Is impact fuzed artillery too powerfull against trenches?

[slug88]

Isn't that what the yellow exclaimation point and "routing" status is used to indicate?

Not to mention "panicked" and "shaken" units.

[Meach]

That's my point, BlackMoria. I find your description fascinating.

All that earth that filled the hole you parked your jeep in, had to go somewhere.

I don't think CMSF takes into account mud moving but being anywhere near a 150million Joule explosion is not going to do your hearing any good either. A deafened and shocked soldier is a casualty.

[YankeeDog]

Isn't that what the yellow exclaimation point and "routing" status is used to indicate?

Well, only one of the BFC guys could give you a definitive answer, but I'm not sure all "psych" casualties are accurately represented by the rout mechanic.

The rout mechanic (i.e., have the little exclamation point appear over their heads, followed by the soldier disappearing off the battlefield) seems to only represent psychological casualties resulting from having to weather sustained incoming fire. This is certainly one way psych casualties happen --- a soldier gets pinned under fire for an extended period of time, or has to sit under an extended artillery barrage and eventually "just can't take it anymore."

But psych casualties also happen from singular, shocking events. For example, Bob sees Bill step on a landmine and have his leg blown to bits, and something just snaps inside Bob; he drops into a fetal position and refuses to move for the next 1/2 hr. No extended period of suppression or similar. I've never seen any routs like this this happen in CMSF. That is, I've never seen a soldier in a unit in good order, and not otherwise suppressed or taking fire, show a little exclamation point and disappear after his unit takes a casualty or two from just one good hit by an HE round, or something like that.

But maybe I haven't been looking in the right place at the right time.

And in any event, the essential point remains: any unit caught under a heavy artillery barrage will take more than just actual hit-by -shrapnel/blown-to-bits casualties. Just the overpressure from being close to a large explosion can cause deafness, blindness, extreme nausea and loss of balance, etc.

So if all an artillery "effectiveness test" is measuring is the number of dummies or plywood cut-outs that have holes punched in them or pieces torn off, that's not telling the whole story, especially on the CM time-frame.

Cheers,

YD

[Apocal]

But psych casualties also happen from singular, shocking events. For example, Bob sees Bill step on a landmine and have his leg blown to bits, and something just snaps inside Bob; he drops into a fetal position and refuses to move for the next 1/2 hr. No extended period of suppression or similar. I've never seen any routs like this this happen in CMSF. That is, I've never seen a soldier in a unit in good order, and not otherwise suppressed or taking fire, show a little exclamation point and disappear after his unit takes a casualty or two from just one good hit by an HE round, or something like that.

But maybe I haven't been looking in the right place at the right time.

Try watching infantry squads struck by RPGs. One or two casualties, but occassionally one guy routs.

[Secondbrooks]

30%? For "Suppressed"? Yikes.

Western doctrine tends to regard any unit that has taken 30-40% cas as "Destroyed", at least for the forseeable future. 20% cas is "Neutralised", i.e. it won't be bothering you much, if at all.

Strictly speaking, "Suppressed" doesn't required *any* cas from artillery.

Interesting... Wondering from where that difference comes from, we and Soviets had common believe that 60% casualities were required to unit to become destoyed.

Ofcourse there is also the factor that 40% casualties to attacking force are considered to be limit after which attacker quits it. For defender 60% is required. And i believe this is quite common rule of thumb in world.

[purpheart23]

BlackMoria:

I've been through several impact zones in my short ten year career and I will tell you i've never seen a 155 crater big enough to park a vehicle in. Might you have found some crater from a larger munition?

[Secondbrooks]

Interesting... Wondering from where that difference comes from, we and Soviets had common believe that 60% casualities were required to unit to become destoyed.

Ofcourse there is also the factor that 40% casualties to attacking force are considered to be limit after which attacker quits it. For defender 60% is required. And i believe this is quite common rule of thumb in world.

Editing time was up, so i will quite myself:

Too much Soviets (or glue sniffed) for me it seems :cool: We have 20% for suppressed, 50% for destoryed. Less is just harassment.

[Mishga]

Maybe it was a 203mm crater the jeep was parked in?

