Call for fire takes 15 minutes?

[RagingBunny]

I was wondering if maybe there are any history buffs here who can tell me what the call for fire procedures were like in WW2. The reason I'm asking is because I just do not understand why a call for fire from a platoon leader, and sometimes the company commander, can take 15 minutes to send on twhen he highest realism settings.

Now, I believe the reason why there is such a delay is because it is imagined that the platoonleader sends the call for fire (cff) to his company commander, who sends it to batallion, who sends it to the batallion fire support coördination centre, who then send it to the guns.

But I seriously doubt it worked that way back then, as it is very inefficiënt and it would clutter the radio net. I would imagine that the platoon leader contacts the company commander, asks permission to switch to the batallion firesupport frequency, switches to the batallion firesupport frequency (firesupport coördination centre), gets assigned an artillery platoon and then switches to the radio frequency of this platoon to send his cff. This would take 4 minutes at the most. Add another 4 minutes to set up your call for fire (when I was an FO untill 4 years ago, I could easily complete a call for fire in 90 seconds, even without my GPS, laser range finder etc ).

So... where do the 15 minutes in Combat Mission come from? I feel like I have to be able to predict the future when I'm defending and have artillery available to me, but with a 15 minute delay :shocknaz:.

 

[Gnarly]

I'm curious as well @RagingBunny , with one extra caveat (as I know zilch about this). Surely there would have to be some kind of protocol/authentication process from the Battalion fire-support and Arty Platoon sides; you've suggested Plt Leader gets permission from Comp. HQ, but the Battalion fire-support and Art. Platoon would need to validate that the Plt Leader has indeed been 'permitted'?

Or would they even accept direct comms from a Platoon Leader?

Otherwise, what's to stop any Plt Leader simply 'dropping-in' on the Arty Platoon comms channel, using the 'password of the day' to call for arty, without going through Company and Battalion??

 

[Strangelove]

Well, I was wondering the same. But I recently finished reading McDonald's book "company commander" and finaly several minutes do not seem that long (one of the first chapter describe daily difficulties in reaching arty - malfunctioning radio, disconected phone lines, intermediate relay required - the spotting rounds, then the delivery....).

Not sure he give any delay in his book so this appreciation is only "guesstimation" and interpretation from his report...

 

[Gnarly]

Damn you @RagingBunny , I can see myself falling into a 'Google-fu' black hole....

Not explicitly answering this topic, but:

http://etloh.8m.com/strategy/artil.html

For the British, see the Basic Procedures for Impromptu Targets section in this:

http://nigelef.tripod.com/maindoc.htm

 

[Septic Limb]

Damn you @RagingBunny , I can see myself falling into a 'Google-fu' black hole....

Not explicitly answering this topic, but:

http://etloh.8m.com/strategy/artil.html

For the British, see the Basic Procedures for Impromptu Targets section in this:

http://nigelef.tripod.com/maindoc.htm

Very interesting. Thanks for sharing.

 

[RagingBunny]

Very interesting indeed @Gnarly! According to this the German FO would usually set up a wire connection to the guns... Can you imagine how time consuming that must have been? And how much wire that must have cost during the war . I'm going to take it with a grain of salt, specially since the guys says he heard this two years ago and didn't take notes.

Altough very enlightening on the differences in the uses of impromptu targetting by the different nations, it doesn't say a whole lot about how a platoon leader would get in touch with the artillery guns. However, Gnarly, what you said about security measures does make sense. These days, we just assume that our radio net is secure and that a call for fire is always legit. I hadn't thought about the fact that back then, this was very different. Maybe security does have something to do with the delay.

Then again, what @Strangelove says makes sense as well: even in 2012 communication with the guns was often a headache. When it worked, it worked. But getting it to work at the start of any operation always took longer than planned. The communications specialist was not to be envied at the start of any operation, running from vehicle to vehicle to solve all the technical communication problems with a very stressed out look on his face.

There are remarkably few sources about ww2 artillery procedures with regards to the chain of command on the internet. I did find a nice WW2 81 mm mortar platoon manual but it wasn't specific about radio procedures either. You'd wonder what Battlefront based their estimation on.

 

[Cargol]

IMO artillery spotting in terms of time needed to call an artillery mission is somehow abstracted in CM2.
The most important factor is the experience of the spotter and that makes perfect sense.
Also mortars are not artillery in terms of caliber and branch,mortars were and till now are organic to Infantry Battalions and they are not concidered to be artillery (at least in NATO).

 

[Fredrocker]

Some items to considered about the in game delays are The Experience, Motivation, Fitness, and Leadership of all the units in the C2 link from Spotter thru Off Map Entity... Changes in these from 'Rambo to Gilligan' settings can produce up to a 50-70% max increase/decrease in the Call to the Response Time on Target... and the effectiveness...

If your playing defense in QB's I always like to take a few TRPs as they are worth there wait in gold...

 

[Ithikial]

Some items to considered about the in game delays are The Experience, Motivation, Fitness, and Leadership of all the units in the C2 link from Spotter thru Off Map Entity... Changes in these from 'Rambo to Gilligan' settings can produce up to a 50-70% max increase/decrease in the Call to the Response Time on Target... and the effectiveness...

If your playing defense in QB's I always like to take a few TRPs as they are worth there wait in gold...

I think the quality of the off map asset also comes into play, particularly for dictating the 'spread' from intended target or chance of errors occuring. It maybe an obvious 'point saver' to reduce some off map assets down to 'green' experience levels but you'll pay for it later.

Also if you want to get painful for off map support go with the Italians in CMFI. Don't even have radios. I only noticed recently that there isn't any radio call back from the off map asset when you place a fire mission with them. The delays are so long because the Italians apparently relied on runners between the spotter and the off map asset to relay orders. A bit pointless to code in a single runner from the spotting team running back and forth but the huge delays makes Italian off map support cringe worthy.