By Paul Ferraro
Americans used the British system, but with a very
significant innovation. They pre-computed the firing data for a HUGE number of
variations of wind/temperature, barrel wear, elevation differentials, etc. Then
for each possible variation, they created a separate calibrated tape measure.
Along the tape was printed the gun laying information instead of distance
marks. When a firing mission came in, the plotting officer would simply go to a
filing cabinet containing the hundreds (thousands?) of these tapes and pull out
the correct one for the current meteorological and situational factors. Then
the tape would be laid out between the two grid points on the map (the
battery's and the target's) and the firing data would be read from the printing
on the tape. Apparently there were some other fudges that got thrown in to make
the firing even more accurate.
Net result was that there were about three minutes elapsed
time from the initial fire support call until shells were making the enemy
duck. And the firing was almost as accurate as the spotted German fires. Ergo,
very responsive explosions exactly where they are wanted.
Again, a drawback to the American system is that it requires
very accurate and detailed maps (say showing individual farm buildings for
instance) which must be plentifully supplied to troops at all levels. However,
given the availability of such maps then American artillery could be
hellacious.
I might guess that temporary lack of such maps may be a
reason why certain obvious movements were tardy during the pursuit across
France. How would you feel about moving into an area where your artillery could
not fire (because the forward troops as well as the artillery had no maps with
appropriate grid marks)?
The tape measure system was not the only innovation of the
Americans, as there were several others that followed directly from the simplicity
of the tape usage.
Since the grid system was so easy to use for calling in
fires, it was standard doctrine to train all officers in it (and many enlisted
men as well?). In fact the technique was so easy, that an otherwise ignorant
enlisted man could be readily walked through the procedure over radio (and was
on more than one occasion) when all his officers had fallen.
Another trick of the Americans, was the Time on Target
mission (TOT). With this one, every battery in range was told the grid coordinates
of the target and time when all shells were to initially land at the target.
Each battery did its normal firing computation and then calculated the time to
"pull the lanyards" by backing off the time-of-flight from the target
time. TOT was particularly nasty because the initial shell from every gun
landed virtually simultaneously before any defender could take cover. It took
too much effort for the Germans to care much for such a technique, and the
British were not accurate enough to make the technique particularly useful.
Very nasty and only Americans could pull it off (claiming it required as little
as 10 or 20 minutes preparation).
Another innovation of the Americans was their ability to
obtain accurate fires extremely quickly from a LARGE number of firing
batteries. Because of the simplicity and elegance of the tape system, almost
any battery in range could fire on any target in any direction. All they had to
do was get a request from another firing HQ or even just listen in on other
battalion radio nets ("Hey, Red Bravo Two, we have a situation at grid
coordinates such and so").
This system was formalized by having a fire mission request
being kicked "upstairs" if warranted for a suitably attractive
target. The firing artillery battalion might contact the division which then
might also request support from corps. Ostensibly, the inclusion of the
division support added an additional three minutes to the fire mission, and
including corps assets added three minutes yet again. There apparently was one
case in Italy of a piper cub pilot (an artillery spotter) calling in no less
than five corps level missions in one hour (this extremity of fire
concentration was of course EXTREMELY uncommon, but certainly not unheard of).
Such relatively spontaneous massing of fires was absolutely
not true of the German system which required a careful pre-plotting by
surveyors to figure out where things really were on the map. In some sense, all
American batteries wind up in general support (can fire for anybody).
Consequently a given fire request may pick up extra "idle" batteries
to thicken the fires. And during emergencies, any battery in range could leap
into the fray to save a Yank ground pounder's tail.
Beyond the above "standard" organizational
doctrine, apparently Americans were quite capable of concentrating fire support
on as large a scale as needed. I'll offer an example from the German
counter-attack at Mortain in August of 1944 (from Saving the Breakout, Alwyn
Fetherstone, 1993). Three American infantry companies were trapped by the
Germans on top of a hill overlooking the valley that Mortain lies within (this
was a bottle neck that a major part of the German attack had to pass through,
if it was going to cut off Patton's breakout). The American infantry held out
for something like two days against the better part of a Panzer/Panzer
grenadier division that desperately wanted the lousy Yanks off of the hill. The
only problem seems to have been that some twelve and a half battalions of Uncle
Sam's artillery could be called on in the instant by the infantry, anywhere on
the highly visible countryside for miles around. This not only prevented all
daylight movement by the German attack, but completely thwarted any attack on
the infantry itself, even at night. To imagine the effect of being a German
attacking up that hill, think of being on a football field with some fifty to
one hundred 20-odd pound TNT explosions going off around you EVERY second (some
two hundred guns each firing every 3 to say 8 seconds). Another way to think of
it is to say that, in some sense, you might expect to have a shell land within
touching distance of you every 15 seconds or so. Yep, I don't think the US
needs to bow to anybody when it comes to an ability to deliver impromptu
concentrated fires.
As a side note, no artillery gun anywhere (in the US Army at
any rate) ever fired more than about 800 rounds in any day (Trevor Dupuy,
Search for Historical Records of High Rate Artillery Fire in Combat Situations,
1978). This was the extreme high, and a more typical high for any given battery
is likely to be on the order of several rounds per gun per day. Apparently
logistical limits more than anything tended to prevent firing a larger number
of missions.
No doubt more than one German officer assumed he'd have at
least the first 15 or 20 minutes of his surprise attack free of defensive
artillery fire. And when the artillery did start to come in, he'd expect to be
warned by the initial spotting rounds. Instead he found he was under immediate
fire placed directly on his men while many were still crossing the start line.
I'm sure it appeared to more than one German that the Americans must have known
when and where such attacks were coming. No wonder some Germans were impressed
with American artillery.
I enjoy reading your blog. Do you have any info on U.S. anti-aircraft artillery in Italy, especially in 1944 and '45?
ReplyDelete898th Anti-Aircraft Artillery Battalion (Automatic Weapons)
ReplyDeletehttp://www.100thww2.org/support/898/898combat.html
Skylighters
http://www.skylighters.org/introduction/
443rd AAA Bn
http://www.texasmilitaryforcesmuseum.org/36division/443con.htm
5th Army Antiaircraft, Salerno to Florence, 9 September 1943 - 8 September 1944
http://www.lonesentry.com/fiftharmyaa/index.html
HISTORY OF TASK FORCE 45
http://www.milhist.net/mto/taskforce45.html
The 473rd Infantry Regiment In WWII
http://www.pjaudinetsr.com/473page1.html
Regards
Mitch