Will be possible HMG indirect fire? (reverse slope fire)

[Cid250]

Reverse slope fire of Heavy and Medium MGs was a practice since World War 1, to support infantry assaults.

It's called indirect MG fire since you doesn't see the area to fire, all it's calculated with some tools and map work.

They spread bullets like rain even at ranges of 3500m... at such ranges you can beat the reverse slope of the hidden enemy positions, and the bullet rain drops at a very high step (angle) so you can hit even the soldiers inside of his fox hole.

Will be possible this feature with the new CM engine?.

[ParaBellum]

I haven't heard of indirect MG fire since WW1. Do you have any references to its use in modern wars? I somehow doubt its relevance for CM:SF's scenario.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by ParaBellum:

I haven't heard of indirect MG fire since WW1. Do you have any references to its use in modern wars? I somehow doubt its relevance for CM:SF's scenario.

It's taught on Canadian machine gun courses, so they tell me. The C2 sight from the 81mm mortar can be fitted to the Sustained Fire (SF) kit (essentially a tripod, like the lafette mount the Germans used for the MG34/42 during the Big One). The C6 machine gun (same as the US M240B) can fire indirectly out to, IIRC, 3200 metres and used as a form of light artillery.

Whether it has ever been done in action, or not, I have no idea. The last I heard of such use of machine guns was in Operation VERITABLE in February 1945, during the "pepperpot" barrages that kicked off the offensive into the Rhineland. They may have made use of the tactic in Korea but I don't immediately recall.

Their use isn't necessarily tactical, though. During VERITABLE they were part of the prepatory barrage - a phase CM usually omits from its tactical portrayals. CM:SF will be an even narrower focus than CM:BO given the 1:1 coverage and what Steve has said about a firm company focus. That said, strategic fire missions and interdiction seem to be, as Parabellum suggests, beside the point?

The topic has come up before - I don't recall anyone producing examples of tactical use of indirect MG fire applicable at the company level or the scale of CM? Never say never, but I'd say if it were to be included in the pantheon some day, just treat it as indirect (off map) artillery. How often would a US company commander and the battalion's machine gunners practice at spotting and "calling in" such fire? Would an MG crew ever get so could that a spotter could give orders and hit an individual foxhole with such fire, as the original poster suggests? I always thought of the technique as outside that kind of control - but I defer to those who actually work with the equipment.

[ May 28, 2007, 03:33 PM: Message edited by: Michael Dorosh ]

[Steiner14]

Originally posted by ParaBellum:

I haven't heard of indirect MG fire since WW1. Do you have any references to its use in modern wars? I somehow doubt its relevance for CM:SF's scenario.

I've read about it in a german WWII book, too but can't remember anymore which one it was. Maybe it was in Heinrich Severloh's book.

[Sergei]

Finnish WW2 usage of the method was mentioned in some thread. Obviously then everybody's life is ruined if the game doesn't support it.

[John Kettler]

ParaBellum,

Someone, suspect JasonC or John D Salt, posted a substantial piece on doing this during World War II, quoting British Army procedures after I had posted indicating that the Germans explicitly trained for this as standard procedure during World War II. I believe the unidentified contributor also provided one or more actual examples of this being done during World War II.

Some discussion of it here.

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=30;t=003750;p=1

Two million Vickers MG rounds fired indirectly from 188 MGs as part of the pepperpots for Op Veritable.

http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=30;t=003726#000024

Vickers in indirect fire mode again.

http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=30;t=001988#000011

A entire indirect Vickers thread. It appears the thread I was involved in may've been lost in a server meltdown.

http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=23;t=006972#000003

Regards,

John Kettler

[JonS]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

Whether it has ever been done in action, or not, I have no idea.

[snip]

The topic has come up before - I don't recall anyone producing examples of tactical use of indirect MG fire applicable at the company level or the scale of CM?

I suspect a good, "modern" (" " because it's almost a quarter century ago ...) example would be the fighting in the Flaklands. However, I don't know whether SFMGs were used indirectly there.

... How often would a US company commander and the battalion's machine gunners practice at spotting and "calling in" such fire?

Dunno about the US, but I'd expect that CW-pattern armies would practice compnay-group stuff.

Would an MG crew ever get so could that a spotter could give orders and hit an individual foxhole with such fire, as the original poster suggests? I always thought of the technique as outside that kind of control - but I defer to those who actually work with the equipment.

Again, dunno, but I very much doubt it. Generally as soon as you get into indirect fire procedures you are looking at affecting an area, not a point.

[John Kettler]

JonS,

Come on down! You are today's winner of (drum rolls, trumpet blares) the Inadvertent, Historically Accurate Pun Award. Flaklands they were indeed, at least if you ask certain Paras who underwent fire from Oerlikon 35mm AA guns.

Well done sir!

Regards,

John Kettler

[allenj7]

I have visually seen shells curving in the game trying to reach a distant target. So yes, this is possible. Put a scout unit able to see it and hide a tank behind a hill and have it fire!

[Cid250]

Yes i'm thinking on the WWII game after SF... it was a well known tactic in WWII. The Germans even had some special tools to make the convergence of several MGs to follow a pattern.

