1939 Poles errata

Moderators: Vis Bellica, Laffe

Post Reply
gebhk
Posts: 50
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2018 10:21 am

Re: 1939 Poles errata

Post by gebhk » Sat Nov 10, 2018 11:13 am

Does anyone have or can point me to a reliable source of data on practical ROFs and minimum/maximum effective ranges of early WW2 SAWs? I am finding this info in short supply, or perhaps more likely, I am looking in the wrong places.

Many thanks
K
Last edited by gebhk on Sat Nov 10, 2018 12:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.

andysyk
Posts: 215
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2014 5:11 pm

Re: 1939 Poles errata

Post by andysyk » Sat Nov 10, 2018 11:37 am

gebhk
Search for the weapons manual your interested in and you can find many on line as pdf.. They usually contain the rates of fire although it is also contained in some Infantry Manuals and sometimes depending on the manual its contradictory. :roll:

User avatar
Arlequín
Posts: 1237
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 11:29 pm
Location: King's Vale Royal

Re: 1939 Poles errata

Post by Arlequín » Sat Nov 10, 2018 12:04 pm

Indeed. While the manuals will tell you what rate they were trained to shoot at, that might well be exceeded in actual combat too. Sad to say I love reading them, they've busted many wargaming myths for me.

Cyclic rates of fire are the most common stats given on Wikipedia et al, but they cannot be matched in operation, short of having a minute's worth of ammo in one big mag/belt. You can calculate how fast you can physically empty a single magazine and stuff like that though from them.

andysyk
Posts: 215
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2014 5:11 pm

Re: 1939 Poles errata

Post by andysyk » Sat Nov 10, 2018 12:30 pm

Yes the main advantage of a top loading, side loading belt fed arm was is that the assistant does the reloading, certainly post war the BREN NO.2, reloaded. The assistant also changed the barrel. This makes a marked difference to the practical rate of fire and I thought that is what the FP reduction represented in game.

The Belgian Fm. 30 BAR bottom loader has an assistant in the manual he is distinct in title from the ammo bearers.

Even though the FN Mle D (Detachable Barrel) was designed in 1932 I think its use was mainly post war, when apparently it did ok in sales. But by then it was a much different weapon than the original BAR.

I don't think that the BAR should get extra dice as a basic boost but I can see some sense that an assistant might add a dice or so. As Arlequin is pointing out it was in its original form according to the manual (well the WW2 era) it was meant to be a team operated weapon. I had always thought poorly of the BAR in comparison to the BREN. Ive quite a bit of experience with the latter, Ive stripped, done dry drills and handled the former but not fired it, I always thought of it along the lines of the later FN FAL HB, M14 SAW type weapons although heavier, but after looking at the manuals and watching the training film I have a bit more respect for it has a team weapon.

I in no way think that in actuality the BAR compares to the BREN as a squad/section LMG. Having fired both fully automatic fixed and detachable barrel platforms the ability to change barrels once in action and heat builds up is the game changer. In combat use many fully automatic weapons are pushed beyond the stated ROF that's why the US ARMY burnt out a lot of BAR barrels. The Polish were looking at replacement barrel designs for the WZ.28 as they were getting problems with that issue prewar in training. That's why they developed the MLe D.

However I think that any one that has experience of Small Arms (even those that dont) and combines that with educated reading formulates opinions on a particular weapons capabilities/assets, two people with the same training and experience may even differ in preferences. In the end any weapon is a tool most are designed for a tactical purpose and most production arms will get the job done.

So there is much to be said of the abstraction in COC. I think weve come away from the OP quite a bit. We have to go with the FP Dice ratings we have.(Im sure wed all like to tweak the Master Arsenal a bit)

I think it really boils down in game how many men in a designated LMG Team can fire their personnel weapons? A bit of clarification?
Should this be strictly according to the Manual, which I thought was a basic premise of COC: full strength units operating according to the tactics laid down in the Infantry Manuals. In which case I would argue ammo bearers and Gun commanders shouldn't be firing however many there are. However the lists do not do this.

Maybe it would be simpler if all such weapons across the board just had to have a 2 man crew after which a dice reduction occurs.

The change to the BAR as a one man weapon does not reflect the US Army Manuals it represents "actual use". Actual tactics used in combat were often very different from those used in the Manuals, we don't usually cover them in COC...

User avatar
Arlequín
Posts: 1237
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 11:29 pm
Location: King's Vale Royal

Re: 1939 Poles errata

Post by Arlequín » Sat Nov 10, 2018 1:09 pm

Agreed. However in the 'LMG' pamphlet I mentioned earlier, the only guy 'hands-on' the Bren was the gunner. The No.2 just made sure he had magazines within reach and that empties were being filled. You could argue from that either; the Bren shouldn't get a reduction in FP for one-man operation, or even that it was a weapon with a whole section as its crew. Extremes I know, but wargamers.

