By that metric, winning wars or even launching any offensive in a peer to peer war isn't actually profitable for the state; just constantly spending that money on building stuff instead, or rather not even taxing for it. And yeah, that's probably true. But as we can say by watching Lindy's most recent video now, and by experience, say, that doesn't make political sense which is why it doesn't ever happen.
If you think that's excessive read about The Battle of Vimy Ridge when Canada got called in to end a battle that'd claimed over 150,000 British and French lives. We started with what the Germans came to call "The Week of Suffering" where we "softened" them up by dropping over one million artillery shells on them. Then we attacked. At dawn, every single gun, piece of artillery, mortar, everything that could fall from the sky was let loose. Everything that could be shot was fired, the goal was to create a massive wall of incoming artillery fire which "crept" up the terrain, effectively "sterilizing" it of German troops, while the Canadian armed forces followed behind, using the artillery as a form of cover. What had claimed over 150,000 British and French lives, the Canadians had finished in time for lunch. I don't believe there's been artillery fire on this level in a single battle before or since. The move came to be known as "the Creeping Barrage"
"how do we measure fear" Usually there is a moral indicator when you hover your mouse over the unit. Also their flags start flashing when they are about to break.
I'm from Odessa, Ukraine, my personal experience of bombardment is that it's probably the closest you can get to hell on Earth. Except napalm and nuclear weapons. After month of being under missiles strikes i got what is essentially "shellshock". Neurological pains in my eyes, neck and shoulders, migraines, nausea, blurred vision, sometimes i can't even see what's on the screen or page of a book, i'm twitching and jerking violently when falling asleep. Feels as if i'm being electrocuted. When you hear the swoosh/zzoomm of an overshot missile you feel utterly helpless and you know soon the soil around you will just start literally boiling like in those anime cartoons when heroes go superpower. It's so violent no words can properly describe it. It feels very surreal, you can't tell where is up and where is bottom, like drowning at big depth and knowing that someone is actively trying to kill you is a haunting realization. I truly hope none of you reading will ever have to experience anything like this. My modest knowledge of English helps explain to certain extent the sensation of being under missile attack, but simpler way is "all hell breaks loose" and that'd be correct. The hell just breaks loose once that 500kg warhead erupts and steel hail whizzes all over the place and that surreal "African sunrise" prolonged flash of orange light from explosion lights up the night sky. Russians mostly strike from 3 to 5 am when people are asleep in their beds. And the worst is to see a lonely survivor who just lost their entire family, pets, home and all the life long belongings. And then they have to find forces to bury their dead in the yard under the destroyed apartment building. People do help, but still. Yet Russian TV somehow manages to convince its audience and some foreign viewers that we are "bombing ourselves" with naval Kalibr and Dagger missiles. *I'm not here to start political flamewars. If you are working for «отдел Э» no need to waste your time, this isn't anti-russian "propaganda". Just an attempt at sharing personal experience. Although please burn in hell if you do work for Russian government.
Shit man, that sounds terrible. I think if this russian invasion proves something like no other war before, its the hell of experiencing it. With reports like you, live footage, interviews etc, the analysation of this conflict in 50+ years will be very interesting and hopefully send a more graphical image about how bad it all is. Still hope you get through this stay safe. 2 months ago i signed a 152mm grenade about to be fired, thats at least some help.
Everything exploding around you sounds like Breaking point from band of brothers you can dig a whole hindenburg line worth of bunkers and trenches around you but if the missle/shell has your name on it there isnt anything you can do. Im glad i live in a boring apartment
@@timberwolfmountaineer873 I know you currently live in it and that is awful for any human being and although i have never been missiled or shelled i have spoken to a number Vietnam, Iraq and Korea vets in the US who have. They also shared very similar stories to what you are saying about how shrapnel has sizzled and boiled pools of water and the intensity of prolonged shelling/missiled has changed the density, color and smell of the atmosphere as well as having random parts of the world violently explode like Tsunami waves of force crashing and booming into another most humans develop either external anger or feelings of helplessness that in a lot of these men where lifetime afflictions i hope the people of Ukraine as well as literally any human that has undergone such a experience can find true peace.
Thanks for sharing. Cannot imagine what you and your friends and neighbors have been going through. Hope peace gets a chance, war is just awful, sometimes necessary, but always horrible. Stay safe and prayers for you and your loved ones.
When the ukelele is played, about 3% are killed outright. Of the remaining, about 1 in 5 have lost their minds and can't fight back and about 3 in 5 are too smart to try.
Speaking as someone with 10 years experience as a US Army Field Artillery Officer. In combat, we have 3 categories of effects we can achieve, none of which pertain to killing all the enemy. We disrupt, damage, or destroy the enemy and it pertains to the percentage of enemy that are being affected by our fire mission. Destroyed would be around 30%. Artillery is THE MOST casualty producing weapon on the battlefield and more soldiers were killed by artillery in WW1 & WW2 than by any other weapon type. Certainly in some instances the number of rounds fired compared to estimated casualties produced seems highly inefficient, but artillery also denies the enemy freedom of movement, screens friendly forces and enables their freedom of movement. It can pin the enemy in place, screen and conceal activities/movement. It can demoralize the enemy, damage their equipment, disrupt their operations, deny them access to key terrain. So not sure I agree with everything that Lloyd is talking about here. Shell shock and demoralization aren't typically an effect we deliberately aim for, its hard to measure, but its an externality that any artilleryman would welcome... So not sure I have ever read of the use of artillery being to persuade the enemy to surrender. In WW1 for instance, artillery was used to cut wire, destroy enemy positions, and with the advent of sophistication in fire control techniques, the use of the creeping barrage, for which the germans didn't have a good answer and enabled allied infantry to much more successfully go onto the offensive in 1917/18.
Artillery persuading the enemy to surrender - 1991 Iraq War, when Iraqi troops surrendered to the USS Missouri’s Pioneer UAV to avoid receiving 16-inch HE shells. web.archive.org/web/20070715081423/wrc.navair-rdte.navy.mil/warfighter_enc/aircraft/UAVs/pioneer.htm
@@clevermusicbox3630 Those "yanks" later enabled our reunification and helped us build our country up from ruins. And at least they tried bombing industrial targets unlike the RAF who were less picky. They may be a bit naive in believing that you can give people democracy but their intentions are good and at least in Germany they were successful.
The artillery has improved a lot since 1918 aswell, just comparing the ww1 artillery pieces to for example the Panzerhaubitze 2000 the diffference in accuracy and amounts of shells on target per minuite are mind boggeling.
Hello sir. I have always wanted to speak to a veteran from US Army's Artillery Corps. I have always wanted to ask, do you think that the Artillery has taken a back-seat in US Army's warfighting doctrine or their tactics due to a rising over-reliance on air power? I have been studying (as an amateur enthusiast would study) the TO&E of the US Army and have found myself feeling underwhelmed by the type and quantity of artillery that the US Army fields. When I compare that with what my own country (India) fields and plans to field by 2030, I feel that US Army should be using arty a lot more. I understand that my country is expected to fight a set piece engagement on India's borders with Pakistan and China, whereas US Army trains for rapid deployment around the world, which explains the move towards M-777 which is air-mobile. I would like to request your opinion on this observation. Thank you.
My grandfather fought in the breakout from Normandy, Belgium, and the assault on the Rhine. He said the most frightened he had ever been was when the Air Force mistakenly bombed his division's positions on two consecutive days.
Yeah, my Dad (1st RCR) told me about being bombed by the U.S.A.F., 300lb bombs. But, they were all dug in, and even with the bombs landing right on their position no one was hurt. He didn't say much about being frightened by it, but at a certain point in the Italian Campaign, I think he was just sort of numb to it all.
@@apropercuppa8612 My grandfather was with the 30th Infantry Division (Old Hickory, or Roosevelt's SS, as the Germans nicknamed it). The bombing was on the opening of Operation Cobra.
Here is an old one. "When the Germans fly over, the English duck. When the English fly over the Germans duck. And, when the Americans fly over, everyone ducks!"
I heard another one in England. Give a Brit a gun and He becomes a soldier. Give a french a gun and He becomes a soldier. Give a german a gun and He becomes a soldier. Don't give an American a gun, he'll go nuts.
to be fair more than 50% of ww1 german casualties were due to artillery fire. and the majority of British casualties at the Some were due to german mortar bombardments
By that logic you should equip soldier with nothing more than trench-knives. To opposing soldiers in a trench with each their trench-knive you are guarrantied a kill EVERY time! 100 % effectiveness. But is that the ONLY way to measure the effectiveness of a given type of weapon or tactic?
I guess you never used a wood spear ..... you probly don't know how to fix the tip of a spear to get like 7 pokes then u beter be good at kung fu but you use fire to harden spear points remember tho a Thompson prototype would shoot down 25 ppl with dull spears
I believe it was during the first Gulf War... One particular piece of intercepted Iraqi army radio traffic was broadcast on the evening news. In that audio clip, one heard a an officer/commander/etc telling a front line soldier to be calm, and that everything was going be alright. The soldier on the other end of the line was crying, uncontrollably, and begging his commanding officer to make it (the bombardment) stop. The soldier was psychologically-broken by the rain of ordnance. Even then, as we fought the Iraqi army, it made me sad to hear his pleading voice....and it still gets me to this very day whenever I think back on it. War is glorious - until you find yourself in the middle of it.
@@lindybeige Just like bombardments, you can't expect just one volley to completely depopulate the area. The enemy whiskers are deeply entrenched in their follicle foxholes. You've made progress, but the enemy is tough, and additional armaments may be required. It could be time to call in reinforcements.
@@lindybeige did you find out if the hair and scalp product was multiple choice? Only asking because I have found a product that works for my hair but not great on my scalp.
When I was a medic in the US military we were taught that 90% of all combat casualties were from artillery. That is why before Kevlar we were issued flack jackets and the pot helmets. The flak jackets and helmet didn't stop rounds but protected vital areas from shrapnel. With the advent of Kevlar we were protected from both.
@@jenniferkeates Not a single true statement and not remotely relevant to anything anyone else said. You have an unhealthy obsession, seek therapy. I hope you get better.
@@BloodyCrow__ well, before the second world war taxes as we know them today and buy into the myth of "always being around" didn't actually exist. takes are bad, 'cause the taxes we have today (at least here in canada and down south in the states) are overreaching & totally bullshit. oh, and also waaaaaay too high, as well.
also, seeking cover to not being hit by shrapnel, stops people from accurately shooting back. that's the idea of cover fire. explosions also make sleeping slightly more difficult.
@@OlavBergman "No Step Back" is a summary of Order 227. What Order 227 really calls for is for officers and men who retreat from defensive positions to be punished. In reality, very few were actually shot for it. Most returned to their positions when the NKVD blocking detachments fired warning shots over their heads, and most of the rest went to penal battalions, which were a death sentence anyway but were more useful.
Oh god, lindy is the only youtuber who can talk about getting shelled for 22 minutes, then do a goofy musical intermission, talk about sponsors AND TALK ANOTHER 20 MINUTES ABOUT GETTING SHELLED, without losing his credibility or without destroying the mood i shouldve infact, seen it comming, but i was yet surprised neat.
Having read a few books of WW2 history, I occasionally spot a theme: A massive bombardment against well dug-in defenders is never as effective as the attackers think it will be. From the Marines on Guadalcanal to Operation Cobra, your odds of survival in a simple trench are pretty good, even against the heaviest of bombardments.
Seems accurate, to add more, there is a reason why the WW1 was dominated by trenches: it was a lot more easy and comfortable to be in for a long time in the frontlines since artillery had a huge role in this war.
On the effect of bombardment, I would challenge anyone to stand downrange of a mortar crew and not try to make themselves as small and flat as physically possible. The point isn't always to score a bullseye but to win the firefight and keep the enemies heads well under the parapet
That's actually an issue with FPS games you know if you die you will just respawn and thus be way more willing to stick your head around a corner when you know there is a guy with an MG.
@@theappleeaters6844 Not if you play realistic games like Arma 3. There are modes where you just have one life, or those where you have to collect you gear so you start again without anything.
@@mondaysinsanity8193 Actually since WW2 most casualties are caused by either artillery or bombs. I haven't finished the video, but I assume it's going to be a load of crap if his conclusion is that they don't hurt the enemy significantly.
