Stalkey and Co | 10 Feb 2021 5:28 a.m. PST |
OK, I already know there was plenty of variation without asking. Let's use the Flames of War era divisions… How long would it take to call in Artillery fire, if the batteries were designated to support a given unit/area on the battlefield? This assumes that telephone/radio is being used [no carrier pigeons] and that the formation at the front has already established communications and some sort of fire plan previously, say the day before or so. I am also assuming that most armies improved over time thanks to practice and better equipment. An infantry officer I spoke to recently said that in the modern era [80s-90s], a new call for fire would take about 5 minutes, assuming the guns were laid previously to cover a given area. My assumption is that WWII would be a bit slower, especially in the early war period. Thanks in advance! |
TheOtherOneFromTableScape | 10 Feb 2021 7:59 a.m. PST |
For the British, from 1943 onwards, providing the regiment had been properly set up (radio net setup, guns emplaced, surveyed and zero line established) a new troop target could be engaged in around 5 minutes, an uncle (divisional) target in about 30 minutes, and something in between for battery or mike (regiment) targets. If the target was already registered it would be quicker and even more so for DF (defensive fire) targets. For those the guns would normally be laid on them if there were no other tasks being carried out. |
Stalkey and Co | 10 Feb 2021 9:14 a.m. PST |
Thanks! Some have said that US and Soviet artillery reaction times were faster and slower respectively. Especially with reaction and target switching for Sovs. I'm inclined to agree that's generally the case, but more info would be great! |
Desert Fox | 10 Feb 2021 9:50 a.m. PST |
A relative served as an artillery spotter with the 3rd Infantry during all of WWII. According to him, he was always posted with the third battalion (forget which regiment) and always spotted for the same divisional artillery battery. Yes, I know, never say always or never. According to him, if communications were up and working, it was expected you should get a smoke ranging round, adjustments and then fire for effect from a battery in under 5 minutes. |
Legion 4 | 10 Feb 2021 10:22 a.m. PST |
We had a long discussion about this here before. I may have to look for it … |
uglyfatbloke | 10 Feb 2021 10:52 a.m. PST |
My father was a Tech Ack – artillery instructor – at the School of Artillery India c1944-46, he told me that for a troop of 25 -pounders a maximum of 5 minutes between defining the target and fire for effect. |
Stalkey and Co | 10 Feb 2021 11:02 a.m. PST |
Great! thanks for info. Obviously it is possible for plenty of delays of all kinds, but on a normal day with "usual" preparations for attack or defense it sounds like my colleague was correct that 5-6 minutes is good. Would love to hear more about Sovs, who always seem to have something different going on. Heavy bombardments but not flexible or responsive is my understanding, both in WWII and in later years including those they trained like Egyptians and such. |
Twoheart | 10 Feb 2021 12:13 p.m. PST |
Red Army at Stalingrad had its heavy arty on east side of Volga. The report at Pavlov's House seem to indicate the heavy stuff was on demand and arrived pretty regularly when called for. Red OB often had artillery regiment attached to infantry regiments. Works for me. |
Mserafin | 10 Feb 2021 12:31 p.m. PST |
American and British artillery were noticeably faster than the Germans and most everyone else. US & UK plot using a gridded map, whereas the poor German FO had to calculate his position, the target's position and that of the firing battery, then pull out his slide rule and do the trigonometry. I believe the average time for German arty to respond was 15 minutes. There used to be a very informative paper about this somewhere on the web, but I'm not in a position to look for it just now. |
Mark 1 | 10 Feb 2021 12:35 p.m. PST |
My understanding is that it would be notably faster for most armies if it was a pre-determined target. So a final defensive fire target, for example, might see effective fire landing in half the time, or less, than a random opportunity target. But this could vary significantly from army to army. The Brits were known for hitting an opportunity target very quickly with one battery. This might be the "five minutes or less" that has been described. The US Army was known for hitting an opportunity target as fast or faster than the British Army, and potentially with more than one battery. But this came at the expense of the precision that the Brits seem to have achieved, as the American approach used more pre-calculated tables that did not accommodate all the variables that might have affected accuracy. The Germans were not as fast, and more often were limited to a single battery for an