Jump to content

Community Strategy Guide


hcrof

Recommended Posts

Hmmm, well that drawing is allmost good, but weld lines are in bad positions and if I try to make new, better ones, it will be not precise.

So I think the best way is to use pics from the game, BFC made great work on models and they are very accurate, allmost like on real vehicle.

But of course if no one wan't to do pics, then ok. :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 106
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Hmmm, well that drawing is allmost good, but weld lines are in bad positions and if I try to make new, better ones, it will be not precise.

I think you maybe making a lot of work for yourself for little return.

After all CM:SF doesn't give you the control of being in the Gunner's (or Comd's) seat and deciding to fire at the gap between the 2nd and 3rd road wheel or the gap between 3rd and 4th.

You just select the target and the AI engages (or the target moves into your covered arc and the AI fires automatically).

To me the diagrams you intend to make are useful for those who use the replay to see where they hit (or were hit) and explain why they achieved penetration or not.

They can't use them to find the best place to fire before they do, apart I guess from the initial should I / shouldn't I decision (which is often out of their hands anyway).

So while redrawing the pictures from scratch may make them 100% accurate I'm not sure its warranted. :)

My thoughts only.

The exception to this of course being the Leo 2A6 as there is not current diagram for it on the web page. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Damian - thanks for the information, its nice to fill in the gaps! Do you have any idea as to the penetration of British or American HEAT rounds? Also, what extra protection does the enhanced Challenger 2 get? All I can find is 'extra Dorchester level 2 applique armour to the sides and turret' Do you have any values for that?

gibsonm - don't worry about .pdf conversion. I can handle that, I even made a professional looking cover page back in the days when I had too much time on my hands! It would be great if you could host it though, thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Damian - thanks for the information, its nice to fill in the gaps! Do you have any idea as to the penetration of British or American HEAT rounds? Also, what extra protection does the enhanced Challenger 2 get? All I can find is 'extra Dorchester level 2 applique armour to the sides and turret' Do you have any values for that?

This should cover that and more (from the CM:SF NATO Beta Board):

Hi,

Thought this might be useful (trying to figure out best way to display it in the thread, otherwise will attach as a PDF [OK as zipped PDF to get around the board limitations]):

Main Gun:

Ammunition Range[m] RHAe[mm] Velocity[m/s] Date

73mm SPG-9: PG-9 1200 300 700 no date

105mm L7: PPTFS M/85 LS 4000 500 1455 no date

105mm L7: PPTFS DM 63C LS 4000 600 1455 no date

105mm L7: 105mm HEAT 4000 600 1170 no date

105mm L7: M 156 LS HESH 4000 310 731 no date

105mm L7: RGRPT M/87LS WP 4000 180 731 no date

120mm RM: DM13 3200 410 1650 1979

120mm RM: DM13A1 3500 420 1640 1983

120mm RM: DM23 3500 500 1650 1983

120mm RM: DM33 3500 600 1650 1987

120mm RM: DM33 PELE 2000 200 1650 2006

120mm RM: DM53 (L44) 4000 840 1670 1999

120mm RM: DM53 (L55) 4000 900 1800 1999

120mm RM: PfielPat 87 Lsp 3500 420 1640 1987

120mm RM: KE-W 3500 640 1585 1991

120mm RM: KE-WA1 4000 660 1740 1999

120mm RM: KE-WA2 4000 750 1740 2004

120mm RM: Slpprj m/95 4000 670 1650 1995

120mm RM: CL3143 4000 840 1770 1999

120mm M256: M829 3500 600 1670 1983

120mm M256: M829A1 3500 700 1575 1988

120mm M256: M829A2 4000 770 1680 1993

120mm M256: M829A3 4000 850 1555 2003

120mm RM: DM12 (L44) 2600 600 1140 1979

120mm RM: DM12 (L55) 2600 600 1180 1979

120mm M256: M830 2600 600 1140 1983

120mm M256: M830A1 2800 420 1410 1993

120mm M256: XM908 2600 420 1410 1997

120mm RM: Slsgr 95 2600 430 744 1995

120mm M256: M1028 Canister 500 24 1410 2004

125mm 2A46: 3BM9 2800 320 1800 1969

125mm 2A46: 3BM15 2800 370 1800 1970s

125mm 2A46: 3BM22 3100 430 1750 1976

125mm 2A46: 3BM26 3100 490 1750 1983

125mm 2A46: 3BM29 3200 510 1750 1982

125mm 2A46: 3BM32 3300 570 1700 1984

125mm 2A46: 3BM42 3300 580 1700 1986

125mm 2A46: 3BM42M* 3500 630 1600 1998

125mm 2A46: Pronit 3500 560 1650 1996

125mm 2A46: T2A 3500 580 1700 1997

125mm 2A46: 125-1 3500 600 1730 1990s

125mm 2A46: 125-2 3500 690 1740 1990s

125mm 2A46: M711 3500 640 1700 1996

125mm 2A46: 3BK12 2700 440 905 1969

125mm 2A46: 3BK14 2700 500 905 1970s

125mm 2A46: 3BK18 2700 630 905 1980s

125mm 2A46: 3BK21 2800 760 905 1980s

125mm 2A46: 3BK29 2800 630 915 1990s

125mm 2A46: HEAT-T 2800 500 850 1982

125mm 2A46: AT-8* (Kobra) 4000 600 400 1979 (ATGM)

125mm 2A46: AT-11 (Svir) 4000 700 341 1985 (ATGM)

125mm 2A46: AT-11* (Refleks) 5000 700 341 1985 (ATGM)

125mm 2A46: AT-11b (Svir) 4000 700 341 1996 (ATGM)

125mm 2A46: AT-11b* (Refleks) 5000 700 341 1996 (ATGM)

RHAe[mm] (Penetration) column:

Black text: RHAe (KE) penetration

Red text: (HE/HESH) effect, does not represent actual RHA equivalent thickness penetration

Green text: RHAe (HEAT) penetration

Some information may not be useful (e.g. 105mm L7) unless you intend to include Leo I with the Canadians / Dutch?

Small Arms:

Ammunition Range[m] RHAe[mm] Velocity[m/s]

5.45mm RU: AP 300 7 920

5.56mm NATO: AP 450 7 920

7.62mm RU: AP 900 10 854

7.62mm NATO: AP 1000 10 854

RHAe[mm] (Penetration) column:

Black text: RHAe (KE) penetration

HMG

Ammunition Range[m] RHAe[mm] Velocity[m/s]

12.7mm RU: AP 1600 30 895

.50 cal NATO: AP 1800 35 887

14.5mm RU: AP 1500 40 976

RHAe[mm] (Penetration) column:

Black text: RHAe (KE) penetration

Autocannon

Ammunition Range[m] RHAe[mm] Velocity[m/s] Date

20mm RH202: DM43 API-T 2000 55 1100 1972

20mm RH202: DM63 APDS-T 2000 60 1150 1989

20mm RH202: DM81 HE-I-T 2000 20 1100 1972

25mm Bushmaster: M791 APDS-T 3000 60 1345 1983

25mm Bushmaster: M919 APFSDS-T 3100 100 1385 1994

25mm Bushmaster: M792 HEI-T 3000 35 1100 1983

30mm 2A42/2A72: 3UBR6 AP 1500 60 970 no date

30mm 2A42/2A72: HE-T 30mm 1500 45 970 no date

30mm Pizarro: 30mm APFSDS 3000 110 1430 no date

30mm Pizarro: MP-T/SD 3000 20 1070 no date

35mm Bushmaster: 35mm APFSDS 4000 170 1400 no date

35mm Bushmaster: ABM M/XX LS 4000 58 1050 no date

35mm Bushmaster: HEI M/XX LS 4000 35 1175 no date

35mm Bushmaster: PPT FRAG M/XX LS 4000 120& 1400 no date

35mm Bushmaster: 35mm APDS 4000 110 1440 no date

40mm Bofors L70: Slpprj 90 2000 140 1465 1993

40mm Bofors L70: Slpprj 90LK/97 2500 140 1465 1997

40mm Bofors L70: Slpprj 95LK/05 2000 170 1510 2005

40mm Bofors L70: Slsgr 90 4000 60 988 1990

40mm Bofors L70: Kulsgr 90 3000 40 1015 1990

40mm Bofors L70: Kulsgr 95LK 3000 20& 1000 1995

RHAe[mm] (Penetration) column:

