Log obstacles:
Abatis: May only be created along roads/paths bordered on both sides by
woods/forest. Impassable to tracked, wheeled, GEV. Difficult to
infantry. May be breached by Combat Engineer Vehicle (rules for CEVs to
follow) or by 2 elements of dismounted engineers (ie requires two sucessful
breach actions by sappers). If mined or boobytrapped, any breaching or
crossing (Grav, infantry) element takes an attack as per normal Dirtside mine
rules. These mines do NOT have the marked on the table, but must be notated in
the defending player's obstacle plan.
Log Hurdle--may be created on any uphill road slope. Usable only if
standing timber is available. Otherwise as Abatis.
Log Crib--as Abatis, may be created on any road if standing timber is
available. May be breached by any size 3+ tracked vehicle.
Log Post belt. Muahahahaha... May be created anywhere if standing
timber is available. May not be created on hard-surfaced road. Bought
(when I work out point costs) in 100-meter (1 inch) strips. Impassable
to all vehicles except grav. Impassable to infantry if reinforced with barbed
wire. May be mined as per abatis. Requires 12 total Engineer activations per
breach. CEVs count as two activations. May be spread
out over multiple turns. Requires an additional 6 if mined--after the
first mine attack, further breaching elements are not attacked. They are
assumed to be taking their time, hence the extra activations. If you want to
force your poor Engineers to ignore the mines, they can do it in 12 but take
attacks. You are also required to buy drinks for
anyone at the game table who presents the insignia of _any_ engineering
unit.:) Note: This is an incredibly effective obstacle, especially if mined.
Requires hardwood post minimum diameter of 40cm. All posts are buried 1.5m
into the ground, either vertically or at a slight angle
toward the enemy, and project 75-120 cm above the ground. Height
should vary from post to post. Minimum acceptable density is 200 per 100
meters of front. Spacing is irregular, with at least 1 m and not less than 2m
between posts. Barbed wire is then strung between posts and scatterable mine
packages exploded in this mix. In other words, this requires a MAJOR effort by
a large engineer unit. I don't want to hear of some subgenius putting in a
12km (120 inches) belt of this stuff with a platoon of troops. This would be
for a major
fortification along a well-established front.
Sounds good. Nothing an Assault Pioneer with a chainsaw could handle
;-). Any thoughts on on rules for creating the abatis with charges?
We never had a chance to do it, but we did go over creating an abatis using
charges. It would need time to be set, by Pioneers but engineers will do, and
then could be activated within seconds.
Any ideas
> -----Original Message-----
> You wrote:
Not something I'd want to do under fire. C-4 can be so delicate if
shot at. Short answer is yes, you should be able to. Two turns of work by at
least a full squad (2 Dirtside elements). But if you take fire, you are 1) Out
in the open, no cover benifits, and 2)Roll d6 vs a 3. If you can't beat or
equal it, something catastrophic occours and remove both elements. If this
occours and there are any surviving
engineer elements on the board, roll a reaction check at +1 Threat
level. If the Engineers pass this reaction check, remove the command
vehicle because pissed-off engineers with leftover explosives do nasty
things to people who order them to commit suicide. That's probably a little
bit high, but I'd strongly frown on anyone as callous to his engineers as to
order them to rig abatis under fire. Honey, if it's that vital, get someone
expendable to do it, like infantry. Or maybe Redlegs. Or cooks, or file
clerks, or aviation.
> We never had a chance to do it, but we did go over creating an abatis
Errr, um. Disconnect on terms here. When I say "Engineers" unless I indicate
differently, I mean Combat Engineers. In the US Army, Combat
Engineers do all battlefield, combat-related missions, but are somewhat
short on heavy earthmoving equipment and other construction crap. Sappers.
What the Germans call (used to call?) Assault Engineers (minus the flame
throwers). What do you mean by Pioneers?
I wouldn't set it up under fire either. I was thinking more along the lines of
having it set up prior to game start. Say, as part of your
withdrawal/defensive plan.