opportunity fire target. The Russians only rarely could manage any fire at a truly random opportunity target. Or if they could, it would take so long to prepare the fire mission that it was more reasonable to describe it as pre-planned fire for the next occasion, rather than opportunity fire for the current occasion. However, they did have a reactive capability. Fire plans usually identified several potential targets. Fire missions for those targets were assigned to batteries, pre-calculated, and held in readiness in case the need arose. So a call for fire on "Target C" could bring fire from the battery (or batteries) assigned to "Target C" very quickly. This fire was also perhaps typically quite accurate. But as the enemy might not actually be exactly at "Target C", it would appear to the Germans as if the Russian fire was missing the target (rather than hitting the target, but missing the Germans). This is what I have gathered from my readings. -Mark (aka: Mk 1) |
Martin Rapier | 10 Feb 2021 12:49 p.m. PST |
", if communications were up and working, it was expected you should get a smoke ranging round, adjustments and then fire for effect from a battery in under 5 minutes." And that is the real issue. If your comms aren't up, or the batteries are relocating, or busy with another mission or whatever. It can take much longer. If the batteries move and need to be re-surveyed, it can take hours. If your army is largely equipped with field telephones (like the Russians) then it takes a while to set the comms up, and even then they are vulnerable to damage. WW2 radio comms were also fairly dodgy, particularly for man packed sets. But yes, if your guns are all lined up, know where they are, comms in a place, no other tasks. A few minutes, unless trying to coordinate a multi battery shoot. Developing an actual divisional fire plan (as in sectors, rate of lift, rate of fire, ammo types, designated targets of opportunity, CB fire etc) would also take hours, if not days, for major offensives. |
79thPA | 10 Feb 2021 4:50 p.m. PST |
From what I remember from a Russian officer's writings, the artillery fired direct, fired [pre-plotted missions, fired by barrage without any attempt to adjust the fire mission ("everything we have drops rounds 250 meters in front of our line" type of thing), and fired in a "Western" manner of calling for and adjusting artillery fire. There did seem to be a problem with coordinating multiple batteries to engage the same target. Russia was pretty radio poor, so comms would be a big factor with them. I imagine that they did more direct fire than anyone else as well. |
Legion 4 | 10 Feb 2021 6:05 p.m. PST |
From what I know being a former Infantry Officer, '79-'90 and student of history. I think much of what is posted here is accurate. Still can't find that old TMP thread where we talked about this before. But it seems to me this pretty much covers it … |
rmaker | 10 Feb 2021 9:00 p.m. PST |
The advantage of the American, and, to a lesser extent, the British systems was that fire could be delivered by batteries that were not specifically tasked with cooperating with the requesting unit. I remember reading (in Clay Pigeons of St. LO, I think), of a company commander calling for fire on an German attack. Everything in his division was already allocated, so the Fire Control Center patched him through to Corps. He gave the FC officer the map coordinates and stayed on the line as the fire was plotted and called to the guns. Then he waited. And waited. He asked of they had understood,, and was told, yes, the rounds were on the way, with a second salvo following. After another minute, all hell broke loose out in front of him followed in about 45 seconds by another rendition. The FC officer asked if that was effective or did he need any more? Turns out that he was dealing with an 8" gun battery 15 miles away! |
Wolfhag | 10 Feb 2021 10:52 p.m. PST |
I've read reports that confirm 79thPA. For a prepared assault they'd make firing positions for artillery at the FEBA with a direct LOS to targets identified by patrols and recon. The night before the assault they roll the guns into position and open fire at dawn for the initial breakthrough. Behind the German FEBA was rolling barrages of heavy artillery and rockets to keep the defenders pinned down. Wolfhag |
Dn Jackson | 11 Feb 2021 12:01 a.m. PST |
"Obviously it is possible for plenty of delays of all kinds, but on a normal day with "usual" preparations for attack or defense it sounds like my colleague was correct that 5-6 minutes is good." I was an FDC in the Marine Corps in the 80s and early 90s. Counter battery fire directed by radar could actually get rounds headed down range before the target's rounds had landed. "If the batteries move and need to be re-surveyed, it can take hours" I don't know about WWII in this regard. We could have rounds headed down range within minutes of pulling into a position. We practiced 'hip shoots' which was going from a road march to shooting at a random point in the march. We could get rounds off within a few minutes, though they weren't as accurate if we'd had time to survey the position and get the guns laid. This was before GPS. |