Black text: RHAe (KE) penetration

Red text: (HE/HESH) effect, does not represent actual RHA equivalent thickness penetration

Green text: RHAe (HEAT) penetration

& Hybrid round that impacts as KE, then detonates into fragments

ATGM

Ammunition Range[m] RHAe[mm] Velocity[m/s] Date

Milan 2 2000 660 160 1984

Milan 2T 1920 1260 140 1993

Dragon II 1000 550 87 1980s

Javelin 2500 600* 200 1996

HOT 2 4000 950 242 no date

TOW 2 3750 890 320 1983

TOW 2A 3750 890 320 1988

TOW 2B 3750 300^ 320 1988

RB57 STORM 800 600^ 300 2006

AT-3d 3000 520 115 1980s

AT-4a 2000 480 200 1973

AT-4b 2500 460 186 1980

AT-4c 2500 500 180 1991

AT-5a 4000 650 186 1977

AT-5b 4000 780 208 1990

AT-6 5000 600 450 1990

AT-7 1000 460 223 1979

AT-13 1500 650 200 1990

AGM-114C 8000 850* 425 no date

AGM-114K 8000 1450* 425 no date

RHAe[mm] (Penetration) column:

Green text: RHAe (HEAT) penetration

^ TOW 2B and RB57 STORM are top attack

* Hellfire and Javelin have a diving terminal phase

Infantry Light Anti Armour Weapons

Ammunition Range[m] RHAe[mm] Velocity[m/s] Date

M72 LAW 300 250 140 1970s*

M72A3 LAW 300 320 145 1980s*

M136 AT-4 400 500 290 1980s

M2 Carl Gustav 700 450 380 1980s

lePzF 300 350 243 no date

PzF 3 600 690 243 1987

PzF 3T 600 1290 243 1996

RPG-7L 400 550 250 1980s

RPG-22 320 400 133 1981

RPG-26 340 440 144 1985

RPG-27 300 720 125 1989

RPG-29 800 720 280 1989

RB57 STORM 800 600^ 300 2006

RHAe[mm] (Penetration) column:

Green text: RHAe (HEAT) penetration

^RB57 STORM light ATGM is top attack

Infantry Support Weapons

Ammunition Range[m] RHAe[mm] Velocity[m/s] Date

40mm AGL: M430 HEDP 2200 40 241 no date

40mm AGL: M383 HE 2200 70 241 no date

40mm AGL: 40x53HL 2200 82 241 no date

RHAe[mm] (Penetration) column:

Red text: (HE/HESH) effect, does not represent actual RHA equivalent thickness penetration

Green text: RHAe (HEAT) penetration

Source: SBWiki

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I’m pretty sure what’s in the NATO module was outlined some time ago (suggest you do a search on the main board).

I’m not about to breech the NDA and post stuff here that I’m not supposed too.

You’ll note that some of the data I posted above may or may not be relevant. For example you can forget all the 105mm L7 data if Leopard I isn’t in it.

Nice try though. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thanks but i could not find anything about what vehicles are going to be in nato? and as well i did find one of my older posts about nato mod and a picture with the canadian cougar... i dont know if anyone that is developing the new mod but the cougar "LAV II RECCE" got de-comishined from the reg forces and is being for use of the reserve army? because i do know canada is in there but i dont think canada would use out dated vehicles in afghanistan? thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

gibsonm - In the end I used that as my prmary source, it seemed to be the most reliable place to get info. I corroborated where I could of course. I had forgotten that it included ammunition penetration levels though. I will have to check that part out again.

I have updated the guide since and I will release a new version soon. I am still short of that information on the enhanced Challenger 2 though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had forgotten that it included ammunition penetration levels though. I will have to check that part out again.

Don't forget to look at the stuff I put up here (a page or two back now).

I am still short of that information on the enhanced Challenger 2 though.

Sure and I expect you will continue to be.

Sorry but all the bumf I have on her has a security classification.

Amazingly soldiers aren't to keen to have their vehicle's protection levels published where the bad guy can read them. :)

That's to ongoing challenge (pardon the pun) of current or near current wargames compared to some other timeframe where everything is published.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I did my first round based on the stuff you posted, checked against what I could find off google. Thanks for that info. Unfortunately estimates seem to vary wildly so it is nice to get another source, especially one which I believe to be a pretty respectable one.

