Mattias

As far as I can see I would agree on them not being used as dedicated AT-guns. The designations for the guns in question would be: The 76,2 mm Pushka obr. 1942 g/ZiS-3 (76-42) was known as 7,62 cm Feldkanone 288 ® in German service and.. The 76,2 mm Pushka obr. 1941 g/ZiS-3 (76-41) as 288/1 ®. The latter was the quick war time solution of mounting the 76,2 mm gun on the 57 mm AT gun, what's it called, carriage whereas the former was the late 1942 model with a newly designed carriage. The 288/1 was quite rare, the 288 on the other hand, were common, and apparently well liked by German gunners. The guns designated 295/1 and 295/2 are two models of the 76,2 mm obr. 1902/30 gun. (All according to Gander & Chamberlain, Enzyklopädie Deutscher Waffen) M.

Well, the caption says (roughly translated): A 3,7 cm anti tank gun at a Reichswehr manoeuvre in the mid 30's. The three piece upper shield could be folded down in order to lower the over all height and make it easier to conceal. So, yes, correctly observed. M.

Thanks, great stuff! It seems a trip to Finland would be in order M.

Well if you don't mind Germans that speak English (complete mood killer in my book) and a story that generally comes through as fiction, say stereotype characters, I'd say that Cross of Iron is a nice enough movie. Good even, but not in comparison with the Winter War (Talvisota) when it comes to the east front experience. I'd place the Finnish movie well ahead of "Stalingrad" too, as I find it refreshingly no nonsense and head on gritty when compared to the others. Perhaps the subject of Stalingrad is so charged and the story so well known (if your interested in the subject) that it tends to get a little, well, dull, when you just have to be exposed to every stereotype situation associated with that battle, one after the other. Nah, to see something you have not seen before and that gets you down and dirty with war go for the Winter war. As for it being a "poor quality flick"... The thought never crossed my mind in the three times I have seen it, quite the contrary really, I guess I was too gripped by it to notice... In the end you'll watch them all no doubt M.

Well, looking at the movie trailer with the StuG's it is clear that at least the gun and the mounting of it is not 100% as it should be on the closest vehicle. When it moves over the oil drum (?) in the first scene the barrel jumps up and down an awfull lot. And.. when it fires in the second scene the interiour of the StuG lights up from the blast, something best avoided in real life But other than that, very good looking M.

Trommelfeuer wrote: Ah, sorry, I took the liberty of adding a new question to the thread. In the trailer that can be downloaded from the site I indicated in my post there are two Finnish StuG's taking part in the action. I was wondering.. Authentic or fake.. Which is why I thought of them when I read this post M.

Sorry about double posting but I thought it might deserve a thread of it's own. And oops.. turns out it has already been posted on the general topics forum. I did make a search but I guess I didn't include said forum Ahead of the front line (my ad hoc translation) The movie follows IR 61 (Infantry Regiment) that was manned by members of the Swedish speaking minority in Finland (known as Finland-Swedes in Sweden). It takes place in the Svir area and on the Karelian istmus during the period 1942-44. Considering the quality of the war movies produced previously in Finland this could be a good one. If nothing else I have heard, first hand, that the direct involvement of the veterans meant that "everything" that happens in the movie happened in real life. Take a look at quick time movie that can be downloaded on the middle right section of the page under "Filmtrailern", "Bredband-version" (25,8 MB). M. [ March 05, 2004, 05:45 AM: Message edited by: Mattias ]

So, what do you make of these StuG´s? A movie of course but are the vehicles the real thing or just lovingly made conversions? Pretty much everything looks right to me, just that they are a little high, but that could be due to the movie format. There are a few StuG's in Finland that are in good condition after all. Does anybody know for sure? Take a look at quick time movie that can be downloaded on the middle right section of the page under "Filmtrailern", "Bredband-version" (25,8 MB). "Ahead of the front line" The movie follows IR 61 (Infantry Regiment) that was manned by members of the Swedish speaking minority in Finland (known as Finland-Swedes in Sweden). It takes place in the Svir area and on the Karelian istmus during the period 1942-44. Considering the quality of the war movies produced previously in Finland this could be a good one. If nothing else I have heard, first hand, that the direct involvement of the veterans meant that "everything" that happens in the movie happened in real life. M.