@@rogaldorn7407 the question is random area bombardment which does tend to be relatively in effective not actual aimed strike I.e. drones or smart bombs for instance
Re: "the race to the parapet" ...Australian troops in WW1 were quoted as saying "you're not close enough to a creeping barrage, unless you're taking friendly casualties"
In the book "Verdun" by Georges Blond, he mentioned German troops finding trenches full of sleeping French soldiers,- sleep caused by the endless heavy bombardment at the start of the battle. It's a great book, perhaps you already know it.
Usually when you kill 10% of an enemy as many will be severely wounded and then there will be lightly woundeds too, who add little to combat effectiveness. And hitting the ground is a good practice when you are fired on. One difference between veterans from the finnish wars and nonbattle experienced personnel were that the latter would stand around and look for the source and wait for an order. The veterans would just drop to the ground.
Also I believe it takes more then 2 people to take care of each wounded and on average 1 for each lightly wounded, this is why in Vietnam the Commies didn't try to kill but injure, the traps for example were normal leg not torso or head height.
@@LordInter Not quite true. In Vietnam, the Americans had a very good extraction program for wounded that was the same extraction for most patrols. Ambulances and the litter bearers of WWII were rarely used. Whereas in prior conflicts, most wounded were treated in theater, in Vietnam, most severely wounded were evacuated to military hospitals outside the theater in the Philippines or even Stateside. The military machine was so large that the wounded did not make as much of a dent in effectiveness except for that individual patrol. Second, most American infantry wore flak jackets. While of dubious utility, they did make a difference in reducing the number of torso wounds. While they didn't stand up to closer rifle rounds, they were effective against grenades, artillery shrapnel, hand guns, and long range rifles. They could slow a longer range rifle round so its traumatic effect on the torso was reduced from a kill to a wound.
Bombardment is cover fire. You're not expecting to hit things, you're expecting to keep things from shooting at your team. If you can actually hit things, that's just bonus.
This is not quite accurate, such as in WW1 the artillery would stop 30 seconds to a minute before the men went over the top. Thus it had little suppressing effect on the enemy since they would not be under bombardment when the troops advanced. For suppression you would use heavy machine guns and good old rifle fire concentrated onto enemy MG nests.
@@craigporter8873 Wrong, if the artillery stopped before the men went over the top then something had gone wrong, seriously wrong. WWI bombardments were incredibly complex things, especially 1916 and later. The problem was that attacking troops in 1914 - 1918 had no way to communicate with the friendly artillery, the lightest radio weighed in at 2000 lb's and was mounted on two trucks... good luch getting those across no mans land. Telephone wires got cut, assuming you were able to lay them across no mans land in the first place, that left signal flags (yeah right!), runners or pigeons. As a result artillery bombardments ran on precise schedules. If for some reason the infantry were delayed or held up only then would the barrage run ahead of them, if they were not, the creeping barrage was designed to protect the attacking infantry only lifting literally as the first waves hit the opposing trenches. The times you hear of bombardments lifting too soon are always down to mistakes, or the infantry were, for some reason, delayed. They were not DESIGNED to lift so early. Indeed, one Scots Guards RSM stated after the war that if you did not take a few casualties to your screening barrage you were probably too far away from it.
@@jeremypnet A creeping barrage isn't really used for suppression either it is to stop the flow of reinforcements onto the field and to disrupt communications between the front and the rear lines. It's kind of weirdly a defensive barrage since it stops counter attacks too.
I've been shelled by 155mm shells. Special bunker with foot thick windows and the shells were dropped just a few yards in front of us. Terrifying experience and we were perfectly safe. The shockwave shook you from the inside out. Goodness knows how men survived that for ten minutes let alone several hours at a time. I was on edge at the slightest noise for days afterwards.
@@TheSword2212there is no way you called him “sensitive” for being bombed you fucking 300 pound restarted discord moderator. How’s your armsa experience helping rn
Situations happening in "combat" have their starting parameters so far removed from humans everyday functioning it almost seems to me as if there are combinations of emotions and dispositions you can experience solely by living through it. Your account sounds intense but it is something that soldiers and people living through wars would generally be able to relate to, only when reading about battles like Verdun, see the pictures ,accounts and add up the time people spent in it I get a feeling as if it happened in some parallel world.
job searching blows. the peacetime equivalent of the artllery barrage. the only thing that blows more is the application process which is the peacetime equivalent of shell-shocked surrender . hang in there :)
@@jamofbob715 I did, yes. Although having to work sucks worse than job searching haha. Ah well, such is life. One day I shall run off to the hills with a tent and live wild and free... (Or just moan and grumble online until I die :) )
@@BlandMarkComedy My turn to watch Lindybeige in the afternoons with bland meals. Oh and job search a little bit... P.S. I just bought a tent and dusted off my old ruck sack :)
I’m an afghan war vet and I frequently dealt with artillery and air bombardment. Afghanistan is very mountainous ground and our charges were designed for flat terrain. Frequently the afghans would fight from a Boulder field, which is kind of a natural trench. Sometime we could get a group of taliban with a single bomb, but on one occasion we dropped 7 bombs on the same guy and he got away (he ran into a village where we were not going to bother him). Even precision weapons are only accurate to a few meters and if you are crouched behind a massive boulder or a thick wall you have a good chance of surviving. The Taliban were ok with frightful casualties since Islam values shadid (Martyrs). Many of their soldiers were recruited for one-time Missions where others were handlers that stayed in safer places and directed units of one-timers from safe distances.
It all depends on your definition of 'effective'. If you're looking at "it takes x weight of fire to kill 1 enemy boi", then artillery isn't that great.
When you described the artillery as “barking dogs- ruff ruff ruff ruff!” My dog got nervous lol. In a dark, humorous sort of manner it seemed to be an accurate representation of how the soldiers would’ve responded.
When I was in the army, as infantry, I was basically trained to understand that our number 1 threat was not enemy infantry or armoured vehicles but rather enemy artillery. If we didn't already have prepared positions (trenches with cover), if you were caught out in the open by enemy artillery, it's game over. By artillery, they meant everything from traditional field guns to missiles to airstrikes - although nowadays actual guns are being deprecated because counter battery fire is now extremely effective so if you can't properly shoot and scoot, you were unlikely to get off more than a few salvos before they hit you back. one thing about the comparison to WWII (whether typhoon attacks or shelling), is that nowadays you have better ordnance, with e.g. specifically antitank missiles, as opposed to the rockets that were all the "air power" had in those days. I think they'd be much more effective vs. tanks now? And there's also helicopters with guided antitank weaponry. I'd had a chat with some of the armoured infantry guys, saying they should be safer with, well, armour around them - but the response on their part was that they had a disadvantage in that they weren't going to be able to hide, while I could. The difference would be that if it was against weapons their tanks were proof against, they were definitely safe, but if the enemy had a proper counter, they were definitely dead. As infantry, I'd basically be ... more or less luck of the draw, no matter what I'm facing :-P
That armoured soldier is smart. If he's in a tank he's a large, clunky, high priority, single target. Infantry on the other hand are individually "weak" but in numbers they are far more flexible. It's like schools of fish in the ocean. They stick together because the predators only pick off a few and it's good odds it won't be you. Now armoured targets are like white whales, everyone wants a piece of them, but only the biggest predators can take one down.
Kinda reminds me of the system that the game "End War" uses. It was a sort of rock-paper-scissors where infantry was ineffective against armor, armor was ineffective against air, and air was ineffective against infantry (in cover). I always favored artillery and rifles in that game though.
In Iraq/Afghanistan I found it much easier to fend off attacks when rockets and mortars were fired at us over a longer period. There's time to react in between shells and it felt less threatening. When shits exploding everywhere from them firing in rapid succession it was much scarier. We risked moving during explosions but we had to because they are advancing on our position. That's another thing indirect fire is good for that I'm not sure if he mentioned: fire supression and advancing.
@@Pengi_SMILES Apparently, there was a rumour among the Iraqis about 15 years ago that the Americans had deployed vicious sharks into the Euphrates, and that the British had unleashed cow-killing badgers in their country. Whether the Iraqis thought that the American-deployed sharks had laser beams on their heads is unknown.
Might be a good explanation why russia is having so much trouble despite the disparity of equipement : ukrainian have moral fanatisme and therefore just eat up the death
3:40 Okay... I was listening to Lindy with my headphones on while looking at something else and I have to say that his stereo plane sounds freaked me out.
I had a friend who served in Viet Nam. He said the most terrifying thing was a bombing run by B-52's hitting a nearby enemy position; hearing the explosions, feeling the ground shake, all you can do is crouch down in a foxhole and wait.
@@bonogiamboni4830 Apparently they were not as much shaken seeing that they actually won the war. Most likely because to bomb somebody you need to know where he is. In this guerilla war with all the jungle and distration you will probably not know exactly where the enemy positions are and it is pretty likely that they have hidden exits and can sometimes just leave unseen whil an empty position gets bombed.
I was a forward observer, once upon a time. "The mission of field artillery is to destroy, neutralize, or suppress the enemy by cannon, rocket, and missile fire and to help integrate all fire support assets into combined arms operations." US Army FM 6-30 Destroy - buildings/bases/power plants/fueling stations. (without supplies, morale drops drastically). Neutralize - kill between 1/3 and 1/5 of the enemy personnel. Suppress - reduce the enemy's ability to push forward. A stalling tactic that allows our ground troops to move forward and safer air support intelligence. Every Non-Infantry soldier works to support the Infantry. Even tankers, gunships, and artillery. Artillery missions are chosen based on the value of the target, not the number of possible casualties. It is more likely artillery will cause fewer casualties than a tank/infantry unit. Artillery attacks non-personnel more often than personnel. Communication towers, power plants, water supplies, food supplies, and the like. It is still quite effective in destroying strongholds. While one round adjustments are best, most are bracketed. 1 round over, one round under, then a FFE (Fire for effect). Modern artillery has a kill radius of 50m with effects (non-lethal) up to 200m depending on terrain. The FFE size depends on the size of the firing level. A platoon is 2 guns. There are 3 firing platoons in a Battery (6 guns). There are 3 firing batteries in a battalion (18) and 3 battalions in a brigade . Brigade firing missions are coordinated to guide the enemy's forward movement. Most targets are predetermined by previously gathered intelligence. Modern FO guided fire missions are either CAS (close air support) which can include bombers, hellfire (helicopter), and the A10. The AC-130 (C-130 with a mounted artillery gun) uses artillery as a direct fire weapon. (Artillery is indirect fires because the person firing isn't the person looking at the target)
Your reply confused me. Please help me understand. It sounds like you're referring to BLC (formerly PLDC) It's the only thing I can think if that would fit being called Sergeant's school. There are a lot of people who struggle with Land-Nav
Josh Gagnier right, when I was in it’s was called WLC, I thought ALC was what they changed the name to. The joke was the Forward Observer I went with, above all else needs to be able to read a map and do land navigation.
My Dad served on 1st Regiment Mountain Artillery R.A. as a forward observer signal man WW2 North West Europe. They had the obsolete 3.7" Howitzer. Specialist close support artillery. The last of the "screw guns" as pack artillery. During the occupation of Antwerp some german snipers set up in dock yard cranes and were real annoyance until they brought up the 1st Rgt. and the 3.7" - 12 cranes, 12 rounds, 12 bullseyes. An error of about 3 meters at the outside?
is this a myth? I've read it in several places. As you were. I checked and the snipers were taken on "over the sights" that is in direct not indirect fire. With AP rounds as for tanks. So CEP would not apply. Sorry to have bothered you.
@@joshgagnier Sorry again. i answered my own question, I was wondering if you knew what the best CEP of close support artillery today was in ideal conditions. That would have been a better way to put the question. Which as I say I answered for myself.
@@johnashley-smith4987 To quote from Hal Clement's _"Chips on Distant Shoulders"_ : Please note that death, destruction, and mayhem are not primary aims of war. They may be secondary ones, as when a cannibal tribe attacks its neighbors for meat, but more usually they are just inconvenient by-products. The aim and end of war is to impose one's will on an opponent. Unfortunately, imposing one's will on another includes the situation in which your will is merely that he not impose his on you.
40:00 this reminded me of Sun Tzu's famous saying that you should not put the enemy on "Death ground"(a place with no means of getting out alive aside from fighting) as the enemy's ability to fight will increase twofold in such conditions, perhaps our reliance on our modern lethal tools of war have caused us to forget about the more psychological aspects which ancient generals such as Sun Tzu eminently understood very well when war was more personal and less efficient.
@@battlez9577 it wasn't death ground, the Romans were physically crushed by each other due to them overextending when they (thought) they had the upper hand. This is more Sun Tzu's "entice the enemy with something that is impossible for them to not fall for" on Hannibal's part. Use your brain.
