Gun Registration

[David B]

I am assuming that when guns are registered on enemy positions/other guns etc that a number of shells are fired and the resultant fall of shot recorded either by FOO's/recce aircraft/balloon.

However would this not give a wake up call to the other side that their positions are being targetted for attack and therefore attempt to shift their forces/guns out of the way until the opposition bombardment

was completed.

[Pete1052]

Yes, that's a sure sign that something might be up -- multiple artillery registrations can be an indication that the enemy is about to attack. I read about the phenomenon in a German officer's memoirs of World War II. Two work-arounds are the offset registration, in which the artillery registration point is near the enemy's position but not precisely on it. The corrections are later applied to data for fire missions targetted upon the enemy. The other technique is the meteorological data plus muzzle velocity gunnery correction which doesn't requiring actual firing. It is a computational method that provides a close approximation of what a fall-of-shot registration would.

[ianjonesncl]

I am assuming that when guns are registered on enemy positions/other guns etc that a number of shells are fired and the resultant fall of shot recorded either by FOO's/recce aircraft/balloon.

However would this not give a wake up call to the other side that their positions are being targetted for attack and therefore attempt to shift their forces/guns out of the way until the opposition bombardment

was completed.

It is indeed an indication that something is about to happen.

As Pete pointed out the use of 'offset registration' or predicted fire is a way of achieving surprise whilst still hitting the target. To achieve this various elements need to be considered, the accuracy of each determining the overall ability to bring down predicted fire.

Good mapping is required in order to calculate basic range and bearing. The difference in altitude (the latter being required as 'non rigidity' affects computations) needs to be determined either by use of artillery instruments or mapping. The position of the guns and the line on which they are laid comes from survey. Ballistic computation requires calibration data for guns (barrel wear affecting muzzle velocities), and consistent shell characteristics. I have just been reading Farndales accounts for the Somme where he states that some 6 inch ammunition varied in length by 4 inches. And as the shell flies through the air it is affected by meteor, consequently corrections to range and / or bearing are required. The degree of inaccuracies of each element could require individual guns to be registered on a target rather than a section or battery.

All of these areas were in their infancy in WW1. In 1914 the doctrine was very much open sights in support of the infantry and cavalry. As the war progressed and indirect fire became the normal method of fire, so mapping and survey by the Royal Engineers developed. The importance of calibration and meteor was recognised and the technical aspects of gunnery became established as opposed to being a black art. With these developments the need to ensure consistency in the quality of ammunition manufacturing was also put in place.

One other aspect which can assist in this whole process is a technique termed ' marking the zone'. I have read a number of accounts where gunners new to an area or OP would look to verify their understanding of the ground by seeing the fall of shot of a few rounds. Thus a single round left, centerer and right of the zone of observation, and a couple at various ridges can aid in reducing the amount of time for 'registration'. From experience this is an effective technique, especially where mapping is poor.

In modern times one of the key questions when conducting fire planning with a supported arm was the degree of accuracy required. This was a trade off between certainty on fall of shot and surprise. In WW1 the Somme was preceded by 6 day bombardment which included registering of targets. I believe by 1917 at Messines, many guns fired on predicted data.

[Seany]

As an aside - when the battery diary states '200 rounds fired blind' does this mean unregistered, unobserved or both?

[Pete1052]

Probably unobserved.

[David B]

Thanks Pete and Ianjonescl, you have made my day.

Cheers

[nigelfe]

'Registration' was what is nowadays called 'adjustment for future engagement' which is a bit more descriptive, future could be hours, days, weeks. That means a target was ranged (probably by only a single gun) and the firing data recorded and then 'reduced' (it wasn't called that then) by removing the correction of the moment and non-standard MV. This enabled its future re-engagement by map shooting or via a witness point if one was registered at the same time (I'm not entirely sure if witness points were routinely used that way).

