Matrix Games Forums

Space Program Manager gets mini-site and Twitch SessionBuzz Aldrin: Ask Me Anything (AMA) on redditDeal of the week Fantasy Kommander: Eukarion WarsSpace Program Manager Launch Contest Announced!Battle Academy 2 is out now on iPad!A closer look at rockets in Space Program ManagerDeal of the Week - Pride of NationsA new update for Piercing Fortress EuropaNew screenshots for War in the West!Pike & Shot is now available!
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Machine Gun Battalion

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command Ops Series >> RE: Machine Gun Battalion Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Machine Gun Battalion - 9/6/2009 6:51:21 PM   
GoodGuy

 

Posts: 1503
Joined: 5/17/2006
From: Cologne, Germany
Status: offline
yay

EDIT: TMO, I misread your previous post, hehe
So, yeah....

http://www.vickersmachinegun.org.uk/transport-universal.htm#plcomd

the Platoon commander's carrier had no MMG (just a box with spare parts and tools for the Vickers, the Platoon Sergeant's carrier had a PIAT only, while each of the 2 Section commander's carriers "carried" a rangefinder only, instead of a Vickers MMG. The carriers of the section commanders also did not have a sufficient amount of men to operate an MMG:

Crew (3 men):
Section commander,
"rangetaker",
driver/mechanic.

The MMG carrier finally carried... guess what... the Vickers and a 4-men crew! *grin*

So, the other 4 carriers carried ammo or alt tools/weapons or even mechanics, but no MMG. So, in this case, my original statement seems to be correct, the author either forgot to mention the 3 other MMG carriers, or he thought mentioning the single MMG carrier would be sufficient to explain the hierarchy of a MMG platoon. Maybe he was even unsure regarding what weapon was assigned to what particular carrier within a given platoon.

Summary: 4 carriers with 4 MMGs per platoon, with the other FOUR carriers being able to hold additional rounds as you (correctly) stated.

< Message edited by GoodGuy -- 9/6/2009 7:19:29 PM >


_____________________________

"Aw Nuts"
General Anthony McAuliffe
December 22nd, 1944
Bastogne

---
"I've always felt that the AA (Alied Assault engine) had the potential to be [....] big."
Tim Stone
8th of August, 2006

(in reply to TMO)
Post #: 31
RE: Machine Gun Battalion - 9/6/2009 7:21:42 PM   
TMO

 

Posts: 251
Joined: 4/12/2003
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline
quote:

No sir...

I thought I was mistaken when I looked at the sub-section setup, for a second, but if you look at these links

http://www.vickersmachinegun.org.uk/transport-universal.htm#plcomd

the Platoon commander's carrier had no MMG (just a box with spare parts and tools for the Vickers, the Platoon Sergeant's carrier had a PIAT only, while each of the 2 Section commander's carriers "carried" a rangefinder only, instead of a Vickers MMG. The carriers of the section commanders also did not have a sufficient amount of men to operate an MMG:

Crew (3 men):
Section commander,
"rangetaker",
driver/mechanic.

The MMG carrier finally carried... guess what... the Vickers and a 4-men crew! *grin*

So, the other 4 carriers carried ammo or alt tools/weapons or even mechanics, but no MMG. So, in this case, my original statement seems to be correct, the author either forgot to mention the 3 other MMG carriers, or he thought mentioning the single MMG carrier would be sufficient to explain the hierarchy of a MMG platoon. Maybe he was even unsure regarding what weapon was assigned to what particular carrier within a given platoon.

Summary: 4 MMGs per platoon.

< Message edited by GoodGuy -- 9/6/2009 7:11:20 PM


The make-up of a machine gun platoon is 8 x carriers, 1 x motorcycle and 4 x MMG - so here we agree. However if you look carefully at the diagrams you will see that the other four non-MMG carriers carried a significant amount of .303 ammo - so yes, eight carriers but four MMGs.

Regards

Tim

< Message edited by TMO -- 9/6/2009 8:30:46 PM >

(in reply to GoodGuy)
Post #: 32
RE: Machine Gun Battalion - 9/6/2009 7:23:21 PM   
TMO

 

Posts: 251
Joined: 4/12/2003
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline
[

< Message edited by TMO -- 9/6/2009 8:27:22 PM >

(in reply to TMO)
Post #: 33
RE: Machine Gun Battalion - 9/14/2009 9:56:02 PM   
TMO

 

Posts: 251
Joined: 4/12/2003
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline
Take a look at:

World War II infantry tactics: squad and platoon By Stephen Bull

In the HTTR scenario Raid on Renkum, R Coy 1 Para is allocated 13,100 rds of 0.303. If 2,000 of this is for the Vickers and each man has (IIRC) 60 rds, this leaves 6,000 rds for the 10 Brens or 600 rds per Bren.