I knew what you meant by Engineers being Combat engineers. Assault Pioneers
are infantry trained to do combat engineer tasks. In the Canadian army there
is one platoon for every infantry battalion. It
gives the bn cmd an engineer asset to be used at his/her discretion.
I hope this clears things up.
> -----Original Message-----
> You wrote:
I'd have to say there's a bit of a problem here. You aren't supposed to do
both sides at the same time, which means that you have to split it between two
turns. Time to rig charges, move off to a safe distance, blow it, come back,
rig the other side, move off to a safe distance, blow it, and double check.
Doing it all at once can cause
problems--say roll unit quality dice vs a 3? to do it right?
> I knew what you meant by Engineers being Combat engineers. Assault
That's not a concept I'm familliar with, so I don't really know how competent
they'd be. Institutional rivalry says I'm shocked they don't blow themselves
to shreds...:P
[quoted original message omitted]
> You wrote:
> (Hackles rising)
Infantry--come fully equipped with hackles. And probably little curly
tails...
No, wait, that's my dog. Whatever.
> Field/Cbt Engrs Aslt Pnrs generally are only employed in combat
Ah. In US, we just attach some jerk like me to the infantry directly.
And being a light engineer, I've got nothing I can't carry on my
back--chain saws, explosives, et al. Never actually seen a
flamethrower, myself.
I've seen, in training videos, and heard from others that you can set and blow
both sides at once. When I asked some advanced Pioneers about
doing one then the other they looked kinda strange at me ;-)
Maybe Americans are more cautious or maybe it's engineers as a whole. Are you
thinking of training doctrine for creating abatis that emphasis safety? Safety
restrictions would be a lot less in war.
For a DS battle I was thinking along the lines of this:
Abatis is set up prior to game start (charges set but not blown).
Forget safe distance the Pioneers/Engineers could be sitting in a track
or in a trench either waiting for orders to detonate or for say the last unit
to pass through before detonating. I like your roll idea. Maybe a failure
would mean the unit would have to check charges on the next turn and then
attempt to detonate again on the following turn?
> -----Original Message-----
How about jamming attempts to detonate using EW?
Tom.
/************************************************
> You wrote:
Uh-uh. 99%+ of battlefield demolitions are non-electrical, and will
become even more so over the next few years. It's safer. Besides, even
electric demo can't be jammed per se, simply prematurely detonated. Not that
that's any more fun for the poor engineers.
> You wrote:
Hey, that's what the manual calls for.
> Maybe Americans are more cautious or maybe it's engineers as a whole.
Probably neatness, knowing some of the senior members o' my Corps.
> Abatis is set up prior to game start (charges set but not blown).
Ah! Easy. No problem doing like this. Thought you were talking prime, set
charges, blow, all under fire. Gah! That would be
God-awful. Why? You gotta sit down a measure every tree you're going
to blow and calculate charge, otherwise you'll cut the tree clean through or
not knock it down. Wouldn't even call for a roll if the
charges are set up beforehand--any idiot should be able to set charges
dual-primed/dual-detonated which goes off often enough to not call for
a roll.
OK, ignorance shows:
Why no electrical stuff?
I have used both electrical and fuse. I prefered the fuse over the electrical.
There was always a moment of hesitation attaching the blasting cap to the line
wondering if there is a current going through the line. Cool thing about
electrical is that it feels so much more satisfying to press a button and blow
something up!
There is a safety factor working with electrical. Unless the wire is sheilded,
radio transmissions can induce a current in the wire. I actually saw this
happen on an exercise. Someone was walking around with a remote control (to
control popup targets), the signal coming from the controller detonated a
charge injuring a man.
The modern battlefield is full of radio transmissions I imagine a DS/SG
would have more (well, I shouldn't say that, could use lasers ;-)
> -----Original Message-----
99% is kinda high John. Don't forget items like Claymores (yes I know they can
be detonated with det cord) which use a hand trigger. I don't know if American
engineers ever use them as they are more an Infanteer's tool.