Pity about the challenger info. I suppose I could venture into the realms of wild speculation to get some sort of number up there :). At the end of the day Im not trying to claim any of the information in the guide is accurate! I might have to write a disclaimer or something...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Thanks for doing all this work guys...

Not sure if this is the right thread, but my (not terribly scientific) experience with arty (repeated uses of various arty "formulae" in a saved scenario vs inf in urban area was that:

1) MLRS is not that effective vs units in built up/urban areas.

2) 120mm Mortars seemed more effective that 122mm guns/hows.

3) For max casualties/suppression for same number of shells, better to use one tube for a longer time than several tubes for a shorter time.

Also, it seems to be not cost effective to use arty vs a single vehicle if there is any other way to kill the armor (ie it's an act of desperation). (Medium or longer duration to kill one AFV is poor use of resources imo.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

The short answer is that the BMP-2 can carry one of two variants of ATGM and in CMSF it carries the lighter one. Without delving into my note I would guess that the reason I wrote those values is that the BMP-2s are carrying a Konkurs (AT-5A) and the BRDM-2s are carrying Konkurs-M (AT-5B). I remember being confused about this and checking it on a firing range so I am pretty confident I am right on this one!

That is not to say there are no errors in my Armour Guide. I have a newer version on my computer with a few corrections and I am sure more will come to light in the future!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok I have updated the guide to specify more clearly which ATGM is used for each vehicle. I have had terrible trouble with gun launched ATGMs though. NATO designations seem to cover a wide variety of missile. For Example the AT-10 seems to refer to an entire family of missiles fired from different platforms but I can't find more specific designations.

If anyone wants the new version of the guide then PM me, until the repository goes back up I can't really distribute it. The new version has a number of changes to tank penetration values based on further testing and new NATO designations for vehicle mounted ATGMs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is necessary to know remeber two facts

1. Soviet FM - give a template and the recipe as it do American FM. American FM (for example, FM 71-1 TANK AND MECHANIZED INFANTRY COMPANY TEAM) is a mix for the theory, principles, wishes and ready decisions, templates, with detailed drawings.

Soviet FM - "Boevoi Ustav" - has 3 parts

1 part - "a regiment, a division" - confidential even now

2 part "Company, a battalion"

3 part - "Platoon, sqad, tank" - for training of soldiers, NCO and younger leaders.

Only 3 part has ready decisions and templates. 1 and 2 part - only principles and wishes, going from 3части. Never been to understand the reasons why it is specified anything in 2 part - if not read 3. Or if to read - "Boevoi Ustav" -is negligent.

Looking at a picture - level a battalion (as the big map of Syria for SMSF - 1-2 infantry companies, a company of tanks and another)

It is necessary to think that it principles, instead of a template of construction of defence (and not differently).

There are some figures, which keys here, it at all mugs and concrete positions for MRP StrongPoint

56d8166b3a05.jpg

Fig1 - Position CP and HQ for MRC and MRB

Here there is a requirement "Boevoi Ustav" - that the commander (level a battalion, a company and below) was in that point - where the battle place, situation is well visible and it is possible quickly and accurately get orders, quickly to react - so quck accurately that probably.

The commander of a platoon in the Soviet doctrine should be guided in conditions and employ the decision of a fighting vehicle, infantry and all weight of the platoon.

The commander does not battle, does not shoot - he observes, observes, observes, get reports and does accurate orders, and observes too. Also remember that soviet have no FBC2B, ha-ha

Analogue of the commander in CMSF is 'Observation unit' -are spies, comand groups, simply weak units. They stand on a high building, a grief, 'good seen' platform. Hold fire and only give to YOU(to the player) knowledge of conditions.

Fig2 Specifies lines - where AT Plt, 2nd eshelon or reserves can be to go to battle. It gives understanding - that before battle - it is necessary to study attentively ways of the enemy to the position and to think over measures - AS, WHERE WHEN reserves will use. It will give calmness in battle. There is no fever and haste at a bad situation enemy attack. There are ready plans (a some - may be 2-3-4) - how to use the reserve and 2nd eshelon.