@@battlez9577 also, Sun Tzu & the OP says it makes the enemies on death ground more vicious and more focused on fighting, NOT that they become invincible. Is English your first language?...
Erick Reis I had actually been wondering about him, as I hadn’t seen him releasing much for the last couple months. It’s good to see some longer videos coming out.
There is a REASON that artillery is called "The King Of Battle." What was done in the previous Century is not the way First World Armies do it today. The average CEP (circular error, probable) of a 155mm HE round at a gun's effective range is about 50 meters. A round's CEP is the distance from the targeted point the round will fall on average. There may be exceptions if FDC (Fire Direction & Control) screws up, but most CEP's are pretty accurate. The CEP can expand at very long ranges but the 800-meter "danger close" limitation the US uses is actually VERY conservative (and designed around the ICM & ICM-DP rounds). Excaliber GPS-Guided shells have a 5-meter CEP in their latest itineration. The old Copperhead Laser-Guided Munition had a CEP of 0 meters as do the newer experimental laser-guided rounds set to enter the inventory in the near future... IF the guy holding the Laser Designator device does his job correctly. The US has been working very hard to reduce "collateral damage" from artillery strikes (including "friendly fire" incidents) while increasing accuracy (by reducing CEP) for more than twenty years.
In logical correlation to this stunning accuracy, we reintroduce the goodl old line infantry formation, with fixed bayonets, marching close behind the moving barrage....^^
@@mikeromney4712 Or, as was seen in Afghanistan, someone calling an artillery barrage within 100 meters of a FOB or other Infantry position. The big issue in Afghanistan was the AVAILABILITY of Indirect Fire during a mission. Often Arty was either not in range (because it was concentrated in FOBs) or was "occupied" with other fire missions. The US is only now beginning to correct its shift away from large concentrations of (often mechanized) artillery to light Infantry units supported with only a few towed guns. Despite the shift, Russia still has a LARGE numerical advantage in the number of guns fielded.
There's a saying in the military. "The cheapest way to kill a guy with a gun...is another guy with a gun." The problem is that on average about the same amount of your guys are going to be killed as the enemy. The moment you start trying to swing that kill ratio in your favour, costs escalate DRAMATICALLY.😒
Other effects include: Handling wounded people. It takes 4 blokes out of the field effectively for each wounded and behind the lines require additional support. Incapacitation of personnel. Fear of flying objects and loud crashy noises makes most people ineffective and stop aiming at the opposition, even under cover. Area denial and prevention of movement for reinforcements and resupply. Infrastructure damage. Things get smashed up slightly with explosive things being blasted next them. Rail, road, optics.
In Saving Private Ryan it would have been a P-47 Thunderbolt, regardless of what they used in the film. There are several P-51s still flying while P-47s are much more rare. Movies too often use what is available, not what is appropriate. The ground attack version of the P-51 was the A-36 Invader (from the P-51A). They were used in the Mediterranean and South East Asia until their use was confined to only the P-51D. A-36s and P-51As were pulled from Europe by June, 1944. The major difference between the P-51 and A-36 were the engines (P-51As / A-36s got Allisons while P-51Ds got more powerful Packards or Merlins) and the A-36 got dive brakes. The A-36 was also reinforced in certain areas such as wing hard points. Both aircraft shared plumbing for drop tanks. A 500 lb bomb would have taken out most of the people within that town street due to the concussion.
The French stopped selling Exocets to the Argentines. They had a total of five Exocets in their inventory. If the French had kept on supplying them we'd have lost a lot more ships and sailors.
I can't prove this but I heard the Sheffield's antimissle defences could of stopped that missile. The failure was on account of France being in NATO, the computer classed the missile as friendly and didn't target or shoot it down. Can anyone out there wiser than me and privy to better G2 comment on this?
@@robertdeen5591 The whole point of Sea Skimming missiles (aka Exocet) is they fly so low the radar cannot see them over the wave scatter. Computers in 1982 were not capable of recognising an oncoming missile as friend or foe. Even today, they would assume malign intent and CWIS would be deployedIn In1982, radar operators on HMS Invincible spotted the missile but there has been so many false alarms, the officer in charge called another false alarm. A Harrier was asked to check with it's radar but reported nothing found. The Sheffield satellite phone was in use which blanketed its radar. Result was they had under a minute to take action. To be fair to the crews, NATO systems were not equipped to stop sea skimming missiles because the USSR did not (yet) have the technology. Today's close in weapons systems (gins and missiles) came into use some time after the Falklands campaign.
A few comments on an interesting presentation. 1) Yes. Most casualties are inflicted by artillery 2) Death may not be contagious but suicide is - of course, you have to have a reason they are killing themselves. At The Little Big Horn - Custer's men began killing themselves and once that started more did it. Basically they were terrified of being captured alive and tortured. The Japanese on Mt. Suribachi on Iwo Jima did the same thing. Here their officers were running around trying to stop them as they could still fight. Now - one of the reasons for this - is you have people who know they are going to die - so - they just want to get it over with. 3) On the Race to the Parapets - two things here. First, the attacking troops would sometimes follow as close as they dared to what was called a Rolling Artillery Barrage - that started in one spot and gradually moved forward ahead of the assaulting troops. Second - during the bombardment - when they stopped shooting - they would often wait a bit, let the enemy leave their bunkers - and then start shooting again. So - often the enemy was reluctant to come out of their bunkers in case the people bombarding them did that. 4) During the Pacific Landings you had massive naval bombardments but the enemy was all hunkered down in bunkers that they had prepared for just that thing. The main thing that this did time and again though - at Corregidor and Wake Island when the Japanese took them and at Tarawa when the Marines landed - the bombardments (or in the case of Wake the fighting) broke the com wire between positions and the defenders couldn't respond to what the attackers were doing because they couldn't communicate. On Wake, the Americans were actually winning when, because they had lost communications with many of their positions and thought they'd fallen, the Naval Commander - surrendered the island. The Americans also had a carrier, the Saratoga on the way to relieve them - when they HQ on Wake reported "situation in doubt". With very few carriers and fewer battleships to hold the line - the decision was made to abort the relief. 5) On measuring fear - during the Vietnam war the American Navy did that. They hooked up their pilots to sensors that measured various human things like heart rates and such. The thing that caused the most fear though, far more than going into combat was - night carrier landings ... 6) One of the factors here in some of the early battles in the Pacific was that you had men who had given up hope of winning - and just gave up. Here again you have the stress of continuing a fight they believe they are going to lose. .
Thanks for the time you took to write this informative comment, deserves more responses, and I feel bad that no one did respond at all in over 10 months! Stay awesome
Very good, thank you. I did a WW2 visit to Normandy, and a WW1 (OK they did not know it was number one), to Ypres, and the Somme,both very moving. The sheer scale of death and injury in WW1 was obscene. I also have climbed many times in the Dolomites, and whilst crawling a tunnel, I saw an inscription, " One day the world will visit, and see how we fought", sadly very few will be able to get to these tunnels. There are still remnants of wooden ladders, and barbed wire on the mountains, they are untouched as very few people can climb up there. This part of WW1 is forgotten, only the Western front is recorded. Shells could not be wasted here,it took such an huge effort to get the guns and shells up there. Thanks for your presentation.
@Badger0fDeath Don't know exactly where/when, but 1 city was skimping on the tithe, so they bombarded it, the city surrendered, they kept bombarding it for 3 years. (Warhammer 40k)
@@LegitBacKd00rNiNJa69 Just because millions of people die from a heart attack, it doesn’t actually make heart attacks particularly effective at killing people. It’s a macabre example but I think the same is true for artillery. Even if everyone is loving to throw around rockets, it doesn’t mean a platoon with precision rifles wouldn’t achieve the same effect with far greater effectiveness under the right circumstances. Also; I would like to see some evidence that support your claims because I am fairly confident that you haven’t actually checked all conflicts and battles to support that part of your theory. A lot of conflicts simply do not involve that much artillery, for instance, due to it being expensive and hard to move. And even mortars are not something you can just hand to some militia in a jungle so to speak. They require a certain amount of training and are not smuggled as easily as a fire arm. While it’s true for most large scale conflicts, many smaller wars were and are simply not fought with firm positions in mind, meaning you can not target an enemy that is really committed to hitting and running as well even of you have the required artillery available to you. A lot of Guerilla type conflicts come to mind. Even in the napoleonic era, the peninsular war is a perfect example for this exact behavior as it even is the origin of the name we have given to the strategy in our modern era.
@@LegitBacKd00rNiNJa69 I have plenty. One of the less spectacular but to me quite enjoyable ones happens to be discussing different topics on UA-cam and similar sides. Also; I can type pretty fast so it’s not like I need a few minutes for such a short comment. You should see my essays m8. This is nothing :)
Not so ! I always exclusively, buy Sistema plastic kitchen containers, particularly for microwave use. There is Lamb, of course, and there are a few Duplicate Bridge Players, who appear , from NZ, on Bridge Base Online, for an early morning game.
This guy is amazing, I am happy to subscribe. The amount of details and perfect description of human psychology in a summarized way with perfect body language is gold. You're one of my favorite youtubers now
6:13 On D-Day the USS Texas was assigned fire support for Omaha Beach and the USS Nevada was assigned fire support for Utah beach. When it comes to calling in artillery fire there are three groups of people who have to do their jobs perfectly. The forward observers (the people on the ground calling in the quadrants of the target. The fire direction control (the people who get the quadrants from the forward observers and tell the guns where to aim what kind of round to use and how much powder) and the gunners (the people who aim and fire the guns). If any of these three groups do not do their job perfectly the guns will miss their target. The USS Nevada had fantastic men doing all three. As a result, ALL the German bunkers on Utah beach (Utah Beach had more than twice the obstacles bunkers and defenders of Omaha Beach) were taken out before the main body of Americans landed on Utah Beach. The USS Nevada was so good that it even did fire support for the 82nd Air Borne and 101st Air Borne, taking out hundreds of Germans and even an entire German tank battalion (over 110 tanks and armored vehicles). The USS Texas, on the other hand, had a major break down by one of the three groups and as a result, it did NOT hit a single target on Omaha Beach.
The Germans were excellent at recovering damaged or broken tanks and making one good one out of two bad ones. A necessity due to the way German vehicles are engineered.
13:53 I have an anecdotal story to sort of back you up there. A group, rag tag team basically of surviving platoons and so on numbering just over 5000 total men was being bombarded by over 300,000 French and British troops, how many guns I don't know. But the Bulgarians managed to survive it with 2 casualties over 72 hour bombardment, by singing and yelling out jokes as they lied there. Some didn't have a trench to lie in, just a tree or "foxhole". But there you go, Trenches are extremely effective if you just sit there and hunker down. As an aside; some artillerists who had lost their guns in the fighting the day before (it was disabled by sappers, it's not like they couldn't find it), figured out that the enemy was using a lone tree as a range finder, so they shoot next to it, not at it, and they simply went over to that tree
In a talk about bombardment accuracy, your pun at 7:56 is right on target. "If you think that something has failed because it didn't hit or because it didn't kill, then I think you're missing the point."
Great explanation of "Mean Point of Impact" ! Remember one type projectile might have a "Kill Radius" of 50 to 75 Yards. We had 100 yards on a "General Purpose" 16inch projectile. Remember "Kill Radius" means 50% death within that figure.
TBH I have to admit I just realised I was looking forward to a beige after Dollar Save Club vid... which this kind of is since it looks like Lindy has used some of the other products in the sponsors kit. Best after shot ever - with heavy artillery KABOOMS!
Love the channel and content. As a former U.S Army F.O, I have to say that when I was in (07-11) we worked both old school fire missions, map, compass, protractor and binos, as well as using some of the latest technologies at the time, g.p.s, lasers etc. I have to say, with some of the new technology, we could call in our 155mm guns for extremely accurate fire missions. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. I've been out of the military for almost 10 years, lord only knows the advances in tech Artillery has now.
Not really. Did the London bombings break the UK???? Did the RAF and USAF bombing break the Germans???? Did the US bombings in Vietnam stop South Vietnam from beeing overun?
@@canisxv9869 None of these (except Dresden) are examples of decimation. The term itself comes to us from the Romans who used decimation of a conquered people to ensure rigid adherence to Roman policies. This is sort of how Rome became Rome. Had there been full on 10% casualties of the citizens of London from the Luftwaffe and V2's, you better believe it would have broken the backs of the Brits. And yes, IMO, the US and RAF bombings DID break the backs of the Third Reich, or we wouldn't STILL be hearing about Dresden, which incurred far more than 10% casualties from bombardment. but that's political opinion open to debate.
