No Smoke???

[Jussi Köhler]

Originally posted by Peterk:

Not meaning to issue a big challenge to anyone who amay or may not be the owner or moderator of the board...but...

This came up on the ASL discussion boards a while ago and I found the following document while checking it out myself. It's a good read. The Russians seemed to love smoke.

A Red Army document on the use of smoke in WWII

http://www.redarmystudies.net/smhj/1987/1987_05.pdf

On page 27, description of a Russian breakthrough in which 4076 smoke grenades were used in Jan 1944 on the Ukrainian front. Rifle troops making smoke mentionned for the first time!

On page 31, description of assault groups in cities setting small frontage 50m-200m smoke screens to cover advances.

Everyones awfully quiet about this post. Doesnt anyone else think that this proves a certain point (to a degree at least) and torpedoes the objections we have heard over the years?

[Tarquelne]

Everyones awfully quiet about this post. Doesnt anyone else think that this proves a certain point (to a degree at least) and torpedoes the objections we have heard over the years?

I'm in denial.

Ask again after I've discussed it with my therapist.

[norman888]

Originally posted by thewood:

Actually, IIRC, IL2 AI could see right through clouds...

That IS the problem with smoke. In the IL2 engine the AI can see through clouds-and it's never been fixed-or could be fixed. I doubt we will ever see it in this game.

[Destraex]

damn bad karma

[Peterk]

Everyones awfully quiet about this post.

Checkmate.

Smoke is pretty curious. Really tough to find references to it in the literature even though you KNOW the troops had it and used it.

I read Band Of Brothers soon after reading that Red Army document. The US paratroopers are smoke grenade belching monsters in ASL...so I decided to keep a very close eye out for mention of smoke grenades in the dozens and dozens of personal stories recounted by the 101st paratroopers in the book. Not once!

So does that mean US paratroopers did not use smoke grenades?

[ September 01, 2006, 01:51 PM: Message edited by: Peterk ]

[WindyCity]

Sometime back ,around 99-00 as this question surfaced back in the CMBO days I asked my Grandfather that fought with the 101st if this was true.

He stated he was never issued any smoke grenades or never seen any used by his unit I co 502. that he recalled.

But he did tell me that some sticks in Normandy did drop BARs in some kind of tubes, so figure that one out.

[Peterk]

Interesting.

I've read a couple of books recently on the Stalingrad fighting - not the big, general books, like Beevor and Craig - but soldier on the ground accounts.

They went into a great amount of detail both for their own attacks and the way the Russians attacked and absolutely no mention of ever using smoke for cover.

I'm not really sure where I stand on the issue. It seems such an obvious thing to do with the equipment if it was available, but almost never (to my eyes so far at least) shows up in the stories.

[M Hofbauer]

Originally posted by Jussi Köhler:

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

Not meaning to issue a big challenge to anyone who amay or may not be the owner or moderator of the board...but...

This came up on the ASL discussion boards a while ago and I found the following document while checking it out myself. It's a good read. The Russians seemed to love smoke.

A Red Army document on the use of smoke in WWII

http://www.redarmystudies.net/smhj/1987/1987_05.pdf

On page 27, description of a Russian breakthrough in which 4076 smoke grenades were used in Jan 1944 on the Ukrainian front. Rifle troops making smoke mentionned for the first time!

On page 31, description of assault groups in cities setting small frontage 50m-200m smoke screens to cover advances.

Everyones awfully quiet about this post. Doesnt anyone else think that this proves a certain point (to a degree at least) and torpedoes the objections we have heard over the years? </font>

[Peterk]

4,000 smoke rounds for the Ukrainian front?

Smoke GRENADES....infantry grenades.

Not artillery smoke rounds for big smoke screens.

Read the article. You'll be surprised at the figures and the details of use.

BTW...there's lots of great stuff on that Red Army Studies site. The issue on Stalingrad is particulary good.

[Tarquelne]

Originally posted by Peterk:

[QB] </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />4,000 smoke rounds for the Ukrainian front?

Smoke GRENADES....infantry grenades.

Not artillery smoke rounds for big smoke screens.

</font>

[Peterk]

And over what time period?

Looks like 3 hours at the beginning of a large attack. Is there any way to use a smoke grenade in an unorthodox manner? Grouping them together and setting them off en masse?

Anyways, regardless of the details of that one single paragraph, that article makes a very strong case that Russians often used smoke for...

i) covering retreats

ii) covering recon/raiding units returning to the lines

iii) deception at the beginning of attacks

iv) hindering enemy fire and sight during beginning of attacks

v) assaults in urban terrain

...and that usage of smoke tactically was very much part of their mindset pretty much from the beginning of the war onward and that smoke use increased as the war went on.

They had "chemical battalions" who appear to be smokescreen specialists.

You can of course discard that article entirely, but it does look fairly authoritative in answering the question "did the russians use smoke?" and "did the Russians use smoke grenades?".

Personally, I can live with TOW not having infantry smoke without too many misgivings. I just threw that article out because I found it interesting when I discovered it.

[Col Deadmarsh]

Originally posted by WindyCity:

Sometime back ,around 99-00 as this question surfaced back in the CMBO days I asked my Grandfather that fought with the 101st if this was true.

He stated he was never issued any smoke grenades or never seen any used by his unit I co 502. that he recalled.

But he did tell me that some sticks in Normandy did drop BARs in some kind of tubes, so figure that one out.

I recently talked to a vet who was at Normandy and he confirmed that his squad was never issued smoke grenades.

So I can accept this in CM.

But to eliminate smoke altogether...how does one rush over barren terrain or retreat from an overwhelming situation with no concealment from arty or mortar smoke?

How does a smaller tank retreat from something it can't kill if it doesn't possess smoke grenade launchers to conceal itself?

It just seems to me that this "no smoke" thing would affect game play to the point where it would seem entirely unrealistic.

Frankly, the more I hear about what was left out of this game, the more I just wanna wait till CM hits the shelves.

[M Hofbauer]

Originally posted by Colonel_Deadmarsh:

I recently talked to a vet who was at Normandy and he confirmed that his squad was never issued smoke grenades.

So I can accept this in CM.

I recently saw a Panther in russian use.

So I can accept all allied forces in CM and ToW being equipped with Panthers.

Oh, and the Germans get Shermans.

Shermans - Germans, get it?

saw a picture of a german sherman once.

or even twice.

[M Hofbauer]

Originally posted by Peterk:

You can of course discard that article entirely, but it does look fairly authoritative in answering the question "did the russians use smoke?" and "did the Russians use smoke grenades?".

Personally, I can live with TOW not having infantry smoke without too many misgivings. I just threw that article out because I found it interesting when I discovered it.

perhaps you misunderstood me or I didnt make myself clear.

I do not doubt that they used smoke.

the original statement was confusing me as 4000 smoke grenades didnt look like a big figure in the context of that statement.

the article might be interesting - havent DLed it yet in all of its 5+ MB glory so I have to hold final judgement.

but thanks already for pointing it out.

[Thomm]

They used a smoke grenade on the MG pillbox in "A Bridge too Far"!

There.

Best regards,

Thomm