[Pete1052]

In the modern American sense of the term registration means determining the difference between standard "should hit" data taken straight from the firing tables and what data actually "did hit" the target. It gives you a right/left and up/down correction to be applied to the standard firing data in the firing tables. It includes corrections to both deflection (horizontal left or right) and quadrant (vertical up or down). A registration is only good for a few hours because weather conditions change. That oversimplifies things a bit because there are several other factors involved, such as the difference in height or altitude between the firing battery and the target. After World War II we even came up with a slight correction for the rotation of the Earth while the shell is still up in the air on the way to its target.

Registrations in the artillery are a bit like "zeroing" the sights of a rifle to make the rounds hit the bullseye. You may have to go a few clicks left, right, up or down to put your shots in the black part of the target paper. An artillery registration is comparable to how many clicks left/right or up/down from a theoretical standard setting you have to make on your sights to hit a target with your rifle at a certain range.

[SiegeGunner]

Abstract musings about artillery registration seem to assume that it doesn't much matter where off-target rounds land, as the unlucky recipient will be an enemy anyway. But what about circumstances when you're shooting beyond observable range and avoiding 'collateral damage' is as important as actually hitting the target? A memoir re the work of the RN Siege Guns on the Belgian coast records an instance where a mistake was made in the coordinates for a shoot on a German naval gun battery situated near a civilian residential area and relief only came after frantic checking revealed that the trajectory terminated close to the front door of a German officers' mess.

[Pete1052]

Apples and oranges, Mick. Mistaken targetting data is an entirely different issue.

[Pete1052]

The corrections made during a registration usually aren't that great, not more than 200 yards/meters in deflection (left/right) or 400 yards/meters in range (up/down) along the azimuth of fire. Usually they're a whole lot less than that. It isn't as though the wrong grid square is routinely fired into during registrations.

If the RN heavy guns routinely made those kinds of mistakes they should have sent them to Hong Kong where they could do no harm. The RN land batteries were mainly using obsolete naval gun tubes that had a lot of probable error in range -- that is, they had high-velocity flat-shooting trajectories in which a slight change in the elevation of the tube could make a major difference in where the rounds landed along the azimuth of fire, especially on flat terrain. That's opposed to howitzers with their low-velocity and more parabolic (up and down) arcs of fire.

[David B]

Ok, another question on registration. When a gun recoils on firing and jumps a little and moves backwards on its mounting/wheels, can that materially affect the point where a shell

will land ? When one sees a violent reaction I presume it could.

[Rockdoc]

Any gun that you see in old films leaping around as it's fired would have to be relayed after each shot. Buffers were meant to minimise this effect and allow a significant number of rounds to be expended before relaying was necessary.

Keith

[nigelfe]

'Registration' in the modern swense was adopted by UK, Cdn, Aust NZ in 1965 as part of the standardisation of artillery fire control. Previously these armies had called it a 'datum shoot', and it was first used in WW1. Basically it's an alternative to calculating the correction for meteor from firing/range tables. Of course it requires the accurate coordinates of the datum/regn point and being able to observe it clearly from an OP. However, there are limits on how widely the resulting data can be used.

In the conditions of WW1 the distance of the ranging rounds from the target wouln't have mattered much, although as pointed out long range guns firing at deep targets, eg railway junctions, might have caused civilian casualties, particularly given the normal dispersion of their fall of shot (long range guns and precision were not words used together!).

Artillery procedures should include double checks to prevent major mistakes and errors in data. But it does happen. The worst I've ever come across was in Vietnam, when a US 8-inch platoon set up their plotting board and aiming circle on zero lines 1000 mils different (an good reason for using bearings not zero lines - easier to detect mistakes), unfortunately as a result they managed to drop a 200lb shell in the local orphanage instead of many km away.

[bill24chev]

The corrections made during a registration usually aren't that great, not more than 200 yards/meters in deflection (left/right) or 400 yards/meters in range (up/down) along the azimuth of fire. Usually they're a whole lot less than that. It isn't as though the wrong grid square is routinely fired into during registrations.

