Was artillery as intense during battles as tv and movies about world war 2 suggest?

Part 2 of the Op Goodwood Training Film by SSVC shows part of the artillery barrage for Op Goodwood around 9.12 - I think it is the real thing because of the short rounds among the tanks.

The von Rosen interview mentions the psychological impact of firepower. This was from the bombing, but aerial bombs and heavy artillery have similar effects.

Gunners in Normamndy ch 16

There were lots of phases in the fireplan and a lot of the fire was counter battery. This is the bit concerning the rolling barrage

Gunners in Normandy Chapter 16

This was fired by 192 25 pounder gun Howitzers.

 

Fascinating thread. I have read all of your posts w/ great interest.

Something Eugene Sledge (With The Old Breed) said about artillery was that the duration of the artillery barrage was more impactful than the intensity of the artillery barrage. Continuous artillery bombardment over long periods of time would cause men to lose their nerve.

 

Marine William Manchester is quoted in "Goodbye Darkness" as saying that there wasn't much that scared him, but artillery fire used to "turn his bowels to water".

Artillery is still the big stick on a battlefield.

Thank heavens we don't use artillery in quite the concentration that was achieved on the Western Front during the Great War.

I have read at least one soldier quote that stated quite catagorically that the during the Great War there was "...too much fucking artillery,"

Will we ever see bombardments of that manitude again? German concentrations during Verdun came very close to achieving the desired outcome of smashing everything in their path. Verdun was a very narrow frontage, only 9 or ten miles with over 1500 guns deployed for the initial bombardment, and the effect was stunning for any Frenchie unfortunate enough to be caught in its path, as the guns were concentrated against one target after another and then back and forth,

Standard German practice was also to stop at certain points to encourage the thought that the bombardment had ended. Men would get out of their holes or go to the latrine only to be caught when the bombardment resumed a very short time later.

I don't think modern soldiers experience artillery fire in any way shape or form as it was done during the Great War.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but footage of psychological battle casualties from that period show men with completely shattered minds.

Bolshevik

 

Seems like the Russians will use a lot of artillery in Eastern Ukraine next as civilians are being evacuated from there in a hurry.

 

TBI wasn’t recognized til the US got involved in the Middle East mostly due to land mines. However, you don’t have to just suffer a physical wound to kill you. Being too close or subjected to explosions within close proximity by artillery can kill by concussion.

 

I can't say for certain, but I feel like IRL would be much worse than on TV. I also read once that artillery never has got its due in literature because the lifestyle doesn't lend itself to good drama, too much inactivity and sitting around punctuated by a few minutes of intense loading.

 

Shell Shock...

 

Long time no see, guys!

In answer to the OP’s question I think it depends on the battle but in general, yes it was intense. I recently received a query to a post about my dad’s obit and see the attachments I had posted of the Unit History and AARs of the 949 FA Bn are messed up now. My sig indicates the total 155mm shells that one Bn fired in 9 months in the ETO and the limited AARs NARA sent me showed quite a bit of harassment and interdiction firing, and I know they were rationed some too due to supply line problems with the Third Army’s rapid advance.

However as one tiny example, in Battle of Mairy - Wikipedia (from a former post of mine) “Luck played a part for the American artillery, at least IMHO with regards to the 949th FA Bn's successful strike in Mairy. The portion of the 106th main column attempting to infiltrate the village was on a "sunken road" (my father referred to it as a valley). The lead tank was disabled by infantry with a bazooka, setting the trap. It just so happened that Lt. J. Russell Major, FO of Battery B of the 949th, was on the high ground and saw this unfold before his eyes, called in the coordinates and 5 Panthers and 20 half-tracks were knocked out by over 300 HE rounds from the 155mm Howitzers.” From T.A. Gardner “By the end of the day, Pz Bde 106 had suffered 764 casualties including the CO of the Panzer regiment and the PzGr Battalion, lost 21 tanks and JgPz, over 60 halftracks, and a good portion of its soft skinned vehicles as well. Panzer strength the next day amounted to just 9 runners.”

As the 949th was not organic to the 90th Div. I’m not sure what other artillery might have been involved but in the overall picture sounds intense to me. I’ll have to read those sources again.

 

I don't have the firing data for the other battalions, but the 344th FA fired 924 rounds in the engagement at Mairy. I don't think the 949th FA was attached to the 90th at the time but they were probably in general support as corps artillery. What FA Group were they attached to at the time?

 

In the book The Forgotten Soldier Guy Sajer describes being on the wrong end of Russian Artillery barrages in detail, it is frightening to read 80 years later.

 

They were assigned to support the 90th Infantry Division at that time. It is not clear to me what FA Group they were assigned to at that time as the Unit History indicates they were variously with the 193rd, 40th, 333rd, 183rd, 203rd, 402nd and 410th FA Groups. They were never organic to any particular Army, Corps, Division or Group as I can as from the records.

 

Indeed, no separate FA battalion was "organic" to a Corps, Division, or Group, they were assigned to an Army, which in turn attached them to Corps, Divisions, and Groups. I'll have to do some digging but sadly most of my record set for the 90th Inf Div is focused on the period 6 June-31 August 1944.

 

While that is true on D-Day, after D-Day it was the "jabos" that the Germans feared the most. They could make a heck of a mess of a convoy.

 

WW1 - The US came late again...Missed some of the fun. Was it as bad?

Australians in WW1




The answer is no the movies dont capture the scope of destruction...Dont come near it. I have an aversion to sudden loud sounds (literally hurts my head) - I would last 5 seconds in WW1.