Machine Gun Battalion

Command Ops: Battles From The Bulge takes the highly acclaimed Airborne Assault engine back to the West Front for the crucial engagements during the Ardennes Offensive. Test your command skills in the fiery crucible of Airborne Assault’s “pausable continuous time” uber-realistic game engine. It's up to you to develop the strategy, issue the orders, set the pace, and try to win the laurels of victory in the cold, shadowy Ardennes.
Command Ops: Highway to the Reich brings us to the setting of one of the most epic and controversial battles of World War II: Operation Market-Garden, covering every major engagement along Hell’s Highway, from the surprise capture of Joe’s Bridge by the Irish Guards a week before the offensive to the final battles on “The Island” south of Arnhem.

Moderators: Arjuna, Panther Paul

TMO
Posts: 247
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2003 11:34 pm
Location: Bristol, UK

RE: Machine Gun Battalion

Post by TMO »

Using II/233/3, the total number or personnel per infantry Bn is: Officers - 36; ORs - 809 (Total 845). Quoting from Geoffrey Picot, Accidental Warrior (In The Front Line From Normandy Till Victory)' Penguin (1994) regarding Bn strength:
At full stregth: about 840 officers and men. Combat soldiers (everybody except those in and serving supply depot): about 730. Typical combat strength in Normandy: 500 or 600.

Looking at the figures in the above posts, in HTTR 'those in and serving supply depot' (essentially most of Signal Pl, Admin Pl and Assualt Pioneer Pl) apear to have been (very reasonably) included in the brigade base. Does anybody from Panther have a breakdown of how Signal Pl, Admin Pl and Assualt Pioneer Pl etc are parcelled up amongst brigade base units?

Regards

Tim

User avatar
Arjuna
Posts: 17768
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 11:18 am
Location: Canberra, Australia
Contact:

RE: Machine Gun Battalion

Post by Arjuna »

Tim,

I appreciate your enthusiasm here, however, we no longer have a full time data content person on board and I really don't want to hold up the delivery of BFTB chasing up this detail. So can we please leave this for now. Thanks.[:)]
Dave "Arjuna" O'Connor
www.panthergames.com
TMO
Posts: 247
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2003 11:34 pm
Location: Bristol, UK

RE: Machine Gun Battalion

Post by TMO »

Dave

Sure, no problem - leave this until after release of BFTB; I've been looking forward to this one for a long time - the last thing I want to do is slow publication down.

I've always admired Panther Games desire for historical accuracy, but with the case of the British 1944 line infantry Bn, as modelled in HTTR - with respect - I think you've got it a little wrong. Compared with II/233/3, it appears to be heavy in Jeeps, 15-cwt trucks and 3t lorries (maybe you've rolled in some supply train elements here) but light in Universal carriers (particularly those from the MG Bn) and LMGs (each carrier in the Carrier Pl had a Bren LMG - the unit also had 4 PIATs and 4 2" mortars - don't think these are currently modelled). After release of BFTB can I request a review of the estabs of the British 1944 line infantry Bn?

As an example, take the 3" mortar Pl as currently modelled;

Personnel: around 60
Rifles: around 50-60
Sten SMGs: 6
Bren LMGs: 4
PIAT: 1
3" mortars: 6
15-cwt trucks: 6
3t lorries: 4

Now compare this with II/233/3:

Personnel: 43
Rifles: 35
Sten SMGs: 7
PIAT: 3
3" mortars: 6
15-cwt truck: 3
Universal carriers: 7

Note that the 3" mortar Pl was not officially issued with Bren LMGs. The 15-cwt trucks carried the 3 PIATs and ammunition for the 3" mortars.

II/233/3 establishment is further reinforced by information in: Geoffrey Picot, Accidental Warrior (In The Front Line From Normandy Till Victory)' Penguin (1994) pp.52-53 (Geoffrey Picot was OC a 3" mortar Pl in Normandy and later OC a rifle Pl):
... At full strength a mortar platoon would have six mortars capable of firing up to about 3,000 yards. The general tactic would be to set them up some way behind the main fighting line and establish an observation post as close to the fighting line as possible; to use either hastily laid field telephone or (less reliably) wireless for communication; and for the man in the observation post to direct the firing. The mortars could be regarded as the battalion's own instant artillery, going everywhere with it, always in its area, always available.