Although off topic modern(ish) (1989/90)Guns and Gunners could still make serious errors. I recall a 155 round landing close to the NAFFI bus stop in one of the Married Quarters estates at Munsterlaager when I lived there in 1988 to 90. Fortunatley the NAFFI bus had just gone so there were no casualties just damage to the MSQ's

[Robert Dunlop]

And there were occasions when the enemy could help with observations about the fall of shot. The Germans were able to use French media reports on the damage and casualties caused in Paris. This was during the long range bombardment of the city in 1918, after the advance to the Marne.

Robert

[truthergw]

In anecdotal accounts, we read of regular bombardment of areas at more or less fixed times. Men learned to take cover and generally avoid the area or the period. It strikes me that registration of guns could take place then without arousing undue suspicion. The morning hate or its like might not have been so silly after all.

[Pete1052]

Artillery procedures should include double checks to prevent major mistakes and errors in data. But it does happen.

An error in the azimuth of lay of the battery will definitely do it. Our U.S. Army standard was approximately 7 minutes to lay a battery for direction. During a unit test the evaluator's stopwatch would then be stopped and at that point we'd use a second aiming circle to verify the lay of the battery for safety reasons. (The net result of that additional safety check was that it would be 14 or 15 minutes before our batteries fired after occupying new positions.) In around 1980 we had a newly-promoted major as our S-3 operations officer who insisted that our batteries should be firing within 7 minutes after occupying new positions.

Later when that officer was promoted to lieutenant colonel he was selected to command one of the U.S. Army's first Multiple Launch Rocket System battalions. During a live-fire field evaluation of his unit at Fort Riley, Kansas with observers from the Pentagon present one of his batteries fired within 7 minutes of occupying a new position and the rounds went off the military reservation and landed in a farmer's field. It was an error in the azimuth of lay. That was the end of that officer's fast-track military career.

[Pete1052]

Yup, accidents happen. In April or May of 1945 Patton's Third Army captured a railroad freight train loaded with a Nazi bigwig's hoard of booze. Patton being the kind of guy he was, every G.I. in Third Army received a bottle of brandy, a bottle of champagne, and a bottle of wine. For about a day and a half the entire Third U.S. Army was stumbling drunk. My Dad was a corporal-technician clerk-typist in a 105mm howitzer battery at the time. While a fire mission was being prepared for firing Dad walked out of the stone farmhouse in Germany where the battery had its Headquarters and Fire Direction Center, only to see six 105 tubes pointed at the building. Drunk G.I.s were stumbling around trying to set their deflections and quadrants on the sights of the howitzers. Dad shouted "Check Fire" and that was the end of that particular fire mission!

[Pete1052]

Abstract musings about artillery registration ...

What I said wasn't abstract or musing at all, it was an attempt to explain the basic nuts and bolts of artillery gunnery to those who have not had professional training in the field. The procedures I described were post-WW II based on my personal experience but the principles of the trade remain the same, Great War or later on. Most artillery operations in combat don't involve great personal heroism -- they mainly involve keeping your head under pressure so you can do arithmetic and trigonometry in your head or on paper while under fire. For the enlisted cannoneers it is usually more basic -- go over there and bring that 100-lb projectile over here, and when you're done go back and get another one, and then after that keep doing it ... Artillery can be heavy work, lots of lifting.

[nigelfe]

I forgot to pick-up the question about guns jumping around. By the time you see the jumping the shell is long gone. However, there is effect called 'jump' with all guns. In can be split into carriage jump and ordnance jump but usually its all treated as one, its mainly caused by flexing not the wheels jumping around. Typically its about a degree in elevation, and varies with every gun and charge. Of course in reality the jump will be very slightly different with every round, and this is one of the components of dispersion.

