"WWII Recon By Fire" Topic

I've read many accounts where MGs were used for Recon by Fire, i.e. Spray and Pray. Shoot and see what shoots back. My question is did tanks also use their main guns for this? Or was HE too valuable to waste? And did all armies do this or was it limited to well supplied units like the US and Soviets? Thanks!

From what I've read, it was used by MGs. Too wasteful for HE.

I've read that US Shermans in W Europe fired HE for recon by fire while advancing. This is one reason why they overloaded their tanks with ammo. If their stabilizer worked it was even more effective. Firing into tree lines with a quick fuse would give an air burst.

If you fired your coax machine gun into an area and saw all of the tracers were ricocheting it meant there was probably a tank or anti-tank gun and would immediately fire your main gun.

"Walking Fire" was a type of recon by fire too and was normally overwatched by direct fire HE and machine guns to give cover.

Wolfhag

Yes, they did.

I imagine HE would be used especially on wooden buildings/structures, but also stone and other ones too, if enemy troops were suspected to be inside.

Better to get the first shot in than to wait to see if you are correct by letting them fire at you first.

Well my grand parents house becauseof its position on a side valley to the main axis of movement was twice shot for recon in 40 by mg and 44 by 37mm , once by Germans, once by Hindu Ss manning some kind of armoured vehicle. ( never could fugure out from tales;). Or a sd 37 AA as they were escorting Aa battery of 88. Vs partisans.
My guess they use what they have and most likely to stir the hornet nest.

Walking fire is suppressive fire. Blazing away at the objective as you advance toward it.
This is how a platoon fully armed with bar were theoretically to manfully stride forward.

Patton particularly liked it.
It was criticised for lack of effectiveness.
Very difficult to get your rounds anywhere near a target whilst moving. Assuming you know exactly where the enemy are.

Andy,
From the descriptions I've read the idea of Walking Fire was to get the enemy to expose themselves when crossing open ground or keep them suppressed like you said. Once exposed they would be engaged with aimed fire and over watching support. I would imagine it was employed in different ways depending on the unit and any previous success – or lack of it.

Evidently it was envisioned as one of the main uses of the BAR when it was invented. We still have my grandfathers BAR from WWI and it is still 100% functional but I never tried Walking Fire with it.

In the early 1970's we were trained to do the fire and maneuver (team rushes) until about 25m from the objective. Then we'd get on line, load a new mag and then stand up and fire from the hip as we walked quickly through the objective but we never called it Walking Fire. The idea was the grazing fire would keep the enemy head down and if they exposed themselves they'd be targeted. I guess the trick is to have the entire enemy under fire as anyone that is not has a nice shot. I've read it had mixed results in VN. Fortunately, I never had to try it.

Wolfhag

The alternative name is marching fire.
link

I think there's some justification from Patton which is probably somewhere out there on the interwebz.
Saying shooting the bejazuzz out the terrain around a defender put them off and drove them to ground.
Which is pretty optimistic. Few rounds are likely to fall in that critical suppression circle.

The enemy had to be pretty shaky in the first place before shooting wildly over their heads would do much.

It worked ok sometimes but the argument was that no fire at all would have also – vs eg the unenthusiastic russian "volunteers".
When this was tried against steady troops then things didn't go so well.
It's not clear exactly when or how but I gather the approach was quietly ditched.

Walking along firing as you go might kind of work if you're on a perfectly flat car park.
Soon as there's any terrain your accuracy will be very poor.
And you'll burn through ammo.
Which is of course why everyone other than Patton thought this was a bad plan.

As you're blazing away, it's that bit harder to spot where that mg42 is returning fire from.
Not to mention the fact that your entire unit is stood up as targets for it.

Team rushes are really a post ww2 thing. Mostly your ww2 era granularity is section/squad. But of course fire and movement was still done.
Usually one squad dashing whilst the other two cover somehow.
Only one third of your force is particularly exposed and it's moving fast or crawling.
The other two thirds are focussed on spotting enemy or firing with rested weapons.

The approach worked rather better for armour.
There's at least one unit decided they would drive right at lightly held objectives, blazing away.
I don't know how lucky they were or if they ever encountered any PAK 40 whilst doing this but they claimed it worked.
There could be other units tried it once and had a bad experience or maybe everyone should have done this.

Recon by fire was and probably still used. But as many posted here it has it's pros & cons. As an Infantry Cdr, we rarely talked about using it. But it may have been useful depending in the terrain & situation.

But again, unlike in Hollywood, you don't have an inexhaustible supply of ammo.

Hollywood and most miniature wargames. Not with computers.

If you are in a defensive position, Mobile or static, the preferred Recon by fire method was with artillery or mortars. The use of MGs would reveal your key positions to the enemy.

Yes, you don't want to reveal your heavy weapons too soon. As they can draw heavy fires …

US recce units in WW2 included jeep (or "peep") platoons that had 3 jeeps with MGs and 3 with 60mm mortars -- obviously intended for recon by fire.

I recently heard what was supposed to be a series of WWII jokes.

In 1 is suggested that if you fire your machinegun into those woods ahead to see who your enemy is…

A. If you get some fire back, then a "gazillion" guys come running at you shouting "Banzai," they're Japanese.

B. If you get some fire, then another "gazillion" guys come at you, with submachines guns blazing, they're Russian.

C. If you get steady, regular, and accurate fire, it's the British.

D. If you get no response; then some odd sounds like voices in the woods; then a couple to a hundred "thumps" way off in the distance behind the woods; then all Hell breaks loose with artillery shells falling all around you; it's the Americans!

GdeP

US recce units in WW2 included jeep (or "peep") platoons that had 3 jeeps with MGs and 3 with 60mm mortars -- obviously intended for recon by fire.

When I arrived in the ROK, in'84. The Mech Bn{M113} I was assigned to. Had 7 M151 Jeeps for our Scout Plt. By '85 they were replaced by the usual 3 M113 APCs and 3 M901 ITVs for a Mech Inf or Armor Bn Scout Plt.