But unlike artillery, mortars were not an accurate weapon. Their bombs would fall anywhere within an oval of about 100 yards long and 50 yards wide. Thus ranging was always difficult and they needed to be employed against a large target, such as some woods, and not a small target, like a house. Each mortar with its crew, ammunition, wireless and telephone sets could be loaded on to a carrier, that is an open-topped, tracked vehicle which could move over rough ground and had some protective armour. A mortar carrier was in fact a Bren machine-gun carrier used for another purpose.

There would normally be about forty-five men including several sergeants in the platoon. ...

Regards

Tim

User avatar
simovitch
Posts: 5760
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2006 7:01 pm

RE: Machine Gun Battalion

Post by simovitch »

Dave,

Maybe we c ould consider these prior to release of BFTB. I used Kennedy's data for a lot of the BFTB stuff, and Andries is actually a contributor to that site. I could fit this in prior to going gold if you think it's warranted.
simovitch

TMO
Posts: 247
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2003 11:34 pm
Location: Bristol, UK

RE: Machine Gun Battalion

Post by TMO »

Another example is the 17 pdr A/T troops attached to 1944 line inf Bns. Currently modelled as:

Personnel: 29
Rifles: 21
Sten SMGs: 5
Bren LMGs: 4
PIAT: 1
17 pdr A/T guns: 4
Total ammo 240 rds (60 per gun). 
15-cwt trucks: 3
3t lorries: 2

According to WE II/186C/1

(http://nigelef.tripod.com/antk42.htm; Steve "Golf 33" Long used this website when he was with Panther Games),

a 1944 17 pdr (towed) A/T troop comprised the following:

HQ
Universal carrier (x1), PIAT (x1).
Jeep (x1).

Troop
Tractor 4x4, anti tank (x4): each, 17 pdr gun, Bren LMG, 30 rds 17 pdr ammo.
15-cwt truck (x2): each, 30 rds 17 pdr ammo, 2" mortar.
3t lorry (x2): 80 rds 17 pdr in one and 100 rds 17 pdr the other.

Total
UC carrier (x1), Jeep (x1), tractors (x4), 15-cwt trucks (x2), 3t lorries (x2), 17 pdr guns (x4), Bren LMGs (x4), 2" mortars (x2), PIAT (x1), 360 rds 17 pdr ammo (i.e. 90 per gun).

Regards

Tim






TMO
Posts: 247
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2003 11:34 pm
Location: Bristol, UK

RE: Machine Gun Battalion

Post by TMO »

From WE II/186C/1 (http://nigelef.tripod.com/antk42.htm;

A 6 pdr troop:

HQ
Universal carrier (x1): PIAT (x1), 24 rds 6 pdr ammo.
Jeep (x1).

Troop
Carrier (x4): each, 6 pdr gun, Bren LMG, 24 rds 6 pdr ammo.
Carrier (x2): each, 30 rds 6 pdr ammo, 2" mortar.
3t lorry (x1): 204 rds 6 pdr ammo.

Total 
UC carrier (x7), Jeep (x1), 3t lorry (x1), 6 pdr guns (x4), Bren LMGs (x4), 2" mortars (x2), PIAT (x1), 384 rds 6 pdr ammo (i.e. 96 rds per gun).

Regards

Tim
User avatar
JeffroK
Posts: 6397
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am

RE: Machine Gun Battalion

Post by JeffroK »

ORIGINAL: GoodGuy

Well, hehe, I stumbled over that book some 5 hrs ago already. But the published pages refer to recce units only, while the interesting parts aren't shown. So I ordered the sucker on Amazon, i wanna know now. lol
While I'm sure the Canadians had Bren carriers, I'm not totally sure whether the Brit. MG Bns had 'em too, now. I can't deny the possibility that the regular carrier platoon of an INF unit could have been employed too, as they used to be the "slaves" within INF units, responsible for transport, medevac, towing stuff. Still, I can't imagine that the MMG units, as heavy weapons support units, often right behind the front line or even in the middle of the shyte (Italy), were using trucks.