If you study the link above you will see that (in addition to 50 rds each for their own rifles) a section took into action 750 rds in 25 magazines with a further 700 rds (intended for the Brens) in bandoliers. In other words around 1,400 rds was available to the Bren as opposed to the 600 currently modelled in the game - quite a difference.

Regards

Tim

< Message edited by TMO -- 9/18/2009 8:56:38 PM >

(in reply to TMO)
Post #: 34
RE: Machine Gun Battalion - 9/15/2009 11:17:18 AM   
GoodGuy

 

Posts: 1503
Joined: 5/17/2006
From: Cologne, Germany
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TMO

... each man has (IIRC) 60 rds,


Hey Tim, is that amount of ammo for rifles? (I can't check, I don't have HTTR installed right now).

If so, it sounds reasonable, it relates to the amount used as standard setup for German riflemen at least, since they had 2 ammo pockets, where each could hold 6 strips with 5 rounds (= 60 rounds). Many riflemen carried additional strips in their tommy-bags (used for bread).

Until around 1941, German riflemen were supposed to carry one strip with "SmK" rounds (steel core) and one strip with "SmK(H)" rounds (tungsten core) against armoured targets. The SmK rounds could penetrate 10mm of armour, the SmK(H) could penetrate 14mm of armour. The tungsten rounds were then used with MGs against Bunker embrasures only, due to the low performance of the Tungsten rounds against armoured targets.

Soldiers/officers with MP40 carried 6 mags (6 x 32 rounds), soldiers using the Sturmgewehr 44 carried around 6 mags (6 x 30). The latter number is a guess, I don't have sources covering the setups of units being equipped with the Sturmgewehr. The first considerable deployment of StG44s occured at the Eastern Front, in late October 1943, with the 93. Infantry-Division (Army Group North).

Prior to the Eastern campaign, a German leMG gunner was supposed to carry 50 rounds (belt or belt drum mag), the first assistant another 50 rounds, the standard setup per leMG was 2500 rounds per crew.
The 3rd assistant was supposed to carry the ammo box with 300 rounds. In order to save space and to get 6 belts (with 50 rounds) into the crate, the tips of the rounds of 4 belts pointed forward, but 2 belts pointed backwards, so that the assistant had to either twist or turn these 2 belts when feeding the gun. This led to jams and tricky situations in combat. The packing was then changed, with all belts/tips pointing to the same direction, which limited the storage space to 250 rounds per box.
The rest was supposed to be stored on the combat vehicle/truck. In practice, already prior to the Eastern campaign, the 2500 rounds were carried into combat, with the boxes being distributed among a section's riflemen and gunners.
Later on, the 3rd assistant position was discarded.
leMG and HMG crews also used phosphor rounds (especially in Russia) - which could lit houses or vehicles, and tracer rounds, where each 4th round was a phosphor/tracer.

< Message edited by GoodGuy -- 9/15/2009 11:21:06 AM >


_____________________________

"Aw Nuts"
General Anthony McAuliffe
December 22nd, 1944
Bastogne

---
"I've always felt that the AA (Alied Assault engine) had the potential to be [....] big."
Tim Stone
8th of August, 2006

(in reply to TMO)
Post #: 35
RE: Machine Gun Battalion - 9/15/2009 3:15:15 PM   
TMO

 

Posts: 251
Joined: 4/12/2003
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline

Two quotes from:

Bayonetstrength

quote:

As a basic load, each man armed with the rifle carried fifty rounds of ammunition in ten chargers of five rounds each. They were carried in one of the two webbing pouches worn by each rifleman. By 1944 the load had doubled to one hundred rounds, but the additional ammunition was earmarked for the Section Bren Gun. Bandoliers, each containing five pockets (10 rounds per pocket) were also used.


quote:

Ammunition wise, each Bren was provided with twenty five magazines, one with the gun and the rest carried in two boxes holding a dozen each. In the Rifle Section the boxes were not taken into action. Instead, each of the six men in the Rifle Group carried two magazines, and each of the three men in the Gun Group carried four. Two magazines could be held in a single webbing pouch. It was quickly found that the only real flaw concerned the magazines, which if loaded to capacity would jam. The maximum load was therefore reduced to twenty eight rounds each, 700 rounds for a full complement of magazines. This was rounded up to 1000 rounds with loose ammunition, carried by its vehicle, or distributed as an extra fifty rounds for each man in the Rifle Group.


