jgdpzr

Well hotdamn, we're gonna have a party! Matt, Rune, and a bunch of area CM'ers. I guess the question remains: Afterwards, will we be going to Thoroughbred III, or Thoroughbred IV? We'll let you decide Matt.

Rune, Sounds like a good plan. If we can arrange a volunteer to let us tour the backlots, we will be in for a treat! Man, I just looked at the date. HMMM, I'm scheduled to do some training that day, time to call in some favors.

Hey Rune! As far as I know, Blackhorse is still there. I live in Louisville, about 40 miles or so north of Fort Knox. A few years ago, after the annual Fourth of July re-enactment, I was able to tour the back lots where most of their vehicles are in storage. Unfortunately, the museum display area is large enough to display only a portion of the vehicles in their collection (as you can tell by the 'storage' notation on the vehicle list you linked). They have been trying to expand for years, maybe some day they will actually raise the money to do so. BTW, too bad you couldn't make it here for the Fourth. This year's re-enactment was one of the better ones. They had the museum's Japgdpanzer IV Lang (not displayed) and a Hetzer (also not displayed) running, as well as many US vehicles they normally don't have out there (a Sherman 105, an M-10) as well as the customary Stuarts, M-20's, HTs, etc. Also, they had an AC being used by the Germans that I didn't recognize. I swear it looked more like a Russian AC than a German vehicle, it was even painted all green. They also added a new wrinkle for the show itself, a German counter-attack. When the show is over, the audience gets to climb all over/inside the vehicles. All-in-all, it was a great show. Anyway, if you'd like to get together, send me an email (address in my profile) and I can meet you there. I can also guide you and your family to some of the better eateries in Louisville.

THAT is probably one of the major reasons you lost. It's rarely advisable to send tanks up to take out ATGs at almost any range. In fact, that is what the gunners (and the one commanding them) want you to do. Artillery is your best weapon to use against ATGs. Tanks-vs-guns=bad idea. Oh, and as Zitadelle said, you'll want to mark any posts regarding scenario details with a spoiler alert, either in the subject line or at the very top of your post.

I think you are definitely on to something here George III. I agree with some who say the contrast may be a little too extreme, especially for the olive drab vehicles. However, I think this can be toned down while still lending a much more three-dimensional look to the models. Count me in as a supporter, excellent work!

I don't want to sound too pedantic, but the Panther II on display has a late G turret with the 75L/70 mounted. The vehicle was intended to have a redesigned turret with the 88mm, but I don't think the two were ever actually mated. The story behind the stug is that it was pulled out of a Russian bog a few years back. Apparently the cold water had a preservative effect, so the paint and everything else are in very good condition. However, battle damage is evident. If you look at the vehicle closely, you will note that the roof of the fighting compartment is cracked and raised slightly, apparently from some sort of top penetration. I wonder if a Sturmovic took it out. The Patton Museum is still trying to raise the funds to drastically increase their display area. They only have enough space to display a fraction of the vehicles stored in the back lot wharehouses. A few years ago, I had an escort who took me back to a couple of those wharehouses and I was amazed at the rows of vehicles in storage. And this was from visiting only a couple of the wharehouses. Incidently, if you are only a couple of hours away, you may want to try to make it down for the re-enactment they conduct every year on the fourth of July. Last year, they rolled out a Jagdpanzer IV Lang, as well as several US vehicles (usually a Sherm or two, a Stuart, and a Greyhound participate, as well as a Kubel or two and a similar number of German Armored Cars). A Mustang or two usually do a few faux strafing runs as well. Last year was the first I'd seen the Jpzr Lang, usually the German armor is a Hetzer or two. I really enjoyed watching Guderian's duck touring around the field, although the motor was overheating quite badly. Part of the appeal is to see if the German vehicles will actually be able to move under their own power. One year the lone Hetzer wouldn't turn over before the event, another year one of the Hetzer's blew a cylinder trying to make it out of a ditch. Last year, the jpzr provided the suspense. If you do plan to attend the re-enactment, I would recommend arriving by 11:00. There is no admission fee, so you can instead spend those dollars on a donation to expand the facility, a worthy cause indeed. Edited to add: Another nice thing about the re-enactment is that after the event they let you crawl all around/inside the vehicles. NOW THAT is immersion, actually sitting at the sights of the 75L/70, for example, is too cool for us armor geeks! [ June 20, 2002, 10:42 AM: Message edited by: jgdpzr ]

OK Matt, what are you getting ready to dump on Kwazydog? Or, do you just owe him some money? Somefink fishy going on for your fingers to pound out those platitudes.

