Artillery Rounds

[Mobius]

This article is interesting in that it shows the ratio of number of 76mm to 122mm artillery shells and 122mm to 152mm shells. This is during the Kursk battle.
http://tankarchives.blogspot.com/2015/1 ... eness.html

I don't have an idea on how the Russians determined the exact location of each shell and effect of shelling when they were not even close to the sites. Especially it may be a week or more before the Russians could capture the battlefield. Maybe it was aerial photography. But they would have to take photos immediately before and after.

[rickier65]

ORIGINAL: Mobius

This article is interesting in that it shows the ratio of number of 76mm to 122mm artillery shells and 122mm to 152mm shells. This is during the Kursk battle.
http://tankarchives.blogspot.com/2015/1 ... eness.html

I don't have an idea on how the Russians determined the exact location of each shell and effect of shelling when they were not even close to the sites. Especially it may be a week or more before the Russians could capture the battlefield. Maybe it was aerial photography. But they would have to take photos immediately before and after.

It was difficult to see the diagrams, but from what I could see, it would be interesting to so how that fits the dispersal pattern PCO uses for art.

Thanks
Rick

[Mobius]

There's a way to click on those photos which enlarges them. Regardless I saved the images so I could view them closer.

From the text it looks like most of these take place the first day of the battle. So they could be pre-plotted salvos at known fortified positions. That is why they do so little damage while being very on target. Or, the positions could even be dummy positions.

[rickier65]

Yes, I did click to enlarge, though they were still not real large. Thanks for posting these.

Rick

[Elron Hubbub]

Artillery dispersion is a function of range. Most wargames do not factor this.

Was the artillery directed by a FO? What was the range to the target? How many of each gun were firing?

It would be interesting to read the original report. That guy data-drops and then pontificates. He is a clown IMO.