[hcrof]

Editing time was up, so i will quite myself:

Too much Soviets (or glue sniffed) for me it seems :cool: We have 20% for suppressed, 50% for destoryed. Less is just harassment.

I don't understand. A defending unit takes 50% casualties (Destroyed) and yet doesn't quit (below 60% casualties). Surely then it isn't destroyed as it is still able to put up a fight?

Or is the unit just downgraded in size? Like a destroyed battalion becomes a company

[Secondbrooks]

I don't understand. A defending unit takes 50% casualties (Destroyed) and yet doesn't quit (below 60% casualties). Surely then it isn't destroyed as it is still able to put up a fight?

Or is the unit just downgraded in size? Like a destroyed battalion becomes a company

50% figure, if i remember this right, is taken into account with just indirect fire. It's basically different thing than 40% and 60% figures, which are more complete (=whole combat) by taking also direct fire into account. With indirect fire there are different terms (destruction, suppression, harassment) used than objectives of mission, which are destruction or "beating" (forcing it to evade) of enemy or occupying terrain which is vital to enemy or own objectives. In later destuction has bit more fatal flavor.

And 60-40% is used to bring out defender's and attacker's differences in determent and will to suffer casualities to reach/maintain mission objectives. Probably serving more as neat guide line in tactical studies, where officers wonders which is best way to do something in theoretic scale.

Something like that.

[Wengart]

Hcrof

I always saw the X% = unit destroyed as the end of effective organized resistance of the unit. They may continue to fight on but it would be on a more individual basis rather than as a cohesive unit. For example, a platoon takes 50% casualties. The platoon would then cease to resist in an organized matter and the only resistance would be from individual squads fighting on without any or very little overall command and control structure.

[purpheart23]

mayhaps mishga, but even so, the 155 craters were very shallow with numerous fragments left over, granted i believe most of these too have been set in the PD mode. I imagine delay would dig out the earth a lil more, but not that much more.

[Michael Emrys]

BlackMoria:

I've been through several impact zones in my short ten year career and I will tell you i've never seen a 155 crater big enough to park a vehicle in. Might you have found some crater from a larger munition?

Such as a 2,000 lb. aerial bomb, perhaps?

Michael

[JonS]

Maybe it was a *very* small jeep?

[purpheart23]

haha, maybe, I've seen what was left of a truck that was hit with what had to have been at least a 500lb. bomb. Like an aluminum can getting hit with a shot gun at point blank and the crater was large. Very large.

[Mishga]

OK, bit outfield here but..

What if it was a buried 155mm detonated electronically like an IED. Would the crater be larger? And excuse the very silly question but would it matter what way the shell was pointing? Just a bog standard 155mm HE shell we are talking about in this situation.

[BlackMoria]

BlackMoria:

I've been through several impact zones in my short ten year career and I will tell you i've never seen a 155 crater big enough to park a vehicle in. Might you have found some crater from a larger munition?

It was absolutely a 155 crater on fuze delay because I put it there.

I hammered a hill with a battery mission and could visually see all the craters being made with each impact. My FO team advanced up to the hill in an Iltis jeep (they are not large) because my M113 blew a transmission the previous day and there were no spare 113s.

The ground was very sandy earth, so that may have been a factor and no doubt the crater would be not as deep if it was clay. But the Iltis fitted in the crater nicely and my OP occupied another crater near the top of the hill as an ad hoc trench to fire the next several fire missions on another ridge.

Mishga: The orientation doesn't much matter when using a 155 round as IED and the depth of the IED will be a factor of depth of the hole. Most IEDs are just deep enough so they can remain undetected to visual observation. In Afghanistan, the typical IED is several mortar rounds together or a single soviet 152mm artillery round but recently, putting 2-3 artillery shells together is starting to become the norm as NATO forces field more IED resistant vehicles.

[Mishga]

Right, I get what you mean.

How does the IED resistant vehicles deal with EFP munitions? I read that the molten core can reach 2km/s before impact. Are the EFP munitions rarer in Afghanistan than common shells and bombs?

[purpheart23]

It was absolutely a 155 crater on fuze delay because I put it there.