@@crucifyrobinhood Roman decimation was used against their own legions as punishment for cowardice, mutiny etc. Each person in the legion (officers included) was made to remove a stone from a bag. 1 in 10 of these was white, the rest were black. The ones with the white stones were beaten to death by their own unit.
@@crucifyrobinhood Contrary to popular belief, Japan does not surrender solely due to atomic bombs. The incendiary night time bombing of 100+ Japanese cities (especially bombing of Tokyo which kill more than 100,000 civilians) and Soviet invasion of Manchuria which destroy Kwantung Army is major factors in why Japan surrender unconditionally to the US
@@johnhaines4163 they could probably still piss their pants if they are to dehydrated to do that they probably are in no condition to fight back anyway.
I was a Field Artillery Fire Direction Officer (FDO) in XVIII Airborne Corps Artillery during Operation Desert Storm. I directed the fires of my platoon of four M198 155mm towed howitzers (nuclear capable). I hold the Military Order of Saint Barbara. Field Artillery is fondly referred to as the “King of Battle” for very good reason. Fun fact: the Iraqis had newer and better howitzers than we did. They fielded the South African built G5 155mm howitzer, which had significantly longer range, and a smaller CEp (Probable circular error/a “tighter shot group”) than our trusty old “One-niner-eights”. Their problem was that they lacked the technical Fire Direction skills to have effects on target at 30+Kilometer range. They could drop rounds within ~200M or so of us, but as Lindy points out - this isn’t good enough. All that did was piss us off. The technical Fire Direction I’m referring to means knowing and accounting for variables such as propellant temperature, muzzle velocity variation from standard for each piece in the platoon, wind speed and direction, air temperature and density layers the projectile will travel through, slight variations in the weight of manufacturing lots of projectiles, and how much the earth would rotate during the projectile’s time of flight, which might be over a minute (Coreolis effect) we did this with firing tables/books, slide rules, protractors, stick pins and boards covered with paper. We also used early computers. Not PCs, mind you, but ancient things with monochrome ‘orange screen’ monitors. The standards we trained to were to have rounds impacting within 50M of the target, which means - effects on target. Killed, wounded, and psychologically destroyed. Every time my platoon fired one round per gun, we basically turned two football fields into a cataclysm of noise, concussive shockwaves, and chunks of white-hot metal the size of your hand or forearm flying through the air at tremendous speed. And that was just your standard impact-fused HE round. And we had many more tools in the toolbox. Air burst fuses, ICM (improved conventional munitions) in anti-personnel and anti-tank flavors, laser-guided projectiles, minefield laying projectiles, and yes, even propaganda leaflet rounds.
G'day, It's Bin-Done Chum....! Look up "Durr Fuhrerbunker..." It didnae wurrrk verra well f'r yonder littul Adolfus, now ; did it ? Much more betterer, it turns out, is to not conduct oneself in such a manner as to provoke anybody to want to squander any such vast resources, merely to convince one to stop talking and behaving like a complete Fuckwit...(!). However, do feel free to conduct the experiment ; on the one hand - behave as a nice person and get on with your life..., or dig a Trench in your Bunker - so as to be able to try to "get away with" behaving like an Arsehole...(?). Your Choice, olde Bean...! Such is Life, Have a good one. ;-p Ciao !
The Battle of Long Tan and the Battle of the Ia Drang Valley during the Vietnam war and the horrendous casualties inflicted on North Vietnamese forces fully vindicate the use of artillery support
184 tons of munitions to take a village.
It might have been more efficient to just build a second village and drop it on top of the first.
IKEA would have a fucking field-day with that shipping order
By that metric, winning wars or even launching any offensive in a peer to peer war isn't actually profitable for the state; just constantly spending that money on building stuff instead, or rather not even taxing for it. And yeah, that's probably true. But as we can say by watching Lindy's most recent video now, and by experience, say, that doesn't make political sense which is why it doesn't ever happen.
@@johnryan9704 So THATS what Obama was doing to Iran... What a GENIUS!
More efficient to ask the germans to bomb themselves
If you think that's excessive read about The Battle of Vimy Ridge when Canada got called in to end a battle that'd claimed over 150,000 British and French lives.
We started with what the Germans came to call "The Week of Suffering" where we "softened" them up by dropping over one million artillery shells on them.
Then we attacked. At dawn, every single gun, piece of artillery, mortar, everything that could fall from the sky was let loose. Everything that could be shot was fired, the goal was to create a massive wall of incoming artillery fire which "crept" up the terrain, effectively "sterilizing" it of German troops, while the Canadian armed forces followed behind, using the artillery as a form of cover.
What had claimed over 150,000 British and French lives, the Canadians had finished in time for lunch.
I don't believe there's been artillery fire on this level in a single battle before or since.
The move came to be known as "the Creeping Barrage"
"how do we measure fear"
Usually there is a moral indicator when you hover your mouse over the unit. Also their flags start flashing when they are about to break.
I usually go by the number of brown trousers my soldiers start wearing.
@@ShiftyMcGoggles What if they have brown shirts too?
@@Paltse they are... shitting out of their chests?
Squad broken!
ArkySaw perhaps a little Nazi Pun?
I'm from Odessa, Ukraine, my personal experience of bombardment is that it's probably the closest you can get to hell on Earth. Except napalm and nuclear weapons. After month of being under missiles strikes i got what is essentially "shellshock". Neurological pains in my eyes, neck and shoulders, migraines, nausea, blurred vision, sometimes i can't even see what's on the screen or page of a book, i'm twitching and jerking violently when falling asleep. Feels as if i'm being electrocuted. When you hear the swoosh/zzoomm of an overshot missile you feel utterly helpless and you know soon the soil around you will just start literally boiling like in those anime cartoons when heroes go superpower. It's so violent no words can properly describe it. It feels very surreal, you can't tell where is up and where is bottom, like drowning at big depth and knowing that someone is actively trying to kill you is a haunting realization. I truly hope none of you reading will ever have to experience anything like this.
My modest knowledge of English helps explain to certain extent the sensation of being under missile attack, but simpler way is "all hell breaks loose" and that'd be correct. The hell just breaks loose once that 500kg warhead erupts and steel hail whizzes all over the place and that surreal "African sunrise" prolonged flash of orange light from explosion lights up the night sky. Russians mostly strike from 3 to 5 am when people are asleep in their beds. And the worst is to see a lonely survivor who just lost their entire family, pets, home and all the life long belongings. And then they have to find forces to bury their dead in the yard under the destroyed apartment building. People do help, but still. Yet Russian TV somehow manages to convince its audience and some foreign viewers that we are "bombing ourselves" with naval Kalibr and Dagger missiles.
*I'm not here to start political flamewars. If you are working for «отдел Э» no need to waste your time, this isn't anti-russian "propaganda". Just an attempt at sharing personal experience. Although please burn in hell if you do work for Russian government.
Shit man, that sounds terrible.
I think if this russian invasion proves something like no other war before, its the hell of experiencing it.
With reports like you, live footage, interviews etc, the analysation of this conflict in 50+ years will be very interesting and hopefully send a more graphical image about how bad it all is.
Still hope you get through this stay safe. 2 months ago i signed a 152mm grenade about to be fired, thats at least some help.
Everything exploding around you sounds like Breaking point from band of brothers you can dig a whole hindenburg line worth of bunkers and trenches around you but if the missle/shell has your name on it there isnt anything you can do. Im glad i live in a boring apartment
@@timberwolfmountaineer873 I know you currently live in it and that is awful for any human being and although i have never been missiled or shelled i have spoken to a number Vietnam, Iraq and Korea vets in the US who have. They also shared very similar stories to what you are saying about how shrapnel has sizzled and boiled pools of water and the intensity of prolonged shelling/missiled has changed the density, color and smell of the atmosphere as well as having random parts of the world violently explode like Tsunami waves of force crashing and booming into another most humans develop either external anger or feelings of helplessness that in a lot of these men where lifetime afflictions i hope the people of Ukraine as well as literally any human that has undergone such a experience can find true peace.
Your English seems pretty good
Thanks for sharing. Cannot imagine what you and your friends and neighbors have been going through. Hope peace gets a chance, war is just awful, sometimes necessary, but always horrible. Stay safe and prayers for you and your loved ones.
"So where are the tanks you destroyed?"
"We destroyed them so much the wrecks didn't even survive, but trust us."
There's tanks?
Well they got hit so hard that they rocketed off into the sky like when those skyrim giants hit someone.
We destroyed the Iraqi Army three times over... if you believe the battle damage assessments.
I suspect the confusion came from a similar predicament.
@AKUJIRULE oy vey!!!!
Lol
Infantry: we ate them
A bullet - Dear Sir
A grenade - To whom it may concern
Artillery Strike - Attention Grid Coordinate
whomever*
@@vaclavjebavy5118 whom is a word in it's own right.
@@64bitAtheist You're right. I suppose it's just the first version of the word I've seen.
Nuclear strike - @everyone
@@onyxguardian1756 Nuclear strike is an open letter to the people of that nation.
“Our men flee the field of battle, this is a shameful display “
Medieval 2 Total War
@@VilleKivinen can you guess this one...
OWA MEN ARE WUNNING FWOM THE BATTUWFIELD. SHAMEFUR DISHPRAY!!
FEAR MAKES A HOME IN OUR ENEMY HEARTS!
@@Stiltonator
Shogun LOL
@@menacingcar0449 I'm pretty sure I've also heard it in Rome Total War I.
"You don't win by killing everyone"
*All Warhammer40K factions look visibly confused*
Except space weeb commies
Gets confused by leadership mechanic sending blobs of kroot and the like scarpering off the battlefield.
My Vostroyans are unsure...
*Confused mustache sounds*
Plaguemarines: cough cough
Necrons: continues firing
Angrymarines: autistic screaming
Angry Krieg noises
When the ukelele is played, about 3% are killed outright. Of the remaining, about 1 in 5 have lost their minds and can't fight back and about 3 in 5 are too smart to try.
Is that in the same weapon category as the funniest joke in the world?
Sees ukulele player on the battlefield. ....
Starts unscrewing pommel......
lol not bad after 5 mins practice
My dog has fleas
Ukelele is a beautiful instrument
Lindy: Dying is not contagious.
*Imperial Japan has entered the chat*
corona has entered the room
World war 1 influenza has entered the chat
Mind control has entered the chat.
Humanity in general has entered the chat
@Iggy the Mad *we're in danger
Last video: sponsored by Dollar Shave Club. This video: noticeably shorter beard. Coincidence? I think not.
He sold out. Long live the beard!
He couldn't resist the temptation of a new razor
IT HAD 6 BLADES, FOR MAXIMUM CHANCES OF SUCCESS
And you were right. I was delaying matters in order to look extra disreputable for that other video.
Hotel? Trivago
Speaking as someone with 10 years experience as a US Army Field Artillery Officer. In combat, we have 3 categories of effects we can achieve, none of which pertain to killing all the enemy. We disrupt, damage, or destroy the enemy and it pertains to the percentage of enemy that are being affected by our fire mission. Destroyed would be around 30%. Artillery is THE MOST casualty producing weapon on the battlefield and more soldiers were killed by artillery in WW1 & WW2 than by any other weapon type. Certainly in some instances the number of rounds fired compared to estimated casualties produced seems highly inefficient, but artillery also denies the enemy freedom of movement, screens friendly forces and enables their freedom of movement. It can pin the enemy in place, screen and conceal activities/movement. It can demoralize the enemy, damage their equipment, disrupt their operations, deny them access to key terrain. So not sure I agree with everything that Lloyd is talking about here. Shell shock and demoralization aren't typically an effect we deliberately aim for, its hard to measure, but its an externality that any artilleryman would welcome... So not sure I have ever read of the use of artillery being to persuade the enemy to surrender. In WW1 for instance, artillery was used to cut wire, destroy enemy positions, and with the advent of sophistication in fire control techniques, the use of the creeping barrage, for which the germans didn't have a good answer and enabled allied infantry to much more successfully go onto the offensive in 1917/18.
@@clevermusicbox3630 And that is relevant because...
