Soviet medium mortars in T2K

[schnickelfritz]

I must admit that I don't feel that Soviet industry would continue to be able to or want to produce the complicated 82mm 2B9 Vasilek automortar after the TDM.

It seems like that the resonable solution to maintain some production with limited resources would be to use the WW2 82mm PM-37 design, a simple, conventional mortar.

Any thoughts?

-Dave

[Panther Al]

To be quite honest, if they was going to revert to any basic simple tube morts, I think they would focus on the 120. The only advantage the 82 has over a 120 is that it isn't as heavy, but as armies worldwide have discovered, its not that big an advantage to keep it in heavy use and production. The 2B9 has another advantage that really makes it stand out, as everyone knows, its mortar, its an automatic cannon, and it even sings dixie! (OK, maybe not the last) And yet, its still lighter than a 120. The dang thing is so good, that for a while you could look on SATS (An US Army Training Program that does all sorts of cool things) and order a mounting kit for it so you can slap it on your HMMWV.


Yes, We had a mounting for it.

But to go back to your question, it would depend, if there was any manufacturing ability other than at a most basic level, they would stick to the 2B9, if not, they would go in my mind to the 120 tube.

[HorseSoldier]

120's are real nice until you're foot slogging infantry and have to carry one and the ammo for it. At which point it ceases to be a company fire support asset immediately. The 8cm-ish mortar fell out of favor as more and more mechanization entered the equation. With less and less mechanization in the equation in T2K the 81s and 82s will make a comeback, particularly when you also figure in that that it takes less explosive, metal, and such to make ammo for one of them than for a 120 or 4.2" mortar.

I personally see the standard 82mm making a comeback -- for the above reasons and because they'll be a lot more forgiving of poor quality control than a Vasilek. I'd also expect that a lot of Soviet units that saw time on the Chinese front might have acquired captured Chinese 82mm mortars and put them to use here and there.

(But then I always like to confuse PCs with odd bits of Chinese kit that Russian and other WP veterans had hauled back from the Eastern Front . . .)

[Legbreaker]

Don't forget though that there's likely to be a lot of pre-war Vasilek's floating about and that there may not be a pressing need to make more tubes. A unit may be able to make do with the tubes they already have, due to their reduced manpower as the war grinds on. Of course that doesn't account for tubes captured by enemy action, destroyed when the unit is nuked, etc...
Wear and tear may also be a factor, but I doubt it's going to be as influential as the others.

[schnickelfritz]

What I am thinking of are Mobilization only and Cat 3 divisions, like the 124th MRD.

The 12.0cm PM-38 heavy mortar is as basic as it gets, while still being somewhat mobile. This piece set the pattern for basic, effective heavy mortars and was loved so much by the Germans that they used it as the pattern for the 12.0cm SGrW 42 and captured every one they could get.

The design was improved with the 12.0cm PM-43 and later 12.0cm 2B11, all being lighter versions of the same configuration.

I know a fellow with a wartime 8.0cm GrW 34 and carrying it while broken down is a chore, much less enough ammo to do any real effect.

Make that double or triple for a heavy mortar. As it is, the 12.0cm Soviet mortars do not really disassemble except for maintenance, the two wheeled carriage is permanently attached.

I would think that the 12.0cm models would be hooked to either a horse draw caisson of some type or pulled behind any truck large enough to pull it and carry a useful ammo load. At 70 pounds a case of 2 rounds, that's up to the GM to set, I think. I would assume you'd use a Ural 375 or similar vehicle whenever available.

A 12.0cm mortar seems to be the standard artillery piece in the year 2000 T2K setting for most pact usint of regimental size and up.

As far as the medium mortars go, I would assume there would be legions of WW2 era 82mm versions gathering dust in warehouses for this type of situation.

It's my impression that the Soviets/Russians NEVER throw useful weapons away. It's my understanding that they had warehouses of captured, arsenal serviced, preserved ex-Wehrmacht small arms until the mid-1990's. My guess is that they still do, even after selling a ton of that stuff off.

Thanks-
Dave

[Panther Al]

Hrm. Alright, I can see where a medium in the range of 82mm can be rather useful, the way I was looking at it, is regardless of the size, more often than not the mort and its ammo will be on a cart of some sort, if thats the case, my thinking was why not use the big one, not the medium?

[Raellus]

I agree that the "old-fashioned" 82mm would be common in Red Army units by 2000. They're simple, man-portable, and provide units of company and battalion size with effective indirect firepower. If terrorist groups like the IRA and PLO can make their own mortar-type launchers/bombs, then I would imagine it would be relatively easy to continue manufacture mortar ammo after the TDM. v2.2 introduced the shop-built WOJO mortar, capable of firing 81mm (NATO) and 82mm (WARPACT) bombs. Of all the "what-if" weapons of the late Twilight War, I think that the WOJO is one of the more plausible.

I think there's a line somewhere in the v1.0 or v2.2 rulebook that says that the mortar is the most common and widely used indirect fire support weapon in every army come 2000.

