Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Artillery Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Accuracy
Roman    5/25/2006 1:00:00 PM
I am just wondering, what is the accuracy of modern artillery pieces (for a given range and weather conditions) assuming the use of ordinary (non-guided) projectiles?
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7   NEXT
S-2    RE:Carl S finnish artillery links   5/30/2006 12:20:08 PM
Yeah, 1559.5 mils to a quarter turn isn't quite the nice number that 1500 or 1600 mils represent. Always liked ours better cause it's more accurate, splits into 800 mil sectors of fire nicely, and it's jingoistically our way. That automatically makes it better, right? Always assumed offhandedly that the Soviet perspective boiled down to "Quantity has a quality of it's own".
 
Quote    Reply

S-2    RE:French Influence-Yimmy Reply   5/30/2006 12:22:56 PM
Yimmy, do you guys still train and fire your GPMGs in an indirect area-fire mode?
 
Quote    Reply

IsoT    RE:French Influence   5/30/2006 2:28:51 PM
I read in Gunners manual pretty much the same thing: In assault over tuulasma river (If I remember the place correctly) German artillery and finnish artillery were joint supporting assault over the river. Division allocated targets and germans replied that it was impossible for them to do required number of shoots. SO that, sort of, illustrates that German artillery wasn't the best in that time. After WWI the french were at their military peak, so it made perfect sence copycat them whenever possible. And I'll take my hat off for Imperial Russian Artillery anytime. Rissians never did see the artillery as quantity over quality: More like you need sufficent numbers to do devastating effect. We are still trying to get that in system that can land multiple rounds simultaniously on target. Like AMOS. On old times you needed multiple barrels to do that. Why it seems that thy opted for quantity stems from the fact that their FOs didn't have sufficent communication to effectively guide fire. Thus they rather shooted grids and creeping barrages. Gemans never thought much of soviet firecontroll, but liked the amount of fire soviets could hurl.
 
Quote    Reply

S-2    RE:French Influence/IsoT reply   5/30/2006 2:38:11 PM
Largely concur. Not knocking Russian indirect fire technical expertise one bit. Very accurate point of comms being a limiting factor in directing fires, which explains why on-call fires were slower and less often used. Too, Soviet battlefield intell was good to excellent. Many targets IN DEPTH were identified by Soviet reconnaissance. With the tubes and ammo available, those targets could be serviced as part of initial prep fires when attacking. Issues of Soviet responsiveness generally arose in the defense. Sometimes solved by firing over open sites in direct fire ala Kursk. Neutralizer, I'm sure, would know, but I recall that the origins of modern indirect fire systems lay with the French during W.W.I.
 
Quote    Reply

Carl S    RE:Wehrmacht Artillery   5/30/2006 6:01:29 PM
IsoT. Do you still have acess to the gunner manual describing the 'Tuulasma River' battle? I am always looking for littel bits of historical evidence like this and the complete translation of the incident would be valuable. In defense of the Wehmacht, they did have a rep for accuracy.
 
Quote    Reply

neutralizer    RE:French Influence/IsoT reply   5/31/2006 6:29:01 AM
Having first seen the C2 sight when in entered service with L16 mor and L7 GPMG (on active service at the time, re-equipment in the field!) I can safely say that the instrument on the MG 42 looked light years better! The true 'mil' is a milliradian, a few years back I was looking at a requirements document for my employer and some buffoon in a DoD had defined a mil as a milliradian! Oops. I can't for the life of me think why anybody would adopt anything other than 6400 as the approximation for practical use. I've still got a nagging thought that the Sovs used 6200 (which has some logic in a nation noted for its mathematics - theory triumphs over practicality). Fortunately I know where there's a part copy of the translation of the Sov arty glossary/encyclopedia. Be a while before I can get to it though. Of course the main people to copy from the French arty were the US in WW1! I'm not sure that anybody else did to any significant degree. I'm just about complete on writing (now onto graphics) a history of UK tech fire control in the 20th cent for my web site, it's an interesting subject because as far as I can see no-one has done such a thing in any detail for any army. It's fairly clear that the Brits worked it all out for themselves although they did 'borrow' the planchette from the French in 1915, but turned it into the artillery board. Of course their first optical dial sight was a licensed version of the Goertz adopted in 1910.
 
Quote    Reply

Carl S    RE:French Influence/IsoT reply   5/31/2006 7:56:59 PM
"because as far as I can see no-one has done such a thing in any detail for any army." All I have found on that subject area few articals in the British Royal Artillery Journal & the US Army Field Artillery Journal. Both focused on the British development, although the latter periodical mentioned Russian pioneering work circa 1900-05. "Fortunately I know where there's a part copy of the translation of the Sov arty glossary/encyclopedia. Be a while before I can get to it though." Hidden treasure! I must have a copy!! Name your price! My first born daughter is yours!
 
Quote    Reply

Carl S    RE:French Influence/IsoT reply   5/31/2006 8:09:06 PM
IsoT...thanks for the comment on the web site. Nice to know not everything on the web is fraudulent. Were you to rewrite that site, is there anything you would add to it?
 
Quote    Reply

IsoT    Finnish comment of german artillery for Carl S   6/1/2006 12:30:23 AM
This is from "Tykkimiehen opas" 1985. pages 201-204 HGreat deeds by finnish field artillery: The bit describes Tuulosjoki breakthrough battle in 4th september 1941. . The bit that interrest you goes like this: "Suomalaisen kenttätykistön taidolle kuvaavaa on, että ammuntoihin osallistuneet kaksi saksalaista batteristoa ilmoittivat jo tulisuunnitelmaa laadittaessa, etteivät he pysty siirtämään suomalaisten aikataulun mukaan tulta maalista toiseen. Saksalaisille annettiin tämän seurauksen valmistelussa toisarvoisia häirintä ja toistoammuntoja toteutettaviksi." In english: Describing for skills of Finnish artillery is that two German batallions participating in shoots announced already in planning pahse that they cannot change targets according to finnish timetablBecause of this the Germans were given harasment and repeating shoots that were secondar in nature. during the fire preparation. Mustavaris, even though he is just a grassdrill (infantryman) can , can give you second opinion on my translation. Something was amiss with the site and I couldn't' see half of the text I typed so I know there are typos.
 
Quote    Reply

13FRET    RE:Carl-M101A1   6/1/2006 2:11:00 AM
S2- you were in Alaska?
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics