Damage to WWI trains by aircraft MG fire

[Bruce]

I'm running a 1918 WWI PBeM game involving attacks on supply trains by fighters armed only with MGs. Each train has 2 on-board AA MGs (3 strength; B damage) and the train strength is 12. Attacking aircraft are assumed to target the train unless they state in their Turn/manoeuvre submissions that they are attacking the AA MGs or defending aircraft.

I have found that having the trains on the board (4' X 4'; 1.22M X 1.22M) for 6-7 Turns gives both defenders and attackers even chances of success provided the entry and exit points and route of the train is known only to the defenders, and the speed is a constant 1 card-length per manoeuvre. This assumes 3 attacking AC against the train supported by 2 defending AC.

This is my 4th game involving attacks on trains in which I have only allowed normal damage points to count and the EXPLOSION and FIRE cards including the SMOKE effect.

This game several players have asked why I do not allow ENGINE hits to slow the speed of the train. I have some experience with small-arms weapons (infantry soldier for 12 years) and have seen WWI vintage trains in our national Technology Museum; I assumed that a WWI aircraft's MGs would not likely penetrate the boiler of a train or any critical pipes etc, and hence would be unlikely to slow the speed of the train due to MG damage to its engine. I also asume that the train's crew would "duck" to avoid being hit.

Am I correct in this thinking? Anybody have any historical information on train attacks by aircraft MGs or other examples that would help? Would a train's boiler "explode" if punctured or would it be more likely to just lose effeciency?

Thanks in advance, once again my friends.

[Flying Officer Kyte]

If the water in a trains boiler got low, the safety plug would melt and let the remaining water douse the firebox. With the thickness of boilerplate, the chances of anything less than armour piercing doing that are as you say minimal. To hit a steam pipe is as likely as rupturing a feed pipe on an aircraft, so a reduction in speed is an outcome that is possible. Whether it would take effect in the time frame that you suggest is debatable. If I were a pilot I'd go for the trucks and hope to hit something explosive, or troops in transit. Now with a few Cooper bombs on board you'd be in a different ballgame entirely.
Hope this helps.
Rob.

[Jager]

Here's some thoughts from an earlier posting:
http://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/sho...ghlight=trains
I would say that while MG fire will damage the engines, it should be halved, and give the engines a lot of hits; maybe 20-30.
The only special hits I would use are crew hits.
The goods cars should take the same number of hits, but smoke and fire damage will effect too.
Karl

[Watchdog]

Note one thing, gentlemen, it was quite common to see an armoured train on the tracks of WWI. These sported a lot of machine guns and usually also artillery, sometimes even of significant calibres.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armoured_train

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_armoured_trains (an error is there, listing A-H trains as used in 1939-1945 )

[Flying Officer Kyte]

Whilst the armoured train was an aspect of the war, I would not expect it to be used for transporting the every day supplies behind the lines. An armoured train was usually for specialist functions, so I suppose you will need to decide which scenario you require and tailor the type of train to that.
Rob.

[Watchdog]

Certainly, Rob. The armoured trains were only a part of whaat could be seen on the tracks, however, so close to the frontline as the official map offers, I would still expect to see an armoured (or at least armed) train more often than a passenger/transport one.

Anyway, an armoured train might prove to be a tougher nut to crack and an iteresting addition to the scenario.

Do we have a skilled artist among us, who would dare to create cards for the armoured trains?

[csadn]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_armoured_trains (an error is there, listing A-H trains as used in 1939-1945 :D )

At this moment, I am reading Sawodny's _German Armored Trains 1904-1945_; in fact, WW2 Germany did wind up using train cars (and in some cases whole trains) which were originally used by the Austro-Hungarian Empire (unfortunately, the book has no proper index; but PZs 23, 24, and 25 all used AH-sourced train cars at one time or another; further data will have to be dug for), mainly from material "acquired" during the invasions of the east.

[Zoe Brain]

FE2bs, Voisins, Capronis, Breguets etc were fitted with 37mm or 25mm guns for train-busting.

100 Squadron had two FE2b aircraft fitted with 37mm canon. One aircraft attacked trains at Douai firing 20 rounds on 17.4.17.

[itchy]

Amazing isnt it ,all it needs to stop the entire rail service in the UK isa few leaves on the track and we are disscussing if an MG would slow down a c1914 train .

[Flying Officer Kyte]

Amazing isnt it ,all it needs to stop the entire rail service in the UK isa few leaves on the track and we are disscussing if an MG would slow down a c1914 train .

Yes, but they had real Locomotives in those days Richard!

FE2bs, Voisins, Capronis, Breguets etc were fitted with 37mm or 25mm guns for train-busting.

