Snipers

[andigger]

I have to admit I am not well versed in the tatics of sniping, but I was reading a book that said the Germans kept their snipers in place for longer periods of time than the British who tended to rotate them every so many days. This would seem to be a benefit to the Germans who would intimate learn the lay of the land, be quickly able to identify unusual activity, etc. On the other hand the British sniper would always be learning what to look for.

Is this true and can any pals shed any light on sniper along the western front.

Thanks, Andy

[Robert Dunlop]

I think that is a fair summary, Andy. More significant than the snipers being moved more frequently was the movement of the infantry who were the targets. Incoming infantry units might be more vulnerable because they had to learn those tricky stretches of trench, etc which the German snipers would have taped. I am not sure how much of this information was passed on when units handed over. However, other anecdotes show that it only took one or two examples of someone being sniped for new soldiers to learn always to take care.

I was reading the history of the New Zealand Engineers recently. There is mention of the NZ Division moving to a part of the line where the snipers were very active. The Kiwis began a systematic campaign that led to the the German snipers being neutralised.

Conversely, when a new German unit came into the line, especially from Russia, the NZers took pride in intimidating them with sniping, etc.

Robert

[andigger]

Interesting, and thanks for the reply.

It seems like it would be one of those lessons quickly learned by the incoming units to ask where the highly vulnerable spots were. Learning the hard way seems to have a high price. Andy

[Robert Dunlop]

I couldn't agree more, except that some hand-overs seemed to be very brief, occured in the middle of the night and, occasionally, in the midst of battle. So I get the impression that sometimes things had to be learned the hard way. Irrespective, I also get the impression that men became accustomed to looking for and reacting to what might be trouble-spots. I wouldn't be surprised if it became second-nature - the sort of thing that you only realise when you have been out of action for a while and you catch yourself doing something that was automatic.

Robert

[Robert Dunlop]

I was reading the history of the New Zealand Engineers recently.

I should mention that the issues of snipers arose in this book because the engineers were responsible for building snipers' lairs. They took great effort and pride in this work. Again, I think it is the issue of ensuring dominance over the enemy in what was essentially a psychological battle - snipers did not inflict sufficient casualties to cause other problems in the routine of trench life, though they did have an effect on the command and control functions when defending against attacks because they selectively took out officers and NCOs.

Robert

[Guest Biplane pilot]

The policy of leaving sniper in place for prolonged periods had another benefit beyond learning the terrain. MOre than half the sniper's job is observation, and once an observer learns the enemy's routine, it's much easier to interpret his possible or probable intentions. But at rock bottom, sniping is mainly about intimidation; killing is the means of accomplishing it.