Creeping Barrage

[crickhollow]

Thank you Old Forge- very interesting (Q: when is a howitzer not a gun?!)

 

I came across this entry on the origins of the creeping barrage - not sure how accurate this is:

https://www.thoughtco.com/the-creeping-barrage-of-ww1-theory-and-practice-1222116

The creeping barrage was first used by Bulgarian artillery crews during the siege of Adrianople in March 1913, over a year before the war began. The wider world took little notice and the idea had to be re-invented again in 1915-16, as a response to both the static, trench-based, warfare into which the swift early movements of the First World War had stalled and the inadequacies of existing artillery barrages.

[ianjonesncl]

9 minutes ago, crickhollow said:

Just to simplify:  is it the case that a gun barrel is unlikely to be raised above 45 degrees? 

Guns were not designed to fire above 45 degrees and as @petwes outlines, may not be possible.

 

10 minutes ago, crickhollow said:

Then the guns start with an elevation for the nearest target and gradually raise the barrel. 

Yes

12 minutes ago, crickhollow said:

Is the order to raise the barrel from say 25 degrees to  27 degrees which in turn moves the target line some by so many yards. The barrel is raised  in unison by degree increments together with all other guns ?

Yes

13 minutes ago, crickhollow said:

The gun needs to be level and in line with other guns?

Ideally. Guns would hopefully have a flat level platforms. They would all have the same survey scheme so that firing data would be common to all guns in the battery.

16 minutes ago, crickhollow said:

Is this  checked after each firing?

I am not sure of the precise drills at that time, however one would hope that for an individual gun the point of lay (ie making sure the sight is layed on an aiming point) was checked during an extended period of firing as guns could move position. I would think that they would have used gross error checking (as described in previous post) to keep an eye on what is happening.

19 minutes ago, crickhollow said:

Is there a stage when the furthest target can only be reached by moving the gun forward?

Not practical for a particular phase as described in previous post.

In multi phased operations, guns would move to new locations to fire for the next phase.

25 minutes ago, crickhollow said:

Howitzers are best for close range targets but maybe limited ability to extend their range?

The Howitzers were allocated to target strong points, trenches and machine gun positions. As well as the shorter range, they fired a heavier shell which would have more effect. Their plunging trajectory made them more effective against trenches. 

[Old Forge]

For interest, some explanations from RA Pam 14 (2021):

SECTION 5 - THE ARTILLERY WEAPONS FAMILY

1.31. It is impossible to incorporate all the requirements of an artillery weapon system in a single delivery system, thus a ‘family’ of systems has evolved. The classification of such delivery systems is determined by their performance. Over the years the distinction between each type has become blurred and most current systems are hybrids displaying characteristics of other systems. Weapons are generally classified as follows:

• Gun.
• Howitzer.
• Mortar.
• Recoilless (RCL).
• Free flight rocket.
• Guided weapon.

1.32. Gun. A comparatively long range, high Muzzle Velocity (MV), low trajectory equipment, firing a relatively small shell with a fixed charge system. Guns may be adapted to fire in the high angle, ie over 800 mils [45 degrees]. A typical example is the 4.5-inch Mark 8 Naval Gun shown in Figure 1-2.

1.33. Howitzer. A medium range, low MV, high trajectory (though not necessarily high angle), equipment, firing a relatively large shell with a variable charge system. Typical examples are the 6-inch howitzer of Wold War 1 vintage, and the 9.2-inch howitzer shown in Figure 1-3.

1.34. Mortar. A comparatively short-range equipment, low pressure, low MV weapon normally designed solely for high angle fire. It is usually muzzle loaded with a smooth bore, and fires a fin-stabilised bomb with a variable charge system. Figure 1-4 shows a 4.2-inch mortar.

1.35. Comparison of Gun, Howitzer and Mortar. Figure 1-5 shows the comparison of the relative trajectories for a gun, howitzer and mortar engaging a target at the same range,both the gun and howitzer can be designed to engage the target at high angle, although this would be the exception rather than the rule. Some modern mortars are equipped to engage targets in the low angle, but this tends to be at extremely short range and usually only in self defence. Modern guns are a hybrid of both gun and howitzer demonstrating characteristics of both.

All the best,

Richard

[crickhollow]

Thank you 'Old Forge'.   The last graph makes things clearer.   Presumably the graph scales are artillery angle vs range?

I note in the graph that all the weapons are shown as achieving the same range but presumably some weapons inherently have a longer range i.e. a gun will usually outdistance a howitzer?

Is range more a factor of propellant rather than barrel  or shell size?

Thx

[Old Forge]

9 hours ago, crickhollow said:

Quote

Presumably the graph scales are artillery angle vs range?

Yes - angle of sight vs range. It's like watering the lawn with a hosepipe - raise the hosepipe nozzle slowly and the arc of water rises whilst the 'splash' walks further up the lawn. At some point not unconnected with 45 degrees, the height of the arc may not vary much but the 'splash' starts coming back towards you. Get it right and you'll have a cool shower. 

Quote

I note in the graph that all the weapons are shown as achieving the same range but presumably some weapons inherently have a longer range i.e. a gun will usually outdistance a howitzer?

Is range more a factor of propellant rather than barrel  or shell size?

It's the outcome of all three. As Pam 14 indicates, guns used to be thought of as longer range, but since most ordnance now is 'gun/howitzer' that doesn't hold true anymore and didn't necessarily hold true in 1914-18, as covered in the thread below (list of British artillery ranges quoted from it under the link).

• 18 pounder Mk I 7,000*
• 60 pounder Mk I 10,300
• 6 inch siege howitzer 9,500
• 8 inch howitzer 10,500**
• 9.2 inch siege howitzer Mk I 10,100
• 9.2 inch railway gun 22,000
• 12 inch siege howitzer 11,300
• 12 inch railway gun 32,700
• 15 inch siege howitzer 10,800

Cheers,

Richard

Edited 26 January , 2023 by Old Forge

[ianjonesncl]

21 hours ago, crickhollow said:

Presumably the graph scales are artillery angle vs range?

This post links to Range Tables. 

You can see how the range is determined, and the base elevation is determined.