Another useful bit of information there thanks Zoe.
Rob.

[Guntruck]

Try thinking small - the use of narrow gauge railways was prevalent on both sides to bring ammo right up to the front lines. If one of those got hit you'd get far more bang for your buck!

[rote Flügel]

Do we have a skilled artist among us, who would dare to create cards for the armoured trains?

Check the files section.. can't remember where but I'm sure i saw some train cards there.. was thinking of using them myself in a game..

[Baldrick62]

If you look to the Eastern Front, particularly after the Revolution and into the Soviet-Polish war, armoured trains are fairly common. I don't recall hearing of their use in the West (static trench warfare doesn't help) other than for super-heavy artillery. Steve's spot-on about the forward movement of logistics via light rail, but something has to get it up to the depot in the first place, and the French Aviation Militaire particularly spent a lot of time raiding marshalling yards by night to hit the larger trains, which it's probably safe to assume had some self-protection capability

[csadn]

If you look to the Eastern Front, particularly after the Revolution and into the Soviet-Polish war, armoured trains are fairly common.

That's how the WW2 Germans came into possession of some of their Austro-Hungarian trains -- the trains were taken from A-H by the newly-formed nations; spent much time fighting with various factions; and in some cases still existed when the Germans hove into view again.

[Bruce]

Holy mackeral, what did I unleash with this question? Another example of the excellent resources among our site members.
Thanks to all.
I think I've got my answer for my current PBeM game: even an un-armoured locomotive would not likely be significantly damaged by aircraft MG fire; therefore I will not allow MG "ENGINE" hits to slow the train.

HOWEVER, my son (an army combat engineer for 14 years) thinks that a "typical" WWI 6 kg "hand-dropped" bomb would have a reasonable chance of damaging the tracks enough to stop the train if the bomb landed within 3' (.9 m), and he thinks that a direct hit on the un-armoured locomotive would also have a reasonable chance of slowing or stopping the train. So, the next time I run an "attack the enemy train" game I think that I'll introduce 2 X 6 kg bombs in a couple of the attacking aircraft but I'll require the impact point to be right on the train's locomotive card (3/4" X 1") or within 1/4" of the track (a single line on the game board). This should be challenging enough but we'll test-play it during one of our monthly Sunday morning gaming sessions to finesse the details.

Thanks again.

[Flying Officer Kyte]

Bruce. Did you know that Peter Pig did a pilot dropping a hand made bomb over the side of his machine. If you are interested PM me your Snail-mail and I'll pop one in the post for you.
Rob.

[David Manley]

With the thickness of boilerplate, the chances of anything less than armour piercing doing that are as you say minimal.

Out of interest (and only because I have some .303 ballistic performance tables to hand) what would be a typical plate thickness for a train boiler? Any live steam experts out there?

[Watchdog]

Out of interest (and only because I have some .303 ballistic performance tables to hand) what would be a typical plate thickness for a train boiler? Any live steam experts out there?

A bit of Google-fu (my Google is in Czech, but the e-book is in English - it says "sheet-iron half an inch in thickness" if you scroll down a bit):
http://books.google.cz/books?id=qWU7...ckness&f=false

And on page 42 of this PDF there is a very detailed chapter on locomotive boilers including some schemes:
http://users.fini.net/~bersano/engli...0Ludy-1920.pdf

[Flying Officer Kyte]

Here is an article on the restoration of a 75 year old boiler with the plate ranging from 3/8 inch to an astounding II/16 inch and I thought that the early boilers mentioned in Jans article would be thicker!
Rob.
http://www.soc-nrhs.org/Rebuild/medco4c.htm

[David Manley]

Hmm, yes in that case the answer to "can a 303 bullet penetrate a boiler" is "sometimes". Of course even if it doesn't the significant local deformation caused by an impact could induce a failure, but then again the naturally curved structure would induce a large number of ricochets. So at close range I'd say it was possible (although a low likelihood), reducing significantly as range increases. I'd leave in the "bang" card to represent that lucky hit that could blow the boiler (but possibly only have it being effective at short range).

btw, I've conducted trials shooting bullets and fragments into pressure vessels of various types and the results were "interesting"

[csadn]

If one wants to seriously affect the performance of a steam locomotive: Colanderize the smokestack -- if it's full of holes (or missing altogether), the boiler will not draw air effectively, and will lose power. Plus, if one looks carefully at pics of trains, there's all those other tubes wandering around; open one of those, and see what happens.

I'll make some inquiries among my more-knowledgeable sources to see what the penetration characteristics for 0.30-cal. are. (I'm poor; I don't get to play with heavy firepower, damn it!)