Recoiless Rifles

[Kiltie Lad]

Hello Lads, and thanks for the advice on loading the 1.12 patch. I'm now "gameable online" and even got the lumps on my haid last night to prove it!!

Are the Recoiless Rifles the Germans use the same thing as the Gehrlich Gun? This was the gun that squeezed the shell (size?)to create an incredible muzzle velocity. I used the 75mm with great effect against a Sherman and a Priest while the oncoming suppresive fire had a terrible time trying to locate me. Also, is the 105mm Recoiless an AT or AP weapon? Thanks in advance.

[Maastrictian]

AT for units stituated in front of the gun, AP for the poor guys behind the gun

[Stalins Organ]

No they are not.

The Gerich gun came out in 3 sized - teh 28/21mm, a 42/35 (?) mm and a 75/55mm. They were purely high velocity AT weapons firing tungsten cored ammo - no HE rounds were ever made for them.

Recoiless rifles are low velocity weapons firing HE ammo - their AT round is HEAT (shaped charge, Monroe effect, call it what you will).

they are recoilless because the energy of teh shell travelling forwards out of tehmuzzle is offset by the energy of the gas exhausting out the rear of the weapon at very high velocity. Hence they also have a big "back blast" - anyone behind one when it fires is in trouble!

[Conscript Bagger]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mike the bike:

...they also have a big "back blast" - anyone behind one when it fires is in trouble!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Absolutely - except in the game. I once lined up three squads behind a 105mm recoilless and had it fire for several turns, and the infantry wasn't fazed in the least. The only backblast effect I've seen occurs when bazooka/panzerschreck teams fire from inside a building - they usually pin themselves, and sometimes set the building on fire. I haven't checked if other units in the building are pinned by backblast, but maybe somebody else knows.

[Maastrictian]

I have had experience with squads pinned by nearby recoil-less rifles. Even more important, its really really difficult to keep them hidden after that first shot. Also, squads in a building with a fireing faust/shrek/zook will often be pinned.

[Kiltie Lad]

Thanks for the info, guys! I don't recall seeing many photos of recoiless rifles-particularly German-WWII era, so was unsure how much action they saw. Do know that they were used extensively in Korea and later conflicts quite a bit as they were easy to mount on jeeps. Didn't want to feature them too much in my mix if they weren't used that much, because the two times I have used them they were extremely deadly and proved hard to take out.

Shawn

[Olle Petersson]

Just as a slightly off topic note;

The very first Swedish RR was a 20mm ATR (fired from the shoulder), in service from 1942, IIRC.

Ballistics were comparable to 20mm ATGs at the time, and thus ineffective in it's intended role already from the beginning of service.

"Recoilless" meant that the recoil was only twice as much as of the regular Mauser rifle. (At least when firing AP with a new "stötbottenbricka". (A circular plate placed at the rear of the cartridge. The rear exhaust gas passed through a hole in it, and the hole grew for every shot fired, reducing recoil and muzzle velocity.))

This ATR was to become the origin of the well known Carl Gustav 84mm recoilless grenade launcher now in use all over the world...

Cheers

Olle

[Pvt.Tom]

I hate those things, they are very deadly and unusually hard to spot, I have played games where they fired for a whole turn before I could see them, I think something is a little off on the modeling of the back blast.

[Olle Petersson]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pvt.Tom:

I think something is a little off on the modeling of the back blast.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>You don't say?!

There are several "offs" with the modeling:

- The sound is modeled like a rocket, not the big bang it really is.

- Graphics show a smoke cone to the rear, not a muzzle blast twice the size of the frontal blast.

- Infantry accidentally positioned behind it when it fires doesn't get airborne.

These are a few of the most noticable "offs" I can think of.

Cheers

Olle

[Pvt.Tom]

Yea, plus I noticed another problem, when I buy them they always seem to die, when the person I am playing buys them my tanks always seem to die? BTS Please fix

[boy_Recon]

Note that "Recoiless Rifles" are different from the "squeeze-bore" principle employed on several German light guns during the war.

Squeeze-bore gun barrels are smaller at the muzzle than at the breech, the difference being compensated for by retractable tungsten studs around the side of the shot. The benefit of the squeeze-bore priciple is a higher velocity discarge than would normally be possible for a shot of that mass. The benefits of Recoilless Rifles are simply reduced recoil necessitating a lighter and more mobile gun construction. This enhanced mobility is NOT shown in CMBO.

[Kiltie Lad]

How about my question of how much recoiless rifles were used in WWII. Thoughts anyone?

[Stalins Organ]

AFAIK they were only used by the German FallschirmJager (Paratroopers) as infantry support weapons, adn then only in the earlier part of the war while the FJ still had an airborne role.

But I presume they would have stayed in use until worn out or replaced.

the 105mm was not very common - there was a more common 75mm RCL IIRC.

[JasonC]

There were ~600 of each type. The 75mm version was used by the FJ, as the previous fellow stated, as early as Crete in 1941. The 105mm version was used both by the FJ and by gebirbsjaegers (GB) - the mountain infantry. The 75mm type was rare by late war, with relatively little ammo made for it, and the mountain infantry used 75mm infantry guns instead. When it was available, its role was to replace 75mm infantry guns as regimental support weapons.

The 105mm was used in place of regimental infantry guns (150mm SiG) and in place of 105mm regular artillery. Both FJ and GB had less artillery support than regular infantry, in practice - regardless of what TOE said. The GB units had to be able to transport their guns on pack mules, too. There was a 105mm mountain gun meant for that role, but not enough of them were made to fill out TOEs. There was more ammo made for the 105s, especially in the midwar. Still less than for standard 105mm artillery, or 105mm mountain guns, though.

Both types enabled these limited transport unit types (FJ, GB) to keep some form of heavy fire support. The principle was not more widely used, despite the benefits of lower weight, because the ammunition used so much more propellant to make than standard artillery. That meant each shell of this type was made at the expense of several shells of the standard types. Which was a more important consideration in the overall war economy, than low weight to get the guns to difficult places.

Note that post-war RRs, and even the types developed by the US during the war toward its end, were much more minituarized than these early German models. The 75mm German version weighed 220 lbs, the 105mm version almost half a ton. Whereas the late war US versions were light enough to be fired from the shoulder like bazookas (the 57mm version in particular), these earlier German ones were strictly light artillery pieces.

[Wreck]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

The benefits of Recoilless Rifles are simply reduced recoil necessitating a lighter and more mobile gun construction. This enhanced mobility is NOT shown in CMBO.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually the enhanced mobility is modelled just fine in CM. The German 75mm has transport class 3, the 105 has 4. This is compared to the 75mm inf (with 4), the 75mm pak (7? I think), or the 105 howizter (8). Transport classes 3 and 4 can get serious movement done on foot in the course of 30 turns; 8 is practically immobile.

Tactically, I often buy a 75mm rcl as German, hoping to be able to carry it into a surprising location.