tss

Fionn wrote: It'll always be the Soviet Red Army to me ... of Workers and Peasants. Or was it the another way round. - Tommi

Wayne wrote: There's a film of street fighting in Berlin at the end of the war where the Russians were leveling entire city blocks using tanks and SP guns. And to think that only four and a half years earlier a Soviet 2nd Lieutenant was sent to Siberia because he ordered his guns to fire at a Finnish mg-nest that was positioned in a church steeple... Funny how in such a short time firing at buildings transformed from a heinous crime against innocent workers first to an acceptable tactic and finally into the preferred tactic. - Tommi

coe write: hmmm, the allies did try to clear pathways with shells that burst slightly above ground as to not crater but to provide enough of a force to set some mines off? Yes, minefields were cleared by artillery. But it took more time than would be available during a CM scenario. (If someone has a counter example to this, I would be interested in hearing it). WWII era artillery was not a surgical weapon. If you had to destroy a small target (less than 100x100 m), you would have to either fire a long barrage with many guns and hope for a few lucky hits, or use only one or two guns with the FO issuing corrections after all rounds. Airbursts certainly help in mine clearing but they are not without their own problems. Proximity fuzes would be pretty much ideal to mine clearing job but if they were not available, the airbursts would have to be created using mechanical time fuzes. It will take a number of spotting rounds before the fuzes are set up correctly (the flight time calculations have always some random errors and mine clearing relies for the blast effect, not shrapnells, so the errors matter more than when firing at soft targets). Perhaps a heavily shelled area might have a reduction in mines Perhaps, but that effect is pretty difficult to quantify. (an american 105 barage is scary y'know).... Yup. Of course I forgot to check my notes to see what the obstacle clearing figures were for heavier guns, but I seem to remember that 105 guns would need about 1/3 - 1/2 less ammo than 75 mm ones. And while American 105 mm barrage was scary, so was a Finnish 105 mm artillery strike. The strike would last only one minute, but in that time 96 shells would land in a 100 m x 100 m target area, each gun of the batallion firing 8 times with first 12 shells landing within two or three seconds. (A 75 mm strike would have 120 shells in a minute, a 120 mm strike 60, and a 150 mm strike 48). - Tommi

kverdon wrote: Using exagerated motions, Slick sits up from under the tank, pulls the stem on the apple and tosses it at his German tormenters. I've posted this before, but a company (or was it a batallion) commander of SS Division Wiking once scared a Soviet tank away with a Cognac bottle. The tank had broken through German lines and surprised the captain who was driving to the lines in his Kübelwagen. He grabbed the nearest thing that that happened to be a Cognac bottle and threw it at the tank hitting it. The tank commander apparently thought it was a Molotov coctail that had failed to ignite and reversed away. Of course, the captain should have been tried as a war criminal for wasting good stuff like that. - Tommi

ASL Veteran wrote: As far as the effectiveness goes - I suppose it could be argued that maybe the casualties are more or less in line, but (and this is a big but) we are making several assumptions about what is going on. As I mentioned, I took the assumptions right out my hat on the fly. I tried to use figures that sounded reasonable to me. The squad is not going to be dispersed over the entire 20x20 square that is a tile in CM. Actually, the worst gripe that I have with CM is that the infantry squads are grouped too tight. I'm not an expert on squad tactical formations that were in use in different armies, but here in Finland the most common battle formation was an open line that was about 40-60 meters wide, the men being 3-8 meters from each other. Of course, this would depend heavily on conditions of the battle. During assaults the density would be higher as well as when defending isolated strongpoints. Just looking at one squad standing in one square should be sufficient to see that this is a false assumption. Umm... I fail to see that. I seem to remember that BTS has stated (many times) that the actual squad figure depicts the "mass center" of the squad and the actual men are considered to be spread out. To say that the flames only cover a 2x2 meter area is also questionable. Now I've never used a FlameThrower before, but from the newsreels of Marines flaming Japanese bunkers, the flame that is spewing forth is very robust in size, and easily exceeds 2m x 2m. I may well be wrong, but I'd guess that firing at bunker results in a larger ball of flame than firing at open ground. The reason for this is that some of the flames would reflect back from the walls of the bunker. My 2x2 meter figure was an estimate of the size of the fire ball where it touches open ground when fired from 15-20 meters. As I've never handled a flamethrower, I don't know how accurate this estimate is. About a week ago I had a chance to read a Finnish flamethrower operator's guide that was written in 1942 (or '41, I'm not sure anymore). According to it, there are three uses for a flamethrower in combat: 1) Destroying bunkers and other fortifications. 2) Clearing trenches during an attack (as an alternative for the point smg gunner). 3) Ambushing tanks. In this role the flamethrowers were used in pairs: the first one blinds the tank and the second one ignites the engine. - Tommi

