Author Topic: Fire Suppression in Combat  (Read 255 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ArizonaTank

  • Man-at-Arms
  • *****
  • Posts: 1531
Fire Suppression in Combat
« on: September 05, 2019, 09:41:56 AM »
There is a "raging" debate going on at BGG regarding the implementation of fire suppression in WWII tactical wargames.

https://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/2266014/suppession-and-fire-magnets-wwii-tactical-games

I am an old Army guy, so tend to "run home to mama" and consider US Army docs when considering such things...

In my studies, I found an interesting US Army document, that does a pretty good job of documenting fire suppression and quantifying it for us wargamers. For wargame designs, it is probably the type of document that should be considered.

https://archive.org/details/DTIC_ADA081134/page/n24



"Baseball's Sad Lexicon" - 1910

These are the saddest of possible words:
      “Tinker to Evers to Chance.”
Trio of bear cubs, and fleeter than birds,
      Tinker and Evers and Chance.
Ruthlessly pricking our gonfalon bubble,
      Making a Giant hit into a double—
Words that are heavy with nothing but trouble:
      “Tinker to Evers to Chance.”

"Tinker to Evers to Chance"
"where doubles go to die"

These three players helped the Cubs win four National League championships and two World Series from 1906 to 1910.

Offline Jarhead0331

  • Judge Advocate General
  • Administrator
  • Arquebusier
  • *
  • Posts: 12694
  • Global Moderator, General Counsel, Heavy Weapons
Re: Fire Suppression in Combat
« Reply #1 on: September 05, 2019, 09:50:29 AM »
Very cool. Thanks for posting.  :clap:
Grogheads Uber Alles
Semper Grog
"No beast is more alpha than JH." Gusington, 10/23/18


Offline ArizonaTank

  • Man-at-Arms
  • *****
  • Posts: 1531
Re: Fire Suppression in Combat
« Reply #2 on: September 05, 2019, 11:33:41 AM »
Some tidbits from the document:

PDF page numbers 37 through 60 contain something called the "CDEC Suppression Experiment" that covers both direct and indirect fire. It has a ton of interesting tidbits with numbers such as:

From PDF page 38
"To what degree do the effects of .50 cal. machinegun fire degrade the performance of an enemy antitank gunner? When subjected to simulated .50 cal. machinegun fire, the mean tracking (productive) time of player personnel was degraded approximately 57 percent."

Also some great general discussion. For example, Army Technical Report TR-79-A19.

Excerpt from PDF Page 156

Once a fire fight is initiated, all combatants tend to take cover. The next reaction is to assume a firing position and attempt to locate targets on which to deliver aimed fire. If no targets can be detected, a normal reaction is to deliver area fire at the assumed target location. Thusly, the fire fight tends to restrict the movement of the ihdividual combatants. If one aide is able to increase its fire, the other side is forced to take greater cover, is less able to detect targets, and therefore, it less able to return fire. In this manner, one side tends to assume fire superiority and the other side is said to be suppressed. The more one side is suppressed, the less they can deliver fire, and therefore the degree of suppression increases as the opposing side is able to deliver even greater volumes of fire. In theory at least, one side could become totally suppressed, allowing the other side to maneuver freely against them. However, in practice, there is a limit to the amount of fire any one side can deliver. Weapon wear and ammunition supplies dictate some restraint. Also, unless some of the fires are lethal, the suppression will only result in a delay and not a victory. In other words, the purpose of suppression appears to be that of gaining the advantage in mobility and the ability to observe, but must be followed by lethal fire in order to achieve a victory.

Also, on PDF pages 263 to 274, there is a report titled "Weapons Effectiveness and Suppressive Fire". This has a long discussion of suppression that clearly encompasses both artillery and small arms fires.
"Baseball's Sad Lexicon" - 1910

These are the saddest of possible words:
      “Tinker to Evers to Chance.”
Trio of bear cubs, and fleeter than birds,
      Tinker and Evers and Chance.
Ruthlessly pricking our gonfalon bubble,
      Making a Giant hit into a double—
Words that are heavy with nothing but trouble:
      “Tinker to Evers to Chance.”

"Tinker to Evers to Chance"
"where doubles go to die"

These three players helped the Cubs win four National League championships and two World Series from 1906 to 1910.