The MG 42 was developed because it was recognised that the MG 34 was less than ideally suited for mass production. The demand for a high ROF MG for the East front was another factor that influenced the development of the MG 42. The MG 42 turned out to be easier and faster to produce. The simplified design, reliance on less labour intensive production and low cost materials was reflected in the price of 250 RM compared to that of the MG 34, which cost 310 RM to produce. Once in the line the weapon turned out to be at least as good as the MG 34 tactically. It's ease of use (not least the rapid barrel change), reliability and high ROF ensured that it was in high demand from day one. Incidentally, DAK is supposed to have been the first recipients of this new weapon in 1942. M.

It means that the unit in question generates X points of firepower (FP) at 100 meters. The unit FP rating is the sum of the individual FP ratings of the different weapons carried by the unit. FP is an abstraction presented in numerical form of, among other things, the penetration, killing and suppressive performance of the weapon in question. In general I would say that you will have good effect if you are able to deliver 100 points of FP into any kind of target. Remember that cover terrain will modify the amount of FP that reaches the target. Why bother? There is about 10% difference between 95 and 105. You might not think that’s much to write home about, but in the end a 105 FP unit will beat a 95 FP unit, all other things being equal. Besides, there are units that have much more FP at 100 meters, right now I can think of one that has 158... And though the difference is not that earth shattering at 100 meters it can be very much so at 40 meters, or indeed 500 meters. So, in conclusion, these are definitely numbers you should keep an eye on... M.

An oldish thread on the subject: over here M.

Its not very complicated once one start confusing things by guessing. Basically it works thusly: SdKfz stands for Sonderkraftfahrzeug and that refers to vehicles that are special purpose military vehicles. In order to keep track of the different types they are given a number for administrative purposes. SdKfz 251 for example is, as we know, a medium halftrack. Of the SdKfz 251 there existed a large number of specialised verions, the 251/3 for example is a radio halftrack. And then in turn there existed several layouts and detailed equipment options for the SdKfz 251/3 radio halftrack, named 251/3 I (roman numerical), and going all the way up to 251/3 IV. And that is just one example… Now, that is just to keep track of things in books, what you actually call them as you use them is another story. The SdKfz 251/3 II for example would be referred to as a “mittlere Funkpanzerwagen”, because that is what it is, a medium radio armoured truck (“wagen” in one form or another being used to describe most basic ground vehicles in the car to tank range in German). All SdKfz numbered vehicle also had a designation of this type. For example, the SdKfz 265 is a kleine Panzerbefehlswagen (small command tank), the SdKfz 2 is a Kettenkrad (tracked motorcykel), the SdKfz 171 is a Panzerkampfwagen V… which brings us to another aspect of the naming convention: Panzerkampfwagen V is perhaps best known as the “Panther”. The name is a so called “suggestivename”, a name that is more suggestive, or sexy if you want. These names are given (officially designated that is) for a number of reasons mostly related to propaganda and moral. It just sounds better and does wonders for public recognition. So, the full name of that famous vehicle could be for example, Panzerkampfwagen V Ausf A (SdKfz 171) Panther. There is more to it but which name you choose for a certain vehicle pretty much boils down to when, why and what your trying say about it M.

Later on all German armoured and special purpose military vehicles were given a SdKfz number for administrative purposes. It was a quick way of seeing exactly which vehicle type, model and special official modification one was dealing with. M. [ October 30, 2003, 02:00 AM: Message edited by: Mattias ]

I have the same impression with regards to the AA issues. However, I was most pleasantly surprised to see that the new drivers had cured the intermittent stuttering that my CM setup have been suffering from for as long as I can remember. I would get tiny "hiccups" when moving around the battlefield, not a problem really, just a very minor annoyance. But still glad to see them go M.