Artillery persuading the enemy to surrender - 1991 Iraq War, when Iraqi troops surrendered to the USS Missouri’s Pioneer UAV to avoid receiving 16-inch HE shells. web.archive.org/web/20070715081423/wrc.navair-rdte.navy.mil/warfighter_enc/aircraft/UAVs/pioneer.htm
@@clevermusicbox3630 Those "yanks" later enabled our reunification and helped us build our country up from ruins. And at least they tried bombing industrial targets unlike the RAF who were less picky. They may be a bit naive in believing that you can give people democracy but their intentions are good and at least in Germany they were successful.
The artillery has improved a lot since 1918 aswell, just comparing the ww1 artillery pieces to for example the Panzerhaubitze 2000 the diffference in accuracy and amounts of shells on target per minuite are mind boggeling.
Hello sir. I have always wanted to speak to a veteran from US Army's Artillery Corps. I have always wanted to ask, do you think that the Artillery has taken a back-seat in US Army's warfighting doctrine or their tactics due to a rising over-reliance on air power?
I have been studying (as an amateur enthusiast would study) the TO&E of the US Army and have found myself feeling underwhelmed by the type and quantity of artillery that the US Army fields. When I compare that with what my own country (India) fields and plans to field by 2030, I feel that US Army should be using arty a lot more. I understand that my country is expected to fight a set piece engagement on India's borders with Pakistan and China, whereas US Army trains for rapid deployment around the world, which explains the move towards M-777 which is air-mobile. I would like to request your opinion on this observation. Thank you.
_"No tiger is continuously attacking you for hours"_
It depends on the type of Tiger. And on the amount of ammunition available.
and fuel
“Behind one door is the path to the exit, Behind the other is a big cat with a tank,”
“What kind”
“A tiger”
No no , statement is still true. Usually its the engine that gives in first , or something similar critical so they need to be towed away.
Let's hope zhe transmission won't... oh no , there it goes again
After minute 3, they would have to resort to throwing the broken transmission at the enemy.
My grandfather fought in the breakout from Normandy, Belgium, and the assault on the Rhine. He said the most frightened he had ever been was when the Air Force mistakenly bombed his division's positions on two consecutive days.
Yeah, my Dad (1st RCR) told me about being bombed by the U.S.A.F., 300lb bombs. But, they were all dug in, and even with the bombs landing right on their position no one was hurt. He didn't say much about being frightened by it, but at a certain point in the Italian Campaign, I think he was just sort of numb to it all.
@@rodchallis8031 Rule 1: you're no good to me dead
Rule 2... Oh what does it matter, you all will probably end up dead anyways
What unit was he with?
@@rodchallis8031 how old is your dad and you?
@@apropercuppa8612 My grandfather was with the 30th Infantry Division (Old Hickory, or Roosevelt's SS, as the Germans nicknamed it). The bombing was on the opening of Operation Cobra.
I see you've put that Dollar Shave sponsorship to good use
As a guy who is growing a beard I will say, yes he is. Hi beard and face are tidy.
Poor little razor probably took a beating
Before and After. Probably the best money Dollar Shave ever spent.
Lindy looked fine before but he looks significantly more handsome now.
@@shanevlietstra2263 *SIX BLADES*
Here is an old one.
"When the Germans fly over, the English duck. When the English fly over the Germans duck.
And, when the Americans fly over, everyone ducks!"
I heard another one in England.
Give a Brit a gun and He becomes a soldier.
Give a french a gun and He becomes a soldier.
Give a german a gun and He becomes a soldier.
Don't give an American a gun, he'll go nuts.
@@papaaaaaaa2625 you don't have to give us a gun we already have plenty
@@papaaaaaaa2625 that does not make sense since Most Americans have guns already.
@@williamt.sherman9841It's a joke. Like "Why don't you give Viagra to Germans"
Because they get a stiff arm and yell "Hail" all the time...
PAPAAAAAAA!!! We don’t any more we got enough for literally every single person in this country and then some... (320 something million)
To quote Captain Edmund Blackadder, "We've fired over a million shells, and what do we have to show for it? One Dachshund with a slight limp."
to be fair more than 50% of ww1 german casualties were due to artillery fire. and the majority of British casualties at the Some were due to german mortar bombardments
But that forgets the purpose of war - i.e. to generate ca$h for the Krupps/military industrial complex (select as appropriate to era/nation).
@AKUJIRULE they did declare war on France.
@AKUJIRULE read history: on August 1st, 1914 Germany declares war on France for being an ally of Russia.
@AKUJIRULE They are talking about WWI
"I realize we're going on a bit of a tangent" - Lindybeige.
That's why we love you.
blogobre “Lloyd and the Tangents” would be a killer skiffle band name
Every artillery officer must be proficient in geometry: Nikolai Iudovich Ivanov.
You misheard, he said "realise". Because he's British.
Just this once?
They should've used wooden Spears, they're apparently more effective
By that logic you should equip soldier with nothing more than trench-knives. To opposing soldiers in a trench with each their trench-knive you are guarrantied a kill EVERY time! 100 % effectiveness.
But is that the ONLY way to measure the effectiveness of a given type of weapon or tactic?
@@ulrikschackmeyer848 Yes it is the only way to measure effectiveness, Id know.
You cant suppress with a spear if you had just knifes you be poisoned lol
I guess you never used a wood spear ..... you probly don't know how to fix the tip of a spear to get like 7 pokes then u beter be good at kung fu but you use fire to harden spear points remember tho a Thompson prototype would shoot down 25 ppl with dull spears
Yall talking bout javelin to look what the javelin missle lol
I believe it was during the first Gulf War... One particular piece of intercepted Iraqi army radio traffic was broadcast on the evening news.
In that audio clip, one heard a an officer/commander/etc telling a front line soldier to be calm, and that everything was going be alright.
The soldier on the other end of the line was crying, uncontrollably, and begging his commanding officer to make it (the bombardment) stop.
The soldier was psychologically-broken by the rain of ordnance.
Even then, as we fought the Iraqi army, it made me sad to hear his pleading voice....and it still gets me to this very day whenever I think back on it.
War is glorious - until you find yourself in the middle of it.
War is sweet to those who have not tasted it
Holy shit was he okay by the end of it?
Did he survive the bombardment
No idea. Only he knows...if he survived the war
No idea. It was intercepted radio traffic. Only he and his God know
Whoa, those shaving tools were actually put to use.
Sparky, when you grow a beard you still need to keep it tidy and the rest of your face shaved. You still need to shave
If THIS is as close as they shave, I'm not impressed.
@@lindybeige Just like bombardments, you can't expect just one volley to completely depopulate the area. The enemy whiskers are deeply entrenched in their follicle foxholes. You've made progress, but the enemy is tough, and additional armaments may be required. It could be time to call in reinforcements.
@@lindybeige did you find out if the hair and scalp product was multiple choice? Only asking because I have found a product that works for my hair but not great on my scalp.
@@lindybeige I genuinely love the amount of piss you took out of them...
When I was a medic in the US military we were taught that 90% of all combat casualties were from artillery. That is why before Kevlar we were issued flack jackets and the pot helmets. The flak jackets and helmet didn't stop rounds but protected vital areas from shrapnel. With the advent of Kevlar we were protected from both.
also helps that medics shouldn't be shot in the first place, as that would be a war crime.. but explosives do not discriminate.
@@thorveim1174 well, not too many countries seem to particularly care for the Geneva conventions anyway...
@@tatotaytoman5934 Geneva Convention? Is that some sorta cosplay event?
@@tatotaytoman5934 They're only war crimes if you lose. Unfortunate reality of war. The victor is absolved of their sins.
seems like that 90% is holding up as true in the recent conflict
"I'm going to let the American taxpayer take this hill...." -- U.S. artillery colonel in WW2
tAxEs BaD
@a_slight_veneer_of_privacy your president doesn't, he boasted about it in the debates and the crowd cheered him on for being "smart".
@@jenniferkeates
Not a single true statement and not remotely relevant to anything anyone else said.
You have an unhealthy obsession, seek therapy. I hope you get better.
@@BloodyCrow__ well, before the second world war taxes as we know them today and buy into the myth of "always being around" didn't actually exist.
takes are bad, 'cause the taxes we have today (at least here in canada and down south in the states) are overreaching & totally bullshit. oh, and also waaaaaay too high, as well.
@@BloodyCrow__ not an argument
Bombardment in war, how well does it work?
Well it makes a mess of things...
widgren87 halloj fellow sven
@@turbopumpen1031 Hallå tillbaks
Halloj där!
@@raseli4066 Hallå tillbaks
Naval bombardment did flip a panther tank into a hole that was then buried until rediscovered years later.
The A-Team spent thousands of rounds and hundreds of Grenades to hit no one.
Best national anthem (that they pinched for their sound theme) ever though, right?
It worked...
Wasn't that amazing? Not even any collateral damage. If I didn't know better, I'd swear they were shooting blanks. 🤪
"what stops people fighting?"
"being dead"
-Lindybeige, 2019
"Only the dead have seen the end of war"
in dedicato imperatum ultra articulo mortis!
Men, gather around, I found the solution for crime
also, seeking cover to not being hit by shrapnel, stops people from accurately shooting back. that's the idea of cover fire. explosions also make sleeping slightly more difficult.
*The planet broke before the Guard did!*
9:05 "Death is not contagious"
The plague: "Hold my beer"
the plague wasn't a garentied death
@@jamescampbell574 No, but it was contagious and it killed people. Therefore, contagious death.
@@jamescampbell574 it also depends on if it was bubonic or the one starting with t because the one starting with t has 100% death rate
*hold my rats
Japan: "Hold my sepukku"
"In the Soviet Union it takes more courage to retreat than to advance." - Joseph Stalin
Ya because if you retreat you get shot in the head.
@@AlbinoKneecaps Only if you retreat without permission from a defensive position.
@@AlbinoKneecaps Suicide in war was considered as the crime of treason.
@@revanofkorriban1505 what means “no step back”? That means nothing bureaucratic like permission in certain circumstances.
@@OlavBergman "No Step Back" is a summary of Order 227. What Order 227 really calls for is for officers and men who retreat from defensive positions to be punished. In reality, very few were actually shot for it. Most returned to their positions when the NKVD blocking detachments fired warning shots over their heads, and most of the rest went to penal battalions, which were a death sentence anyway but were more useful.
Oh god, lindy is the only youtuber who can talk about getting shelled for 22 minutes, then do a goofy musical intermission, talk about sponsors AND TALK ANOTHER 20 MINUTES ABOUT GETTING SHELLED, without losing his credibility or without destroying the mood
i shouldve infact, seen it comming, but i was yet surprised
neat.
I should lighten the tone a bit. So I... SHELL!
"You dont win by killing everyone", 40k Ultra marines eye twitches in anger.
ALWAYS ANGRY!!
The Salamanders laugh in flamethrower.
Nids: "Not unless you can use their juicy biomass"
The Black Templars want to know your location.
The Necrons awake from a long nap.
Having read a few books of WW2 history, I occasionally spot a theme: A massive bombardment against well dug-in defenders is never as effective as the attackers think it will be. From the Marines on Guadalcanal to Operation Cobra, your odds of survival in a simple trench are pretty good, even against the heaviest of bombardments.
Seems accurate, to add more, there is a reason why the WW1 was dominated by trenches: it was a lot more easy and comfortable to be in for a long time in the frontlines since artillery had a huge role in this war.
But thats really scary
thats survivorship bias; you're only remembering the times it didnt work because people only comment on it
@@tabula_rosa Are you sure? Because we have the bombarders as well who can tell the story even if the defenders all die
On the effect of bombardment, I would challenge anyone to stand downrange of a mortar crew and not try to make themselves as small and flat as physically possible. The point isn't always to score a bullseye but to win the firefight and keep the enemies heads well under the parapet
Yep suppressive fire is the idea, flanking element does the actual killing pretty standard modern doctrine
That's actually an issue with FPS games you know if you die you will just respawn and thus be way more willing to stick your head around a corner when you know there is a guy with an MG.
@@theappleeaters6844 Not if you play realistic games like Arma 3.
There are modes where you just have one life, or those where you have to collect you gear so you start again without anything.
@@mondaysinsanity8193 Actually since WW2 most casualties are caused by either artillery or bombs. I haven't finished the video, but I assume it's going to be a load of crap if his conclusion is that they don't hurt the enemy significantly.
