engineers and hedgehog obstacles

[Bartokomus]

I searched the forum and i couldn't find guidance, so i guess everyone else knows the answer!

Can engineers clear hedgehogs with the blast command? In the manual it says that engineers can breach obstacles (all inclusive), and then on the same page it mentions only bunkers, bocage, and mines. When i try to guide my pioneers to blast a hedgehog they do everything the same as when they're blowing through bocage or a wall, but they never throw one of the charges and they are not under any fire or artillery.

Much help appreciated for what can/cannot be blasted into oblivion!

[John1966]

Tried it playing a scenario the other night and, from the results, I would suggest that they can't remove hedgehogs. Which is annoying...

[Pak40]

No, this has been brought up before. I think the general consensus is that demo charge can't really hurt a huge mass of welded metal, let alone several. Historically the hedgehogs had to be roped or chained to a heavy vehicle and pulled out the way.

[jbmtintin]

Good question, and even a better answer.

[womble]

No, this has been brought up before. I think the general consensus is that demo charge can't really hurt a huge mass of welded metal, let alone several. Historically the hedgehogs had to be roped or chained to a heavy vehicle and pulled out the way.

And the ones that had been concreted into the ground had to be cut away with acetylene torches or cutting charges, or dug out with engineering vehicles.

[GreenAsJade]

Anyone got any good piccies?

Edit: of course, google has.

Google also has this:

a. Hedgehogs. Steel hedgehogs as shown in figure 3-14 are relatively lightweight for the obstacle effect they provide, and they are quickly installed or removed. They are designed to revolve under wheeled vehicles and puncture them or to belly up tracked vehicles. Unless kept under observation and covered with fire, the enemy can readily move them aside.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/accp/en0065/le3.htm

GaJ

[Michael Emrys]

No, this has been brought up before. I think the general consensus is that demo charge can't really hurt a huge mass of welded metal, let alone several. Historically the hedgehogs had to be roped or chained to a heavy vehicle and pulled out the way.

So how is it that the obstacles on Omaha beach were removed by explosive? With enough TNT you can remove anything. Granted, it requires more preparation than just heaving in a satchel charge; but then, so does blasting a gap in bocage.

Michael

[YankeeDog]

Even a relatively small, crude linear charge will cut through a small steel I-beam pretty easily.

WWII engineers definitely knew of and used linear charges; there were even standardized ones that came all ready to use.

Now, whether Engineers typically carried linear charges when running around the battlefield, I don't know. They certainly had the training and know-how to build crude ones out of plastique, if time allowed. And in any event, the game appears at assume that engineers have the right charge ready for whatever the immediate job requires. For example, the type of charge required to efficiently blow a hole in an embankment such as bocage is very different from the type of charge used to blow a hole in a wall. But in the game engineers magically have whichever they need, prepped and ready to go.

So I'm not sure why the game doesn't assume that engineers have a linear charge or two on hand when they need to blow up a hedgehog; it should be within their capabilities.

[winkelried]

Even a relatively small, crude linear charge will cut through a small steel I-beam pretty easily.

you mean a bangalore?

[YankeeDog]

you mean a bangalore?

No; a bangalore is not a linear charge. Linear charges aka Cutting Charges are v-shaped charges -- basically a rectangular block of plastique with a V dug out of one of the long sides. Ideally, the V should then be lined with a metal such as lead to maximize the cutting effect, but this isn't absolutely necessary for the charge to work. They're a type of shaped charge designed to create a long, narrow cut rather than the pinpoint penetration such as what you get with a HEAT warhead.

Their most common use is in controlled demolition to cut through tough materials like I-beams and rebar.

As I mentioned, there were several standardized ones used by engineers in WWII. Brits used one called the Hayrick charge, IIRC. Don't remember offhand the names of ones carried by other forces, though given time a trained demolitions expert could certainly fashion one by hand with a bit of C-4.

[womble]

It would be cool if 'proper' Engineer formations got a variety of different charges and their use and effect were variously simulated in the game. Since we seem to be stuck with a 'satchel charge' that's big enough that any one troop can only carry 2 (I think that's what I've seen) and bang-y enough to sort the common problems (bocage, walls, wire), I think we'll be waiting a while for more detail in the engineering field.

[The_Capt]

No; a bangalore is not a linear charge. Linear charges aka Cutting Charges are v-shaped charges -- basically a rectangular block of plastique with a V dug out of one of the long sides. Ideally, the V should then be lined with a metal such as lead to maximize the cutting effect, but this isn't absolutely necessary for the charge to work. They're a type of shaped charge designed to create a long, narrow cut rather than the pinpoint penetration such as what you get with a HEAT warhead.