Playing Syria - it is necessary to think over attentively AS, WHERE and WHEN the reserve will be used.

Fig3 Shows a place and reserve structure. Here AT platoon and 1 MRC. The concept Is necessary - that there will be a reserve where it will stand both where and as will use (see Fig2).Certainly, the concept of the Soviet doctrine-is all defence is necessary do as anti-tank defence first of all. Killing enemy tanks - to do enemy attackunsuccessful . The infantry of the enemy can quickly lay down, hide by holding fire. The tank cannot quickly hide. The most powerful AT element - in a reserve

Fig4 Shows a place 'concentrate fire' (a death zone) and a mine place.

It is necessary to think over places before battle where the enemy will go and prepare death zones. It is necessary to do strengthenings of the position as much as possible, more strongly and more widely. The line a small trench how to do in CMSF scenarios for Syria is a punishment in the Soviet doctrine for any commander (to clean from post command). I will speak in detail if level a company-platoon is discussed.

Fig5-6Shows a place and construction of the bottom level (a platoon, the tank) in each company - main principle

About it later if it is interesting

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very interesting, It seems that when I originally posted that image, I misinterpreted the aspects of the reserves. I hadn't realised that the 'lines' were future positions for the reserves and always wondered why there were so many AT assets shown. I must also say to other readers that although the positions seem to be all the same, company commanders were given some flexibility on how to deploy (line, 2 up, 1 up etc) according to the terrain.

The defence aims to slow and attrit the enemy before channelling them into pre prepared areas within the defensive area then block and destroy them. Note the 'backwards' facing tank!

Given time, this defence will get more and more elaborate with more mines, trenches, fireplans and wire and the commanders will have time to 'wargame' possibilities and make new contingency plans. The Russians love contingency plans :)

Alek, Please continue with your description of the lower levels. It is always better to get the information from a Russian language source than western books :). Are these field manuals available online so I could use google translator?

The use of reserves could also be used more often by scenario designers to make for a more interesting battle. No more wading through lines of static defence!

*runs off to make a new scenario*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a misconception - why is the Soviet plans or platoon ready to protect around.

The essence of these issues is not that - men are weak or not, a good relationship or not, good leadership or not. The essence of these issues - in the different approaches and the reality of battle.

Blue side has the superiority of the last war, -1991 and 2003, Iraq, Yugoslavia. Afghanistan.

On the ground, was the number of equal (equal to men, tanks), the aircraft were full advantage. Technological superiority was very strong. Abrams vs. T-55, M109 Paladin against the 130mm and 122mm towed Guns, space communications and radiowarfare against the old communications.

Objectively, the war against the backward or weak enemy.

Blue side has not received crushing blows fire at the depth of its area , had no jammed from radiowarfare of red hand, had a blue planes on it top, no one red enemy aircraft. Have full control, full of hope for assistance or retreat to the dangerous case - does not mean that the blue infantry platoon still red company.

Soviet doctrine was made in this case - to fight against high technological enemy, against a large number of the enemy, a difficult situation for communication, management, form

to maneuver.

The Red Army withstood the most difficult battle against the Wehrmacht. The Wehrmacht was better organized, good comunication, connection whith Luftwaffe and Training, doctrine. Principles of Soviet doctrine made, when hundreds of kilometers of the retreat, then advancing from Stalingrad to Berlin. The principles of the suffering of a lot of blood, when Private Ryan landed in Sicily or on Omaha Beach, Private Ivan was behind the battle for Stalingrad and Kursk, and moved slowly forward through the Wehrmacht and the SS-divizones.

Why do some plans drawn up in contingency advance?

Because there is a danger during the fight opportunity to say a short text only («Forest-1 to Forest 21! Do plan # 3! Engage! Go-go-go!») And you can not do the detailed instructions, when the enemy goes fast forward. The speed of mechanized forces so large that the space defense battalion (3-5 km) can be cut for a few minutes for the unsuccessful cases flow.

Why keep the platoon together in a small space?

When will attack the enemy - is likely - radio jammed, powerful rumble of fire, heavy fire, bad for human risk. The troop commander must be able to:

1. Seeing the situation of a platoon area- who killed, the machine lined, the tank is hidden in the back position, and so on.