[Legbreaker]

With more and more units becoming foot mobile with a sprinkling of vehicles and livestock for the heavy equipment, I can definitely see mid range motars being exceptionally useful. They wouldn't want to be manpacked very far (a few kilometres would probably be far enough), but they do give a unit much needed supporting fire.

The big guns wouldn't be thrown away, however with the limited transportation options available in 2000, they would probably be restricted to defensive positions (cantonments) and along roadways and other transportation corridors (rivers and railways).

[HorseSoldier]

v2.2 introduced the shop-built WOJO mortar, capable of firing 81mm (NATO) and 82mm (WARPACT) bombs. Of all the "what-if" weapons of the late Twilight War, I think that the WOJO is one of the more plausible.

I think that one started out in the ver 1.0 Heavy Weapons Guide, but may be wrong.

I think there's a line somewhere in the v1.0 or v2.2 rulebook that says that the mortar is the most common and widely used indirect fire support weapon in every army come 2000.

I think in the timeline for '99 or 2000 there's verbiage about how mortars and ammunition for them is still being cranked out by combatants who lack the resources to make hydraulic buffers and high strength cannon barrels for howitzers and such.

[Abbott Shaull]

I believe they were both the v1 Heavy weapon guide and later in the basic rules at revision to give examples. It was one of the things the original rule set had pointed out, and adding them basic rules in later addition made sense to reinforce the point.

Honestly, I think any Militia or military units would keep their larger weapon in defensive position, even the 120 mm Mortars too. I can see these crews having responsibility of Medium or Light Mortars too that they take to the field for short duration operation in support of their units, depending on the needs. Like the Striker Brigade Mortar teams carry a lighter mortar that the gun crew can set up outside of the vehicle as needed. Even if the unit didn't have horses or other transport I can see where some troops could be pressed into service to move them by hand over limited distances.

[Abbott Shaull]

The next thing is that in light troops on NATO side the 81mm and 4.1" mortars were the heavy Mortars at Battalion while 60mm or smaller were company level. While on the Pact and Heavy NATO units the 81mm/4.1" Mortars were Company level weapons in Infantry type and some other units and the 120mm was the Mortars at Battalion with the exception being the Armor Cavalry units that had them down to Troop level.

[Legbreaker]

60mm may be the standard Company mortar for the US, but MANY countries throughout Nato and the world use the 81mm almost exclusively (60mm isn't even an option).

[Abbott Shaull]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

60mm may be the standard Company mortar for the US, but MANY countries throughout Nato and the world use the 81mm almost exclusively (60mm isn't even an option).

The 60mm was used in the Light Infantry, Airborne Infantry and Air Assault Companies. Rest of the companies in the US Army that have been using 81mm and 120mm. At a time I think even Ranger Platoons had a 1 or two 60mm Mortar assigned to them too.

Yeah are quite correct that for the rest it seem the 81mm is the way to go. Even though I know there was time when the British fielded the 51mm and other versions of light mortars.

The thing is I think by 2000 as Artillery and even ammo for the various gernade launchers gets harder to find, one could see more and more of the lighters mortars to come back. The WOJO Mortars bombs were 60mm with optional attachment fins to allow them to be fire from 81 and 82mm mortars.

[Legbreaker]

Other way round actually. 82mm with wooden sabots for the 60mm rounds. You'd NEVER manage to fire an 82 from 60mm no matter how hard you tried!

[perardua]

The British used 51mm mortars in Flight/Platoon HQs until very recently (we had them with us when we deployed to Afghanistan in 2009), and they were primarily used to lob up illum. Originally the 40mm UGL was supposed to replace the 51mm, but due to the fact we still don't have 40mm illum in service, and because light 'commando' mortars are useful, they have been retained. In fact, the British forces recently introduced a 60mm replacement for the 51mm, which we also took with us to theatre when we went out. It's pretty much the same general design - barrel with integral baseplate, no bipod, simple sights. The Army infantry don't have a company level mortar at all, it's either platoon level (51mm or 60mm) or battalion level (81mm). RAF Regiment Squadrons are about the size of a reinforced company, and we do use 81mm mortars grouped into the fourth (Support Weapons) Flight.
During my tour, I was on the Support Weapons Flight of my squadron, and we spent about half our time firing 81mm mortars in support of the Rifle Flights (the other half was spent on patrols and OPs). In my experience, the 81mm is a very effective weapon system, though the weight of the weapon and ammunition means that manpacking it is not an easy proposition. We also mentored a Bulgarian unit stationed with us who were using 82mm mortars, as there were plans for them to take over some of our tasks and free us up for patrols, but their fire control procedures and very high failure rate meant it never came through (watching them fire illum one night, almost three quarters of the parachutes opened late, didn't open, or opened but then caught fire).

[rcaf_777]

The Canadian Army at the time of Twilight has both the 60mm and 81mm mortars in there infantry battalions. The 81mm are in a mortar platoon found in the battalion combat support company and usually mounted in APC, they found in only Regular Force Battalion since the CF only bought 180 systems.

The 60mm are found in infantry companies and platoons, in dismounted operations the rounds are spreadout throught the platoon or company and dropped of once the base of fire is est durring contact with an enemy force.

