How much effective rifle range line of sight was there from a trench in Flanders?

[Felix C]

I am presuming that firing from a trench would be via loopholes at near ground level with limited rifle traverse and sight picture. With the ground in front chewed up by artillery and the terrain even if considered flat topographically to have some undulations. Plus obstacles and craters obscuring the picture or providing cover. How close could an approaching line of infantry approach before being in effective rifle range? 

 

There is a followup MG position question if they were in saps forward of a trench to fire into the flank or if used as indirect fire and later direct fire as enemy infantry closed. 

You see what I refer to.

 

I understand the Germans generally sought out hills to have more line of sight for weapons and the Brits were usually not holding high ground in Flanders. 

 

I ask because from ground level I do not get much forward vision unless the ground is entirely flat as in a rifle range. 

 

  

Edited 3 September , 2020 by Felix C

[Michelle Young]

Moved at request of OP.

[FROGSMILE]

It’s not really possible to give a definitive answer to this question because each individual piece of defended ground was different topographically and could vary even more according to the time of year and weather conditions.  Early in the war trench lines were often very close together, sometimes less than 100-hundred yards apart.  Later in the war the German and allied central powers developed the concept of defence-in-depth with successive lines, machine guns and scattered posts forward, and increased manning further back, a technique then emulated by the British and Dominion/Commonwealth forces.  Ground was rarely completely flat.  In most cases battle-shooting with rifles did not extend beyond 200-yards, at most, other than for carefully positioned teams of snipers, but it’s impossible to generalise.  The fact that more use was made of bombing with hand grenades during the middle years of the war, to the extent that the quality of marksmanship deteriorated, tells its own story. 

Edited 5 September , 2020 by FROGSMILE

[AOK4]

One has also to consider MG barrages from a large distance. MGs were spread out in the landscape and some of them were used to fire barrages at certain intervals on known duckboard tracks and other busy routes. These barrages didn't shoot on sight but just with elevation towards certain areas. Infantry fire was usually only on short distance, apart from expert snipers with their special equipment.

 

Jan

[FROGSMILE]

9 hours ago, AOK4 said:

One has also to consider MG barrages from a large distance. MGs were spread out in the landscape and some of them were used to fire barrages at certain intervals on known duckboard tracks and other busy routes. These barrages didn't shoot on sight but just with elevation towards certain areas. Infantry fire was usually only on short distance, apart from expert snipers with their special equipment.

 

Jan

Yes, I agree with you the importance of this.  Much of it was based on observations from the Russo/Japanese War of 1904.

This from a British Manual circa 1916:

 

"A machine gun barrage requires much pre-arrangement. It must be made to conform with the artillery barrage, to cover ground unswept by shell fire. The ground must be surveyed. Air photographs must be studied. The barrage line must then be plotted on the map. Gun positions must be sited on the map, from which objectives can be mathematically obtained. The ground must be reconnoitred to find gun positions corresponding with those plotted on the map, with the necessary concealment, fields of fire etc. Barrage lines have to be worked out for each group of guns and for each gun in detail. Aiming marks have to be provided both for day and night firing. These are fixed in the ground a few yards in front of the gun position, and marked with luminous paint. Ammunition has to be transported to gun positions. Tracks to and from must then be obliterated to avoid aerial observation. Water supply for cooling purposes has to be provided. In addition to all this, the guns must be prepared to engage and throw back the enemy by direct fire in the case of a strong counter attack or to move forward when the assault has proved successful."

[Bob Davies]

I often wondered this myself. I realize this does not refer to line of sight but it is something I read in a war diary which I had not heard about before. Basically the firing of rifles at the enemy line/or specified areas to harass. Basically the soldiers are firing up to 900 rounds (not each man but split between the group doing the harassing) over a period of time, say 2 hours. I don't believe they could see the targets but it kept the enemy on his toes. This would happen daily at different times. Sometimes only 200 rounds were fired. I will have to dig it out to give you better details. From the 138th brigade diaries if memory serves me well. Regards, Bob.