Regards

Tim

(in reply to GoodGuy)
Post #: 36
RE: Machine Gun Battalion - 9/16/2009 11:10:38 PM   
TMO

 

Posts: 251
Joined: 4/12/2003
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline
Regarding the composition of a British infantry battalion circa 1944. The following is from two sources, namely Gary Kennedy's excellent (and very well researched) site:

http://www.bayonetstrength.150m.com/toe/BritInfantry/rifle_company.htm

quote:

Compiled from the War Establishment for an Infantry Battalion, reference II/233/2, effective 30th April 1943. This organisation was superseded by II/233/3 from 12th November 1944, which incorporated nine amendments made since the Spring of 1943.


and my own original copy of II/233/3 (Notified in ACIs 29/11/44. Effective date 12/11/44).

Bn HQ
Transport: Car 4-seat (x1), Jeep (x1), 15-cwt truck (office) (x1), 15-cwt truck (x3)*, Universal Carrier (x1).
Weapons: Bren LMG (x1).
*My copy has 15-cwt-truck (x2) and one 4x4 armoured ambulance.

HQ Coy
Coy HQ
Transport: Jeep (x1).

Signal Pl
Transport: 15-cwt truck (x2).
Weapons: PIAT (x1).

Admin Pl
Transport: Jeep (x1), 15-cwt truck (x1), 3t lorry (x2)*.
Weapons: Bren LMG ( x3), PIAT (x3).
*My copy has Jeep (x1), 15-cwt truck (x1), 3t truck (x13), 15-cwt truck (water - 200 gls) (x1).

S Coy
3" mortar Pl
Transport: Universal carrier (x7), 15-cwt truck (x3).
Weapons: 3" mortar (x6), PIAT (x3).

Carrier Pl
Transport: Universal carrier (x13), 15-cwt truck (x2).
Weapons: Bren LMG (x13), PIAT (x4), 2" mortar (x4).

A/T Pl
Transport: Loyd carrier (x12), Universal carrier (x1), 15-cwt truck (x1)*.
Weapons: 6pdr (x6), Bren LMG (x6), 2" mortar (x6).
*My copy has 15-cwt truck (x2).

Pioneer Pl
Transport: Jeep (x3), 3t lorry (x1).

Rifle Coy (x4) - each
Transport: Universal carrier (x1).
Weapons: Bren LMG (x10), PIAT (x3), 2" mortar (x4).

Regards

Tim

PS Will add more over the next few days.



< Message edited by TMO -- 9/19/2009 4:29:40 PM >

(in reply to TMO)
Post #: 37
RE: Machine Gun Battalion - 9/17/2009 11:17:04 PM   
TMO

 

Posts: 251
Joined: 4/12/2003
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline
In terms of personnel the figures are as follows:

Bn HQ
5 Officers
53 ORs

HQ Coy
Coy HQ
1 Officer
5 ORs

Signal Pl 
1 Officer
35 ORs

Admin Pl
2 Officers
52 ORs

S Coy
3" mortar Pl
1 Officer
42 ORs 

Carrier Pl 
2 Officers
61 ORs 

A/T Pl
2 Officers
53 ORs

Pioneer Pl 
1 Officer
21 ORs 

Rifle Coy (x4) - each 
5 Officers
120 ORs 

Regards

Tim

< Message edited by TMO -- 9/17/2009 11:20:48 PM >

(in reply to TMO)
Post #: 38
RE: Machine Gun Battalion - 9/18/2009 5:27:45 AM   
mariandavid

 

Posts: 229
Joined: 5/22/2008
Status: offline
Just a couple of points to add to a rewarding discussion. The biggest problem in modelling an MMG company is that it was significantly different in power in the attack and defence. This, of course, was due to the weight of the gun and (above all) of its water and ammunition. It is reasonable to assume that a platoon could only displace forward on foot with half of its four guns. Just to confirm the allocation in most divisions was one company per brigade, with all three platoons placed in prepared positions when on the defence. If attacking the positions on and flanking the attack were doubled, with most by 1944 matching the WW1 practise of 'sweeping fire' at up to 4,500 yards (when the 'z' ammunition was available) to catch enemy reinforcements. As a sidenote the Germans stated (have not got the source handy) that the two deadliest weapons they faced in WW1 were the French 75mm and the Vickers MMG - the latter it seems because all that revealed its effect was the 'gentle patter' of the rounds impacting.