@@rogaldorn7407 the question is random area bombardment which does tend to be relatively in effective not actual aimed strike I.e. drones or smart bombs for instance
Re: "the race to the parapet" ...Australian troops in WW1 were quoted as saying "you're not close enough to a creeping barrage, unless you're taking friendly casualties"
"you are 10x more likely to be a casualty when standing up compared to lying down"
"just lie down"
*COMMITS ROLL*
imagine sitting tight in a trench and a whole squad of enemy soldiers come somersaulting into it
ABU HAJAAR
so i was just building a model while watching/listening to this....Bloody Typhoon noises you did made me jump!
So... they do their job right :)
Sup Grim
I jumped
yeah OMG - I had my headphones on and nearly jumped off the fucking couch
me 2
In the book "Verdun" by Georges Blond, he mentioned German troops finding trenches full of sleeping French soldiers,- sleep caused by the endless heavy bombardment at the start of the battle.
It's a great book, perhaps you already know it.
Have read it, can verify that it's worth a read.
Did it mention Tom Cruise in power armor?
Nearly a quarter hour long and no ads. Wow. A true channel dedicated to scholarly pursuit and NOT monetization. Automatic upvote 👍
Three quarters of an hour*
Usually when you kill 10% of an enemy as many will be severely wounded and then there will be lightly woundeds too, who add little to combat effectiveness.
And hitting the ground is a good practice when you are fired on. One difference between veterans from the finnish wars and nonbattle experienced personnel were that the latter would stand around and look for the source and wait for an order. The veterans would just drop to the ground.
Interesting comment, shame it's buried under a thousand copy-pasted 'joke' comments
@@thebackofdoctormanhattanshead to be fair: some jokes are kinda funny.
Also I believe it takes more then 2 people to take care of each wounded and on average 1 for each lightly wounded, this is why in Vietnam the Commies didn't try to kill but injure, the traps for example were normal leg not torso or head height.
@@LordInter Why kill one if you can disable 3?
@@LordInter Not quite true. In Vietnam, the Americans had a very good extraction program for wounded that was the same extraction for most patrols. Ambulances and the litter bearers of WWII were rarely used. Whereas in prior conflicts, most wounded were treated in theater, in Vietnam, most severely wounded were evacuated to military hospitals outside the theater in the Philippines or even Stateside. The military machine was so large that the wounded did not make as much of a dent in effectiveness except for that individual patrol.
Second, most American infantry wore flak jackets. While of dubious utility, they did make a difference in reducing the number of torso wounds. While they didn't stand up to closer rifle rounds, they were effective against grenades, artillery shrapnel, hand guns, and long range rifles. They could slow a longer range rifle round so its traumatic effect on the torso was reduced from a kill to a wound.
Bombardment is cover fire. You're not expecting to hit things, you're expecting to keep things from shooting at your team.
If you can actually hit things, that's just bonus.
You need to hit a few things and kill some people or no one will believe you can.
This is not quite accurate, such as in WW1 the artillery would stop 30 seconds to a minute before the men went over the top. Thus it had little suppressing effect on the enemy since they would not be under bombardment when the troops advanced. For suppression you would use heavy machine guns and good old rifle fire concentrated onto enemy MG nests.
Craig Porter I suggest you look up the term “creeping barrage”.
@@craigporter8873 Wrong, if the artillery stopped before the men went over the top then something had gone wrong, seriously wrong. WWI bombardments were incredibly complex things, especially 1916 and later. The problem was that attacking troops in 1914 - 1918 had no way to communicate with the friendly artillery, the lightest radio weighed in at 2000 lb's and was mounted on two trucks... good luch getting those across no mans land. Telephone wires got cut, assuming you were able to lay them across no mans land in the first place, that left signal flags (yeah right!), runners or pigeons. As a result artillery bombardments ran on precise schedules. If for some reason the infantry were delayed or held up only then would the barrage run ahead of them, if they were not, the creeping barrage was designed to protect the attacking infantry only lifting literally as the first waves hit the opposing trenches.
The times you hear of bombardments lifting too soon are always down to mistakes, or the infantry were, for some reason, delayed. They were not DESIGNED to lift so early. Indeed, one Scots Guards RSM stated after the war that if you did not take a few casualties to your screening barrage you were probably too far away from it.
@@jeremypnet A creeping barrage isn't really used for suppression either it is to stop the flow of reinforcements onto the field and to disrupt communications between the front and the rear lines. It's kind of weirdly a defensive barrage since it stops counter attacks too.
I've been shelled by 155mm shells. Special bunker with foot thick windows and the shells were dropped just a few yards in front of us. Terrifying experience and we were perfectly safe. The shockwave shook you from the inside out. Goodness knows how men survived that for ten minutes let alone several hours at a time. I was on edge at the slightest noise for days afterwards.
Sensitive men
@@TheSword2212there is no way you called him “sensitive” for being bombed you fucking 300 pound restarted discord moderator. How’s your armsa experience helping rn
Situations happening in "combat" have their starting parameters so far removed from humans everyday functioning it almost seems to me as if there are combinations of emotions and dispositions you can experience solely by living through it. Your account sounds intense but it is something that soldiers and people living through wars would generally be able to relate to, only when reading about battles like Verdun, see the pictures ,accounts and add up the time people spent in it I get a feeling as if it happened in some parallel world.
like loud instruments? yeah it feels annoying
Fantastic editing, felt like I was really there!
Vvvrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrmmmmmm
/typhoon
Yes, he's famous for his editing ;)
A strong cup of tea, a relatively bland meal and a Lindybeige video essay! Not a bad way to spend an afternoon when one should be job-searching.
job searching blows. the peacetime equivalent of the artllery barrage. the only thing that blows more is the application process which is the peacetime equivalent of shell-shocked surrender . hang in there :)
Golly! When you put it like that... Cheers for the support good sir.
It’s a Sunday now, and it’s raining so great time for some Beige!
Did you find a job?
@@jamofbob715 I did, yes. Although having to work sucks worse than job searching haha. Ah well, such is life. One day I shall run off to the hills with a tent and live wild and free... (Or just moan and grumble online until I die :) )
@@BlandMarkComedy My turn to watch Lindybeige in the afternoons with bland meals. Oh and job search a little bit...
P.S. I just bought a tent and dusted off my old ruck sack :)
I’m an afghan war vet and I frequently dealt with artillery and air bombardment. Afghanistan is very mountainous ground and our charges were designed for flat terrain. Frequently the afghans would fight from a Boulder field, which is kind of a natural trench. Sometime we could get a group of taliban with a single bomb, but on one occasion we dropped 7 bombs on the same guy and he got away (he ran into a village where we were not going to bother him). Even precision weapons are only accurate to a few meters and if you are crouched behind a massive boulder or a thick wall you have a good chance of surviving. The Taliban were ok with frightful casualties since Islam values shadid (Martyrs). Many of their soldiers were recruited for one-time
Missions where others were handlers that stayed in safer places and directed units of one-timers from safe distances.
When mr Beige (Lloyd) produced the ukulele I started to wonder if he had been extensively shelled.
When he started playing and singing I felt like I was getting extensively shelled.
Lindybeige makes the case that bombardments are useless, then explains why you're wrong to think that...every video is a journey
Not really. He is asking if they are effective. Not useless.
it's pretty clear that hes trying to explain how bombardment was effective. lol
@Call Me Ishmael Well, I am not the one making the video nor any claims :-)
@Call Me Ishmael MOBY DICK!!!
It all depends on your definition of 'effective'. If you're looking at "it takes x weight of fire to kill 1 enemy boi", then artillery isn't that great.
When you described the artillery as “barking dogs- ruff ruff ruff ruff!” My dog got nervous lol. In a dark, humorous sort of manner it seemed to be an accurate representation of how the soldiers would’ve responded.
Petition to make the "Sponsor Time" jingle a thing every time he has a sponsor. Like to show your support.
When I was in the army, as infantry, I was basically trained to understand that our number 1 threat was not enemy infantry or armoured vehicles but rather enemy artillery. If we didn't already have prepared positions (trenches with cover), if you were caught out in the open by enemy artillery, it's game over. By artillery, they meant everything from traditional field guns to missiles to airstrikes - although nowadays actual guns are being deprecated because counter battery fire is now extremely effective so if you can't properly shoot and scoot, you were unlikely to get off more than a few salvos before they hit you back.
one thing about the comparison to WWII (whether typhoon attacks or shelling), is that nowadays you have better ordnance, with e.g. specifically antitank missiles, as opposed to the rockets that were all the "air power" had in those days. I think they'd be much more effective vs. tanks now? And there's also helicopters with guided antitank weaponry. I'd had a chat with some of the armoured infantry guys, saying they should be safer with, well, armour around them - but the response on their part was that they had a disadvantage in that they weren't going to be able to hide, while I could. The difference would be that if it was against weapons their tanks were proof against, they were definitely safe, but if the enemy had a proper counter, they were definitely dead. As infantry, I'd basically be ... more or less luck of the draw, no matter what I'm facing :-P
,
That armoured soldier is smart. If he's in a tank he's a large, clunky, high priority, single target.
Infantry on the other hand are individually "weak" but in numbers they are far more flexible.
It's like schools of fish in the ocean. They stick together because the predators only pick off a few and it's good odds it won't be you. Now armoured targets are like white whales, everyone wants a piece of them, but only the biggest predators can take one down.
Kinda reminds me of the system that the game "End War" uses. It was a sort of rock-paper-scissors where infantry was ineffective against armor, armor was ineffective against air, and air was ineffective against infantry (in cover). I always favored artillery and rifles in that game though.
Those typhoones at around 4 minute mark literally scared me. I did not expect that.
In Iraq/Afghanistan I found it much easier to fend off attacks when rockets and mortars were fired at us over a longer period. There's time to react in between shells and it felt less threatening. When shits exploding everywhere from them firing in rapid succession it was much scarier. We risked moving during explosions but we had to because they are advancing on our position. That's another thing indirect fire is good for that I'm not sure if he mentioned: fire supression and advancing.
Man, your time in the imperial guard sounds rough.
@@notatrollll maybe when you grow up and stop playing Warhammer you can serve
@@Erik-hi I'm gonna be real with you dawg - I'm not dying for corrupt politicians and oil corporations
@@TheBananamonger that's fine. It's not something everyone can/wants to do.
Q: How do you get the enemy to stop fighting and surrender?
A: Bring up the Crocodiles!
A: bring up the Ladies from Hell and "Mad" Jack.
I know you mean the flame tank. But unleashing a load of actual Crocodiles on their position might also be effective.
Activate the Omega-13!
@@Pengi_SMILES Apparently, there was a rumour among the Iraqis about 15 years ago that the Americans had deployed vicious sharks into the Euphrates, and that the British had unleashed cow-killing badgers in their country. Whether the Iraqis thought that the American-deployed sharks had laser beams on their heads is unknown.
@@Schwarzvogel1 Just read the newspaper accounts of the British attack badgers. Thanks for introducing me to the funniest thing I've read today.
As recent events have shown, even extremely prolonged bombardments have very little effect on well dug in and motivated soldiers.
Might be a good explanation why russia is having so much trouble despite the disparity of equipement : ukrainian have moral fanatisme and therefore just eat up the death
Lindy is looking very dapper and less deranged in this video. I don't know how I feel about this
he is gay
3:40 Okay... I was listening to Lindy with my headphones on while looking at something else and I have to say that his stereo plane sounds freaked me out.
"In the grim darkness of the 2nd Millennium, there is only war."
Lindy: Death is not contagious.
Black Death: Hold my rats...
The rat theory has been put into serious question.
Daniel Burgess I’m pretty sure it was gerbils
Hold my fleas*
This aged, well... you can see for yourself.
Damnit, was going to say this.
I had a friend who served in Viet Nam. He said the most terrifying thing was a bombing run by B-52's hitting a nearby enemy position; hearing the explosions, feeling the ground shake, all you can do is crouch down in a foxhole and wait.
You fan up the ante and call it in danger close.
Sounds thrilling but I am grateful to have not experienced that firsthand
Man if he was terrified of his own bombers i can't imagine what the viet were feeling.
@@bonogiamboni4830 Apparently they were not as much shaken seeing that they actually won the war.
Most likely because to bomb somebody you need to know where he is.
In this guerilla war with all the jungle and distration you will probably not know exactly where the enemy positions are and it is pretty likely that they have hidden exits and can sometimes just leave unseen whil an empty position gets bombed.
@@1337Jogi huh. Fair enough.
British Artillerist at Castle de Rio: "Sir, How many shells do we lay down?"
Officer: "The Usual Number"
Artillerist: "Fire for effect, 4,000 Shells"
I was a forward observer, once upon a time.