Speaking as guy who has had to carry a 60mm durring dismounted ops, it sucks, carrying a big steel tube with three rounds, plus rucksack, plus rifle, plus ammo, plus rations, SUCKS BIG TIME

[perardua]

I have similar memories of carrying an 81mm mortar barrel across Otterburn training area along with my bergen, rifle+UGL with ammo, mortar rounds and various other sundries, then getting to the range, dropping off the kit and going straight into a live firing Flight attack. Happily, on ops we had the luxury of vehicles to carry our mortars and ammo.

[Fusilier]

Originally Posted by rcaf_777

The 81mm are in a mortar platoon found in the battalion combat support company and usually mounted in APC, they found in only Regular Force Battalion since the CF only bought 180 systems.

Not true. The Princess Louise Fusiliers still had their 81mm mortars and dedicated crews.

[rcaf_777]

Originally Posted by Fusilier

Not true. The Princess Louise Fusiliers still had their 81mm mortars and dedicated crews.

when did they get them before 1993 or after, the 81mm tubes were bought for Regular Force in 1968 it was'nt untill 1993 and alot tubes and training for them were made avaible this was primary due 4 CMBG being disbanded, there 8 per infantry battalion that over half the supply just for Regular Force BN's, add in the spares held the BN's, tubes at three major battle schools and the infantry schools and your not looking alot of tubes avaible for reserve training, I knew some units had then lost then had them again and lost them ect depends on who need them I guess, I was a reservsit for eight years and I saw the tubes used with reserve crew only durring major ex in Meaford and Petawawa and Florida and those tubes were on loan from other units.

[Fusilier]

Originally Posted by rcaf_777

when did they get them before 1993 or after

Before. And these were regimental tubes, not loans. By the time the infantry transferred the mortars over to the artillery they were the last reserve battalion having them - but that doesn't apply to Twilight2000.

[HorseSoldier]

So in current Canadian organization the artillery guys are the people operating mortars?

[Fusilier]

Originally Posted by HorseSoldier

So in current Canadian organization the artillery guys are the people operating mortars?

Yes, unfortunately. Downsizing of manpower and budgets.

[perardua]

Originally Posted by Fusilier

Yes, unfortunately. Downsizing of manpower and budgets.

That sucks. I was always a fan of the phrase "every mortarman is an infantryman, but not every infantryman is a mortarman!" Made up for having far longer training days than the Rifle Flights (we mostly had to fit our mortar training around all the other mandatory pre-deployment training, hence we used to tab our mortars around ranges and exercise areas so we could drill on them while waiting for stuff to happen).

[Fusilier]

Originally Posted by perardua

That sucks. I was always a fan of the phrase "every mortarman is an infantryman, but not every infantryman is a mortarman!"

We used that phrase in Canada too.

[HorseSoldier]

I think it would be okay as long as the artillery guys were permanently attached to the infantry units they would be supporting, but I'm guessing that's not the case either?

[Abbott Shaull]

Well it reminds me of one of the time Anderson Cooper was over in Iraq, he followed men from an Artillery Battery. They would provide Fire Support Missions during the day and at night they would conduct foot patrols like Infantry units...

[rcaf_777]

The infantry still has the 60mm Mortar but is found as platoon support weapon and Canadian infantry is no longer running their mortar course I think

[Abbott Shaull]

I know in WWII Infantry Company, there may or may not be a mortar attached at Platoon level as well as other assets.

This is like today in many cases the Anti-Tank teams in the Light Infantry Company could be pooled at Company level or dispersed to Platoon level. Where opposed to the Mechanized Infantry Companies where an AT Specialist as assigned to the dismount team.

Honestly I tend to agree that 120mm Mortar would be standard indirect fire piece used at Brigade and Regimental Level with few remaining artillery pieces they may have. While at Battalion Level, you would see some either 120mm or medium Mortars in support organized as Platoon or maybe as Battery that controlled all Mortar assets that are farmed out to Companies on the need basis, much like the Mechanized Battalion Anti-Tank Company.

The Mortar unit may have two type of Mortars. One they use in encampment and when they are one campaigns, and smaller on they use when they are on patrols supporting assets of the command they support.

Just some thoughts.

[Fusilier]

Originally Posted by HorseSoldier

I think it would be okay as long as the artillery guys were permanently attached to the infantry units they would be supporting, but I'm guessing that's not the case either?

I agree, but no they aren't.

[Abbott Shaull]

I think by 2000 the if Artillerymen were replacing Infantrymen at manning Mortars with Infantry or Armor Task Force, they would be permanent assigned to the said Task Force since their old Battalions would be downsized due to lack of gun replacement due to losses. Even if the Battalions were issued with Mortar to make up the losses in general they could part with some and replace the ammo bearer with anyone in general.

By 2000 I see Combat Engineers and even some MP units being tasked as Infantry similar to during Iraqi Freedom when units were tasked outside of what they ever had planned to operate as. You know Armor units operating as HMMWV convoy protection or Armor/Artillery units operating as regular ground Infantry.