I hammered a hill with a battery mission and could visually see all the craters being made with each impact. My FO team advanced up to the hill in an Iltis jeep (they are not large) because my M113 blew a transmission the previous day and there were no spare 113s.

The ground was very sandy earth, so that may have been a factor and no doubt the crater would be not as deep if it was clay. But the Iltis fitted in the crater nicely and my OP occupied another crater near the top of the hill as an ad hoc trench to fire the next several fire missions on another ridge.

Mishga: The orientation doesn't much matter when using a 155 round as IED and the depth of the IED will be a factor of depth of the hole. Most IEDs are just deep enough so they can remain undetected to visual observation. In Afghanistan, the typical IED is several mortar rounds together or a single soviet 152mm artillery round but recently, putting 2-3 artillery shells together is starting to become the norm as NATO forces field more IED resistant vehicles.

I meant no offense, just never seen it my self, most of the craters I've made/seen were probably no more than a foot or two deep.

[taccovert4]

Right, I get what you mean.

How does the IED resistant vehicles deal with EFP munitions? I read that the molten core can reach 2km/s before impact. Are the EFP munitions rarer in Afghanistan than common shells and bombs?

Not but so well. The best thing about EFP munitions is that unlike regular bombs, you actually have to aim. Your stock IED can take out a light skinned vehicle simply by detonating with the vehicle in the blast radius. The closer to ground zero, the more severe the damage.

MRAPs seek to mitigate these issues by raising the hull of the vehicle off the ground and having a rounded or Veed hull to redirect blasts directly under the vehicle; and by having a unitary hull compartment containing the personnell and much of the cargo space, which provides protection from blast overpressure and shrapnel. In theory at least, an MRAP can have every external part blasted off the hull, and can be quite literally sitting on the crater with only its hull intact and the crew should be able to be extracted with only minor injuries. In practice, it's probably not that simple.

For your fancier IEDs, the MRAP has to rely on some age-old principles of armor penetration....

As far back as 2006, there were 155 based IEDs with the bases of the rounds directed so as to be aimed at the vehicle when the bomb went off. While difficult to aim accurately, if done correctly, the result was a huge chunk of the base of the shell impacting the vehicle as a single entity, making it a 'poor man's AT round'. This same principle was used in WWI, when German Snipers would invert a handful of the bullets for their Mausers. By having the base impact first, it gave the round improved energy transfer at impact, which allowed it to penetrate or cave in the steel sniper plates the British had begun to use. MRAPs are designed to provide some protection against this, but their armor is for blast-proofing and small arms, so there is a chance, depending on the nature of the bomb and the caliber of the round, that an inverted Artillery shell could penetrate an MRAP's armor based on the overmatching principle (where the caliber of the shell is larger than the thickness of the armor, and shatters its way through by sheer mass), the same principle that allows low velocity Infantry gun shells in CMx1 to defeat tanks.

in the EFP family there are 2 major types of bombs. There is the true EFPHEAT shell, with an inverted cone, precisely measured and constructed of the proper materials, matched with the proper type and amount of explosives, and carefully constructed to factory specs. This is the most dangerous form, and creates that 'explosive jet and slug of metal' that literally burn through armor. Depending on the size and the distance from ground zero, tanks have problems with these bombs. In one case a Hezbollah EFPHEAT bomb literally blew the turret off of an Israeli Merkava IV tank (arguably one of the most survivable and proven MBTs in the world). It was made from a 30 gallon hot water heater and was buried in the road. MRAPs aren't going to stop such large or well made EFPs. Smaller EFPHEATs farther away from the vehicle, possibly, but your best bet is to discover the bomb (which has some definable placement parameters making it easier to spot than the traditional blast radius ones) or that the bombers screw up in construction or aiming the weapon.

The other type of EFP is the platter charge, which uses a dished out piece of metal (think wok) with the explosive charge on the outside of the curve. These bombs aren't really creating the same HEAT (high explosive anti-tank) effect that the EFPHEATs are. They are, however, directing and increasing the ferocity of the explosion. MRAPs can defeat these on a regular basis, depending on the size, construction, and proximity.

[Meach]

Excellent post. I learned a lot from that.