Aloicious

Did the Germans have an equivalent HMG to the M2? Or was the next step up from the 7.62 the 14.7mm?(not sure if thats the right caliber) Yes the HMG's are heavy, but the Americans and Russians mounted their heavies on their AFVs. Just seems kind of odd that the Germans didn't do this, at least in the later war. They're tank crews probably could've used it against all those Allied Jabos. I was reading something on Rudel and he said he paricularly disliked the Lend-Lease armour that the Russians used because of the .50 cal. Apparently he was shot down a couple times by them.

Thank you all. Enlightening as always JasonC.

Thanks for the rapid response. Didn't realize that the 128 was actually in the game. I've been stuck on the early war period for a while, so I've not yet fully explored everything in the game. Oh how I love CMBB. Thank you BTS!

In what numbers did the Gurkhas serve during the war? Enough to form a division/s?

Were there any attempts to convert this into a weapon that could be used in the field? As in, from Flak 88 to Pak 43? Or was this weapon just too massive? Or perhaps it was just overkill and the 88's did the job just fine? And just how numerous was this weapon? Also a question for JasonC: You mentioned the Germans using a 100mm gun in a topic on taking on KV's during the early war period. Were these Flak guns? Or were they dedicated Paks, or maybe even converted naval guns like the Russian 100mm gun? Thanks in advance.

Oh, one more thing. Why didn't the Germans ever mount one of their heavy MG's on a pintle on the turrets of their AFVs? It seems like quite a useful addition to any combat vehicle. The Americans and the Russians utilised them enough. I would imagine theyd be great against thin skinned vehicles. And did the russians mount the Dshk on any other tanks aside from the IS's?

Now another question. Having rapid fire capability would obviously increase effectiveness against soft targets, mainly infantry. With such a small round, the HE charge would be rather miniscule. But I'm guessing theres going to be a trade off against armour. Does the rapid fire capability detract from the rounds effect against armour? Im betting that it would probably. I ask because there's the 37mm Flak, which is an rapid fire weapon, and then theres the 37mm Kwk. Why not mount the Flak version in an AFV? Aside from the Ostwind. Or is it the Wirblewind that mounts the 37? And yes, that did help thank you very much.

Kampfwagenkanone and Flak is Fliegerabwehrkanone.

Wouldn't it be more difficult to switch from a belt of HE to a belt of AP than to just drop a clip of HE and slap in a clicp of AP? Especially when an enemy tank shows itself? I'm of course speaking in terms of the Kwk. Im just having a difficult time imagining how the ammo would be loaded.

How is the ammo fed into these guns? Belts or clips?

Are the Ghurkas just a military unit, I mean would they be analgous to the Rangers or SEALs, or are they just your typical Nepalese warriors who happen to be quite fierce and tough?

I can see how it would be rather unwieldy to use the bayonet in melee combat. The heavy, sturdy wood stock of a rifle would be more than sufficient to render an opponent senseless. Hard to fight when you're getting your head bashed in with a big nasty club. And while we're on the topic, what can anyone tell me about the ghurkas? All know about them is a little anecdote I read in a one book or another. A British officer I believe, in the Italian campaign I think, asked a Ghurka soldier who regularly went out on night raids into German lines, to bring back a wristwatch if he found one. Then one morning, when the Brit officer woke he found a nice present outside his tent, a severed arm of a poor german soldier, wristwatch and all.

I received as a B-day present recently, the German Infantry Handbook, which i just love. I noticed that though the Landsers were issued a bayonet, they received no training, at least formal, with it. I'm guessing that Americans received training with their bayonets, I think we've all seen the 'scream-at-the-dummy-and-kill-it-dead-with-the-pointy-thing-attached-to-the-end-of-your-rifle' bit in war flicks. Anyone know how extensive training with bayonets were for those that did receive any at all? Would it make any real difference if you did receive even minor training? It just seems rather odd that the Germans wouldnt be trained with such a trusty bit of equipment. Also I've read somewhere, and I don't remember, that in lieu of the bayonet, German infantry would sometimes use their folding spade, even sometimes sharpening the edges of the head. Any idea of how commonplace this practice was. Personally I'd rather use my shovel than knife, but thats just me. Wonder wich the ground pounders preferred? Thanks in advance.