I also note the Belgian copy of the BAR, the M1930, has FP 4 in the Blitz Book, compared to the Chauchat's 3. An omission(?) possibly, but no mag LMG (or German belt LMG) suffers a reduction for one crew, apart from the French FM 24/29, which loses three dice for some reason.

Personally I would make all formal gun team members 'crew', which doesn't mess with the Force rating equivalency and assumes they are performing their roles, rather than adding FP dice with their rifle and ignoring their function.

andysyk
Posts: 215
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2014 5:11 pm

Re: 1939 Poles errata

Post by andysyk » Sat Nov 10, 2018 2:06 pm

Yes I did notice differences in the wartime BREN manual to my post war experience. Id always assumed that the role of the N0.2 as a reloader/ barrel changer was there from its adoption, it just makes so much sense, it seems it wasn't, I now wonder when it became practice. But Im sure Ive seen wartime film with the n0.2 loading. (Yep it was, found the Training Film see following post)

As I said above Ive used the BREN solo and in a team, the n0.2 as a loader makes a very marked difference in ROF.

Yep I presumed the upping to 4 D for the FM30 were due to it being "product improved" but it doesn't say whether rerolls ones, likewise Chauchat.

My personnel preference also would be for all designated Gun Commanders, Assistants and ammo bearers to be non firing in game which would suit the premise and set a standard for list building.

Anyway can I have a Team List for these chaps: http://charlesmccain.com/wp-content/upl ... 5/SBS2.jpg
Last edited by andysyk on Sat Nov 10, 2018 2:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.

andysyk
Posts: 215
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2014 5:11 pm

Re: 1939 Poles errata

Post by andysyk » Sat Nov 10, 2018 2:48 pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3sHa85ewgQ

Bren Gun training film. The 1 & 2 man drills are in it identical to my training. Although at the beginning it states its a one man weapon...

User avatar
Truscott Trotter
Posts: 5064
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:11 pm
Location: Tasmania the Southernmost CoC in the world

Re: 1939 Poles errata

Post by Truscott Trotter » Sat Nov 10, 2018 9:50 pm

FWIW the Paras at Normandy used their Brens in one man teams - they liked the captured MG-42 as the FP was far in excess of their Bren (no matter what the manuals say) but they did not like the fact that it needed 2 men to operate.

Nowhere did they mention 3rd man spotting or even a permanent second man to load.

I did read about the 3 man Bren crew in a first hand account of Norway 1940 but i guess by 1944 things had changed a lot in practice

User avatar
Arlequín
Posts: 1237
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 11:29 pm
Location: King's Vale Royal

Re: 1939 Poles errata

Post by Arlequín » Sat Nov 10, 2018 10:22 pm

If they had the numbers the third man was usually the Lance-Jack, his job was to call the shots. All machine guns kick up dust at the muzzle and this can make the gunner unable to see where his shots went and correct his aim. On film you'll often see gunners jerking their heads out of the gun line when they've fired, they're trying to see fall of shot past the dust. Having a guy a foot or two away giving you corrections, or looking for new targets, is a big help.

The thing is, the more guys doing stuff for the gun, the more effective it is, up to a reasonable limit. In CoC each one over two is a lost FP dice. The gun doesn't shoot faster, but if there's a guy continually putting mags by the gun, a couple filling them, another running back to fetch more ammo, one spotting and the rest providing flank and rear security, that gun will shoot all day.

quote=andysyk post_id=66211 time=1541858787 user_id=627]
Anyway can I have a Team List for these chaps: http://charlesmccain.com/wp-content/upl ... 5/SBS2.jpg
[/quote]

Do you think the guy with the carbine feels a touch inadequate?

User avatar
Truscott Trotter
Posts: 5064
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:11 pm
Location: Tasmania the Southernmost CoC in the world

Re: 1939 Poles errata

Post by Truscott Trotter » Sat Nov 10, 2018 10:33 pm

The gun doesn't shoot faster, but if there's a guy continually putting mags by the gun, a couple filling them, another running back to fetch more ammo, one spotting and the rest providing flank and rear security, that gun will shoot all day.

No it wont't the barrel will overheat and warp - unless changed frequently or you use small bursts of fire with pauses in between - both of which were SOP for LMG.

In addition jams we more frequent when ling busts through a hot gun - not sure of the technical reason but thats what I seem to read.

Water cooled MMG will fire all day

If CoC is going to go by prewar or early war manuals of theoretical use then fine - as long as all LMG's are graded by the same logic.

Post Reply