Whew, for a second there I thought MD was interested in finding the nearest NAMBLA chapter.

Ah yes, you aren't the first to say that.

Alright MrSpkr, Dan's given you new data to compute...get to work! We gotta know if this is confirmation, or a mere ploy to further obfuscate The Truth. And what's with the Hoosier stuff? Your profile says you're an OU football fan. Hoosier hoops interest, alumnus, or are you just trying to yank this wildcat's chain? Because if it is the latter, "Go Cards!" is far more offensive these days. I was even pulling for the Hoosiers through most of the tourney. UK fans particularly loved the humiliation IU handed Duke on our home court.

I like your theory better. Your astounding skill at deductive reasoning has convinced me that the July clue was just a starting point. Keep the hat, Ollie Stone's got nothing on you. And btw, I'm not sure which I find scarier: That we share some delusions, or that we share a first name.

Hey guys, I just noticed something that could be a hint. Like others, at first I was enamoured with the whole June 22 release date idea. But now, I just don't think that is gonna happen, it just feels too early to me. However, I think Matt may have given us a hint to the mythical release date that BFC has in mind. OK, not an actual date, but a month. I am thinking it may be July. Why? Look down a few threads at the "Its Christmas in July, err, June" thread title. Sure, it could be an honest mistake--a slip of the tongue--but Matt edited the text of the message, why wouldn't he edit the title if it had really been a mistake? Perhaps he's giving us a clue, cloaking a reference to our "happy day" among talk of a winter mod set. This would be consistent with the impressions of imminence held by some, and possibly hinted at by the gang in all of their nose to the grindstone talk. OK, that's my contribution to the conspiracy theory, YMMV. And in all honesty, I still think it won't come out until Autumn. Having experienced the original pre-CMBO (heck, pre-demo even) waiting period, I believe the gang won't release it until they feel it is good-and-ready, and they always have something else to tinker with. Until then, relax, start up a new pbem, and take comfort in the knowledge that at least this time we have something more than three demo scenarios to hold us over. [ June 05, 2002, 02:31 PM: Message edited by: jgdpzr ]

I agree with the Lord General, this color scheme is so much easier on the eyes. IMO, black fonts are a necessity and I like the background colors. I know it doesn't count for anything, but put me in the category to keep this scheme and ditch the black background/light font scheme.

Thanks!

Just hit the reply with quotes button and delete everything between the ] and the [ except what you want to quote.

Fionn is Fionn Kelly, the AAR guru of CM:The Early Years. Wayback in yonder years, in the time of the beta demo and before, the neophyte CMers were treated to remarkably detailed reports of the brave exploits of the Germans under the command of Herr Kelly. No allied commander was able to stay the hand of Fionn (well, almost none) and he acheived mythical status in his role of tester/consultant. Then he got in to one too many pi**ing matches on the board and got booted (and was held up as the poster child for how BTS applies a fair hand in moderating these premises--they'll even gag their friends!). He always maintained good relations with the BTS crew, so they, in their esteemed wisdom, allowed him to come back a month or two ago. So now, he is back among the living.

What I have observed in terms of FO's embarking on vehicles: 1.)FO's can call in a fire order before embarking, but cannot while embarked; 2.)While on the vehicle, the FO cannot adjust the fire. Given #2, any fire that comes down while the FO is riding on the back of or inside any vehicle will be treated as unobserved fire and will therefore be scattered. Also, I believe that once an FO mounts a vehicle, a time penalty is incurred that will be commensurate with the normal delay for other unobserved fires. This last bit is just my hunch, I haven't really paid enough attention to confirm it. Finally, once the the FO dismounts and is able to observe the target, fire correction will kick in and the shot pattern will tighten.