[FROGSMILE]

On 05/09/2020 at 21:33, Bob Davies said:

I often wondered this myself. I realize this does not refer to line of sight but it is something I read in a war diary which I had not heard about before. Basically the firing of rifles at the enemy line/or specified areas to harass. Basically the soldiers are firing up to 900 rounds (not each man but split between the group doing the harassing) over a period of time, say 2 hours. I don't believe they could see the targets but it kept the enemy on his toes. This would happen daily at different times. Sometimes only 200 rounds were fired. I will have to dig it out to give you better details. From the 138th brigade diaries if memory serves me well. Regards, Bob.

Yes that was termed ‘harassing fire’ and was a form of interdiction on likely places where the enemy might concentrate such as bridges and road junctions.  When I used to instruct at the support weapons wing of the school of infantry we still taught the technique using the exact same procedures of map, compass, protractor and ammunition range tables.  The only difference is that mils are used to measure bearing rather than degrees.  It’s ironic that this teaching was going on in the almost unchanged huts where the machine gun school moved to from Seaford in 1922.  Bolted to the wriggly tin walls of my hut (a former stable), configured as they all were as a classroom with raised flooring, were the rings to which horses were secured when it was the cavalry school.

Edited 18 January , 2021 by FROGSMILE

[Bob Davies]

On 05/09/2020 at 23:19, FROGSMILE said:

Yes that was termed ‘harassing fire’

Thanks for sharing your memories Frogsmile. I suppose the "rings to which horses were secured" that you mention, were and possibly still are on the Quartermasters lists? ;-) I found the war diary I referred to earlier, (still free to download from the national archives) from the 138th Lincoln and Leicester Brigade, part of the 46th North Midland Division. Regards, Bob.

[FROGSMILE]

3 minutes ago, Bob Davies said:

Thanks for sharing your memories Frogsmile. I suppose the "rings to which horses were secured" that you mention, were and possibly still are on the Quartermasters lists? ;-) I found the war diary I referred to earlier, (still free to download from the national archives) from the 138th Lincoln and Leicester Brigade, part of the 46th North Midland Division. Regards, Bob.

 

Yes that looks like a typical 'Harassing Shoot' as they used to be called, Bob.  Often carried out at night, from a gun position selected and occupied for the purpose (we still practised the procedure), after firing on a grid pattern, but with each square fired on in an unpredictable sequence.  It was always standard practice to depart immediately the last round was fired, as it was known to stir up a hornet's nest and usually attract return fire for having had the temerity to spoil a nice quiet evening period when both sides needed to carry out their administration and sustenance.

[Bob Davies]

12 minutes ago, FROGSMILE said:

stir up a hornet's nest and usually attract return fire for having had the temerity to spoil a nice quiet evening period

Thanks Frogsmile, yes it looks to be 0815 am two mornings on the trot and 5 15 pm one afternoon in this example. 'Sniperscope' looks to be the word describing how it was delivered? Elsewhere in the diary it mentions 26,000 rounds being fired upon a long distance target by the MG.  I would imagine this would be from the MG Corps attached with the Brigade.

[FROGSMILE]

16 hours ago, Bob Davies said:

Thanks Frogsmile, yes it looks to be 0815 am two mornings on the trot and 5 15 pm one afternoon in this example. 'Sniperscope' looks to be the word describing how it was delivered? Elsewhere in the diary it mentions 26,000 rounds being fired upon a long distance target by the MG.  I would imagine this would be from the MG Corps attached with the Brigade.

Normally it would be fired on set bearings obtained from a compass and maintained using aiming posts or stakes either side of the barrel.  Then elevation set on the gun according to ranges from range tables.  Both would then be adjusted to fire on different points, depending on the arrangement ordered for the shoot.  The best shoots were targeted on road junctions and other areas where traffic was known to exist.  Thousands of rounds were fired.  You can imagine the effect at the beaten zone end.

Edited 18 January , 2021 by FROGSMILE

[Bob Davies]

1 hour ago, FROGSMILE said:

Thousands of rounds were fired.  You can imagine the effect at the beaten zone end.

Not a good place to be! 1916 June, 3,000 rounds fired each night by the MG Corps 138th Brigade at the enemys' lines of approach..... Reading through these war diaries gives a good account of what was happening, casualty numbers and all.  WO 95 2688 is the number from the Archives for the 138th Brigade Leicester and Lincolns for anyone reading and free to download. Everything from gas to mining and all in between. Now, pick up yer brass!

 

Edited 17 January , 2021 by Bob Davies
to add a bit of brass!