Counter Battery Fire

[Tank Hunter]

Hi

While I was playing last night one thing struck me during AI's initial barrage.

Why are we not able to deploy our artillery in CB mode?

Let's say your opponent has on board mortars. They fire and you can clearly see incoming shells. This should provide a "?" contact and allow you to use your artillery or mortars as a counter meassure if you want to.

For off board artillery you could set it up to be in CB mode and they will aquire data from enemy barrages and conduct CBF. This could be simulated under the hood and provide an additional strategy layer. Based on enemy's artillery range your own guns could or could not perform any CBF.

CBF would be based on sound ranging and flash spotting which would require enemy guns to fire. These methods have been there forever and were joined by radar in World War II. Radar could detect a shell in flight; the gun that fired it could not usually be seen and the shell's elliptical trajectory made it impossible to extrapolate backwards with the technology of that time. However, mortar bombs have a parabolic trajectory (as do guns firing in 'high angle') defined by a simple mathematical equation with two points on the parabolic curve. It was therefore possible to deduce a mortar's position by tracking its bomb and recording two points on its trajectory.

[Speedy]

Outside the scope of the game I would think.

[Glukx Ouglouk]

CBF for off map artillery is very far outside the scope of this game... Any CBF issues should already be included in the choice of which support assets are available and how many shells are allocated from each, because they're completely outside the control of a company/battalion commander.

[womble]

Hi

While I was playing last night one thing struck me during AI's initial barrage.

Why are we not able to deploy our artillery in CB mode?

Let's say your opponent has on board mortars. They fire and you can clearly see incoming shells. This should provide a "?" contact and allow you to use your artillery or mortars as a counter meassure if you want to.

"Clearly see" only applies to the player. I doubt very much that you'd be able to eyeball a grapefruit-sized object travelling at half the speed of sound, coming up from behind obscuration. You might see it in game, and if you have LOS to where you think it's coming from you can drop a barrage on it, but since you can't order a barrage on a prearranged location without a TRP on it without LOS, why should firing at suspected enemy mortar emplacements be any different?

[Tank Hunter]

I could agree on off board batteries beeing outside the scope but what about on-map mortars? Should not the local commander in field be able to realize his forces are under mortar attack and based on spotted trajectory have indications from where mortar fire is coming?

I have just read a personal account of one of the Gebirgsjaegers in Finland during WWII when his platoon was attacking a Soviet line, he was manning one of the MGs protecting the assault team. He opened fire on Soviet positions keeping them pinned while a group of Germans advanced toward the enemy. Shortly after he heard Soviet mortars fire and his group came under mortar bombardement forcing them to seek cover in the nearby craters.

After few minutes German mortars opened fire on the Soviet mortar positions silencing them and allowing the MG team to get out of the cover and retreat to their original positions.

[YankeeDog]

IRL, it's not easy to spot mortar bombs flying through the air. And in any event, it would be difficult to correctly judge azimuth and bearing by eye, so that you could calculate the location of the mortars mathematically. But if you get close enough to the enemy mortars that you can see or at least hear them, or even just make a good educated guess as to where they are based on reading of terrain and the areas they're targeting, then the game will let you do this now.

So I don't see the issue here...

[Lt Belenko]

I really don't think WWII radar was capable of mortar fire tracking, firing unit extrapolation, impact location prediction etc. That level of technology wasn't available until decades later. I believe this was the first system that could provide CBF data. At the bottom development occurred in the 1970s, full scale production in 1981.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/an-tpq-37.htm

[ArgusEye]

The Brits deployed mobile anti-mortar radar trucks to Italy in '44. The Germans were impressed enough to declare these trucks priority targets, even though they didn't exactly know what these things did.

[YankeeDog]

The Brits deployed mobile anti-mortar radar trucks to Italy in '44. The Germans were impressed enough to declare these trucks priority targets, even though they didn't exactly know what these things did.

Off the top of my head, but I believe there was some limited deployment of counter-mortar radar in the low countries in late 1944 or maybe early 1945.

At any rate, the system was highly experimental and a far cry from today's automatic, rapid response systems. I also don't think it was ever deployed in Normandy, so it's moot for CMBN.

[pagskier]

I'm sure it was use in late 1944 1945 by Commonwealth troops.

Not too sure about Normandy/italy and US forces

But I think those woule be rear echelon units, not actual assault troops manning them

[Praetori]

There were systems employed by most sides during the war that was capable of giving direction and crude ranging of enemy arty. By means of triangulation the enemy arty could be positioned albeit roughly.

