Cerdic | 11 Jun 2016 7:09 a.m. PST |
I remember reading a book by someone who fought in the desert. Sorry I can't remember what it was called though! Anyway, he said that a lot of the desert gave an initial impression of being flat, but when you looked more carefully there were a lot of gentle undulations that 'hid' troops. |
Andy ONeill | 11 Jun 2016 7:23 a.m. PST |
Desert isn't exactly the most obvious theatre in ww2 for someone who wants to do infantry gaming. |
idontbelieveit | 11 Jun 2016 7:31 a.m. PST |
I wish I had the link still. I had it once but can't seem to find it. The archives of the New Zealanders who were involved. It was pretty interesting and there's always a quote like "there was no cover anywhere." |
Starfury Rider | 11 Jun 2016 7:50 a.m. PST |
2NZEF pages are here – link Gary |
Legion 4 | 11 Jun 2016 8:21 a.m. PST |
In the desert many times there is little cover or concealment to hide from in coming fire, etc. That is what infantry spends most of it's time on the battlefield doing is trying avoid fly objects. Infantry while prone can use every little fold and bump for cover of some sort. As pointed out : a lot of the desert gave an initial impression of being flat, but when you looked more carefully there were a lot of gentle undulations that 'hid' troops. Infantry in the defense in many cases in this type of terrain. Is very useful and effective. And they must dig in deep, add obstacles, minefields, etc. … create "terrain" so to speak. But as in all Infantry ops, using supporting fire from FA, mortars, CAS, etc. Is critical and very useful in suppressing and attiting enemy Infantry, etc., … And of course using fire and maneuver and fire and movement[this used to be called something like Assault Fire], moving from cover to cover. Under suppressive fire from other Infantry in support, etc. Is basically the way it is done. And if you have armor support it may give you an edge. As in the beginning with the use of armor in WWI. It's primary use was to support the Infantry. |
Martin Rapier | 11 Jun 2016 8:50 a.m. PST |
Patrick Delaforces various divisional historys (51st High land Div etc) give a pretty good idea of desert infantry combat. While the tankers get all the glory, as in every other theatre of WW2, tank battalions were outnumbered by infantry ones by a huge degree (just as armoured divisions were by infantry divisions). |
Eclaireur | 11 Jun 2016 9:15 a.m. PST |
If you're talking about the initial battle on Sidi Rezegh airfield during Op Crusader, there really weren't many infantry there. 7th Armoured Division had been formed with 3 armoured brigades for this Op, and I would have to look it up but I don't think that meant more than 3 battalions of infantry. The Germans similarly had a defence based around anti-tank guns, machine guns, and a certain amount of armour. They didn't have a big number of infantry there. The Brits brought in more later. There was a certain amount of cover around the airfield – natural and man made, like weapons pits or aircraft revetments. That might have helped reduce the casualties further… EC |
Sundance | 11 Jun 2016 3:19 p.m. PST |
Yes, the desert is a long way from being flat. |
LORDGHEE | 12 Jun 2016 4:05 p.m. PST |
well it looks like google cars are not allowed in Lybia as there is no street view in th area of Sidi Rezegh airfield. Try google earth and tilt the view |
Big Red | 15 Jun 2016 10:38 a.m. PST |
Shimmering heated air can distort, disguise and conceal. |
Grumble87106 | 02 Sep 2016 7:43 a.m. PST |
The book *Tobruk: The Great Siege Reassessed* by Frank Harrison describes quite a bit of infantry fighting during the breakout to the southeast by the 70th Division and other forces in order to link up with the rest of the Allied forces. Of course there was some tank support from within the garrison as well. As Big Red notes, shimmering heat can be a big factor, as can dust and fog of battle. Some special rules to provide for these factors could make infantry battles quite interesting. |