Blue Macs wrote: "Victory Lies in the Truth". Does this generalize to: "Defeat Tells the Truth in the Falsehood"? - Tommi

Let's make a funny calculation.(I'm doing this on the fly so don't expect too much accuracy). Let's suppose that the flame incapacitates a person in 1 second. I don't know whether this is reasonable or not but I'd guess that shorter exposures wouldn't give long lasting damage. Next, suppose that the target is a 10-man infantry squad in foxholes covering a 20 x 20 meter area (one CM terrain square), with one foxhole being 1m x 1m. I'm not an expert on flamethrowers, so let's just assume that the point of effect (where the flame touches ground) is 2m x 2m. Now, the square has 20x20 = 400 possible foxhole locations. (If we allow two-man or larger foxholes). At any point the flame will cover 4 locations. So, supposing that you want to give each possible location a 1 second spray and you can move the flame instantly, it will take 400/4 = 100 seconds to cover the whole area. Except that you have fuel only for 8 seconds, so you can cover only 32 of the 400 possible spots. These figures were taken straight out of a hat but I'd say that when firing a dispersed squad, one or two casualties is the maximum. (Morale effects are altogether different issue). The flamethrowers are most effective when attacking fixed fortifications where you can be quite certain that the enemy is concentrated in a quite small area. Favourite targets are firing slits of bunkers and trench-clearing. - Tommi

coe wrote: Can you disable minefields with intense artillery, Clearing minefields (and barbed wire) with artillery requires either _a lot_ rounds and a competant FO or a great amount of dumb luck. A 1936-vintage Finnish artillery field manual ("Tykistön taktillinen toiminta") quotes that with 75 mm guns it takes 250-350 rounds to clear a 10x30 meter area of obstacles. (The figure is for wire, but the text implies that it applies to minefields also). With intensive fire, a 75 mm gun can fire 10 rounds in a minute (but only for a short time because the barrel will otherwise be ruined). The guns in CM fire with much slower rof. I've not checked but I think that they fire less than 5 salvos in a minute. So, to clear that small area would take at least 15 CM turns. In practice, obstacle clearing was much slower since intensive fire couldn't be used and the results of each shot had to be observed. The artillery manual gives the figure that a 2-gun section can clear a breach in 3-4 hours, so a battery would need 1.5-2 hours, the effective rof being somewhere around one shell a minute per gun. Also note, that according to an older Finnish manual (early 20's), it is not possible to clear obstacles that are placed in marsh with artillery. - Tommi

AR wrote: I always considered mine fields as an area where infantry would not be able to pass (which requires more than 10-15 mines). Digressing from CM representation, that is a quite dangerous assumption to make in the real life. In particular, Soviets were experts in attacking through minefields that the defenders thought were impenetrable. They would send a team to clear a pathway a couple of days before the attack. Of course, all armies did that to some extent but Soviets were the best. I have read accounts where Soviet mine-clearers spent two or three days inside a minefield, working at night and lying motionlessly in cover during days. One Soviet trick was to work with bare arms so that it would be easier to feel tripwires. - Tommi

Trooper wrote: The Mouse that Roared. Army of Darkness. Well, if you count those as war films, you might well include one of the best films ever made: "Doctor Strangelove". - Tommi [This message has been edited by tss (edited 08-16-2000).]

Grognerd_Fogman wrote: To even it out a bit maybe you could allocate more points and experience to the "unogo" player... Hell no. They should have sharpened mangoes, at most. Remember, the prerequisite for a good campaign is that the enemy should under no circumstances have weapons. - Tommi

Correction to my own post: The T-34 that Sergei mentioned was not the only Soviet tank destroyed in that attack. The first victims were a platoon of T-34s that Corporal Lagus (son of the division commander Ruben Lagus) torched. The T-34 that Sergei mentioned was first one of the 4 T-34s destroyed by Olof Lagus. (His vehicle was commanded by Lt. Sartio). - Tommi

