Matrix Games Forums

While exercising this morning, I was watching a recording of Connections2 by James Burke on the Science Channel.

In the show, it was stated that Seismology was born during WWI when a Russian Aristocrat was attempting to develop a method for locating enemy artillery batteries.

So, I wanted to ask (Golf33 feel free to jump in) beyond this initial link has Seismological techniques played any role in the field of artillery?

Thanks.

I believe it's the same as 'sound locating' which is still in use today.

http://www.locatingartillery.org/overview.htm

The modern version is still in use in many armies and is highly effective. Sound ranging has a major advantage over radar locating techniques in that it is a passive system. Weapon locating radars are easy to detect and obviously a high-priority target, whereas sound locating equipment is small and dug in and emits no detectable signal.

http://www.baesystems.com/newsroom/2003 ... 3news1.htm

Cheers
33

I remember reading some info 'Counterbatteryobservation' in WWII, bad thing I don't remember the page anymore.
But for instance in SP WaW the counterbattery fire has only a very small chance of 'kicking' in. (And it seemed to be agreed that this reflects realism very well)
So I'm a bit puzzled why they put so much effort into this.
Since I would think the effort put in was a bit too much then just 'in field research' I only can think of three other reasons.

First: to have approximate info on enemies artillery setup zones (not exact enough for counterfire but good enough to mark it on some map);
Second: to a lesser degree the number of batteries since I guess it is more difficult to estimate the number of arty units by observing the impact zone then by observing 'different' locations arty units fired from.
Third: for better command connection - it might be harder for some CO to figure out that a major move of the OPFOR has started if all incoming messages of the front units have to be weeded for their incoming arty fire, and maybe even some units have lost contact due to the arty fire already (or the messenger on his Krad is still on the way). The observation unit could give a much better and comprehensive information on the nature of arty fire (i.e. massive arty strike from a lot of different location).

So am I way off? Or can give someone detailed info on this.

murx

Not sure what you're asking there, murx I'll just give a bit more detail on counterbattery ops and if you still have questions, ask away

Counterbattery fire has been a top priority for artillery organisations since about 1917 when the British discovered that it was the key to successful offensives.

Since artillery is the big killer on the battlefield it is crucial to prevent the enemy using it against you, especially on the attack. The basic techniques were worked out during WWI and refined during WWII.

Lots of different organisations are involved. The frontline troops have a radio report ("SHELLREP") that includes their observation of the calibre of weapon, gun/mortar/rocket, time between impact and hearing the firing, and approximate direction to firing sound (also can be judged for artillery at least by the orientation of the shell hole). This radio report goes straight to arty intel cell at all HQs of Brigade level or higher.

In addition to all these reports, you have trained artillery observers who as well as directing friendly fire, also conduct a somewhat more experienced assessment of incoming fire where possible. Then you have 'flash-spotting' units whose job is to watch for the flash of enemy guns firing and report back time of shot and bearings. Remember that if you have a report from two units in different places, each giving a bearing to the same battery, then the intersection of those bearings marks the firing battery.

Next you have sound ranging units, which take a fair bit of time to set up since they have to precisely survey in and dig-in their microphones and set up the lines. These are however very accurate in detecting firing units. You also have (these days at least, not sure about WWII) weapon locating radars which track the shells during the upward part of their trajectory and plot back along the flightpath to find the origin. Finally you have artillery spotters in aircraft who are looking for flash or dust from enemy guns firing.

At artillery intel cell all this information is collected and turned into a list of enemy batteries, including location, firing activity and calibre of weapon. Before a major offensive, friendly batteries will often relocate and go silent (no firing) to prevent the enemy getting their location, while enemy batteries will be left alone to encourage them not to move. Just before the offensive starts, most of the friendly batteries open up on the enemy artillery, doing as much damage as possible and at least forcing them to move so they can't fire while friendly troops are advancing. Some friendly batteries will usually remain silent during this phase so that when the enemy gets organised to start his counterbattery fire, his new locations and any previously undetected units can be located and engaged by these hidden units.

If successful, by the time the enemy artillery has recovered enough to start returning fire effectively, the friendly troops have secured the objective and are dug-in. Friendly artillery can then relocate itself to avoid counterbattery and be in position to start firing on the enemy counterattack force. Generally the units used for counterbattery fire are the medium and heavy artillery due to their greater range, since it's obviously better to shoot at enemy guns from outside their range where they can't shoot back!

Counterbattery fire isn't modelled in AA because it wasn't a major factor during the Arnhem operation. For example, even though the paras suffered terribly from enemy shelling and mortars, they were unable to spot for counterbattery fire - even when XXX Corps arrived in range - because they lacked any specialist equipment and were so heavily suppressed they couldn't get to a position to observe the enemy batteries firing.

Regards
33

Steve,

You say it's not modeled, but it seems arty units always draw priority fire when the AI arty is picking targets to hit with its arty.

Is this simply the result of the AI looking for the highest valued target (Combat Power Rating) with a current/good intel report? So, despite my belief that the AI performs counter-battery fire, it's just an illusion?

Dave informs me that enemy artillery units are indeed added to the target list in the same way other sightings would be (ie higher priority and active sightings get fired on first). I'll check with him and let you know if there's any special priority given to artillery units in the target list.

Cheers
33

Golf33 - thanks for the very detailed description of the use of counterbattery observation.

I was a bit puzzled about the usefulness since I read that the casualities of CB fire was very little - but I probably forgot about the 'cohesion' factor
The CB fire didn't make much of damage but inhibited the enemy to use their artillery efficiently. That of course makes perfect sense.

(looks at watch... dang still not November ... no where close to the 17th...)

murx