I have a suspicion that by late 1944 each battalion was operating with its own platoon of MMG (as long as Montgomery did not know!). Certainly in Italy this was the practise. Although the figures quoted for weapon strength are correct, there is reason to believe that in practise front-line troops paid little attention to this. In the case of the British this is most evident in the widespread adoption of the Sten SMG - British divisions had more SMG than those of any other army and many pictures show a high usage in urban terrain. The other is the addition of an LMG to platoon headquarters or to one or more sections. As always what mattered was the ammunition load available. In defensive or 'short staged advances' an unit would logically load up with whatever is on hand. Incidentally the largest number of Bren LMG in a company that I have been able to find was about 30 - one for every three men - mind you this was in Italy and by a battalion of the London Scottish an unit notorious for ignoring official dictates!

(in reply to TMO)
Post #: 39
RE: Machine Gun Battalion - 9/18/2009 9:22:05 PM   
TMO

 

Posts: 251
Joined: 4/12/2003
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline
Mariandavid

quote:

Incidentally the largest number of Bren LMG in a company that I have been able to find was about 30 - one for every three men - mind you this was in Italy and by a battalion of the London Scottish an unit notorious for ignoring official dictates!   


Wow! 3 per section - that's a lot. I'd imagine not common practice though. Although interestingly this information supports the quote from World War II infantry tactics: squad and platoon By Stephen Bull that by the end of the war some infantry sections were upgrading their number of Brens:

quote:

In the late stages of the war it was not unknown for the section to carry two Brens.


Regards

Tim


(in reply to mariandavid)
Post #: 40
RE: Machine Gun Battalion - 9/18/2009 10:12:08 PM   
TMO

 

Posts: 251
Joined: 4/12/2003
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline
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:

quote:

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



< Message edited by TMO -- 9/18/2009 10:32:11 PM >

(in reply to TMO)
Post #: 41
RE: Machine Gun Battalion - 9/19/2009 1:23:41 AM   
Arjuna


Posts: 17791
Joined: 3/31/2003
From: Canberra, Australia
Status: offline
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

(in reply to TMO)
Post #: 42
RE: Machine Gun Battalion - 9/19/2009 5:30:21 PM   
TMO

 

Posts: 251
Joined: 4/12/2003
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline
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):

quote:

... 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



< Message edited by TMO -- 9/20/2009 3:56:53 PM >

(in reply to Arjuna)
Post #: 43
RE: Machine Gun Battalion - 9/19/2009 11:50:14 PM   
simovitch


Posts: 4183
Joined: 2/14/2006
Status: offline
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.


< Message edited by simovitch -- 9/20/2009 2:48:10 AM >


_____________________________

simovitch


(in reply to TMO)
Post #: 44
RE: Machine Gun Battalion - 9/23/2009 11:51:02 PM   
TMO

 

Posts: 251
Joined: 4/12/2003
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline
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








< Message edited by TMO -- 9/24/2009 10:53:40 PM >

(in reply to simovitch)
Post #: 45
RE: Machine Gun Battalion - 9/24/2009 10:22:50 PM   
TMO

 

Posts: 251
Joined: 4/12/2003
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline
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


< Message edited by TMO -- 9/24/2009 10:48:02 PM >

(in reply to TMO)
Post #: 46
RE: Machine Gun Battalion - 10/16/2009 11:06:12 PM   
JeffK


Posts: 5208
Joined: 1/26/2005
From: Back in the Office, Can I get my tin hut back!
Status: offline

quote:

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

(in reply to GoodGuy)
Post #: 47
RE: Machine Gun Battalion - 8/27/2012 10:48:58 PM   
Central Blue

 

Posts: 695
Joined: 8/20/2004
Status: offline
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

(in reply to JeffK)
Post #: 48
RE: Machine Gun Battalion - 1/7/2013 4:08:35 AM   
Michael Dorosh


Posts: 378
Joined: 3/2/2003
Status: offline

quote:

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/lightweapons/machineguns/vickersmachinegun.htm

    quote:

    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:

    quote:

    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

    quote:

    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/lightweapons/machineguns/vickersmachinegun.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.


_____________________________

The Tactical Wargamer


(in reply to GoodGuy)
Post #: 49
RE: Machine Gun Battalion - 1/7/2013 10:24:27 AM   
RockinHarry


Posts: 2950
Joined: 1/18/2001
From: Germany
Status: offline
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:

http://www.myspace.com/rockinharryz
http://www.youtube.com/user/rockinharryz
https://www.facebook.com/harry.zann

(in reply to Michael Dorosh)
Post #: 50
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command Ops Series >> RE: Machine Gun Battalion Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.160