Sergei wrote: Maybe the T-34 crew was drunk or sleeping, because it didn't fire even once. Ms. Fortune was smiling to the StuG crew, however... I might add a few details on that account. (Sergei may correct me if I picked the wrong battle. Also, my sources are home so this may not be completely correct). That encounter happened at Kuuterselkä during the night between June 14 and 15 in 1944. Note that at the time of year there's no real dark period in Finland, only a dusk that lasts for a couple of hours after midnight. The Finnish counter attack (conducted with Assault Gun Batallion (Sturms) and Jääkäri brigade) crashed into the spearhead of Soviet advance a couple of hours after they had broken the second line (VT-line) of Finnish defence at Kuuterselkä. The Soviet formations were distrupted by a large bombing run that destroyed ~10 tanks and assault guns. The Soviets were in process of securing the breakthrough while their recon elements were probing forward when the counter attack came. The Soviet tankers were surprised by Finnish Stugs as they hadn't seen any Finnish AFVs before during the campaign. The T-34 that Sergei mentioned was not the only Soviet tank destroyed in that attack. The first victims were a platoon of T-34s that Corporal Lagus (son of the division commander Ruben Lagus) torched. Those tanks were stopped in tight formation in the middle of the road. During the attack Lieutenant Olli Aulanko drove his Stug over a horse-drawn AT battery, crushing the guns and animals beneath the treads. In the end the counter attack failed when Soviets poured reinforcements in the area. Finns lost 5 Stugs (one intact when its crew abandoned it) and Soviets lost 19 tanks to Stugs, and a few to Panzershrecks. In addition, a couple of Stugs were damaged. The total Soviet tank losses were a little over 30, IIRC, according to Soviet sources but this figure includes those killed in the bombing run. - Tommi

For a truly surreal effect, try "The North Star" aka "Armored Attack". It's just about the only Hollywood movie ever made that portrays communism as a noble cause. Valiant Soviet peasants throwing back barbarous fascists who want to drain their children of blood (yes, literally). I particularly liked the scene where a convoy of five (or so) trucks and a motorcycle drove in a circle portraying the advance of a motorized division. - Tommi

Geier wrote: And Tommi, if you´re reading this, if there are any inaccuracies in the above mentioned films I'll just cover my ears and chant "They were made from novels! Artistic license!" over and over. To anyone else, see them. I particularly like the tank inaccuracy in the original "Unknown soldier". American movies use T-34s to model German heavies. In "Unknown Soldier", a German Pz-IVJ was used to portray KV-IE. Nice turnabout. As regards to "Winter War", the counter attack to Vasikkasaari didn't really succeed, and the Soviets couldn't be thrown back to South side of the river. However, that is quite understandable mistake since the division commander (and possibly even the regiment commander) thought that the attack succeeded and reported so upwards. But yes, both films are remarkably accurate. (Though the actors in "Unknown Soldier" were too old, since it was a cadre unit). - Tommi

Pascal DI FOLCO wrote: Some people do want more complex forms... Yeah, but they are all bureaucrats or lawyers so they don't count. - Tommi

HankWWIIOnline wrote: Guy Sajer is the author of "The Forgotten Soldier" and also "Soldat" I believe(What I've heard anyway). No, "Soldat" is by Siegfried Knappe. Also, there's a controversy whether Sajer really fought in the East Front or not. Knappe certainly was a veteran. - Tommi

Von Brizee wrote: First few months the Germans slaughtered everything. In some places that would include themselves. See for example the battles of Salla and Kalastajasaarento. The Germans had some pretty heavy losses in the Northmost part of the front and their performance in the South end was not extraoridinary, either. These troubles were hidden in constant reports of successess of Army Groups North and Center. - Tommi

Another must-read on Stalingrad is "Battle for Stalingrad" by Vasili Chuikov. It's a pretty hard book to find, but very illustrive since it is just about the only Russian account of the full battle that has been translated to other languages. - Tommi

Michael emrys wrote: Houses especially with lots of radio antennas attract artillery like flypaper. So that's the reason why I found a swarm of 76K02 cannons dangling from my living room ceiling this morning. - Tommi

