btm

Oops -double post

Auggy- I own an M1 Garand and shoot it regularly in competition. I will probably buy a couple more in the future, it is a superb rifle. If you are a U.S. citizen, and meet certain other requirements, you are eleigible to purchase an M1 Garand through the Civilian Marksmanship Program. The CMP program offers M1's at a price that is $300-$400 less than you will find on the regular market. The CMP site is here: Civilian Marksmanship Program ------------- As to the penetration question: I am assuming that the cartridge used was WW2-vintage .30-'06 M2AP. This exchange (http://yarchive.net/gun/ammo/armor_plate.html)describes a very informal test wherein M2AP penetrated 1/2" of armor (unknown type) angled at 30 degrees (at unknown range). 1995 British MOD standards for Class 2 and Class 3A armor use M2AP as the standard for testing armor plate from 5mm to <15mm, which seems to indicate that M2AP will normally penetrate up to 15mm of this class of armor plate. I will try to find better documentation of the performance of M2AP against armor plate and post it here.

Londoner- Aye, I am perfectly steady, thanks! I inferred from your previous post that you were suggesting that Van Creveld's work ought to have settled the issue. Apparently, this is not the case, and so I apologize for the aspersion. I do feel that there is a strong anti-American bias in many supposedly scholarly works. However, that does not mean that I feel that particular actions or aspects of the U.S. are above examination and constructive criticism. On the contrary, I feel that there is tremendous value in examining the past. I am confident that this feeling is shared by most with an interest in the past. As to the "tea-swilling bums" comment, I did not mean to suggest that the judgement was sound or even shared by me. I meant only to demonstrate that a little information can be dangerous, and lead to erroneous conclusions, ie: the well known story of the XXX Corps armor failing to reach Arnhem due to stopping to brew tea for a proper tea time.

I read Van Creveld's Fighting Power and was unimpressed. I've also read the recent refutations of Van Creveld and his school of thought: Closing with the Enemy by Doubler The G.I. Offensive in Europe by Mansoor American Soldiers by Kindsvatter And then there's When the Odds were Even by Bonn, and Draftee Division by Brown. So don't pretend that Van Creveld's work, or even S.L.A. Marshall's work are universally accepted or even respected. Needless to say, the debate is not going to resolved anytime soon. I highly doubt that it will be resolved in this forum, at that. I suspect that the pervasive anti-American tone will persist in "scholarly" and foreign histories for the forseeable future, just as it always has. In fact, such sentiment is hardly the exclusive domain of military history. On the other hand, there are significant numbers of Americans who still consider the British to be pompous, tea-swilling bums who had to be pried from their crumpets in order to take the fight to the enemy.

I don't want to get in the middle of this happy, stupid, little flame war, but I wanted to make a few corrections: 1) The M1918A2 Browning Automatic Rifle used the same ammunition as the M1 Garand, M1903 Springfield, et. al., this being .30-'06, typically M2 ball. 2) Loads for the British .303 are usually slightly less powerful than loads for the U.S. .30-'06. For a real comparison, you would need to compare specific loads, such as M2 Ball or M118 Ball versus a specific .303 load. Volkov - Amen, don't let the bastards get you down!

The short answer is yes, the U.S. G.I. did carry more ammo than his counterparts from other nations. Typical ammo loadout for a U.S. rifleman included: 10 x 8round en-bloc clips in M1923 Cartridge Belt 1 or 2 x 5 x 8round en-bloc clips in cloth bandolier(s) And in general, the U.S. infantryman was better supplied and more likely to be carrying a full ammo loadout than infantrymen from other nations.

JasonC- I would just like to express my appreciation for your posts. They always show good reasoning backed with verifiable data. If not for folks like you, we'd be forced to listen to guys like Rexford tell us that all German tanks were in fact invincible, and that as such, any American AFV kill claims from WW2 were merely propaganda.

Regarding aerial victory claims: Read Combat Kill by Hugh Morgan and Jurgen Seibel. This book examines in detail the procedures used by the major combatants for claiming and evaulating victory claims. As for best of the best, I would also suggest "Hub" Zemke, whose 56th Fighter Group was the top scoring FG in the ETO. Also, worth mentioning: -Carlson's Raiders -Any of the U.S. Army Ranger Battalions, both ETO and PTO (esp. 2nd) -Merrill's Marauders -Wingate's "Chindits" -U.S. 1st Air Commando Group, CBI -U.S. 601st Tank Destroyer Battalion: 155 AFV kills, 11 Aircraft downed

Marco, Thanks for the tips! I'll try to incorporate them into an update ASAP. Thanks for the offer for more help. There are indeed a few questions I'd like to ask you. I'll put them together in an e-mail. Thanks again.

Apparently, Northworst Airlines' baggage handlers ask that same question. When my flight arrived (uncharacteristically) 1 hour early in Minneapolis/St. Paul for connection to Grand Rapids, MI, Northworst sent my baggage to Minot. Yep, the opposite direction.

This is my first mod, so please let me know if you have any suggestions or requests. (Especially if you happen to be my hero, Marco Bergman!) Mod adds weathering effects, minor stencils, and grousers/water can to the (originally empty) grouser racks. It's available at CMMODS as BTM_M10_GMC. Screenie: http://www.cmmods.com/web/CMAKMods.nsf/b9aa3982b22d91ec85256c5300582977/46F8F4CA27FF5BFD85256E84000A8673

I have had the Osprey New Vanguard series books recommended to me. My only reservation is that in order to cover even a portion of the AFV's involved, I would need to invest in 30+ books at $15-$20 a pop. It seems like there ought to be some books out there in the $50+ range that offer the same amount of detail while covering more than a single vehicle. Of course, I've yet to find any!

Tried to post this in the general forum, but no one there is interested in discussing topics related to WW2. Rather frustrating. I am looking for a few high-quality reference books on WW2 AFV's. I am most interested in U.S., U.K., and German AFV's. I would prefer books that provide good illustrations and technical depth. I am also interested in finding some good books that deal with U.S. tank destroyers specifically. I would like to hear what the members of this board recommend. Thanks in advance!

Andreas- Roger, thanks for the correction. I'll buy that the SMG's in the German squad provide superior firepower at 40m. Sorry for the misconception.

Redwolf- 1) Try reading my post again. The subject of my query is in fact the firepower rating of the squad as a whole, not the weapons independently. 2) I raised the issue as a matter of discussion, not to claim that there is necessarily a problem. I really wonder why I have to point this out, as I think that I made this clear by my use of language in my original post. ---------------------------------------- Flamingknives and Andreas- I am using the data from the "CM3INF.xls" spreadsheet (I am at work and do not have the game available). There are two entries for '43 Jaeger. They are, respectively: 43 Jaeger (10): 2xK98, 7xMP40, 1xMG34: 301,108,33,18 43 Jaeger (10): 8xK98, 1xMP40, 1xMG42: 315,119,39,20 If these are incorrect, then I will abandon the issue. Otherwise, I am still interested to hear the reasoning behind these ratings.