The Germans had a system mounted on halftracks that was based on sound based direction and ranging though the name eludes me atm.

edit: Sdkfz 251/13, 14 and 15 (sound and optical flash detection variants).

[StellarRat]

I really don't think WWII radar was capable of mortar fire tracking, firing unit extrapolation, impact location prediction etc. That level of technology wasn't available until decades later. I believe this was the first system that could provide CBF data. At the bottom development occurred in the 1970s, full scale production in 1981.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/an-tpq-37.htm

Yes, but sound location systems were around even in WW I (I think.) I don't know how good they were, but I imagine they could give a fairly accurate bearing, ranging is another matter.

[Chainsaw]

Yes, but sound location systems were around even in WW I (I think.) I don't know how good they were, but I imagine they could give a fairly accurate bearing, ranging is another matter.

That is what triangulation gives you. If you have 2 listning posts lets say 5km apart and a mortar is firing, both will have 2 different headings, if you cross these two headings with the OPs current position you get a point in the triangle (with the OPs being the base) where the enemy firing came from. Crudely atleast.

I know it became standard for most british forces to report in every mortar stonk they could hear and give headings to it. soon enough the FO figured out a position for the enemy battery and put down CB fire on them.

[Praetori]

Yes, but sound location systems were around even in WW I (I think.) I don't know how good they were, but I imagine they could give a fairly accurate bearing, ranging is another matter.

By moving the "recording" unit half a click a couple of times and take directions during the duration of a barrage the enemy arty could be pinpointed on a map.

Several units could together triangulate manually over radio.

It's quite simple but rather inaccurate as the distance increase.

[StellarRat]

That is what triangulation gives you. If you have 2 listning posts lets say 5km apart and a mortar is firing, both will have 2 different headings, if you cross these two headings with the OPs current position you get a point in the triangle (with the OPs being the base) where the enemy firing came from. Crudely atleast.

I know it became standard for most british forces to report in every mortar stonk they could hear and give headings to it. soon enough the FO figured out a position for the enemy battery and put down CB fire on them.

Doh! I forgot you could use two or more to triangulate! I was thinking of a one device solution like a modern system. I agree with both of you.

[gunnergoz]

Given the tactical scale of CM:N and the time factor involved (1 hour battles or less, most of the time) I just see traditional artillery counter battery operations as being beyond the scope of the game. At this level, the most you can hope to do is try to figure out where the enemy mortars are generally located on the game map and either drop some harassing fire in the area or actually send in some armor to take them out.

On a campaign level, I could see where, in the presence of strong enemy off-map artillery assets, the player could be able to opt to devote some of his own off-map artillery towards nullifying the enemy's assets in between tactical scenarios. I doubt there is any provision in the game for this at present, however. Counter battery is normally the sort of thing that division and corps artillery HQ's specialize in dealing with, not tactical commanders in this time frame.

[JonS]

For teh British in both late-WWI and WWII Sound ranging used a (or several) 'baselines' of five or six microphones surveyed in along a line. By precicely recoding the time the sound wave from the firing report arrived sequentially at each microphone, it was possible to triangulate back to the firing point. Flash-spotting used directors, which would be aimed at the visible flash of guns firing then, again, triangulated with sightings from other directors surveyed in at opther locations. Those, plus MOREPS and SHELLREPS (page 18) from forward troops, SIGINT, plus formal and informal aerial recconaissance reports, all went back to the Corps Counter Battery Office, where all the various information was collated and plotted, and assets applied to neutralise enemy artillery. From Normandy onwards, radar location for hostile artillery and mortars was added to the mix* of information sources. It was all very deliberate - and highly successful. However mortars always remained a particular challenge because of their small firing-point footprint and their mobility.

But all that it was well outside the scope of any tactical commander that you would reasonably find in CMBN. And if you do happen to find a commander that would reasonably be concerned about it - such as a scen in which a divisional or corps HQ is under direct ground attack - then they're going to have far more immediate concerns than carrying on with what is essentially a staff function.

Specifics:

Based on enemy's artillery range your own guns could or could not perform any CBF

But where are your guns, and where are the enemy's? The 3D battle map in CMBN floats disembodied, complete unto itself. Off map artillery isn't at any specific location off map, it is just Off Map. Somewhere. Everywhere. And nowhere. There is no concept of a tangible world off the edges of the 3D map.