The normal procedure was to fire 4 MGs, and was described very well in the best book about MG42: The Myrvang's one.

Will be a pity that we miss the chance to add indirect fire for MG platoons, and also indirect fore for Infantry guns and Assault guns... all those weapons had indirect fire methods on WWII.

[SgtMuhammed]

In my several years as a 60 and M2 gunner I never recieved any training in indirect fire with the gun. We all knew it was possible because we heard that the Rangers practiced it but it was never something that I trained in either as a gunner or as a squad leader. Maybe some of the Mech guys have done so but I never did.

[Kineas]

Anyone has a guess/calculation for the impact velocity of the bullets?

[hellfish]

When I cross trained with the Brits, they were taught to do it (so they said), but in my six years as an infantryman, two of which I was an M60 gunner, we were never taught how to do it.

[edward_n_kelly]

Practiced it and taught it when I was in an SFMG platoon with M60s in the late 1970s. Saw it in a firepower demo with FN MAG58 (L7) in the early 1990s. Discussed it with a mate who was RSM of an infantry Bn (and then its Training Officer on taking his PSO) in the early 2000s - still doing it in the Army of Oz.

Edward

[adultery]

they do in the new zealand army too...but then...those are highly trained troops....with cheap gear

[FAI]

Originally posted by Captain Adultery:

they do in the new zealand army too...but then...those are highly trained troops....with cheap gear

I'm impressed with their deployment to Mordor...

[JasonC]

I certainly did not, and your links are dead.

I am aware of its use in WW I and a few times in WW II, but consider it a truely clueless misuse of MGs and a collosal waste of ammo. Occasional interdiction fire to isolate a forward trench or to prevent night movements, on the other hand, are standard MG uses.

[MikeyD]

You can't target out of LOS but I suppose there could be inadvertant indirect mg fire. Bullet trajectories are pretty faithful to the real thing, you see muzzle climb when firing bursts. Plus green troop in general tend to aim a bit high. That means while targetting along a ridge a proportion of the rounds are going to scoot the ridge and go sailing of in a ballistic trajectory. Where this might actually come in handy is with Syrian and U.S. grenade launcher mgs. They've got an arcing trajectory and a pretty big dispersion pattern. So targetting the tipy-top of a ridge should get a few grenades raining down on the far side. Enough for harrassing fire if nothing else.

[jjhouston]

"We used lots of mortar fire from positions in the rear--artillery, tank fire and quad 50s, a four-barrel anti-aircraft gun, used in an indirect-fire ground role. In addition, track-mounted, dual 40mm cannon were used in a similar role. All of these weapons were used in a harassing and interdiction (H&I) role, both day..."

http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-1792930/ROA-remembers-the-forgotten-war.html

[third-hand personal anecdote]I wasn't in Korea myself, but my father, describes that while in Vietnam, veterans explained to him the effectiveness quad .50s used in defilade fire during Korea.[/third-hand personal anecdote]

[Bil Hardenberger]

It's called Plunging Fire and I learned the technique when I was trained on the M-60 back in the 80's... I've seen it referenced in more than a few current US Army FM's also. It is still a very valid and important tool to the MG gunner.

Here is an example:

5-6. RESPECT TO THE GROUND

Fire with respect to the GROUND (Figure 5-3) includes grazing and plunging fires.

a. Grazing Fire. Grazing fire occurs when the center of the cone of fire does not rise more than 1 meter above the ground. When firing on level or uniformly sloping terrain, the gunner can obtain a maximum of 600 meters of grazing fire.

b. Plunging Fire. Plunging fire occurs when the danger space is confined to the beaten zone. Plunging fire also occurs when firing at long ranges, from high ground to low ground, into abruptly rising ground, or across uneven terrain, resulting in a loss of grazing fire at any point along the trajectory.

Other terms to be aware of are searching fire:

c. Searching Fire. Searching fire is fire distributed in depth by successive changes in elevation. The gunner selects successive aiming points in depth. The changes made in each aiming point will depend on the range and slope of the ground.

..and firing from defilade:

A machine gun is in defilade when the weapon and its crew are completely behind terrain that masks them from the enemy (usually on the reverse slope of a hill). Fire, from a defilade position, is controlled by an observer (the leader or a member of the crew who can see the target) that is in a position near the machine gun.

Bil

[ July 19, 2007, 09:51 AM: Message edited by: Bil Hardenberger ]

[Holman]

OMG someone said "tripod"...

[JonS]

Originally posted by JasonC:

I ... consider [indirect MG fire] a truely clueless misuse of MGs and a collosal waste of ammo. Occasional interdiction fire to isolate a forward trench or to prevent night movements, on the other hand, are standard MG uses.

Ignoring for the moment that these two sentences are contradictory, I suppose the answer the the first sentence is either:

a) that really depends on the effect you're trying to acheive, does it not? or

ammo is cheap, time is plentiful. If you have the resources (ie, the MGs with the necessary eqpt and trained crews) and a valid opportunity to use them, why would you not do it (in a conventional war setting)?

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Martyr:

OMG someone said "tripod"...

Bren there, done that...

[flammenwerfer]

Heh. Good one.