It's been a while since I looked at a WW1 RT but I'm fairly sure I've seen Jump there, although it may have been later rather than earlier ones (it will be on the introductory/first page for each charge). Back in the days before computers meant we put away our brains, we always applied it in the sums, but having looked a a WW1 map shooting proforma it's not there (but the processes evolved during the war). Of course in WW1 if fire was been ranged there were no calculations, the observer just ordered the range and deflection.

As regards time into action, I've no idea what the WW1 procedure was, mainly because I've never looked for it. Later practice was to report 'Ready' to the observers, BC, etc, when the first gun had recorded its aiming point and been checked in its centre of arc bearing by a gun line section commander using a prismatic compass (this will also detect errors in a gun's zero line). Typically Ready was couple of minutes or less after reaching their position (in daylight - bit more a night because no shouting & minimum lights slowed things down) (I've also known the track plan needing several minutes to to traverse from the 'entry' to the position to an individual gun position), depending on the type of gun and the time it takes to get into action. One gun ready meant the unit was ready to start ranging.

I spent time in happy M-L, swingers on the NATO ranges (south of the town) were extremely rare, particularly after a major error by a US or Cdn bty (can't remember which) forced all charges to be prepared and checked before firing started (loading wrong charge is the most common mistake). If the range safety procedures were being properly followed then a round outside the impact area was impossible, if it happens the safety officer should be court martialed.

[David B]

Nigelfe,

I realized that when you see a gun jump the shell is probably half way to the target, I was more concerned with the second and subsequent shells. Does the gun eventually dig a hole for itself

and thus alter elevation and direction in some degree or is this not necessary. Suspect that in a barrage this would probably be a good thing anyway, giving the fall of shot a spread around the target.

[Pete1052]

The spades of the U.S. M101-series of 105mm split-trail howitzers are deliberately dug in by a soldier with a shovel when the piece is being prepared for action, but that's a World War II-vintage weapon.

[Thunderbox]

Nigelfe,

I realized that when you see a gun jump the shell is probably half way to the target, I was more concerned with the second and subsequent shells. Does the gun eventually dig a hole for itself

and thus alter elevation and direction in some degree or is this not necessary. Suspect that in a barrage this would probably be a good thing anyway, giving the fall of shot a spread around the target.

Before each shot, the gun-layer checks the bearing and elevation. Elevation is kept accurate because the sights usually incorporate one or more spirit levels - the entire sight cluster is adjusted so that it is vertical and cross-levelled. Many gun sighting systems use something like a prism or stadia market driven into the ground, against which the gun's bearing is checked - and adjusted if necessary. Hence even if the gun has physically moved or dug itself in, the sights are constantly recalibrated against a vertical axis, and against a check bearing.

During periods of intense firing, the Gun Position Officer (in the UK system) from time to time will carry out a drill: "Check bearing; aiming point director". The "director" is the theodolite-type survey instrument which has been set up by the GPO or the survey in order to position the guns when they deployed on that position. In this drill, the GPO orders each gun in turn to lay their sights on the "director". The GPO then shouts out the bearing that the gun should be reading (ie a reciprocal of the bearing director-to-gun). If any error has crept in, the gun layer slips the scales of the sights to make the correction.

A normal part of British artillery battery procedure is also for the GPO or another firing point officer to make frequent spot checks on gun bearings using a hand-held compass. The officer will also compare the barrels elevations of all the guns across the battery position - its extremely obvious if one gun is out.

A real problem on gun positions was that - at least in the days before modern firing data transmission systems and hearing protection - many older gunners (especially the No1s commanding each gun) were partially or fully deaf! Hence they often mis-hear shouted fire orders and end up transposing elevation or bearing figures.....

[Rockdoc]

One of my Grandfather's stories was about a young and inexperienced officer. When the guns were about to fire for the first time after his arrival the officer was offered ear-plugs by one of the No 1s but they were refused when he was told that the men didn't use them because they were used to the noise. The guns were ordered to rapid fire and the officer passed out quite soon afterwards. "We put him safely out of the way and got on with the job."

Keith