Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

WWII Tank Losses by Indirect Artillery Fire

Discussion in '☆☆ New Recruits ☆☆' started by delairlanding, Aug 1, 2015.

  1. delairlanding

    delairlanding New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2015
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Is there any information available on how effective indirect artillery fire was against armor in WWII? Was the US Army able to use its advantage in artillery against German tanks in tactical situations?
     
  2. KodiakBeer

    KodiakBeer Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    6,329
    Likes Received:
    1,712
    Location:
    The Arid Zone
    It was often very effective. American artillery was the best in the war, and with a good observer they could lay down a barrage that was extremely dense. They could even lay down "Time on Target" barrages where every shell from multiple batteries would land at the same moment. Just the shock waves from a ToT could kill men in Panzers that weren't buttoned down, even without a direct hit.

    The book Fire Mission!: The Seige at Mortain is one of the best first person accounts of the war. It was written by an artillery observer at Mortain who changed the entire course of that battle, calling in strikes on Panzer formations and other targets.
     
  3. m kenny

    m kenny Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2003
    Messages:
    1,645
    Likes Received:
    225
    There were trials done in the UK where Churchills were driven through a 25pdr barrage to test this out. The result (if I remember correctly) was that tanks had nothing to fear and even a direct hit with HE could be shrugged off. There are a few photos about showing full-on HE hits on tanks that show nothing but a large splash mark on the armour. I am sure a direct hit from a large calbre shell would be more serious but such a hit would be mere chance.

    Found a link to it.
    http://mr-home.staff.shef.ac.uk/hobbies/ww2eff2.pdf

    WO 291/399 Casualties to Churchill tanks in 25-pdr concentrations.
    A trial conducted in 1943 tested proposed new tactics, whereby Churchills would advance though
    concentrations of friendly 25-pdr fire, by twice driving a squadron of Churchills through live artillery
    fire. It is concluded that the worst that can happen to a Churchill in these circumstances is
    immobilisation. The effect of a 25-pdr round exploding on a Churchill is described thus:
    "There is no adverse effect on the crew from a 25 pdr direct hit. Fragments cannot penetrate the tank,
    and the blast is not at all uncomfortable."
     
  4. KodiakBeer

    KodiakBeer Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    6,329
    Likes Received:
    1,712
    Location:
    The Arid Zone
    The 25 pounder is a very light shell compared to the 105 and the 155. A hit from either of these larger shells would put a panzer out of commission every time. Close hits from either, but especially the 155, could and did injure or kill personnel in Panzers, especially if they were riding unbuttoned and unaware of the incoming fire about to begin.

    The Churchill was a heavy tank, but even heavies are lightly armored on the top. I find it doubtful that even a direct hit on the top from a light gun like the 25 pounder would leave it mobile.
     
  5. Pacifist

    Pacifist Active Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2014
    Messages:
    406
    Likes Received:
    90
    Turret top armor

    Sherman 25mm

    Churchill Mk VII 20mm


    Tiger II 40mm

    Tiger I 25mm

    Panther G 16mm

    Panzer IV F2 10mm

    Panzer 3N 10mm
     
  6. Sheldrake

    Sheldrake Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2013
    Messages:
    1,773
    Likes Received:
    568
    Location:
    London UK
    Royal Artillery Notes for 1943 includes an account of a destruction shoot against a column of German tanks trapped in a defile in Tunisia. This was carried out with medium (5.5") rather than field artillery (25pdr) and consisted of rounds corrected to with 25 yards of the target and repeated until the target changed shape or caught fire.,

    21 Army Group OR Team report mNo 17 on German AFV casualties in Normandy 6 June -7 Aug found 8% of German AFVs were knocked out by HE artillery - (7 x Mk V and 2x Mk IV) from the sample were KO by HE. Four of the Pz V from the same 5.5" bombardment. 2% (4) of the hulks inspected from 7 -31 Aug had been KO by HE shells.
     
    Nigel Dunkley and SKYLINEDRIVE like this.
  7. Terry D

    Terry D Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2015
    Messages:
    602
    Likes Received:
    264
    Location:
    Huerta, California
    I interviewed an officer of 147th (Essex Yeomanry) Field Regiment, which worked with 50th Div and 8th Armd Bde in Normandy. They did use indicrect fire against enemy armor. Even if you didn't knock the tank out that way, plunging fire could hit and damage air filters and other unprotected bits on the top and rear of the tank that were seldom struck by direct fire. Also, armor depends on soft-skinned vehicles to function; if you hit a mechanized column with artillery you'll destroy a lot of fuel, ammo, and repair trucks. I suppose tactical air often got their best results against German armor in the same fashion.
     
  8. Sheldrake

    Sheldrake Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2013
    Messages:
    1,773
    Likes Received:
    568
    Location:
    London UK
    Who was that?
     
  9. harolds

    harolds Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2011
    Messages:
    1,898
    Likes Received:
    372
    In my readings I have come across at least two references of Shermans shedding tracks due to the blast effects of close missed by medium arty. Also remember that our TDs were especially vulnerable to plunging fire.

    I have also read in various books that even if a concentration of artillery didn't hit or damage a tank, it often meant the tank had to move. Often that meant breaking off the action.
     
  10. Sheldrake

    Sheldrake Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2013
    Messages:
    1,773
    Likes Received:
    568
    Location:
    London UK
    The self propelled TDs were open topped. While the light armour offered protection from fragments from ground burst shells and mortar bombs the detachments were vulnerable to fragments from air-bursts or a direct hit.

    It is worth noting that a significant proportion of AFV crew casualties occurred when the crew were dismounted. A sudden concentration of artillery fire on a tank leaguer could inflict casualties before anyone dismounted could take cover.

    These are the destructive effects of artillery - in terms of damage to the equipment or detachment. HE fire will also have a neutralising effect which degrades the effectiveness of the tank engaged by artillery fire.

    - The crew would close down, reducing their vision and situational awareness.

    - Dust and smoke obscured vision making it harder to acquire and engage targets

    - Light damage , cracked vision blocks and damage to aerials could degrade the tanks performance.

    - The effect on morale "pucker factor" of being under fire from shells which might turn out to be heavy enough to hurt. Over time this can be every debilitating. von Rosen a Tiger platoon commander in Normandy spoke of two of his soldiers going mad and one shooting himself while under an aerial bombardment which these men physically survived. The RA Training memoranda from Italy commented on an action North of Rome when a shoot by medium and heavy guns on a heavy tank in a concealed position flushed the tank from cover where it was engaged and destroyed by 17 Pdr guns and M10 TDs.
     
  11. Terry D

    Terry D Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2015
    Messages:
    602
    Likes Received:
    264
    Location:
    Huerta, California
    I got that from General Tony Richardson, recently deceased.
     

Share This Page