Legion 4 | 11 Feb 2021 1:08 a.m. PST |
Yes, from WWII on, targets that are preregistered will normally get quicker rounds on targets The FO/PL/Co Cdr, etc. will just call for a fire mission on pre-plotted target, by just basically saying, "Fire Mission target AB0001. The FDC already know the grids and fire soon follows. But well trained crews can get rounds on target fairly quickly if a fire mission is called on other than a preregistered target. E.g. a unit in on a patrol and is engaged then call in the grids. And the FA/mortars make the adjustment on target. E.g. "Fire mission, adjust fire, "grids", target, enemy troops in the open, VT in effect, over" … |
deephorse | 11 Feb 2021 4:13 a.m. PST |
Returning to the original topic, I am currently reading about the actions of the Royal Artillery in its support of the B.E.F. in France in 1940. One noteworthy incident, because it was probably the first use of radio to call in a fire mission in that campaign (and it was possibly the only such use of radio in that campaign – the author's claim, not mine) had rounds landing on target 10 minutes after they were called for. Apparently this was regarded as quick for that time in history. Also mentioned was the night time practice of laying the guns on a SOS target, now called FPF or FDF, and having a gun sentry. If an urgent request came in from a forward unit, all the sentry had to do was go round each gun and pull the lanyard. A round would be on target very quickly that way. |
Skarper | 11 Feb 2021 5:18 a.m. PST |
Surely there is a big difference between requesting fire on a 'new' target and doing so on a target that is near a previous target? The time to communicate plus the flight time are pretty much fixed. [Might be as much as 1 minute each]. The time to calculate direction and elevation could be quite a while for a new target or maybe as little as 1 minute for a target that is just an adjustment from a previous target? nigelef.tripod.com Is a mine of information on this. My understanding of the relative merits of the main Armies in WW2 is as follows. The Germans could be very accurate, but were slower than the Western Allies. The Americans were the most accurate but not much quicker than the Germans. The British were the quickest but sacrificed accuracy for speed, tending to blanket the target with fire as fast as possible. The Soviets basically did not attempt impromtu fires with artillery [mortars could do this] and used what amounted to WW1 methods for bombardments and creeping barrages. |
Nine pound round | 11 Feb 2021 7:10 a.m. PST |
Twenty years ago, the standard in the US Army for an "immediate suppression mission" was to have rounds on the way within a minute – my recollection is that we had to have firing data to the gun line in 35 seconds. That wasn't necessarily computer-aided- a well-trained FDC could calculate the data faster than the old BCS. An IS mission was typically just two rounds of PD-fuzed HE- not adjusted, nothing like that, but the mission was designed for immediate response in an emergency. For priority targets (previously planned target data set on the gun, fixed rounds with charges ready to cut at the gun), you could cut response time to not much more than time of flight (for 105mm, given its max range, thirty seconds or less). |
donlowry | 11 Feb 2021 9:28 a.m. PST |
Would mortars have been any faster? |
Skarper | 11 Feb 2021 10:03 a.m. PST |
Mortar fire would – I gather – be faster. Closer to the target = shorter flight time Usually dedicated to the unit being supported = not 'busy'. Communications would be better – often a field phone or within easy range of the current radios using voice. |
Legion 4 | 11 Feb 2021 11:55 a.m. PST |
Yes mortars are generally faster. For all the reasons Skarper posted … Plus I was an 81mm Mortar PL at times when I was in a Rifle Co. in the 101, '80-'82 IIRC At that time Infantry Cos. had an 81mm Plt organic to their TO&Es. But were removed when the US ARMY went to the J-Series TO&E … Also … Generally from about WWII on, targets that are preregistered will normally get quicker rounds on targets The FO/PL/Co Cdr, etc. will just call for a fire mission on pre-plotted target, by just basically saying, "Fire Mission target AB0001…, etc." The FDC already know the grids for AB0001 and fire soon follows. But well trained crews can get rounds on target fairly quickly if a fire mission is called on other than preregistered targets. Sometimes called "a Target of Opportunity" … E.g. a unit in on a patrol and is engaged, then calls in the grids. And the FA/mortars make the adjustment on target.
