.com.unity Forums
  The Official e-Store of Shrapnel Games

This Month's Specials

BCT Commander- Save $8.00
winSPWW2- Save $5.00

   







Go Back   .com.unity Forums > The Camo Workshop > WinSPWW2 > TO&Es
Notices


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 12th, 2023, 07:28 AM

Charles M Charles M is offline
Private
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Spain
Posts: 34
Thanks: 0
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
Charles M is on a distinguished road
Default Game Manual - UK vs U artillery

British and US artillery

Reading through the SPWW" Game Manual, in "Country Descriptions" readers will come across the comment that "American artillery was about the best in the world". The phrase is a little ambiguous, though the comments following it suggest that the writer is referring to equipment, rather than doctrine or effectiveness.

If the comment is meant to describe just US army equipment, this writer has no issues with it. However, if it is meant to refer to battlefield effectiveness based on doctrine as well as equipment it is well off the mark. If comparisons with British and US methods are made, the British win hands down. Indeed, the US army based their artillery doctrine and methods on British practice, but with important exceptions or, more accurately, omissions. A certain American museum curator featured in a TV documentary rather unwisely claimed that US artillery was the best in world war two, without doing his homework.

As described in my revised article on the British army as published in the ASL Annual, The British developed methods to quickly direct supporting artillery fire to where it was needed. From December 1942 the British put senior rather than just junior officers up front as well as observers in order to bring down the supportive fire of an entire army corps or larger formation if necessary, quickly and effectively. Although it demanded good radio communication, linking the various formations into the net, the regimental support of 24 guns could be answered in just 60 seconds (an 'Uncle' target), divisional support from 72 guns (a 'Mike' target) in 3-5 minutes, and corps level support in 8 minutes. The support of 150-250 guns ('Victor' target) was also possible, if little used, as was army level support ('William' target).

In the US army, the forward observers remained junior in rank, more akin to a 90-day wonder left alone with a radio. Lieutenant Colonel Paddy de Burgh, OBE from the Royal School of Artillery museum observed to this writer, "The two countries had different view points with the same end result, though we were quicker. We put our senior officers up front with the BC battery commander] working with the Battalion Commander and the two troop Commanders (Captains) and with the Companies. They made decisions on the spot and the appropriate fire orders went over the wireless. If, and only if, there was some other crisis only known to RHQ they could veto or adjust the guns available for the task.

The Americans put the young officers up front and therefore their fire orders were a request. The importance and allocation of guns was made at the gun end. Nevertheless if there was an emergency the request was acted on instantly".

This is why in certain scenarios in SPWW2 British artillery can bring down fire in the next turn (3 minutes' delay) rather than with greater delay.

Lt. Colonel de Burgh was at Arnhem with 17pdr AT guns and answered, over the years, many questions (posed when ASL was being researched) based on on his own experiences as an artillery officer throughout the war, working with a variety of weapons.

The other omission in US methods was more operational than doctrinal. Because the British in N.W. Europe adopted the narrow front approach, as opposed to the US army's 'broad front' strategy, British artillery had about twice as much ammunition available as US artillery units at any one time.

Sources


Ian Daglish, Battleground Europe -Normandy: Operation Bluecoat – The British Armoured Breakout, Barnsley, 2003, p. 176.
Russel A. Hart, Clash of Arms: How the Allies won in Normandy, London, 2003, pp. 90, 108 footnote 80, and 310.
Ian V. Hogg, The Guns: 1939-1945, London, 1969, p. 44.
Brigadier A.L. Pemberton, The Development of Artillery Tactics and Equipment, HMSO, 1950, p. 161.
Royal School of Artillery, letter from Lt. Colonel Paddy de Burgh, OBE, dated 25th July 1988.
Russel F. Weigly, Eisenhower's Lieutenants: The Campaigns of France and Germany, 1944-1945, London 1981 edn., p 428 (general comment).
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old July 21st, 2023, 01:36 PM
Suhiir's Avatar

Suhiir Suhiir is offline
Lieutenant General
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 2,829
Thanks: 542
Thanked 792 Times in 600 Posts
Suhiir is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Game Manual - UK vs U artillery

As a former Forward Observer myself (when I was a Sgt (E5)) one thing this doesn't take into account is the location, in terms of where on the battlefield the observer is.

It's all well and fine to have a senior FO able to call in and direct the massed artillery of a brigade/division/corps down on an AREA it's another matter when a line company needs a POINT target (i.e. a an MG nest, pillbox, enemy infantry platoon) delt with.

During WW2 USMC moved FOs down the chain of command to where they are now. Company level. YES there is a Battalion/Brigade/Division Fire Direction Center/Coordinator for the (relatively few) times massed artillery needs to be coordinated.

Aircraft/naval guns/artillery/mortars are ALL just methods of delivering supporting fire and treated essentially the same (yes USMC air support is MUCH more closely integrated with the ground elements then are those of any other "Air Force" I'm aware of.)

So "best" is VERY much a matter of perspective.
"Best" calling in/coordinating massed fires?
"Best" at responding to the battlefield situation as it develops?
__________________
Suhiir - Wargame Junkie

People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." - Albert Einstein

Last edited by Suhiir; July 22nd, 2023 at 11:43 AM..
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Suhiir For This Useful Post:
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:30 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2024, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.