There are rules for spotters in firing ship to ship In Micronauts and in other naval wargame rules but I am unable to find actual use of them.
While there are many cases of their use in shore bombardment, I have found only the Royal Navy in the battle of the River Plate as user in a sea battle.
Someone knows of any other battle where spotters were used to direct firing?
Spotters in naval wargame
Moderators: dnichols, GHQ, Mk 1
-
- E5
- Posts: 865
- Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 12:09 am
- Location: MILANO, ITALY
Spotters in naval wargame
Ubicumque et semper
-
- E5
- Posts: 407
- Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 2:18 am
- Location: Warsaw, Indiana
I'm kind of vague on your question tammy?
If you are asking if there was spotters for directed fire in naval battles then yes there is and always will be spotters especially in world war one and world war two era fleet actions. Most fire spotters where in the forecastle and bridge area spotting for specific guns of each ship. Now if they where taken out or lost communication then the local fire control or (spotters) on the guns or real close to the guns took over. this was much less acurate for fire control. Of course fire control radar in world war two helped and spotter aircraft helped ie... the yamato used aircraft the missouri had radar. I hope this helps if i didnt answer clearly let me know.
fullmetaljacket
If you are asking if there was spotters for directed fire in naval battles then yes there is and always will be spotters especially in world war one and world war two era fleet actions. Most fire spotters where in the forecastle and bridge area spotting for specific guns of each ship. Now if they where taken out or lost communication then the local fire control or (spotters) on the guns or real close to the guns took over. this was much less acurate for fire control. Of course fire control radar in world war two helped and spotter aircraft helped ie... the yamato used aircraft the missouri had radar. I hope this helps if i didnt answer clearly let me know.
fullmetaljacket
-
- E5
- Posts: 1629
- Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 2:24 am
- Location: Waukegan, Illinois USA
One specific occasion; there may be others: During the Battle of Narvik, HMS Warspite received fire spotting from its catapult-launched Swordfish.
For a hypothetical: At the time of Jutland, the German surface forces were able to receive radio signals from airships. LZ41 was aloft in the general area but was unable to establish contact with the British fleet because of poor visibility.
Don S.
For a hypothetical: At the time of Jutland, the German surface forces were able to receive radio signals from airships. LZ41 was aloft in the general area but was unable to establish contact with the British fleet because of poor visibility.
Don S.
-
- E5
- Posts: 865
- Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 12:09 am
- Location: MILANO, ITALY
I use the word "spotter" inntending a plane with an observer that adjuts the artillery fire during the engagement and not only a recce plane.
The reason of my question is that most naval rules give an advantage to the fire for the presence of a spotter in flight directing the fire (Micronauts gives a -2 to the owning ship for a scout plane within 10 kyds of target). This was a practice foreseen by all the navies before the IIWW (excpetion: the Italian navy) but I cannot find actual cases of its use during the war.
For example at Narvik, as far as I know, the Sowrdfish launched by Warspite signalled the position of German detroyers but did not actually adjusted the fire of the battleship.
The reason of my question is that most naval rules give an advantage to the fire for the presence of a spotter in flight directing the fire (Micronauts gives a -2 to the owning ship for a scout plane within 10 kyds of target). This was a practice foreseen by all the navies before the IIWW (excpetion: the Italian navy) but I cannot find actual cases of its use during the war.
For example at Narvik, as far as I know, the Sowrdfish launched by Warspite signalled the position of German detroyers but did not actually adjusted the fire of the battleship.
Ubicumque et semper
-
- E5
- Posts: 309
- Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 12:40 pm
- Location: Oklahoma
Savo Island
While the Japanese spotters didn't actually do gunnery spotting they dropped flares and illuminated the Allied ships.
Other than directing shellfire inland I can't think of a single case where a spotter was used to correct shellfire during a naval action.
On the other hand it seems everyone thought it would happen.
Oh, Java Sea. Again no gunnery adjustment but spotting and flares by the Japanese. At least I can't recall that the spotters adjusted any fire.
At the Battle of Cape Esperance the Americans attempted it but failed miserably.
While the Japanese spotters didn't actually do gunnery spotting they dropped flares and illuminated the Allied ships.
Other than directing shellfire inland I can't think of a single case where a spotter was used to correct shellfire during a naval action.
On the other hand it seems everyone thought it would happen.
Oh, Java Sea. Again no gunnery adjustment but spotting and flares by the Japanese. At least I can't recall that the spotters adjusted any fire.
At the Battle of Cape Esperance the Americans attempted it but failed miserably.
Ray
-
- E5
- Posts: 865
- Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 12:09 am
- Location: MILANO, ITALY
I arrived exactly at the same conclusion (except for River Plate engagement), for this I asked my question.Other than directing shellfire inland I can't think of a single case where a spotter was used to correct shellfire during a naval action.
On the other hand it seems everyone thought it would happen[/code]
Two failed attempts were made by the Royal Navy in the Mediterranean, at Capo Teulada they launched the planes too early and at Gaudo they launche them too late.
Ubicumque et semper