BTW: oddly enough, the carrier on the picture I posted has a Rhino insignia, and "AD" above it. Would that refer to the 1st British Armoured Division? Their Rhino used to be a charging one [:)], though. Maybe they borrowed equipment :P

Whatever the case, carriers had been used, for sure.
The insignia is from 1st Armoured Div or 2nd Armoured Bde, the insignia changed to the charging Rhino during 1944.

I think AD is actually ADA, someones name.
Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum
Central Blue
Posts: 695
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 5:31 pm

RE: Machine Gun Battalion

Post by Central Blue »

Ran into this old thread while researching the (apparently) missing battalion carrier platoon.

Nice to see so many people referring to the pertinent manuals. If I remember correctly, the company shoot and the beaten zone were all leftovers from WWI.

Anyway, makes more sense to me to parcel out the carrier platoon to the rifle companies rather than parcel out the Vickers. I'm not quite sure what I will do with the Vickers. It's a bit mystifying that the battalion carrier platoon, AT platoon, and pioneer platoon are all missing from the British estab. That's shorting them quite a bit of fire power.

I am even reading the manual to see if I can assign the various carrier types without degrading forest movement. Any help is always appreciated.

I am currently having fun with Mayhem on the Meuse. It seems more in keeping with the plans of the time than Peiper crosses the Meuse.
USS St. Louis firing on Guam, July 1944. The Cardinals and Browns faced each other in the World Series that year
Image
User avatar
madorosh
Posts: 334
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2003 10:44 pm
Contact:

RE: Machine Gun Battalion

Post by madorosh »

ORIGINAL: GoodGuy

The term "MMG" refers to a (Vickers) medium machine gun, right?

@TMO: According to what I've read so far a Rifle section had a rifle group and a gun group, the latter (3 men) being equipped with 1 Bren.
"Bayonetstrength" mentions this too, so an Inf Bn would have had 27 Bren MGs, and an entire Division 243 Brens.
It doesn't look like Inf Bns had Vickers MMGs at their disposal, though. Those were purely divisional assets. Parts/Sections of MG battalions could be attached to Bde's or Bns at the discretion of the Div. Commander.

That said, British Inf Bns were somewhat "underpowered", means they had serious disadvantages in house-to-house fighting throughout Europe, because of the lack of automatic/semi-automatic weapons, thus Inf line units assaulting urban areas could often only advance if they called in tank support, in cases where MMG support wasn't available.
The only submachine gun issued to a rifle section was the one issued to its leader, the corporal.

@Dave - OOB, number of MMGs, range:

  • OOB:

    http://www.canadiansoldiers.com/weapons ... inegun.htm
    www.canadiansoldiers.com

    "During the Second World War, machinegun support was again provided by specialist units. Upon mobilization, one machine gun battalion was assigned to each brigade of infantry; by the time the units went into action, only one machine gun battalion was assigned to each Division. Three machine gun companies, with three machine gun platoons of four Vickers guns each, as well as a heavy mortar company, made up the MG battalion.

    In Korea, Vickers Guns were assigned directly to the infantry battalions, in a specialist Vickers platoon. "

    "Divisional MG Battalion 1944-45":
    http://www.vickersmachinegun.org.uk/org-infdivww2.htm


    alternative Version:
    "Divisional MG (Support) Battalion"
    http://www.vickersmachinegun.org.uk/org-divsptbn.htm .

    The latter was a formation with 3 "Support Groups", with each group consisting of 1 MG Coy only, 1 AA company (16 x 20mm Oerlikon?) and 1 Mortar company with only 2 mortar platoons. This setup was rather unusual and disliked by Div. Commanders + troops, it seems.
  • Number of MMGs:

    A MG battalion (1943-1946) had 3 MG Coys (with a total of 9 MG platoons) and 1 Mortar Coy (4 platoons). Each Bn had 36 MMGs.
  • Range:

    The Vickers MMG had a range of up to 4500 yards (!).