Wow, quite a pi**ing match this devolved into. P51D, really, all we are asking for are the references to the sources that you claim make clear Wittman's demise. I know the tone of some of the posts may not have been friendly, but surely you can understand that most here are simply skeptical of claims we cannot substantiate. I don't think the perceived personal attacks were intentional. We simply want to know what you know, and surely, as an historian, you can understand that we're not inclined to simply take an anonymous person's opinion on some game board as gospel. Our skepticism is not personal, however. We have documented interviews of people (both Allied and German) claiming to have witnessed Wittman's tank being knocked out by a 17 pounder from a firefly. These accounts exist, that much we KNOW. AFAIK (hence my plea for your sources), the Typhoon theory is based primarily on the examination of the vehicle in the field and the damage it sustained. As others have noted, what is lacking is corroborative evidence of CAS activity in the area. I, and most others here, really would just like to see what evidence supports the Typhoon attack, that is all. Since you say that it is now essentially a foregone conclusion in your circles, we amatuers don't want to be left behind. Please, enlighten us. That is a sincere request, not sarcastic in the least.

I agree with Michael on this. I know I have seen this footage several times. When I have seen it prior, the commander is seen escaping out of the cupola BEFORE the tank fully brews up. In fact, there is quite a bit of other footage with this scene, including a round from an allied tank in the foreground seen penetrating the side lower hull of the tank (I believe just right above the track). A couple seconds later, you can see the hole clearly as the fire starts to burn inside. At roughly the same time the commander escapes, and then the thing really starts to burn.

Yes, this has been discussed at length. IIRC, the basic problem stems from limitations within the current game engine. Specifically, randomizing armour quality between different vehicles of the same type, as well as varying the quality regarding different plates on the same vehicle, are not as easy to implement as we may think. Rexford spent a great deal of time and effort in expressing his reservations about the current ratings. To be honest, I am not sure what BTS' final take on his work was, but seems I remember Steve acknowledge they may have done some things differently had they been aware of the information he presented before they set the values. The 85% armour quality of the Panther, BTW, was the instance most heavily scrutinized.

Thanks! I think James probably has it right--they may have been suspended from the turret ring rather than a turret basket, but they still rotated with the turret. [ May 08, 2002, 09:07 AM: Message edited by: jgdpzr ]

Wow, I have never heard this. Also, I am looking at a drawing of a cutaway T-34/76 (1942) with the turret rotated to the right ~45 degrees and you can clearly see how at least the commander's/gunner's seat is rotated accordingly (can't see the loaders seat). Admittedly, this is from an Osprey/New Vanguard book which is certainly not a definitive source, but I wonder if this was a feature of very early models. I have only seen the interior of a T-34/85, but despite being roomier than the 76 it is still a very confined space. If the crews had to literally get off their seats and move with the turret, they really had it rough. Just trying to step along with the movement of the turret and dodge the fixtures (spartan as they are) would take a great deal of coordination. I would be interested to see the sources that describe this layout. Doug, what is the title of the book you are reading (author as well)? And Rexford, if you can find the source that corroborates this I'd appreciate it as well.

I didn't know that there are 30 months in the year!!</font>

IIRC, there is nothing but a small amount of anecdotal evidence of panzer grey vehicles in the west from 1944 on. Most of this evidence is in the form of accounts of US vets saying they saw grey vehicles. Also, some b&w photos showing darkly colored vehicles have been interpreted as panzer grey. However, both of these pieces of evidence have been largely discounted. The latter in that these photos almost certainly show vehicles that are either primarily panzer green or the red-brown primer that served as the base color late in the war, not panzer grey. The veterans' accounts may also confuse panzer green with grey, as that color supposedly had a greyish tint, particularly when dirty or dusty. I am not aware of any collaborative evidence supplied by the Germans that they were using panzer grey vehicles in 1944-45. Now, regarding other color schemes, there was a great deal of variance because many of the schemes were applied in the field with paints that varied widely in how they were dilluted. An exception to these schemes was the aforementioned ambush paint scheme that was applied in the factory. By 1945, the Germans were facing extreme shortages of most paints, and this resulted in vehicles being painted with whatever was on hand at the factories. I have seen some allusions to panzer grey stocks possibly being used in these instances, but I have not seen anything definitive. Edited for grammar. [ April 23, 2002, 03:23 PM: Message edited by: jgdpzr ]

Oh boy, another discussion of panzer grey, this reminds me of some discussions I have had with my modeling friends. In essence, I agree with everyone here (I'm easy). By that I mean I, too, have read that new panzer grey was quite dark. In fact, I remember reading references to the panzers used in the Spanish Civil War as looking practically black. However, as others have noted, the color tended to lighten with age. Further, the accumulation of dust and dirt tended to make the appearance lighter. So, bottomline is that there is most likely a very wide range of shades that could be considered historical.