Artillery, high angle used on non HE airbursts?

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Afaik, HE with airburst are usually delivered in high angle mode to direct the shrapnel and blast downward on the troops below. How does this work for i.e HC Smoke and APICM rounds? Do they 'require' high angle as well, or is a 'flyby' sufficient?

[PhilippRauch 0]

Depends on tactial situation and target, i would say.

I would try for example to dump my WP rounds with flat trajectory under the shelter a enemy may have, while in foxholes i would try to get the payload right upon them/into their positions.

Also if i shoot at trenches i might do flat again, if the trench is aligned along the flightpath of my shells, so it spreads nicely along the whole length of it. But if there are mountains next to their positions, i might not have the possiblily to use flat at all...

But i guess each army has its own rules for each situation, it also depends on what the FO wants to achive atm.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Although I have no WP (no point without viewblock and incendiary effects), I take it that the low angle approach doesn't make HC or APICM rounds less effective in doing their job then. Hmmm, more work then.. :) My FDC will switch into high angle mode when a HE airburst is selected (or terrain hit is detected of course), but it shouldn't if a non HE airburst is selected.

[the_shadow 0]

a flat trajectory will spread the submunistions from a ICM (APICM or DPICM) in a larger/longer.

same goes for WP/Smoke.

it´s up to the FO wich has "eyes on target" to decide whats best in the given situation.

ofcourse, when using WP/Smoke wind, temperature and such also decides what´s the best solution to achive the effect the FO wants.

so the short answer is. the FO decides, always.

[MSGT Montgomery 1]

My experience with this is that any high angle increases probable error. Shown in your TFT. As an FDC Chief id always suggest low angle over high angle. The trajectory of the round would have minimal effect on the airburst effects.

The FO (forward observer) only transmits a call for fire. Which includes mainly a description of the scenario. Such as Immediate suppression or troops in the open, etc. The fire order is generated by the Fire Direction Center. Such as MTO, Angle T, 4 rounds He, or Illumination, etc. The Fire Direction Center then sends MTO (Message to observer) with ordinance used and number of rounds. There is a pub listed fm 640-50 u can look up to confirm. It is the bible of the artillery. It shows the entire process. But certainly high angle is used only when the trajectory is obstructed and decreasing the powder cannot raise the Quadrant (or trajectory) of the round to get over a hill for example.

To add.. but not certain. I believe the trajectory only effects willy P missions. Which is a direct fire mission. Ill look it up.

Edited April 19, 2009 by RedRacer

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Willy P :) Okay, that's a new one for me.

Anyway, I have more questions for the experts. I'm working on some artillery scripts for the practice of scripting, not sure if anything will ever be released. The big idea is that you have to designate your own position just to make it a bit harder. Any error in designation will be added to where the rounds actually land. Main modes of operations are adjust fire and fire for effect. With adjust fire, fire for effect comes automatically at the correct point using automatic correction, after the adjust round strikes. This will give the enemy time to react and find cover. With fire for effect, you'd better have a correct designation on your own position. You can shift a fire for effect manually though. I'm considering an immediate type too, but this one will go to the center of the designated target grid, but you have no option to control distribution. My FDC will also deny certain combinations, such as certain fuses in rain, slope and wood considerations for APICM, copperhead footprint (circular, for practical reasons) decreasing with 'cloud cover'.

Distribution and dispersion. I'm able to make rounds land (scripted, no guns fired) within a variable (with distance and angle) elliptical shape when aimed at a point. Elliptical since charge variations will mean more range error than aiming errors affect lateral. In an open sheaf distribution pattern however, guns are actually aiming within points in a 100m radius circle (if nothing is specified). If I understand this correctly that is.

Question: Does the fire computer take dispersion into account when plotting aimpoints (all dispersion ellipses within the distribution circle radius), or does it also place aimpoint along the circle radius (allowing rounds to go outside the radius due to charge and aiming variations)?

In certain situations you might have to volley over a mountain to get to target, which might require a high angle fire. Illum rounds are prefitted with time fuse. Time fuse can not be used in high angle fires.

Question: How does FDC deal with this problem? Forward the request to a firebase that might be better positioned? Deny the request? Or allow fuse time (not vt/proximity) even if not 'allowed' for high angle missions, since illum missions doesn't have to be accurate, doesn't cause damage, and height of burst is high enough to allow penty of room for errors?

In war movies, we often see untrained (non FO) personell call for artillery support, and some seconds later it starts raining shells on the enemy. When the FO calls for fire, the whole deal takes a pretty good amount of time with all the readbacks.

Question: Is it realistic that what is seen in movies can happen, maybe just with an added ID confirmation?

And lastly, Question: What is the practical difference from using a 7m VT fuse compared to a 20m VT fuse? How are light vehicles and troops in the open affected by each type? I mean, what makes FDC choose one fuse over the other?

Sorry if I ask too many questions.

[PhilippRauch 0]

There can be preplotted aimpoints afaik, to have the batteries fire on if needed, the calculations are done already before enemy is in target area.

Burstheight will vary the width of the affected area, think of a cone like spread from burstposition into velocity vector of shell to ground..

Not much more i can tell you right now.. but your ideas sound good however ..

afaik VT is proximity, they just called it during WWII variable time for security reasons to obfusciate that its a radarsensor, also because of this the brits didnt use the VT on artilleryshells, in fear of the axis powers finding a dud and reverse engineering the radar tech.. they only used the radar fuzes in AA shells on the island.. just read that in some arty collectors forum ;)

Today the naming i dont remember right now.. since i know of fuzes with time settings though ... you see obfuscating the germans still works :D

[noubernou 77]

Sorry, to bump this thread, but found it doing a bit of research on Angle T and figured I'd throw in some comments.

As far as I have heard, you can fire low angle with VT or time fuzes on HE and still get the same effect on target as HE. The lateral length of the shell throws out the most frag, with the direction of fire influencing it to some degree. If the shell is over a trench or whatever you are trying to get rounds over then the amount of fragmentation is going to be about the same as if it were coming straight down. The difference, if any, is so negligible that it would not take the benefit away from firing LA when possible (shorter time of flight, less probable error, etc).

ICM type rounds are preferred to be fired low angle as the direction of travel helps spread out the grenades more. The grenades are ejected out the base of the projectile and when traveling more parallel to the ground the more spread out they will be along the axis of fire. I am not certain on this but ICM would not be fired against troops under cover (especially tree canopy, which for some of the older submunitions caused an increased dud-rate).

HC Smoke, or the improved WP rounds (that use the felt pads) really don't matter, but you can get the same effect with the ICM since they are also base-ejected.

Still like RedRacer said, LA is the best angle to fire at. More accurate and more timely, which is always a good thing.