Their most common use is in controlled demolition to cut through tough materials like I-beams and rebar.

As I mentioned, there were several standardized ones used by engineers in WWII. Brits used one called the Hayrick charge, IIRC. Don't remember offhand the names of ones carried by other forces, though given time a trained demolitions expert could certainly fashion one by hand with a bit of C-4.

We use the term "steel cutting" or "shaped charges", linear speaks to stuff like bangalore, necklaces or vipers.

The real world answer to the question is "yes". HE can clear hedgehogs obstacles, even ones anchored in concrete or staked into the ground. You don't even need specialized cutting charges. Blocks of C-4 at the main junction or you can cut the legs to be sure will normally do the job.

We use cutting charges for stuff like bridges made out of big steel or concrete.

The problem in CMBN-sense is the time it would take to do it. Securing explosives to the steel isn't a simple "slap and go" as the charges are likely to blow right off. You need to tie them on or secure them as tightly as possible taking bit more time than is comfortable under fire.

[YankeeDog]

The problem in CMBN-sense is the time it would take to do it. Securing explosives to the steel isn't a simple "slap and go" as the charges are likely to blow right off. You need to tie them on or secure them as tightly as possible taking bit more time than is comfortable under fire.

Well, yes. But setting charges to blow a large, useable hole in an embankment full of large rocks and tree roots (i.e., bocage) would also take some time and preparation. Unless you just use a really large amount of explosives (which brings in other complications, like a much larger danger area, and also the very real chance that you'll end up replacing the bank with a deep crater that would also be difficult for vehicles to cross), you have to dig bore holes into the bank and then tamp the charges in.

Overall, I'm in favor of engineers being able to do more things with explosives in the game than they can now (such as destroy hedgehogs, blow short paths though minefields etc.) BUT have it take much longer to do so -- while the uses for explosives are limited in the game, it seems to me that what you can do, you can do way too quickly.

I'm not so sure we need specific modeling of different kinds of charges, though -- I'm happy with the abstraction of a time delay while the engineers prep and modify the charge. Combat demo kits/so-called "satchel charges" were designed to be flexible, and could be modified for the job at hand.

[The_Capt]

Well, yes. But setting charges to blow a large, useable hole in an embankment full of large rocks and tree roots (i.e., bocage) would also take some time and preparation. Unless you just use a really large amount of explosives (which brings in other complications, like a much larger danger area, and also the very real chance that you'll end up replacing the bank with a deep crater that would also be difficult for vehicles to cross), you have to dig bore holes into the bank and then tamp the charges in.

Overall, I'm in favor of engineers being able to do more things with explosives in the game than they can now (such as destroy hedgehogs, blow short paths though minefields etc.) BUT have it take much longer to do so -- while the uses for explosives are limited in the game, it seems to me that what you can do, you can do way too quickly.

I'm not so sure we need specific modeling of different kinds of charges, though -- I'm happy with the abstraction of a time delay while the engineers prep and modify the charge. Combat demo kits/so-called "satchel charges" were designed to be flexible, and could be modified for the job at hand.

Bocage is very interesting and in fact would depend on a lot of different factors. If the trees are the only problem (ie the slope of the mound isn't too steep) you could try and get away with linear charges placed at the base. But organics are a nightmare to try and work with when it come to explosives. They contain water and air gaps that make a predictable result difficult.

In the end, BFC went with a simplified engineer model with generous work times. Much better than CMx1 but still room for improvement. Could we see more engineer play? Sure. There are a lot of obstacles and works not seen in the game. But here I think it came down to a question of prioritization of the core elements of the game or risk the game never being done.

[YankeeDog]

Bocage is very interesting and in fact would depend on a lot of different factors. If the trees are the only problem (ie the slope of the mound isn't too steep) you could try and get away with linear charges placed at the base. But organics are a nightmare to try and work with when it come to explosives. They contain water and air gaps that make a predictable result difficult.

In the end, BFC went with a simplified engineer model with generous work times. Much better than CMx1 but still room for improvement. Could we see more engineer play? Sure. There are a lot of obstacles and works not seen in the game. But here I think it came down to a question of prioritization of the core elements of the game or risk the game never being done.

