Covering Fire!

Eisenhower · #1 (**permalink**) December 8th, 2003, 02:41 PM

Alright, this bugged me the entire time I was watching Saving Private Ryan...

Their version of covering fire is getting out of cover, shooting for a while (hoping that will do some damage to the enemy) and then returning to cover, sending out men to rush the defenses. Now tell me if I'm wrong, but I think covering fire is continual fire to keep the advances covered, not finishing right before the men go...
And as for supressing fire, that's to try and kill the enemy before anything else.
Is there anything other than covering and suppressing? Please correct me if I'm wrong on either or both. That just really bugged me...(not saying I look for historical accuracy in SPR

)

Eisenhower · #2 (**permalink**) December 8th, 2003, 04:31 PM

Alpha_Cluster · #3 (**permalink**) December 8th, 2003, 07:11 PM

Whell that movie is very inaccrate

Stefan · #4 (**permalink**) December 8th, 2003, 07:29 PM

Basically covering and suppressing fire are the same thing. Both are fire intended to get the enemy to keep his head down whilst you do something, for example send a few men to get closer to their position. I think the issue in SPR was that (if you are referring to the bit on the beach) they were putting down fire so the men can get out, but there wasnt enough space to fire at the enemy and have guys run out of the enclave.

Neither suppressive or covering fire are intended to kill the enemy as such (at least not specifically) but to discourag the enemy from shooting back.

I think Miller was working on the basis that if they put a few rounds down on the enemy the guys would be clear before they get their act together and return fire.

Eisenhower · #5 (**permalink**) December 8th, 2003, 08:25 PM

There wasn't enough room? It looked like there was men all along the ridge coming off of the bunker. But I guess I'm looking too deep into this...look what you fellas have done to me

But there's no other commands besides suppressing and covering?

BratwurstDimSum · #6 (**permalink**) December 9th, 2003, 02:41 PM

Here my is bible for "fires commands" although they originate from Civil War a lot of types survived into WW2. For example Enfilading fire is a term I heard in "Band of Brothers" in ep2.

http://civilwarfortifications.com/ac...y/xgf-006.html

In summary:

Quote:

There were nine basic varieties of fire that were classified according to three primary and non-exclusive criterion: direction of fire and orientation of the front of the target to the firing unit; differences in elevation between the firing unit and the target; and the intended trajectory of shot or shell fired at the target.

Direct Fire: Fire was Direct when the firing unit delivered its fire along a line that was nearly perpendicular to the front of the target. This variety of fire was used to batter a breach or when the target had considerable depth. It could be used to silence a fortification's artillery armament when enfilading ricochet batteries could not be established.

Oblique Fire: Fire was aid to be oblique when the firing unit delivered its fire along a line that struck the front of the target at an acute angle. This variety of fire could be used to batter a parapet or break down the cheeks of embrasures.

Enfilade Fire: Enfilade fire occurred when the firing unit delivered its fire along a line that was parallel to the front of the target and the fire struck the target squarely in flank. Enfilade fire was very effective against troops and guns positioned behind a long untraversed section of parapet. Most ricochet batteries were established in positions where their fire could enfilade ramparts.

Slanting Fire: Slanting fire occurred when the firing unit struck the rear of the target at an acute angle. Slanting fire could be used by batteries established along the prolongations of a fortification's parapets to strike the interior side of bastion flanks using ricochet or a pitching fire.

Reverse Fire: Reverse fire occurred when the firing unit delivered its fire along a line that was nearly perpendicular to the rear of the target.

Plunging Fire: Plunging fire was delivered from a firing unit on a much higher elevation than the target.

Vertical Fire: Usually delivered by mortars or howitzers used as mortars, vertical fire followed a very high arcing trajectory so that the shell fell on its target at a very acute angle.

Ricochet Fire: Ricochet fire was delivered by guns, howitzers, and sometimes mortars, using very small charges of powder and aimed with a relative high elevation to loft shot or shell over the interior slope of a parapet so that shot or shell would ricochet or bounce several times. Ricochet fire was generally employed in batteries established along the prolongations of a fortification's ramparts to dismount guns protected by traverses. It was also effective against hostile warships engaging land batteries.

Pitching Fire: Fire delivered with reduced charges of powder from guns or howitzers set at relatively high elevations to loft shot or shell over one work to strike another to its rear. Pitching fire was employed to reach the interior works of a fortification from a relatively great distance and breach scarp walls without necessity of establishing breaching batteries along the crest of the covered way.

Info on US Army squad manuvers can be obtained from their Field Manual (very good with graphics and maps):

http://www.adtdl.army.mil/cgi-bin/at...fm/7-8/toc.htm

[ 09. December 2003, 09:46 AM: Message edited by: BratwurstDimSum ]

Eisenhower · #7 (**permalink**) December 9th, 2003, 02:48 PM

Holy...

Thank you Bratwurst. I'll listen for enfilading fire next time I watch BoB.
[img]graemlins/moh.gif[/img]

Stefan · #8 (**permalink**) December 9th, 2003, 03:50 PM

Enough room in the sense that there was not enough space for one man to give fire from cover whilst the others make a run for it, that was quite a small bottleneck IIRC.