I.e. "Fire mission, adjust fire, "grids", target, enemy troops in the open, VT in effect, over" … etc., etc. And yes Plt Ldrs and Co. Cdrs are trained to call for fire. And if an FA unit is support of a e.g. Infantry or Tank Bn. An FO/FIST from that FA unit in support is attached to each Plt and Co. Cdr. |
Last Hussar | 11 Feb 2021 12:21 p.m. PST |
Rmaker, when you say he waited and waited, do you know how long? Interesting thread, I was going to ask this question myself |
rmaker | 11 Feb 2021 12:46 p.m. PST |
No, IIRC the author didn't specify, but obviously longer than what he expected. |
Wolfhag | 11 Feb 2021 1:57 p.m. PST |
Mortars would be faster if the team had a direct sight to the target which was ideal but not always available and would not need an aiming stake to sight in on. So it would really be like a very high trajectory direct fire weapon. The FO might be close enough to the tubes to shout corrections or on a field phone. I've read accounts of light mortar teams with the tube already deployed able to put out a three-round bracketing barrage being fired within 10-15 seconds of the order to fire and with a 15-20 second time of flight hitting the target. With the commander estimating the range to within 10% a target at 500-600m should be bracketed with the first barrage. A correction would be made and the second barrage falling within 20-25 seconds after the last round from the first barrage. You can be dropping rounds down the tube about every 2-3 seconds with the gunner making a slight adjustment after each shot. A two-tube team would coordinate in an attempt to fire an "X" pattern over the target ensuring suppression with 6 rounds on the first barrage and target destruction on the second barrage. Accuracy can be very accurate if the base plate is firmly placed. If not there would be a larger dispersion between each shot or the rate of fire slowed as the gunner needed to realign the sight on the aiming stake after each shot. At longer ranges, a ranging shot might be fired first before firing the barrage. Medium and heavy mortars normally needed an FO and radio and were slower to react with a longer time of flight. Wolfhag |
Skarper | 11 Feb 2021 2:25 p.m. PST |
It's interesting how light mortars went out of favour then came back! 60mm mortars pack much more punch than 50mm tubes and I expect the rounds are increasingly lethal post WW2 too. I suppose HE rounds are highly suppressive, even if small calibre and being able to fire from out of line of sight would be a bonus. Fire you cannot return is also, I gather, more demoralising too. I read a WW2 memoir of a GI who was a 60mm mortar crewman and the accounts of getting the weapon into action and rounds on target corroborate with Wolfhag's summary. An 81 mm tube is almost as portable as a 60mm BUT the ammo is MUCH heavier. It annoys me when some rules allow medium mortars to be moved around and fired a lot without running out of ammo. YES ASL, I mean you! |
Legion 4 | 11 Feb 2021 3:47 p.m. PST |
The 60mm mortar had a shorter range[can't remember now ] So generally they'd be able to see their target. 81 and larger would usually fire indirectly. With adjustments coming from one of the Plt Leaders and/or Co. Cdr. Mortars when they were part of the Co. You didn't have an FO per se unless there was an FA unit in direct support, etc. So it was no problem for officers and NCOs could call in mortar fire. When I was on active duty we never saw a 60mm. But we did have our M203s. Anytime you take indirect fire you go to ground/take cover and if possible get out of the impact area. And yes mortar ammo like any ammo is not infinite. When moving dismounted. You take all you can, sometimes having the other troops in the Co. carry a round or two. But many of those troopers are packing a lot gear/weight too. |
Thresher01 | 12 Feb 2021 4:36 a.m. PST |
I imagine by D-Day, 1944 and later, Allied artillery control would be very good indeed, as outlined above. From what I've read, it appears from then on, German units were suffering with logistical and production issues, so ammo for artillery batteries was frequently in short supply, other than for the opening barrage during the Battle of the Bulge. Road traffic, rail lines, trains, and bridges were frequently attacked and knocked out/destroyed by Allied air power prior to D-Day and beyond. The Germans did have the trump card though, with their medium and heavy mortars in Normandy. Many/most defensive positions were linked to spotters up front by field telephones, and in the bocage country at least, many fields were pre-registered, resulting in horrific casualties. I read where 67% of Allied casualties in Normandy were supposedly caused by mortars. |
Legion 4 | 12 Feb 2021 9:12 a.m. PST |