2. Just to be able to rapidly and well to give orders to his platoon. This can be good to do a voice or to send liaison soldier at short distance, when the radio station is suppressed or destroyed by enemy fire. When it is necessary - shooting of 1 tank and 3 BMP< what was received a voice command fro Plt leader is much better , than one sqaud that has no help, because radio is jammed by enemy

3. His leadership of the platoon leader must support the morale of soldiers (such as a sergeant killed) or remove cowardice and panic in the strongest terms ('Boevoi Ustav' permit to use the weapon for cowards)

Why platoon prepares defense - on the flank, the rear, why not the flexibility to withdraw?

This is a historical truth - if you watch an educational moment. In 1942, each platoon or company commander thought he was very intelligent, he can retreat to the flexibility of action. The Nazis were on the Volga. Tens of millions of people were under the boot of occupation, 16 million were tortured by the Nazis. The Red Army was a shame because she could not defend their country well.

Let us cast away the patriotism and history GPW.

When the battle is against a strong enemy, control and communications can be difficult.

The platoon is in danger can choose to withdraw. Perhaps rightly so, for the platoon. But a bad connection or a bad situation can not give to notify the company commander, battalion, their neighbors from the other platoons - about his retreat. Then a neighbor platoon, company commander will think that this squad on the it defensive area, in fact - these soldiers far back and near enemy in former Plt DefArea. This is a very bad surprise for the company, battalion, neighbors - because Platoon is very "flexibility" .

The second danger is the fact that the platoon can get under heavy fire (enemy or friendly fire in the confusion of battle) in the open when It makes "a flexible retreat." Then it will be big losses, panic and disorder to escape.

To eliminate bad surprises, panic, running back - is a simple solution of the 'Boevoi Ustav'. It says that "Order must be fulfilled. Point." If the platoon has the mission to defend a strong point - the commander and the soldiers must think and do everything possible - to perform. If the neighbors are all killed or panic running back, must have a ready plan and position - to make a circle of protection and comply with the order - "protection platoon strong point. When the hard, scary, dangerous - must grit my teeth, hold hands and keep the defense.

In 1973, the first Syrian strong attack on Golan hills was able to destroy the position of 188 Israeli brigade «Barak». The commander of 188 Brigade was killed in a tank, brigade chief of staff killed in a tank. Heavy artillery prepared fire makes the destruction, the mass of the Syrian troops makes the attack. 188 Brigade was divided into individual items, groups, did not lead the battle as a whole. However, the 188Brigade soldiers did not show "flexibility" and depart. They gritted his teeth and stood on his defensive position. This is a classic approach for the blue side - when the Soviet doctrine of defense was used for maximum benefit.

Error think - Soviet commander (platoon, company, or more) has a wooden head. The platoon commander may make a presentation to the company about a bad situation, the company commander makes an order about the retreat. The platoon organized retreat on ORDER senior commander. The company may, at the departure of the platoon to assist fire, maneuver to avoid large losses, there was no panic.

The platoon commander (eg, possibly a company and battalion, and further, the platoon is a simple example) can have a 'flexible self-retreat' - when it announced plan of battle. For example, the vanguard of the defense, the front cover position, maneuver defense, the rearguard of general waste. Then the senior commander (company and battalion) will have an overall plan to account for the retreat platoon, even if it does not have any messages from the platoon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I cannot emphasise enough the importance of electronic warfare to the Soviets. While the west regarded their lack of 'sophisticated' command and control as a weakness,the Soviets regarded it as a strength.

On the modern battlefield a radio operating at full power can be located in less than a minute and artillery used to destroy the source, both sides planned to use massive jamming on enemy communications and nuclear weapons would knock out electronics with EMP. However spectacular the battle on the ground would have been, the battle for the electronic spectrum would be equally hard fought. In this situation, command and control for both sides would be seriously degraded but this was the way the Soviet army trained and expected to fight. Units kept in radio silence until contact with the enemy and the use of pre made plans means orders can be kept brief and simple on the radio.

That is not to say the Soviets would not have used more radios if they could have afforded it, it is just that given how useless they would become in WW3, there use was kept to a minimum and the funds and training allocated elsewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...