"SP arty Fire Contol better than towed?" Topic

Is there any reason that the fire control for SP artillery would be better than for towed artillery? I'm only considering indirect fire.

If you know of any other objective factors that increase the firepower of SP arty compared to towed, please feel free to chime in.

Thanks!

Bigger batteries, much much shorter setup times (assuming decent map surveys already carried out), can displace faster, slightly less vulnerable to CB fire. A whole set of incremental advantages, but nothing specifically about fire control per se.

Bigger batteries? Why? Is this for everyone, just for the Brits, or … ?

Nope, none whatsoever. They wold use exactly the same systems, organisation and procedures for fire control.

The only real advantage is mobility.

Even the armour protection idea is moot, as virtually everything else arrayed around the guns in the battery would be soft-skinned. When in action there would not be enough ready ammunition inside the SP guns, so personnel would be standing alongside, passing ammunition up.

McKinney,

I think it's a German thing – towed batteries were usually four guns, while SP batteries were six guns.

After the early experiment with twelve-gun batteries, British field batteries were always eight guns, whether towed or SP.

What Jemima said. The speed and accuracy of the math done at the FDC would be the same for both.

Also in WW2, except for observed fire situations, would an SP gun battery really get into action for indirect fire that much faster? Given that the ammo is in trucks, ammo points have to be set up, the fire direction center still has to be set up, communication with observers established, gun positions surveyed and all the fiddly stuff the gun bunnies have to do. Does anyone here know? If not, I will poke around some and see what I come up with.

A SP gun has an on-board storage of a number of rounds. It can allow the gun to "Hip-shoot" by quickly pulling into a position and dropping a couple of rounds at a target before the wheeled transport arrives with the bulk ammo. For towed or SP, the abilities of the people in the FDC and the skill of the spotter are the keys to quick and effective fire.

For WW2 I don't think it made any difference . For modern the SP guns tend to have very intricate computerised fire control systems. Probably a moot point as we are talking about WW2 here ;)

I was thinking of German batteries.

But as I noted, any potential improvements are all marginal and nothing to actually do with fire direction procedures.

Pre-GPS, depending on your survey techniques and mapping, being able to move around quickly might actually be a disadvantage… (unless you have lots of pre-surveyed gun positions).

WW2 era SP artillery occasionally got pressed into service as ersatz assault guns. Perhaps not the best overall use, but suitable for some tactical problems.

The ammo wasn't necessarily carried in trucks. German Wespe batteries (105mm howitzers on Pz II chassis) included versions with no gun for carrying ammo, so they could keep up with the guns.

Found this resource, looking through it to find how the UA Army employed them differently:
PDF link

FM 6-20 Field Artillery Tactical Emplyment, Feb 1944

Normally I don't chime in on these threads but this is one area I know something about having been an artilleryman for about 10 years working in battery fire direction centers (FDCs). Last couple of years as a FDC Chief in both towed 155mm and self-propelled 8" battery's.

I can say beyond any doubt that in regards to fire accuracy it's completely irrelevant whether the battery is self-propelled or towed.

Also, establishing the battery position takes the same amount of time either way. The guns need to be sighted to the aiming circle, the FDC needs to set up the charts, spades on the guns need set, etc.

The accuracy involves how well the FDC set up the charts, adjustments for wind/weather (not sure if they did this in WWII but I wiling the bet they did), rotation of the round leaving the tube, and how fast the FDC can process a fire mission. Remember everything back then would have been calculated on slide rulers. It's not as simple as pointing and shooting. There are many factors that affect accuracy for indirect fire.

Thank you emckinney for allowing me a chance to get on my soap box.

I think it's a German thing – towed batteries were usually four guns, while SP batteries were six guns.

The same applies also to US army – towed batteries in infantry division were 4 tubes each, while the SP batteries in armoured divisions were 6 tubes each.

However, infantry division also benefited from having three regimental cannon companies, each of 6 tubes.

Fire effectiveness due to more tubes is a different issue in my opinion.
From my experience in the army and readings, the USA had separate FDC from the firing battery. The FDC would do the calculations and the firing officer would direct the adjustments to the tubes. It does not matter if they are towed or SPA. The operation is a separate activity.

Remember everything back then would have been calculated on slide rulers.

That isn't a downside. Hard to break, and if you have custom slide rules (like the ones used by submarine crews) you can pull the numbers directly off the slide.

I know a couple officers that could work a torpedo slide rule just as fast as the Ohio-class fire control system could spit out a fire control solution.

The only guys with a speed advantage are the Brits as they didn't use an FDC for immediate support missions (i.e. the observer firing the guns of his parent unit): rather than requesting fire they could order it directly.

British batteries were eight guns, but normally operated in two four-gun Troops, each with it's own CP. When displacing they would leap frog, one troop moving and the other remaining in action until the first troop had arrived at the new location and set up.

Lion I always trained to get to that standard. We used the computer as the primary fire control system, but the manuel team also worked every solution and compared them to check for errors. When everybody had enough sleep, and had not been digging to many holes in the dirt, the manuel side could keep up just fine. But at 3 AM after a full day of playing army, errors would start showing up regularly. We could get it right, but we had to slow down.

And for those who are interested, when there is no computer, you do everything twice, again at the same time.

Owen