Stalins Organ

AFLC - I think I've seen the same Jagdpanther when it was at Duxford 20 yrs ago. IIRC the commentary said it had been knocked out by rockets. There are a number of ways that you might get several hits - as you say, the original "killers" might not eralise they had ko'ed it and kept pumping rounds into it. Or maybe a day later a new crew came along, saw it and pumped a few more in, or mybe 2-3 of the typhoon's rockets hit from teh saem salvo, or maybe another typhoon saw it a bit later and put another round in and claimed the kill to?! I think the detailed hit info should be able to be turned off for an entire game, and the status of AFV's should be only indicated by their picture (ie no bases showing if they're still active or not) - that would encourage players to keep on shooting until they blew up/caught fire, as seemed to be historical practice!

IIRC a number of British Matilda 2 tanks weer "KO'ed" during the battle of Arras in 1940 by having storage bins on the outside set on fire by 20mm flak hits. Penetrations are not the only way of knocking out a tank......except in CM!!

Ah well, we have still have 2 candidates for WW2 Leopard then

You sometimes get a similar effect when reinforcements arrive in game - the Sherwood (?) Fusiliers is one such scenario MINOR SPOILER ALERT When the Canadian reinfoercements arrive tehy are WAY too close to the front line, so suddenly a column of 10 or 15 shermans, fireflys and churchills arrives on this road pointing up the main axis of enemy advance and there's this mad minute as every German unit in front of them gets wasted!!

I ahve a video of the original "All Quiet on the Western Front" - does that count?

But surely there can be only 1??!! :eek:

Hey Babra - does the book say anything about the Porsche type 100?

Schutz that RPG 43 is NOT a rocket grenade - it is a hand-thrown grenade - you can see the ring to pull out the safety pin quite clearly, and the handle is made of wood. The Sabot around the handle at the bottom of the warhead is to protect the striking mechanism. Obviously short ranged, probably not wonderfully effective, but better than a smack with a wet fish!! :eek: [ 04-12-2001: Message edited by: Mike the bike ]

IIRC teh .50 cal ranging MG's were not stock standard Brownings (if they were Brownings at all) - they had ballistics specifically matched to the 105 guns in use at the time.

Yes - I forget what type tho. IIRC the text I remember said that the Jap tank tactics were pretty much crap - they came along the road, closed up, not firing or anything - a turkey shoot for the anti-tank gunners (but that's 20+ years ago I read it remember!!)

I doubt that any nation can readily gear up to replace thousands of modern MBT's, assuming any war lasts long enough to need them! The emphasis on 1st shot = kill these days makes me think that the losing side will have its front line units completely wiped out pretty quickly and not nearly enough time to do anything about it. Not to mention that traiing the crews will take a wee while too!! But if it should happen then IMO the Russians would have a significant advantage in that they don't seem to throw anythign away - so wehn the T-80's are destroyed they'll roll out a few thousand old T-72's, and when they go T-62's, then T55's and T10's, then T34/85's, and then CM2 will be useable for modern warfare!! BTW I know about the US aircraft parks - do they do anything like that for old MBT's? I mean M-60's & -48's are still tanks after all, and would be pretty useful against 2nd line Sov-era MBT's.

After a bit more digging (= web search!! ) the Type 100 was porsche's unsuccessful design for the Tiger 1. So to all you blokes going on about the MBT leopard :cool:

I think this answers yuor question: The History of the Porsche Typ 100 and 101 also known as the Leopard and Tiger (P) by Thomas L Jentz and Hilary L Doyle Panzer Tracts series ISBN 10892848-03-1 Soft covers, 60 pages. Published by Darlington Productions Inc, Maryland, USA. Web site Price $19.95 each, UK price should be around £14. I don't know anything about the type 100 - anyone got details?

Just on a whim I did a search for "anti tank guns in Singapore" and found this picture: http://www.iol.net.au/~conway/ww2/singapore/barkiantitank.html?category=Picture This is one I remember from the book I mentioned above, so that's a start The full site is at http://www.iol.net.au/~conway/ww2/singapore.html#17jan The unit is 2/4 Australian Anti-tank battery. Another interesting page on British tank guns is http://www.miniatures.de/html/int/shellsB.html [ 04-11-2001: Message edited by: Mike the bike ]

Yeah - the SU-122 will be the Sherman 105/Stuh-42 of the Russian army - a 122mm howitzer mounted in teh front of a T34 chassis. Don't know about how much amo it'll carry though - can't get into the Russian military zone today!

No I don't have the reference unfortunately, or I'd have been quoting it a long time ago!! I remember it, vaguely, from an account of an AT battery stationed in Singers that I read probably 20-25 years ago!! Why was it used in the Pacific? Well because there weren't any tanks to speak of to fire AP at of course!!

He hehe - yes it will be interesting to see what BTS comes up with!! One restriction on the KV-2 might be that you are never allowed more than 1 of them in a single battle1 As for the IS-2, well, yes, they were pretty common - IIRC somethign like 2800 were made, which is quite a lot for a heavy tank. It will be expensive. The IS3 will not be expensive tho', because it won't be in CM2 as it did not see service in WW2.

A little off topic I guess, but here's a reference to a 2 pounder HE shell in thePacific - in a New Zealand Valentine - http://www.kithobbyist.com/AMPSNewZealand/KiwisInArmour/tshist.htm I know there's always some debate about HE whenever 2 pdrs are mentioned - some people seem to think that they _couldn't" fire HE - which is of course nonsense - it was just that the British doctrine at he start of the war was that the 2 pdr was an AT gun, so didn't need HE and wasn't equipped with it. I have also seen a reference to HE being issued to an AT batter based in Singapore - the theory being that the Japs didn't have tanks, so the guns needed the HE to be able to do anything at all. Which is at least logical and consistant with Brit doctrine of the time!! lol