Mines

[imported_no_one]

Eh,it's no big deal :shrug: All in the name of victory and all :mad:

But seriously,my comment wasn't in regard to our battle necessarily,just in general.I think it is apt,yes?

[jrcar]

IRL minefields are usually marked.

Minefields are used to "shape" the enemy to go where you want them (ie into a killing area), their pupose is not to cause casualties.

Of course the enemy KNOWS you are trying to shape them to go elsewhere, and so it is often better to go through the minefield (either deliberately or on the run) as the casualties will probably be lower than going into the killing area.

It was standard practise when laying a minefield to make multiple copies of the minefield map, held by the unit protecting the minefield (and handed onto the next unit if they exchange places) and at divisional level.

It is too hard to do decent minefields in CM, and you can't do dummies

Cheers

Rob

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by jrcar:

Of course the enemy KNOWS you are trying to shape them to go elsewhere, and so it is often better to go through the minefield (either deliberately or on the run) as the casualties will probably be lower than going into the killing area.

Unless the owning side is using double reverse psychology and has registered and boresighted the minefield, making it the kill zone.

[evil laughter]

Michael

[SgtMuhammed]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

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

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by sgtgoody (esq):

One of the reasons all of the non-combatants on the battlefield talk is somewhat moot is because in WWII they really didn't care.

Huh? :confused: What makes you think that the non-combatants didn't care? Or the combatants, for that matter.

When Germans burned, demolished and mined Lapland in 1944-45, the Finnish media most certainly made a big deal about it. </font>

[Lee_DiSantis]

WHAT ABOUT GOLD MINES??? SILVER???!! BAUXITE!???!!

[SgtMuhammed]

Open pit or deep shaft!!! This could make all the difference.

[stoat]

Uranium, man. It's the 21st century.

[Snow Leopard]

Are you talking about mime at France?

[Michael Emrys]

Mimes are the worst. And French mimes are the very worst. That Marcel Marceau...bleh!

Michael

[Sergei]

But mimes are a great delicacy to Space Lobsters. Especially the French mimes - preferably from northern France, as the southerners taste too garliccy.

[FAI]

Originally posted by Snow Leopard:

Try use pioneer squad, I use satchel charges to deal with mines.

Shouldn't there be other ways to clear a mine field other than using explosives? I mean, engineers do physically remove and disarm mines one by one.

[Pvt. Ryan]

Originally posted by FAI:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Snow Leopard:

Try use pioneer squad, I use satchel charges to deal with mines.

Shouldn't there be other ways to clear a mine field other than using explosives? I mean, engineers do physically remove and disarm mines one by one. </font>

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by FAI:

Shouldn't there be other ways to clear a mine field other than using explosives? I mean, engineers do physically remove and disarm mines one by one.

Yes, it was done, but it was slow work. Who'd want to sit around for 300 turns wating for your engineers to lift a path through a minefield? Flail tanks, on the other hand...

Michael

[JonS]

Originally posted by jrcar:

IRL minefields are usually marked.

Minefields are used to "shape" the enemy to go where you want them (ie into a killing area), their pupose is not to cause casualties.

Of course the enemy KNOWS you are trying to shape them to go elsewhere, and so it is often better to go through the minefield (either deliberately or on the run) as the casualties will probably be lower than going into the killing area.

It was standard practise when laying a minefield to make multiple copies of the minefield map, held by the unit protecting the minefield (and handed onto the next unit if they exchange places) and at divisional level.

Rob,

AIUI, the German practice in WWII was quite different to the British practice (which you've pretty well descibed above). Again AIUI, the Germans didn't map their fields, and generally didn't mark them either, at least not to the same degree as the British. This was particularly notable during the NA campaign, but I believe it pertained elsewhere too.

In summary, the British treated them - both offensively and defensively - as an obstacle, and worked them accordingly. The Germans treated them as a weapon more than as an obstacle.

One interesting anomally was the minefileds that 6th AB Div laid SE of the Orne following D-Day. THey were undestandably a bit concerned about having to stop Pz Divs rolling over them, and laid extensive miefields to cover their front, but they weren't planned, and weren't mapped (read; not laid under RE supervision). As a result, they proved very difficult to gap for GOODWOOD, contributing to the congestion that attack faced in it's opening stages. Later it took several battalions(?) of engrs a long time to clear practical paths through them.

Regards

JonS

[SgtMuhammed]

You could also look at the Russian use of mines during Kursk. Mines were sown in fields that were then planted with wheat and corn. This made them extreemly hard to find. They were fully intended to cause casualties as part of the plan to bleed the Germans of their armor.

[FAI]

Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

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

Shouldn't there be other ways to clear a mine field other than using explosives? I mean, engineers do physically remove and disarm mines one by one.

Yes, it was done, but it was slow work. Who'd want to sit around for 300 turns wating for your engineers to lift a path through a minefield? Flail tanks, on the other hand...

Michael </font>

[SgtMuhammed]

The normal way to use explosives was to place a small bit on the mine. This still meant you had to find all the mines in the intended path (minefields were breached rather than cleared as is done in the game) then inspect them for anti-handling devices, then prep them with an explosive charge, fuse the charge (usually in a chain so they all blow at once once you are ready) take cover and boom. Once the debris settles you have to proof the lane because any mine that is left will ALWAYS be right where the most important vehicle will run over it.

