sherman 75 or other regular tank. Firing HE rounds from the 105mm howitzer was not *that* easy.

please refer to page 534 and 535 of the US Army Standard Ordnance Catalog. You will see that the ammo for the 105mm M4 howitzer on the M4(105) and M4A3(105) was not a fixed cartridge like any other tank shell, but rather it consisted, typically for howitzer ammo, of a base charge and several additional propelling charges in seperate bags. In fact, the M4(105) tank howitzers used the exact same ammunition as the respective 105mm howitzer gun pieces.

quote:

"The ammunition used in the 105mm howitzers M2, M2A1 and M4 is issued in complete rounds of the semi-fixed type. The M1 shell round includes a cartridge case containing a primer and propelling charge, consisting of a base charge and six increments. The projectile may be easily removed from the cartridge case in order to adjust the propelling charge for the desired range."

In other words, there were 7 types of charges used in conjunction with different elevations to reach certain ranges.

You are right however that the HEAT round (M67) was a true "complete round" that did not need adjusting of charges, but could be fired just like that.

As regards the Gemünden scenario by jagdpzr, I downloaded it but was a bit disappointed by the lack of an Ü in Gemünden, but what disappointed me even more was that the scneario's map did not resemble the terrain in Gemünden. So I didn't play it immediately but filed it in the "still to play" list to play it some other day not as an historical but a regular, challenging battle. Now of course I will benefit from the improvements jgdpzr made in the meantime and I will probably DL it again in the newest version.

[jgdpzr]

MH,

My apologies for not doing the umulat (I'm sure I probably just misspelled it as well), one of these days I need to get over my abject laziness and figure out how to do that.

And since you speak with knowledge of the area, sounds like my saying the map is "loosely" based on the actual terrain is a gross overstatement. In truth, the only thing I had to go on was one photo of the town taken overlooking the bridge and a map, both from the After the Battle magazine. Sounds like my guesstimates weren't very accurate. Oh well, my intent was never to deceive, so I hope a sense of deception didn't fuel your disappointment. I wanted to make a scenario dominated by a potentially difficult bridge crossing, so that was the direction I went. I suppose I should call it a "fictional battle with a couple minor historical details thrown in for the hell of it" but of course that's not one of the options at the Depot.

And yes, although the tweak was very minor, it should make the scenario play better from the intended perspective (US versus the AI Germans). I hope you are able to overcome your disappointment and enjoy the battle. And I do appreciate your feedback regarding the inaccuracy of the map, at least my misperception has been clarified.

[M Hofbauer]

jagdpzr,

I didn't mean to talk down the scenario or your effort. My disappointment stemmed mainly from the fact that I was expecting too much, something that I got used to in reality that cannot really be done with CMBO's terrain system. So I should have anticipated the scenario to be based loosely on the historic event, instead of expecting a 1:1 mirror of reality. But I did realize it's value as a challenging regular scenario which is why I said I look forward to playing it one of these days as a regular, fun game.

Thanks for that!

[jgdpzr]

MH,

Don't worry, I didn't take your words personally. In fact, I'm happy to get feedback from someone familiar with the area (you have to admit, you've got an advantage on me--I'm not aware of any WWII battles fought in Kentucky!). Your feedback has even prompted me to play around with my keyboard character map (at least on my NT machine at work) to find the umulat.

In the end, if you enjoy the battle itself, I will have succeeded.

Gemünden!

I found it! Happy day!

BTW, I just checked out your website. Outstanding! I've just added a new bookmark.

[ July 18, 2002, 11:00 AM: Message edited by: jgdpzr ]

[JasonC]

M Hof - I not only know how semi-seperate ammo works, I have done every part of the process as a US artilleryman. But in a tank, the ammo prep is done before action, not on the fly. The powder is cut and the charges prepared, and shells are fused, and the finished rounds placed in ready racks. After which, it is not appreciably harder to load them, just as quickly, as 75mm ammo. They are just heavier so your arms get tired a little faster - but in hours, not minutes.

The reason for semi seperate ammo is to allow the powder charge to be varied for indirect fire purposes. When firing indirect, you can adjust either the powder or the quadrant (how high you point the gun) to effect the range. It is easier to be able to vary both, especially with any kind of high obstructions in the shell flight path (so you can boost trajectory angle but not range if you want, etc).

There is no need for varied powder charges for exclusively direct fire work. You'd just use a reasonably full charge, like a charge 5. The only reason you wouldn't use the highest is to avoid excessive barrel wear. If highest muzzle velocity were thought important for accuracy reasons, you'd put in the full charge 7 in all of them. But either way, you'd do all this before going into action at all, just as you'd fuse the shells then too.

[M Hofbauer]

Jason,

I do get your point. Reading your post again it is now apparent to me what you meant.

As a side note, your arguing is not specific to the Sherman M4(105)/ M4A3(105), but to all.