Going by memory.. The L/43 use the same barrel as the L/46 (the PaK weapon) combined with a shortened breach designed for confined spaces. Using a stubby shell casing it did not match the performance of the L/46, something that was pretty much remedied with the introduction of the L/48 gun. Another factor that was, as I understand it, as important as the performance gain was that the L/48 was cheaper and could be produced faster because it was a less sophisticated design. M.

I'm having a cuppa myself right now, Lapsang, mmm.. Downloading the Homeworld 2 demo and browsing Western Digitals support pages. Generally feeling pretty good about myself M.

I'll get cracking you tea sipping teuton Sorry for the wait, my mind is a bit binary at times! M.

Thanks all for taking the time! What got me thinking was some article I can't find now indicating that there is a general performance advantage to be had from integrated audio solutions. Then again, being less advanced they wouldn't be as processor intensive to start with Again, thanks.. My only problem now is: Can I have windows XP installed and running from a NTFS HD while using a FAT32 HD as backup and move files freely between the two within windows? I have a new 120 GB drive and an older 14 GB and would like to run the two together as C: and D: drives. Pretty binary question I hope Cheers! M.

Taking advantage of the knowledgeable and friendly forum I am in the market for a new motherboard and among the many factors to keep in mind is, as I understand it, what kind of integral audio chip is used. Certainly not the most important aspect of a Mobo, but one that I have failed to grasp. So.. I am using a SB Live Value card right now. Is this ageing card inferior to current integrated solutions? Sound quality, features and processing speed (ability take over sound related work from the CPU) being the points of comparison. Or, should I just stick with the old card? And, which is the best chip? After all, if I get a new mobo it will have integrated sound anyway, so what should I look for? I have still not decided for which CPU I'll go so, all solutions are of interest, AMD as well as Intel related. Any and all help is greatly appreciated Mattias

When CMBB was made the CM engine could not handle multiple turret vehicles. Changes has been made in CMAK, which will feature multi gun tanks. M.

Take a look over at: Die Nahverteidigungswaffe Good site, pretty much sums up the information availible when taking a little closer look at the subject. M.

I'm with you on this flamingknives, it happens all the time in my games. And by that I do mean very frequently. Ran a few tests and sure enough, lots of HE being spent on AC's, halftracks and soft skinned vehicles (with plenty AP available to the tanks doing the shooting)... M.

If you hold all the objective areas Phemur it would seem you have already beaten the Ferdinands... All hail the Queen of the battlefield Oh, and a bit of Ferdinandiana... Spielberger notes that 19 Ferdinands were destroyed (total losses) between the 5th and the 14th of July 1943, most of them to artillery hitting the engine covers. In four cases the electrical drive caught fire and destroyed the vehicle. By the 1st of august another 20 Ferdinands were lost, most of those being blown up by their own crews to prevent capture. By that time the regiment had reported 502 enemy tanks, 20 PaK and around 100 artillery pieces destroyed. (Schwere Jagdpanzer, 2.Aufl., page 86) M. [ June 23, 2003, 05:43 AM: Message edited by: Mattias ]

You are correct Massimo. It was indeed SOP for at least some armoured forces to present your front armour with a slight angel towards the enemy. The Tiger crews, for example, was reminded of this in the "Tigerfiebel". This way the front armour gained a few extra millimetres of effective armour at the, in this case, cost effective price of exposing the side armour at an extreme angle. The matter has been brought up previously on this forum. Though I can not recall the exact wording from BFC I think it was a matter of too much micro management for/of the tacAI that prevented the inclusion of this feature. M. [ June 01, 2003, 06:32 AM: Message edited by: Mattias ]

"Da die Wirkung der alten Granaten bei diesem Kaliber nicht mehr ausreichte, erhielt die Truppe ab Februar 1942 die Stielgranate 41, ein durch ein Leitwerk stabilisiertes Überkaliber-Geschoß." From February 1942 according to This site Looking around a bit I can't find any source contradicting the early 1942 date. M.