Yes; I agree with this point. I guess what I am saying is that, as the engine develops, I'd like to see more uses for explosives included in the engine, but longer work times. Other detail stuff like modeling the specific types of charges needed for certain jobs etc. is a lower priority for me -- I'm more willing live with abstraction in this area.

[Michael Emrys]

Overall, I'm in favor of engineers being able to do more things with explosives in the game than they can now (such as destroy hedgehogs, blow short paths though minefields etc.) BUT have it take much longer to do so -- while the uses for explosives are limited in the game, it seems to me that what you can do, you can do way too quickly.

+1

Michael

[winkelried]

We use the term "steel cutting" or "shaped charges", linear speaks to stuff like bangalore, necklaces or vipers.

exactly - that's why i was a bit confused. - thanks for the clarification YankeeDog and The_Capt.

The real world answer to the question is "yes". HE can clear hedgehogs obstacles, even ones anchored in concrete or staked into the ground. You don't even need specialized cutting charges. Blocks of C-4 at the main junction or you can cut the legs to be sure will normally do the job.

correct. and for smaller stuff we used detonating cord - don't know if this was available in WW2.

We use cutting charges for stuff like bridges made out of big steel or concrete.

was nice against reinforced concrete.

The problem in CMBN-sense is the time it would take to do it. Securing explosives to the steel isn't a simple "slap and go" as the charges are likely to blow right off. You need to tie them on or secure them as tightly as possible taking bit more time than is comfortable under fire.

timing is the main issue with all engineering tasks. with battle lengths above 1 1/2 or 2 hours lots of things become possible.

if the hedgehogs aren't anchored in concrete or so good approach would be to use a tank, some smoke and a cable and tow the hedgehog away. depends a bit how good the enemy is firing into the smoke (can be done by a well prepared HMG pretty efficiently).

[winkelried]

Yes; I agree with this point. I guess what I am saying is that, as the engine develops, I'd like to see more uses for explosives included in the engine, but longer work times. Other detail stuff like modeling the specific types of charges needed for certain jobs etc. is a lower priority for me -- I'm more willing live with abstraction in this area.

Depends a bit. I fully agree when it's about realism - things engineers do, should take longer and then they could do even more.

But when it's about the flow of things in the CM battles I have my doubts that a lot of people would find it fun to wait 15/20 minutes behind a bocage until the engineers have prepared their charge to blow that hole.

[womble]

...depends a bit how good the enemy is firing into the smoke (can be done by a well prepared HMG pretty efficiently).

And there's another wrinkle: smoke is an impervious shield to area fire (unless it happens there's a means present of engineering appropriate grazing fire that will extend into the smoked area).

But when it's about the flow of things in the CM battles I have my doubts that a lot of people would find it fun to wait 15/20 minutes behind a bocage until the engineers have prepared their charge to blow that hole.

And it's even less likely there'd be any pTruppen left there to take advantage of the hole anyway, if the defenders had indirect HE available.

[GreenAsJade]

And there's another wrinkle: smoke is an impervious shield to area fire

Yes, in CMBN, it is. It's suprising there hasn't been more complaining about this actually!

I think it's probably because CMBN is so low on cover already that we don't need another hole punched in one of the few things we can hide behind

GaJ

[winkelried]

And there's another wrinkle: smoke is an impervious shield to area fire (unless it happens there's a means present of engineering appropriate grazing fire that will extend into the smoked area).

that's why I love smoke :-)

And it's even less likely there'd be any pTruppen left there to take advantage of the hole anyway, if the defenders had indirect HE available.

Who needs pixeltruppen anyway

[Sublime]

not as impervious as it would seem. when you area fire the nearby areas close to it get affected ( i guess to model the mg fire sweeping back and forth) ive noticed if I area fire right before or around smoke it'll supress people in it fair 'nuff

[winkelried]

not as impervious as it would seem. when you area fire the nearby areas close to it get affected ( i guess to model the mg fire sweeping back and forth) ive noticed if I area fire right before or around smoke it'll supress people in it fair 'nuff

Do TRPs work with HMGs? I think they did in CMx1 with ATGs?

[womble]

not as impervious as it would seem. when you area fire the nearby areas close to it get affected ( i guess to model the mg fire sweeping back and forth) ive noticed if I area fire right before or around smoke it'll supress people in it fair 'nuff

Yes. As I said, grazing fire will get into smoky areas. You can't put a target order into there though.

[Sublime]

Im not sure about HMGs. I wouldnt be surprised. Those AIUI they DO work with ATGs. And indirectly called on board mortars. However I wish that onboard mortars could 'target' TRPs almost like DF..