"The mission of field artillery is to destroy, neutralize, or suppress the enemy by cannon, rocket, and missile fire and to help integrate all fire support assets into combined arms operations." US Army FM 6-30
Destroy - buildings/bases/power plants/fueling stations. (without supplies, morale drops drastically).
Neutralize - kill between 1/3 and 1/5 of the enemy personnel.
Suppress - reduce the enemy's ability to push forward. A stalling tactic that allows our ground troops to move forward and safer air support intelligence.
Every Non-Infantry soldier works to support the Infantry. Even tankers, gunships, and artillery.
Artillery missions are chosen based on the value of the target, not the number of possible casualties. It is more likely artillery will cause fewer casualties than a tank/infantry unit. Artillery attacks non-personnel more often than personnel. Communication towers, power plants, water supplies, food supplies, and the like. It is still quite effective in destroying strongholds.
While one round adjustments are best, most are bracketed. 1 round over, one round under, then a FFE (Fire for effect). Modern artillery has a kill radius of 50m with effects (non-lethal) up to 200m depending on terrain. The FFE size depends on the size of the firing level. A platoon is 2 guns. There are 3 firing platoons in a Battery (6 guns). There are 3 firing batteries in a battalion (18) and 3 battalions in a brigade . Brigade firing missions are coordinated to guide the enemy's forward movement. Most targets are predetermined by previously gathered intelligence.
Modern FO guided fire missions are either CAS (close air support) which can include bombers, hellfire (helicopter), and the A10. The AC-130 (C-130 with a mounted artillery gun) uses artillery as a direct fire weapon. (Artillery is indirect fires because the person firing isn't the person looking at the target)
Your reply confused me.
Please help me understand.
It sounds like you're referring to BLC (formerly PLDC) It's the only thing I can think if that would fit being called Sergeant's school.
There are a lot of people who struggle with Land-Nav
Josh Gagnier right, when I was in it’s was called WLC, I thought ALC was what they changed the name to. The joke was the Forward Observer I went with, above all else needs to be able to read a map and do land navigation.
My Dad served on 1st Regiment Mountain Artillery R.A. as a forward observer signal man WW2 North West Europe. They had the obsolete 3.7" Howitzer. Specialist close support artillery. The last of the "screw guns" as pack artillery.
During the occupation of Antwerp some german snipers set up in dock yard cranes and were real annoyance until they brought up the 1st Rgt. and the 3.7" - 12 cranes, 12 rounds, 12 bullseyes. An error of about 3 meters at the outside?
is this a myth? I've read it in several places.
As you were. I checked and the snipers were taken on "over the sights" that is in direct not indirect fire. With AP rounds as for tanks. So CEP would not apply.
Sorry to have bothered you.
I have no idea.
@@joshgagnier Sorry again. i answered my own question, I was wondering if you knew what the best CEP of close support artillery today was in ideal conditions. That would have been a better way to put the question. Which as I say I answered for myself.
"Killing people shouldn't be the object."
Lloyd for PM!
Defence secretary would be more appropriate by that logic.
It is actually the aim. Wounded combatants take 4 individuals to look after , dead ones take none
@@johnashley-smith4987 To quote from Hal Clement's _"Chips on Distant Shoulders"_ :
Please note that death, destruction, and mayhem are not primary aims of war. They may be secondary ones, as when a cannibal tribe attacks its neighbors for meat, but more usually they are just inconvenient by-products. The aim and end of war is to impose one's will on an opponent.
Unfortunately, imposing one's will on another includes the situation in which your will is merely that he not impose his on you.
@Maitre Mark Can you give me a name or link to that? Sounds interesting.
@Maitre Mark Ah no, I kind of meant the specific case you mentioned at the end, with two conquistador armies facing off with minimal casualties.
40:00 this reminded me of Sun Tzu's famous saying that you should not put the enemy on "Death ground"(a place with no means of getting out alive aside from fighting) as the enemy's ability to fight will increase twofold in such conditions, perhaps our reliance on our modern lethal tools of war have caused us to forget about the more psychological aspects which ancient generals such as Sun Tzu eminently understood very well when war was more personal and less efficient.
He was proven wrong by hannibals at Cannae
@@battlez9577 it wasn't death ground, the Romans were physically crushed by each other due to them overextending when they (thought) they had the upper hand. This is more Sun Tzu's "entice the enemy with something that is impossible for them to not fall for" on Hannibal's part. Use your brain.
@@battlez9577 also, Sun Tzu & the OP says it makes the enemies on death ground more vicious and more focused on fighting, NOT that they become invincible. Is English your first language?...
That musical interlude was an unexpected bit of lightness. Thanks, Mike, for providing that ukulele!
Damn you are releasing lots of long videos very fast
Nice
Erick Reis nice
Erick Reis I had actually been wondering about him, as I hadn’t seen him releasing much for the last couple months. It’s good to see some longer videos coming out.
I think its in response to the survey he did
I know right
He's both British and a historian he would make a 25 hour uncut video if we let him lol
That moment when a Lindy show up in your recommended and you are reasonably sure you haven't seen it before. SWEET!
“The great courses plus” that’s a strange way to spell *RAID shadow legends*
There is a REASON that artillery is called "The King Of Battle." What was done in the previous Century is not the way First World Armies do it today. The average CEP (circular error, probable) of a 155mm HE round at a gun's effective range is about 50 meters. A round's CEP is the distance from the targeted point the round will fall on average. There may be exceptions if FDC (Fire Direction & Control) screws up, but most CEP's are pretty accurate. The CEP can expand at very long ranges but the 800-meter "danger close" limitation the US uses is actually VERY conservative (and designed around the ICM & ICM-DP rounds). Excaliber GPS-Guided shells have a 5-meter CEP in their latest itineration. The old Copperhead Laser-Guided Munition had a CEP of 0 meters as do the newer experimental laser-guided rounds set to enter the inventory in the near future... IF the guy holding the Laser Designator device does his job correctly. The US has been working very hard to reduce "collateral damage" from artillery strikes (including "friendly fire" incidents) while increasing accuracy (by reducing CEP) for more than twenty years.
In logical correlation to this stunning accuracy, we reintroduce the goodl old line infantry formation, with fixed bayonets, marching close behind the moving barrage....^^
@@mikeromney4712 Or, as was seen in Afghanistan, someone calling an artillery barrage within 100 meters of a FOB or other Infantry position. The big issue in Afghanistan was the AVAILABILITY of Indirect Fire during a mission. Often Arty was either not in range (because it was concentrated in FOBs) or was "occupied" with other fire missions. The US is only now beginning to correct its shift away from large concentrations of (often mechanized) artillery to light Infantry units supported with only a few towed guns. Despite the shift, Russia still has a LARGE numerical advantage in the number of guns fielded.
@@swaghauler8334 this doesn't mean the wont shoot allies, they just wont do it in that way anymore lol
There's a saying in the military.
"The cheapest way to kill a guy with a gun...is another guy with a gun."
The problem is that on average about the same amount of your guys are going to be killed as the enemy.
The moment you start trying to swing that kill ratio in your favour, costs escalate DRAMATICALLY.😒
Other effects include:
Handling wounded people. It takes 4 blokes out of the field effectively for each wounded and behind the lines require additional support.
Incapacitation of personnel. Fear of flying objects and loud crashy noises makes most people ineffective and stop aiming at the opposition, even under cover.
Area denial and prevention of movement for reinforcements and resupply.
Infrastructure damage. Things get smashed up slightly with explosive things being blasted next them. Rail, road, optics.
I guess you could say the motto of bombardment is: “The enemy shell be petrified”
OUT!
I think you mean 'mortarfied'
I would go with "The enemy shell be shocked"
😂😂
the ACTUAL (unofficial) motto of artillery is "To give the poor bastard on the receiving end the maximum opportunity to die for his country"
Who needs Typhoons when a Mustang with a single bomb can take out a tank in the middle of a town. At least that worked in Saving Private Ryan.
In Saving Private Ryan it would have been a P-47 Thunderbolt, regardless of what they used in the film. There are several P-51s still flying while P-47s are much more rare. Movies too often use what is available, not what is appropriate.
The ground attack version of the P-51 was the A-36 Invader (from the P-51A). They were used in the Mediterranean and South East Asia until their use was confined to only the P-51D. A-36s and P-51As were pulled from Europe by June, 1944.
The major difference between the P-51 and A-36 were the engines (P-51As / A-36s got Allisons while P-51Ds got more powerful Packards or Merlins) and the A-36 got dive brakes. The A-36 was also reinforced in certain areas such as wing hard points. Both aircraft shared plumbing for drop tanks.
A 500 lb bomb would have taken out most of the people within that town street due to the concussion.
The Typhoon s and P-51 had a lousy record against tanks hit to munitions used.
Poo Scoopers were no longer viable by 1945
The French stopped selling Exocets to the Argentines. They had a total of five Exocets in their inventory. If the French had kept on supplying them we'd have lost a lot more ships and sailors.
I can't prove this but I heard the Sheffield's antimissle defences could of stopped that missile. The failure was on account of France being in NATO, the computer classed the missile as friendly and didn't target or shoot it down.
Can anyone out there wiser than me and privy to better G2 comment on this?
@@robertdeen5591 The whole point of Sea Skimming missiles (aka Exocet) is they fly so low the radar cannot see them over the wave scatter. Computers in 1982 were not capable of recognising an oncoming missile as friend or foe. Even today, they would assume malign intent and CWIS would be deployedIn
In1982, radar operators on HMS Invincible spotted the missile but there has been so many false alarms, the officer in charge called another false alarm. A Harrier was asked to check with it's radar but reported nothing found. The Sheffield satellite phone was in use which blanketed its radar. Result was they had under a minute to take action. To be fair to the crews, NATO systems were not equipped to stop sea skimming missiles because the USSR did not (yet) have the technology. Today's close in weapons systems (gins and missiles) came into use some time after the Falklands campaign.
@@davidelliott5843 thank you for enlightening me.
A few comments on an interesting presentation.
1) Yes. Most casualties are inflicted by artillery
2) Death may not be contagious but suicide is - of course, you have to have a reason they are killing themselves. At The Little Big Horn - Custer's men began killing themselves and once that started more did it. Basically they were terrified of being captured alive and tortured. The Japanese on Mt. Suribachi on Iwo Jima did the same thing. Here their officers were running around trying to stop them as they could still fight. Now - one of the reasons for this - is you have people who know they are going to die - so - they just want to get it over with.
3) On the Race to the Parapets - two things here. First, the attacking troops would sometimes follow as close as they dared to what was called a Rolling Artillery Barrage - that started in one spot and gradually moved forward ahead of the assaulting troops. Second - during the bombardment - when they stopped shooting - they would often wait a bit, let the enemy leave their bunkers - and then start shooting again. So - often the enemy was reluctant to come out of their bunkers in case the people bombarding them did that.
4) During the Pacific Landings you had massive naval bombardments but the enemy was all hunkered down in bunkers that they had prepared for just that thing. The main thing that this did time and again though - at Corregidor and Wake Island when the Japanese took them and at Tarawa when the Marines landed - the bombardments (or in the case of Wake the fighting) broke the com wire between positions and the defenders couldn't respond to what the attackers were doing because they couldn't communicate. On Wake, the Americans were actually winning when, because they had lost communications with many of their positions and thought they'd fallen, the Naval Commander - surrendered the island. The Americans also had a carrier, the Saratoga on the way to relieve them - when they HQ on Wake reported "situation in doubt". With very few carriers and fewer battleships to hold the line - the decision was made to abort the relief.
5) On measuring fear - during the Vietnam war the American Navy did that. They hooked up their pilots to sensors that measured various human things like heart rates and such. The thing that caused the most fear though, far more than going into combat was - night carrier landings ...
6) One of the factors here in some of the early battles in the Pacific was that you had men who had given up hope of winning - and just gave up. Here again you have the stress of continuing a fight they believe they are going to lose.
.
Thanks for the time you took to write this informative comment, deserves more responses, and I feel bad that no one did respond at all in over 10 months! Stay awesome
@@LastNickLeft Hell ... I got 63 likes ... I'm surprised that many people read it ...
.
Bob Smith its valuable information, and we thank you for it
Thanks, mate. That was informative
Very good, thank you.
I did a WW2 visit to Normandy, and a WW1 (OK they did not know it was number one), to Ypres, and the Somme,both very moving.
The sheer scale of death and injury in WW1 was obscene.