Yes with all the German FA & mortars being pre-registered they could quickly get steel on target and lift & shift. |
Wolfhag | 12 Feb 2021 9:30 a.m. PST |
I think mortars are unfairly represented in most games. If you are playing a game with 1+ minute turns light mortars should be considered as part of small arms fire. Their firepower should be determined by the # of rounds fired with a maximum supply. Light mortars are normally in the Weapons Platoon of a Company and sometimes referred to as the "Company Commanders Artillery". If you are playing US mortars you should include WP and smoke rounds. The new 60mm mortars have extended range and more lethality. They can be fired without a base plate just like the Jap Knee Mortars with a high degree of accuracy and put into action in seconds. An interesting thing about being the target of mortars is that you can attempt to avoid them. Their sound is very distinctive and you can easily tell the direction it comes from but not exactly who the target is. You can actually see an 81mm mortar at its apex before it starts falling. Normally the ToF is going to be 15-30 seconds which can give you enough time to evade to get out of the barrage zone before impact and there may be 5+ rounds in the air on the initial barrage before the first one hits so when you evade they can't immediately correct on you. In a mortar barrage, the gunner is attempting to bracket you by slightly moving the tube to have the next round land 20-30m from the last you can run towards the last impact. It may sound crazy but if you've ever been caught hunkered down in a mortar barrage not knowing if the next round will drop on you it's pretty terrifying. The reason for firing a suppression barrage without spotting rounds is to suppress the target so they can't evade. Firing at a point target like an MG emplacement might involve spotting and correcting but not against experienced troops in the open. The Germans used a tactic where they'd register a mortar on a choke point or likely area a foot unit would move through. Then the enemy got into the barrage zone a machine gun team working in conjunction with the mortar team would open fire normally pinning the enemy. As soon as the mortar team heard the mg fire they'd start dropping rounds down the tube impacting in 15-20 seconds. Wolfhag |
donlowry | 12 Feb 2021 10:06 a.m. PST |
WW2 U.S. armored infantry had a 60mm mortar in every platoon. |
Legion 4 | 12 Feb 2021 4:00 p.m. PST |
Yes you can see that in BoB & SPR … Note: Mortars that fire open site, i.e. they can see the target are generally faster. They are basically firing them direct, but with a high angle e.g. a howitzer. IIRC, the 81mm mortar crew could have 3 rounds in the air at the same time before the first one hits. And the rest hit very shortly after … |
Nine pound round | 12 Feb 2021 7:57 p.m. PST |
Maybe they're better now than they were 20 years ago, but in my experience, mortars (particularly the 60mm) were not terribly accurate weapons. It's seldom the case that company mortars have access to meteorological messages, let alone survey, and this can severely degrade their accuracy, since the high angle of fire is inherently more vulnerable to wind variations in the upper part of their trajectory. They're great for quick response, though. I have been on the receiving end of mortar fire, but since it was accidental and friendly, I may be slightly prejudiced. There is a good description, probably the best nontechnical one I have read, of how the US Army developed and employed the fire direction center at the battery and battalion level in John Gudmundsson's "On Artillery." That organizational innovation was really the thing that made the US Army's field artillery so flexible, and enabled the large-scale massing of fires in WWII and afterwards. The development of modern artillery doctrine at Ft Sill in the 1930s was of decisive importance to the conduct of WWII in the ETO. |
Legion 4 | 13 Feb 2021 2:22 a.m. PST |
Yes I'm pretty sure all the mortars of today are superior to WWII's. Or even later. As well as techniques, etc., are better. E.g. the FDC uses computers not the plotting board, etc. Note: I was an 81mm Plt Ldr, with the 101, '80-'81 … |
Legion 4 | 13 Feb 2021 2:24 a.m. PST |
Errata: WW2 U.S. armored infantry had a 60mm mortar in every platoon. Legion 4 12 Feb 2021 3:00 p.m. PST Yes you can see that in BoB & SPR … I missed reading Armored Infantry … the Infantry in BoB & SPR were Airborne. But they had 60mms too. |
Skarper | 13 Feb 2021 1:04 p.m. PST |
US PIR platoons had, according to TOE, a mortar squad with a 60mm mortar and a few men to carry the ammo. The Platoon according to the sadly no longer online Bayonet strength… 2 rifle squads each with 1 M1919A4 plus a mortar squad. What happened in action after a drop would no doubt vary a lot. Some sources suggest the paratroops reorganised as 3 x 9 man squads by Market-Garden. |