Let's say your opponent has on board mortars

A reasonable question, since it's likely to be quite a normal occurrence in CMBN, I should think. In that case you will have to use your noggin and conduct CB with the information and resources you have at hand. It's your tactical problem, so you figure out a tactical solution. Don't expect the game to hold your hand.

Regards

Jon

* Incidentally, a bit later in the campaign - from late-1944 - radar was occasionally being used to track friendly rounds going out, and the data gleaned was used to conduct adjustments.

P.S. the following map shows examples of actual Flash- and Sound-Ranging baselines, as deployed in Tunisia during the final stages of the North African Campaign, from this source.

[StrykerPSG]

IRL, it's not easy to spot mortar bombs flying through the air. And in any event, it would be difficult to correctly judge azimuth and bearing by eye, so that you could calculate the location of the mortars mathematically. But if you get close enough to the enemy mortars that you can see or at least hear them, or even just make a good educated guess as to where they are based on reading of terrain and the areas they're targeting, then the game will let you do this now.

So I don't see the issue here...

I agree spotting would be tough, near impossible. However, one techique being overlooked and is quite an old technique is one called crater analysis. It's quite easy actually and moderately accurate for a direction and caliber range. Can be used for either mortars or artillery. Steps are:

1)Locate the crater, secure a fragment

2)Depending on spray pattern, mortars and artillery possess disctinct burst pattern in the ground. Place a stake near fuze burrow, another stake in the middle of the spray pattern

3)Using a compass or Aiming Circle, shoot a back azimuth to determine direction

4)Securing one of the casing fragments, match it to the caliber template to determine minimum and maximum range

5)Record all data on a counterbattery card with DTG

6)Record 8-13 digit grid(yes, 13 for GPS grids, not 12)

7)Await another impacting round and repeat process.

That's it. It's actually a bit more complex, but simple in design and used to take out quite a few insurgent guns in Iraq. It doesn't give an exact fix, but generally we ar creatures of habit and as such, will go back to where we have secured and fired from before. By having an azimuth and caliber, the S2 shop can begin tracing lines and come up with a pattern that becomes predicatable and often fatal to a negligent crew, which is why I always assumed my enemy has a similar capacity to conduct basic geometry.

Here's the hyperlink to FM 6-50, Appendix J, Crater Analysis: https://rdl.train.army.mil/soldierPortal/atia/adlsc/view/public/9512-1/fm/6-50/Appj.htm

Please note, you will initially get a warning about certificate errors, continue to website anyway. It's actually quite cool and used it regularly enough that it became a BDE standard.

Matt

[gunnergoz]

I agree spotting would be tough, near impossible. However, one techique being overlooked and is quite an old technique is one called crater analysis. It's quite easy actually and moderately accurate for a direction and caliber range. Can be used for either mortars or artillery. Steps are:

(snip)

Matt

Real world Steps are:

1. WAIT FOR THE F'in BARRAGE TO FINISH

2. CHANGE YOUR UNDERWEAR as may be required

3. SEND OUT THE FNG TO DO THE CRATER ANALYSIS...etc

[StrykerPSG]

Real world Steps are:

1. WAIT FOR THE F'in BARRAGE TO FINISH

2. CHANGE YOUR UNDERWEAR as may be required

3. SEND OUT THE FNG TO DO THE CRATER ANALYSIS...etc

LMAO, how true, how true.

Matt

[Magpie_Oz]

why 13 figures for GPS Grid References ?

[StrykerPSG]

Easting has a maximum of 6 digits, northing has maximum of 7 digits. Most usually rounded in zeroes and rarely exceeds 8-10 digits.

Matt

[Magpie_Oz]

OK so you are quoting the full UTM coordinate rather than a grid reference ?

[StrykerPSG]

Yes, if you're using a GPS, however, that tech obviously didn't exist back then but used with great frequency today. Also depends on signal quality as to whether or not you'll get all 13 digits as anything other than 0's for the last few numbers of the northing and easting.

Matt

[MikeyD]

Counter-battery fire is like battalion artillery barrage fire, waaaaay beyond the scope of the game but that doesn't mean it wouldn't be a hoot to see a 'demonstration scenario'!

For instance: You play axis with dug-in on-map howitzers, the AI has a painted target zone on top of your position. Hit go and watch everybody immediately die in a spectacular fashion. End of scenario. An alternative for H2H would be to place an enemy TRP directly on top of your guns so he can order ten Long Toms to blast the hell out of you. just for demonstration purposes.