I also have climbed many times in the Dolomites, and whilst crawling a tunnel, I saw an inscription, " One day the world will visit, and see how we fought", sadly very few will be able to get to these tunnels. There are still remnants of wooden ladders, and barbed wire on the mountains, they are untouched as very few people can climb up there. This part of WW1 is forgotten, only the Western front is recorded.
Shells could not be wasted here,it took such an huge effort to get the guns and shells up there.
Thanks for your presentation.
Yup, seen barbed wire and ww1 ammo in the Carpathians. Weird, but I felt honored to walk where these valiant men fought
The typhoon sound effect caught me off guard to be honest, just like the german
Missed opportunity for the Spanish inquisition.
WW1 nations: we’ve got day long artillery bombardments! No one can beat us!
40k: hold my amasec
Bombard a city for 3 years, after they surrendered
@@kharnthebetrayer8251 *the Death Korps of Krieg in a nutshell*
@Badger0fDeath In approximately 38 thousand years. Give or take.
@Badger0fDeath Don't know exactly where/when, but 1 city was skimping on the tithe, so they bombarded it, the city surrendered, they kept bombarding it for 3 years.
(Warhammer 40k)
Artillery is like machine gun fire: it's not about killing people, it's about making people think they're about to die.
artillery is the weapon which caused the most casualties in every major conflict since the Napoleonic wars
@@LegitBacKd00rNiNJa69 Just because millions of people die from a heart attack, it doesn’t actually make heart attacks particularly effective at killing people. It’s a macabre example but I think the same is true for artillery. Even if everyone is loving to throw around rockets, it doesn’t mean a platoon with precision rifles wouldn’t achieve the same effect with far greater effectiveness under the right circumstances.
Also; I would like to see some evidence that support your claims because I am fairly confident that you haven’t actually checked all conflicts and battles to support that part of your theory.
A lot of conflicts simply do not involve that much artillery, for instance, due to it being expensive and hard to move. And even mortars are not something you can just hand to some militia in a jungle so to speak. They require a certain amount of training and are not smuggled as easily as a fire arm.
While it’s true for most large scale conflicts, many smaller wars were and are simply not fought with firm positions in mind, meaning you can not target an enemy that is really committed to hitting and running as well even of you have the required artillery available to you.
A lot of Guerilla type conflicts come to mind. Even in the napoleonic era, the peninsular war is a perfect example for this exact behavior as it even is the origin of the name we have given to the strategy in our modern era.
@@Arcaryon please get a hobby
@@LegitBacKd00rNiNJa69 I have plenty. One of the less spectacular but to me quite enjoyable ones happens to be discussing different topics on UA-cam and similar sides.
Also; I can type pretty fast so it’s not like I need a few minutes for such a short comment.
You should see my essays m8. This is nothing :)
@@LegitBacKd00rNiNJa69 a dismissive sort of "i aint reding allat"! how mystical
Production value with sounds of planes was great, WROOOOMMMMM!!!! 4:15
they were way too loud relative to his voice (rip headphone users) but I guess that was kind of the point
You're probably the first Brit in 60 years to have noticed New Zealand.
Has it really been that long since the 'Fellowship of the Ring' was released?
@@ianlowe4666 Yes
@@MrBigCookieCrumble LOL!
touché, well played Sir
Marry Christmas yes it was. I live not far from Spy Valley. The 5 eyes base was definitely a target.
Not so !
I always exclusively, buy Sistema plastic kitchen containers, particularly for microwave use.
There is Lamb, of course, and there are a few Duplicate Bridge Players, who appear , from NZ, on Bridge Base Online, for an early morning game.
This guy is amazing, I am happy to subscribe. The amount of details and perfect description of human psychology in a summarized way with perfect body language is gold. You're one of my favorite youtubers now
I do enjoy that he focuses on the psychological side of warfare. It's always very interesting. And the color scheme is so proper as well.
Colour*
6:13 On D-Day the USS Texas was assigned fire support for Omaha Beach and the USS Nevada was assigned fire support for Utah beach. When it comes to calling in artillery fire there are three groups of people who have to do their jobs perfectly. The forward observers (the people on the ground calling in the quadrants of the target. The fire direction control (the people who get the quadrants from the forward observers and tell the guns where to aim what kind of round to use and how much powder) and the gunners (the people who aim and fire the guns). If any of these three groups do not do their job perfectly the guns will miss their target. The USS Nevada had fantastic men doing all three. As a result, ALL the German bunkers on Utah beach (Utah Beach had more than twice the obstacles bunkers and defenders of Omaha Beach) were taken out before the main body of Americans landed on Utah Beach. The USS Nevada was so good that it even did fire support for the 82nd Air Borne and 101st Air Borne, taking out hundreds of Germans and even an entire German tank battalion (over 110 tanks and armored vehicles).
The USS Texas, on the other hand, had a major break down by one of the three groups and as a result, it did NOT hit a single target on Omaha Beach.
@@13redlion13 it was not 110 thanks it was 110 armored vehicles. In other words an armored battalion. Also it is documented fact.
Thank God USS Texas didn't hit beach. The Airforce had left enough craters for Germans to use.
The Germans were excellent at recovering damaged or broken tanks and making one good one out of two bad ones. A necessity due to the way German vehicles are engineered.
Your long videos are my favorite, thank you. When will you show as finishing your sword and armour?
Great videos, old boy. I found your channel in my suggestions a day ago and I'm absolutely hooked.
Have you seen spears are better than swords yet classic I think he even did a follow up
Look up "FIRE ARROWS!!"
13:53 I have an anecdotal story to sort of back you up there. A group, rag tag team basically of surviving platoons and so on numbering just over 5000 total men was being bombarded by over 300,000 French and British troops, how many guns I don't know. But the Bulgarians managed to survive it with 2 casualties over 72 hour bombardment, by singing and yelling out jokes as they lied there. Some didn't have a trench to lie in, just a tree or "foxhole". But there you go, Trenches are extremely effective if you just sit there and hunker down.
As an aside; some artillerists who had lost their guns in the fighting the day before (it was disabled by sappers, it's not like they couldn't find it), figured out that the enemy was using a lone tree as a range finder, so they shoot next to it, not at it, and they simply went over to that tree
I would have moved the tree during the night
In a talk about bombardment accuracy, your pun at 7:56 is right on target.
"If you think that something has failed because it didn't hit or because it didn't kill, then I think you're missing the point."
Two videos in a week? What a treat!
Great explanation of "Mean Point of Impact" ! Remember one type projectile might have a "Kill Radius" of 50 to 75 Yards. We had 100 yards on a "General Purpose" 16inch projectile. Remember "Kill Radius" means 50% death within that figure.
Lindy: talks about bombardment
The Class: *That Beard Is On Point, Mr B*
I was expecting another dollar shave club ad. I swear I watched that part 5 times last video
He did shave though! Lookit!
TBH I have to admit I just realised I was looking forward to a beige after Dollar Save Club vid... which this kind of is since it looks like Lindy has used some of the other products in the sponsors kit. Best after shot ever - with heavy artillery KABOOMS!
I cried laughing at that bit and although Lloyd does make me laugh I think that's the first time I've had actual tears
In our household we would tune a ukulele by singing "my dog has fleas" works every time. Keep up the great work!
Any game with artillery, you can see me using indirect fire almost exclusively. Best thing ever.
If you manage to ruin the other staff officers evening poker game, their efficiency the next day might drop 50%.
Love the channel and content. As a former U.S Army F.O, I have to say that when I was in (07-11) we worked both old school fire missions, map, compass, protractor and binos, as well as using some of the latest technologies at the time, g.p.s, lasers etc. I have to say, with some of the new technology, we could call in our 155mm guns for extremely accurate fire missions. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. I've been out of the military for almost 10 years, lord only knows the advances in tech Artillery has now.
Ten percent fatalities is better known as "Decimation". It's an effective morale killer.
Not really. Did the London bombings break the UK???? Did the RAF and USAF bombing break the Germans???? Did the US bombings in Vietnam stop South Vietnam from beeing overun?
@@canisxv9869 None of these (except Dresden) are examples of decimation. The term itself comes to us from the Romans who used decimation of a conquered people to ensure rigid adherence to Roman policies. This is sort of how Rome became Rome. Had there been full on 10% casualties of the citizens of London from the Luftwaffe and V2's, you better believe it would have broken the backs of the Brits. And yes, IMO, the US and RAF bombings DID break the backs of the Third Reich, or we wouldn't STILL be hearing about Dresden, which incurred far more than 10% casualties from bombardment. but that's political opinion open to debate.
@@canisxv9869 Two words. Hiroshima. Nagasaki.
@@crucifyrobinhood Roman decimation was used against their own legions as punishment for cowardice, mutiny etc. Each person in the legion (officers included) was made to remove a stone from a bag. 1 in 10 of these was white, the rest were black. The ones with the white stones were beaten to death by their own unit.
@@crucifyrobinhood Contrary to popular belief, Japan does not surrender solely due to atomic bombs. The incendiary night time bombing of 100+ Japanese cities (especially bombing of Tokyo which kill more than 100,000 civilians) and Soviet invasion of Manchuria which destroy Kwantung Army is major factors in why Japan surrender unconditionally to the US
You could measure the fear of troops by weighing their underpants. I admit there are practical issues to overcome.
They may not have eaten recently.
@@johnhaines4163 they could probably still piss their pants if they are to dehydrated to do that they probably are in no condition to fight back anyway.
56th
I was a Field Artillery Fire Direction Officer (FDO) in XVIII Airborne Corps Artillery during Operation Desert Storm. I directed the fires of my platoon of four M198 155mm towed howitzers (nuclear capable). I hold the Military Order of Saint Barbara. Field Artillery is fondly referred to as the “King of Battle” for very good reason.
Fun fact: the Iraqis had newer and better howitzers than we did. They fielded the South African built G5 155mm howitzer, which had significantly longer range, and a smaller CEp (Probable circular error/a “tighter shot group”) than our trusty old “One-niner-eights”. Their problem was that they lacked the technical Fire Direction skills to have effects on target at 30+Kilometer range. They could drop rounds within ~200M or so of us, but as Lindy points out - this isn’t good enough. All that did was piss us off. The technical Fire Direction I’m referring to means knowing and accounting for variables such as propellant temperature, muzzle velocity variation from standard for each piece in the platoon, wind speed and direction, air temperature and density layers the projectile will travel through, slight variations in the weight of manufacturing lots of projectiles, and how much the earth would rotate during the projectile’s time of flight, which might be over a minute (Coreolis effect) we did this with firing tables/books, slide rules, protractors, stick pins and boards covered with paper. We also used early computers. Not PCs, mind you, but ancient things with monochrome ‘orange screen’ monitors. The standards we trained to were to have rounds impacting within 50M of the target, which means - effects on target. Killed, wounded, and psychologically destroyed. Every time my platoon fired one round per gun, we basically turned two football fields into a cataclysm of noise, concussive shockwaves, and chunks of white-hot metal the size of your hand or forearm flying through the air at tremendous speed. And that was just your standard impact-fused HE round. And we had many more tools in the toolbox. Air burst fuses, ICM (improved conventional munitions) in anti-personnel and anti-tank flavors, laser-guided projectiles, minefield laying projectiles, and yes, even propaganda leaflet rounds.
so what you're saying we need to dig a trench in a bunker and we are pretty much completely safe
but what if we build the an bunker in the digged trench inside said bunker?
G'day,
It's
Bin-Done
Chum....!
Look up
"Durr Fuhrerbunker..."
It didnae wurrrk verra well f'r yonder littul Adolfus, now ; did it ?
Much more betterer, it turns out, is to not conduct oneself in such a manner as to provoke anybody to want to squander any such vast resources, merely to convince one to stop talking and behaving like a complete Fuckwit...(!).
However, do feel free to conduct the experiment ; on the one hand - behave as a nice person and get on with your life..., or dig a Trench in your Bunker - so as to be able to try to "get away with" behaving like an Arsehole...(?).
Your Choice, olde Bean...!
Such is Life,
Have a good one.
;-p
Ciao !
dont forget to lie down
@@seljukturk8627 do you try to create a god!?
The Battle of Long Tan and the Battle of the Ia Drang Valley during the Vietnam war and the horrendous casualties inflicted on North Vietnamese forces fully vindicate the use of artillery support
Or just by considering that artillery has been responsible for most of the casualties in WW1 and I'm pretty sure WW2 as well.
I am usually bored by youtube videos where one guy is talking at the camera and nothing else but lindybeige is AWESOME!
Lindy- Makes a highly detailed and interesting about artillery and military tactics
Me- Stonks lol