    Let me quote the British Small Arms Manual, page 9:
    ORIGINAL: "SMALL ARMS MANUAL" by Brigadier J. A. Barlow, S.A.C., The West Yorkshire Regt. and Lt.-Col. R.E.W. Johnson - the London Rifle Brigade. Printed and issued in 1944.

    "The Medium Machine-Gun.

    Since this weapon is normally mounted on a heavy tripod its accuracy can be relied upon at ranges considerably greater than those attained by the L.M.G. or the rifle. In the case of the Vickers gun this increase in accurate range is enhanced by the fact that special (Mark VIII) ammunition is used which makes it possible to employ the gun in a miniature artillery role at ranges up to 4,500 yards.
    The medium machine gun should, therefore, not be wasted on short-range tasks which can be undertaken with L.M.Gs. (or, even by riflemen), but should be used in bursts of not less than 20 rounds, the length of burst increasing up to about 30 rounds."

    Note: The owner of this Manual added some interesting notes on the last pages of the manual ("Notes" section), a collection of penetration values for different small arms / calibres.

    You can download the manual here: http://www.badongo.com/file/7513521
    www.canadiansoldiers.com

    "In addition to direct fire, Vickers Guns were often used indirectly; this type of fire was first used in the First World War. During Operation VERITABLE in Feb 1945, Vickers Guns added their fire to the "pepperpot" supporting fire that was used during the largest artillery operation of the Second World War. Vickers Guns had also "thickened" the barrages leading up to the assault on Vimy Ridge in April 1917."

http://www.canadiansoldiers.com/weapons ... inegun.htm

Is this (maximum) range of the Vickers rendered in BFTB?

This reminds me of my queries regarding the range of German Inf guns (example: 75mm le IG 18 = 3800 meters, s.IG 33 = 4650 meters - in indirect fire mode), and PoE's query regarding the range of 88mm Flak guns (in direct fire mode - in an AT role).
Are these ranges and fire modes (I almost forgot to include over-calibre AT grenades for the IGs) for the IGs considered in BFTB?

Sorry for the necropost, but I see this thread has been recently bumped, and I also notice my website has been directly quoted here. Actually, one comment jumps out at me:

"That said, British Inf Bns were somewhat "underpowered", means they had serious disadvantages in house-to-house fighting throughout Europe, because of the lack of automatic/semi-automatic weapons, thus Inf line units assaulting urban areas could often only advance if they called in tank support, in cases where MMG support wasn't available."

I don't understand why people think the British were somehow disadvantaged that their MGs were in separate battalions, and to claim that there was a disadvantage in "house-to-house" fighting seems illogical on the face of it. I understand this is three years after the fact, but I'd challenge anyone reading this now to produce some kind of evidence or discussion of that point. It seems to me that urban warfare was something of a rarity both in Italy and NW Europe (needless to say, the Western Desert also), and of all the descriptions I've read, a criticism along the lines of lack of heavy machine gun fire has never been one of them. Canadians were involved in two real divisional level city fights; Ortona and Groningen and prevailed in both cases. They were involved in some fighting in the outskirts and suburbs of Caen also. The British fought in Caen and Hamburg with some other notable fights such as Geilenkirchen. Were they really disadvantaged?

I'd have thought that the increasing use of flame weapons would have been of more advantage in "house-to-house" fighting, and other "funnies" such as the AVRE. The quote makes it sound like calling in tank support was soemthing to be avoided; on the contrary, tank-infantry cooperation was the model towards which efficient formations strived.
User avatar
RockinHarry
Posts: 2344
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Germany
Contact:

RE: Machine Gun Battalion

Post by RockinHarry »

Just like MD said, MOUT would mostly see infantry and churchill tanks (and "Funny" sub variants), doing the majority of dirty city clearing works. My research on Operation Veritable yield enough of that evidences. Although not quite city size (rather large towns), Goch, Cleve and Xanten are good examples to have a look at.

For various reasons, I´d parcelled out HMG/MMG from my OP Veritable ESTAB infantry companies, yet it´s left to be seen, if the game AI can handle it.
RockinHarry in the web:

https://www.facebook.com/harry.zann
Post Reply

Return to “Command Ops Series”