Legion 4 | 13 Feb 2021 4:38 p.m. PST |
What happened in action after a drop would no doubt vary a lot. Bingo ! |
Starfury Rider | 14 Feb 2021 12:49 p.m. PST |
Skarper, I am back online, just search bayonetstrength and I should come in the first few results. Still a long way to go but the US Paras are on there. Re the original question, artillery is one of those subjects I know I don't know enough about. The June 1945 US field manual on Field Artillery and Gunnery (FM 6-40) is over 450 pages long and I fear if I tried to read it page to page my head would explode. I must confess I have come to think that, in certain quarters, the undeniable excellence of US gunnery has grown such that all other artilleries are written off as being practically semi-professional by comparison. There is a much shorter explanation in a thesis on the CARL Digital Library that I think distills the US practice at least into more manageable chunks (for me at least); link Sadly there's no bitesize equivalent for the RA and its contemporaries. I know Nigel Evans' website, linked to above, and it's on my list to comb through when I get to Field Regiments, along with my copy of 'The Development of Artillery and Tactics'. There are very few British Army manuals/pamphlets online, certainly compared to US FMs and TMs, and not many on RA methods, though there were a great many produced. Gary |
Blutarski | 14 Feb 2021 6:00 p.m. PST |
In my readings on German defensive preparations in Normandy, I have come across descriptions of concrete reinforced mortar pits with panoramic images of all preregistered targets within the tube's arc of fire painted on the appropriate inner face of the pit with appropriate targeting data. - – - This discussion brings to mind a WRG 1925-1950 game played MANY years ago with a friend in which I was able to basically destroy a platoon of American infantry with a squad of dug-in German infantry and a section of two pre-registered 81mm mortars in indirect support. The Americans came down a road through heavy woods; the German infantry suppressed the lead squad and accompanying platoon leader. The mortars did the rest of the business. It was an educational experience for me. Good rules should reward good tactics. B |
Skarper | 14 Feb 2021 10:52 p.m. PST |
That's great you are back online Starfury – I must have missed the memo! I like the new pdf format. Saves me a lot of time compiling documents from the data. Thanks for the invaluable service. |
deephorse | 15 Feb 2021 3:32 a.m. PST |
There are very few British Army manuals/pamphlets online, certainly compared to US FMs and TMs, and not many on RA methods, though there were a great many produced. Thankfully there are some very good books on the RA in WWII, 'Ubique' and 'Gunfire' being just two that I own and keep dipping into. |
Nine pound round | 15 Feb 2021 11:05 a.m. PST |
6-40 was the gunnery manual, which is pretty in the weeds for gaming, since it covers the mechanics of managing the requirements for accurate predicted fire and the calculation of technical firing data. The one sense in which it might be useful is if you can find a late WWI-era gunnery manual. The difference in technique and in available calculating resources is pretty astonishing. |
Starfury Rider | 17 Feb 2021 11:30 a.m. PST |
I actually found something with timescales for RA units coming into action and firing. They are dated June 1941 and the document is noted as being cancelled. I don't know if that means the figures were superseded or a new method was introduced. Troop; 1. To advance 1 mile from RV and fire first round, with short wireless communication to OP – 15min 2. To come into action on line of march and be ready to fire on R/T (radio) orders from BC (Bty comdr) – 8min Battery; 1. To advance 1 mile from RV with short wireless communication to two OPs ready to fire – 15min 2. Link shoot, from guns in action to troops ready for link shooting – 8mins 3. Silent registration of eight points and preparation of panoramas – 20-40min Regiment; 1. To advance 1 mile from RV with short wireless communication to OPs and orientation by RSO (I think Regtl Survey Officer) of all battery directors – 45min 2. Regimental barrage (10 lifts) from receipt of traces at bty CPs to the production of gun programmes – 80min 3. Regimental quick barrage from receipt of co-ords and detail of barrage to the production of gun programmes – 30-40min Taken from "The development of artillery tactics and equipment" of 1950 and quoting RATM War No.4, June 1941, which I believe are RA Training Memorandums. Gary |