Needless to say this process takes much longer than it does in the game.

You can clear a minefield through direct or indirect fire but the results are not quite as sure as by having people do it.

[jrcar]

G'Day Jon,

In the East I believe it was normal German practise to record minefields, including sending a copy back to supreme HQ (I think they did 5 copies?). This is from my recolection in 1943 though. I know the NA minefields were not well marked, they are still clearing them So it may be a case of lessons learnt as the war went on.

But I don't have the source so it must be taken with a grain of salt.

It may also be a case of doctrine vs what really happens....

My recolection is that it was also recognised Soviet practise... but again reality may not match doctrine... especially with poorly trained troops and a lack of time.

I don't recall many first person accounts where they run into unmarked minefields in NW Europe, but many references to booby traps.

But as always happy to learn differently!

Cheers

Rob

Originally posted by JonS:

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

IRL minefields are usually marked.

Minefields are used to "shape" the enemy to go where you want them (ie into a killing area), their pupose is not to cause casualties.

Of course the enemy KNOWS you are trying to shape them to go elsewhere, and so it is often better to go through the minefield (either deliberately or on the run) as the casualties will probably be lower than going into the killing area.

It was standard practise when laying a minefield to make multiple copies of the minefield map, held by the unit protecting the minefield (and handed onto the next unit if they exchange places) and at divisional level.

Rob,

AIUI, the German practice in WWII was quite different to the British practice (which you've pretty well descibed above). Again AIUI, the Germans didn't map their fields, and generally didn't mark them either, at least not to the same degree as the British. This was particularly notable during the NA campaign, but I believe it pertained elsewhere too.

In summary, the British treated them - both offensively and defensively - as an obstacle, and worked them accordingly. The Germans treated them as a weapon more than as an obstacle.

One interesting anomally was the minefileds that 6th AB Div laid SE of the Orne following D-Day. THey were undestandably a bit concerned about having to stop Pz Divs rolling over them, and laid extensive miefields to cover their front, but they weren't planned, and weren't mapped (read; not laid under RE supervision). As a result, they proved very difficult to gap for GOODWOOD, contributing to the congestion that attack faced in it's opening stages. Later it took several battalions(?) of engrs a long time to clear practical paths through them.

Regards

JonS </font>

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by FAI:

IRL, how effective were explosives in clearing mine fields? Were they often used? I'm guessing that it would take a whole lot of satchel charges to clear a path through a mine filed, depending on the blast radius of the satchels charges.

I am not terribly well versed on this aspect of the war, but I have to say that prior to CM I had never heard of using satchel charges for this purpose. I always thought that was just emblematic of engineering explosives in general. I know that in more recent times, something called a "snake" has been used. This is like a long bangalore torpedo, an explosive-filled tube that is laid across the minefield and then detonated. But IIRC if anything like that was available during WW II, it was likely still in a somewhat experimental stage and not widely used.

Michael

[Nidan1]

Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

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

Of course the enemy KNOWS you are trying to shape them to go elsewhere, and so it is often better to go through the minefield (either deliberately or on the run) as the casualties will probably be lower than going into the killing area.

Unless the owning side is using double reverse psychology and has registered and boresighted the minefield, making it the kill zone.

[evil laughter]

Michael </font>

[Nidan1]

Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

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

IRL, how effective were explosives in clearing mine fields? Were they often used? I'm guessing that it would take a whole lot of satchel charges to clear a path through a mine filed, depending on the blast radius of the satchels charges.

I am not terribly well versed on this aspect of the war, but I have to say that prior to CM I had never heard of using satchel charges for this purpose. I always thought that was just emblematic of engineering explosives in general. I know that in more recent times, something called a "snake" has been used. This is like a long bangalore torpedo, an explosive-filled tube that is laid across the minefield and then detonated. But IIRC if anything like that was available during WW II, it was likely still in a somewhat experimental stage and not widely used.

Michael </font>

[Panzeh]

The eyeball mk.1 is the most effective mine detector, particularly when a soldier is prone.

[Renaud]

In CMBB & CMAK engineers will automatically remove daisy-chain AT mines, without using satchels. You just have to get them close enough and wait a few minutes. Lanes of these mines can be used in scenarious to simulate previously reconnoitered fields. Your sappers can then clear lanes for the tanks.

It's only the revealed AT and AP minefields they throw satchels at.

[JonS]

Originally posted by Renaud:

In CMBB & CMAK engineers will automatically remove daisy-chain AT mines, without using satchels. You just have to get them close enough and wait a few minutes. Lanes of these mines can be used in scenarious to simulate previously reconnoitered fields. Your sappers can then clear lanes for the tanks.

Crikey, that's such an obvious and good idea. In conjunction with landmarks (using "* * *"s or sumfink) to mark the limits of the minefield, and the odd A-Pers mine for booby traps, hey presto, a reasonable facsimile of an extensive minefield.

Thanks Ren

Jon

[Renaud]

I have a big (long/narrow) Kursk breakthrough map I made using that concept. It has only the static fortification units, no others. I can send it your way if you want to use it for something or just look at it.

The idea is that german engineers must clear openings for the vehicles, while under fire. Used it once in a massive QB campaign recreation of the eastern front war, for june 43 of course (1 QB per month). Worked pretty well.