Staying on topic, I know fuses will probably used for quite a while but I'm
trying to think of more DS era solutions.
> -----Original Message-----
> You wrote:
1)Safety. Safety is always number 1. All it takes for a tragic accident with
electric demo is one genius with a damn radio.
2)The silly wires break too often.
> OK, ignorance shows:
I wouldn't say it's ignorant at all. It's not like a whole lot of people deal
with explosives in their everyday lives.
> Why no electrical stuff?
The reason is that electrical systems are VERY touchy. The comment about
using ECM (or just about any strong electro-magnetic field) to detonate
charges is quite possible even today. Even a sufficient static electric charge
(ala rubbing your shoes on the carpet to zap your kid brother on the
ear) could - but unlikely - set the charge off.
Given the increasing number of items that give off electro-magnetics as
part of their everyday operation, the possibility of mishaps has increased
dramatically in the modern era. Thus, the increasing reliance on
non-electrical detonation systems.
Today's technology has made the simplistic system of timing cord (essentially
a fuse just like on a stick of dynamite) very accurate and reliable. Even for
a system set for an extended delay, the timing is usually accurate to within a
few seconds if properly constructed. The entire system can easily be made
waterproof as well (timing and det cord have their own internal O2 source)
with almost 100% reliability.
Demolitions, according to my training is defined as anything that destroys
something else. Maybe you ment to say explosives?
Just a question: how much explosives do you personally get to detonate per
year? The reason I'm asking is that we always hear stories about how well
equipped the American Armed Forces are (being in Canada).
> -----Original Message-----
Hey John
Describe a Shock tube. I'm not sure what your referencing.
Thanks
> -----Original Message-----
> You wrote:
Demolitions destroy stuff. Claymores kill people--although if you tie
to it a tree, you can drop it. Wasteful way to drop a tree, IMHO.
> Just a question: how much explosives do you personally get to detonate
Well, I'm National Guard, remember. Our company generally does about 2
live Demo drills a year, and varies from 25lbs of C-4 to a full
Hummer-load of C-4. Plus Annual Training in the summer, which ranges
from a (literal) ton of explosives to none. So it's hard to generalize. Good
average might be a few hundred pounds for a company?
> You wrote:
Plastic tube lined with explosives. To quote the applicable manual, "The shcok
tube is a thin, plastic tube of extruded polymer with a layer of special
explosvie material (called HMX) deposited on its interior surface. This
special explosive dust poroagates a detonation wave. The wae moves along the
shock tube to a factory crimped and sealed blasting cap (which is moisture
resistant). The detonation is normally contained within the plastic tubing.
The shock tue offers the instantaneous action of electric initiation wihtout
the risk of accidental initiation of the blasting cap (and the charge) by
radio transmitters in the area, or by static electricity discarge. The shock
tube medium is extremely reliable." (ST 5-250-1, Modernized Demolition
Initiators, October 1997, US Army Engineer School)
You Canadians probably won't see this for another decade or so--I've
yet to get to use any live stuff myself. But the classes I've had on it have
been fascinating. As you can see, they've only had it in service for a year
and a half.
It sounds similar to a Bangalore torpedo? Is that the case? Is it one? If
you're not sure what a bangalore is (maybe different terminology), please let
me know.
> -----Original Message-----
> You wrote:
No, it's a replacement for electric demolition initiation. It's a little
larger in diameter than det cord. And yes, I know what a Bangalore is!
> Sean Bayan Schoonmaker wrote:
> >Why no electrical stuff?
> The reason is that electrical systems are VERY touchy.
-->8--
> Given the increasing number of items that give off electro-magnetics
-->8--
Interesting, I hadn't considered this. Still, electronic - as opposed to
electrical - detonators will surely be developed soon. That is, a small
matchbox-sized unit that does a 2-way communication with the detonator,
and will ignore spurious signals from induction. Something like:
"Detonator 3456675/775679 blow up in 3.75 seconds"
"Authentication code required: 99979" "GoBoom" "Acknowledged, WILLCO"