Not strictly topical to this thread but I managed to find a 1945 booklet ("Their Name is Legion") that contained English translations of Soviet hero-stories that had been published in newspapers during the war. Nowadays it is very difficult to say how much truth remains in the stories. I got interested in one particular story. According to it Sergeant Major Alexander Nikolaev rammed a Tiger with his burning T-34 and both tanks exploded. The interesting thing in this story was its date. The newspaper story was published in March 5 1943 and the event allegedly happened in the South Ukrainian Front. Did Germans have Tigers there that early? I thought that at the time there were Tigers only with Army Group North. - Tommi

rwcanuck wrote: Or, will it be difficult to have them switch sides? I recall that Steve once wrote that with the current code base it is very difficult to do that. I don't know what they plan to do in the future. There weren't too many battles between Finns and Germans that would make good scenarios. For most part of that war Germans were on constant retreat and fought only few delaying actions and Finns were content to follow them. However, it wasn't a fake war as some sources claim. It started as one but transformed into a real war pretty quickly. Off my head I can remember only two battles that could make interesting scenarios: Suursaari island and Tornio. I mentioned the Tornio battle, which was the only tank battle of the war, in the H39 thread. The Suursaari is an island in the Gulf of Finland that was strategically important as it blocked the route to Leningrad. After Finns had made armistice with (not surrender to) Soviets, Germans wanted to occupy the island. They thought that Finns wouldn't resist but they were wrong and they were driven back with heavy losses. (They managed to capture the main port of the island for a while but a Finnish mortar team prevented them from unloading heavy equipment which gave Finns time to organize a counter attack. Also, Finns were helped by Soviet tac air.) - Tommi

Rattus wrote: I wonder if the H39 in Norway was left behind by the Anglo-French expeditionary force in 1940. I know the French took some tanks and chenillettes(?) with them and the tanks at least saw action. It's definitely German. Germans sent a lot of captured French tanks to Norway and Northern Finland. See my above post. - Tommi

Probably the last tank battle where H39s participated was at Tornio October 5 1944. About 20 Hotchkissess and Somuas supported a German counter attack against Finns. Finns had a company of T-26 tanks. This was probably the only tank battle in 1944 (perhaps in the whole war) where both sides used captured vehicles that had been designed before the war. One German tank was destroyed and one Finnish one damaged in the tank duel. In addition to that loss Finnish schreckmen destroyed four German tanks (I think that the expression "hoist by own petard" is quite appropriate here) and the attack was repulsed. The identity of the tank that was destroyed by a T-26 was never conclusively established as the guy who checked the battlefield didn't know anything about tanks. It was probably a Hotchkiss but its description is not a complete match, since it speaks of "a light 6 ton tank" while Hotchkiss weighted 12 tons. - Tommi

marcusm wrote: The regiment I'm looking for is JR35 (Karjalan jääkäri ryk.) located around Ladoga during the war. I didn't have just about anything about that regiment in my bookshelf so I went to library. I found an outline of its operations in 1941 (not much details and the later years were on loan): Commanders: JR35: Lt.Col. L. Ruotsalo I/JR35: Maj. F. Jansson II/JR35: Capt. Ryynänen III/JR35: Capt. Petramaa The regiment was thrown around and in 1941 it fought with three different divisions and one detachment. It belonged to the 1st Division (commanded by Paalu) but it was later loaned first to 11th Division (Heiskanen?), then to the 4th Division, next to Group O (Oinonen), and finally to the 4th Division again. Here's a short list of places and battles where the regiment participated (the list is not complete but it gives quite clear picture on the route). 22.7.-6.8. Guarding the flank of 1st Division at Vieljärvi (North of Ladoga). 7.8. Repulsed a Soviet counterattack at Perjärvi (I and II batallions). 7.8. I/JR35 captured Hiisijärvi and Ivaselkä villages. 10.8. A Soviet counter attack almost encircled parts of I batallion, it retreated to a stream line at South-end of Perjärvi. 12.-13.8. Heavy Soviet counter attacks repulsed. 1.9. II/JR35 supported the attack of JR60 and advanced to Kotsuura where it was left on defence. 2.9. II and III batallions were sent to the 11th Division, I batallion guarded flanks of JR60. 4.9. II/JR35 manned a stream line at Kutismanjoki. (I think that the scene in the Unknown Soldier where they cross a river happened here, though JR8 (Linna's regiment) didn't really use boats but a bridge. I may be wrong, though) 5.9. I/JR35 relieved a batallion of JR8 that was guarding an encirclement. I believe (but I'm not 100% certain) that this encirclement was the infamous "****ed-up encirclement" that was mentioned in passing in the Unknown Soldier (book). The encirclement got its name after a nasty event where a young Gypsy boy killed and robbed at least two men of his company who had won a lot of money in a Blackjack game. The Gypsy then defected to the Soviets but run back the next day only to be mercilessly shot by friends of the men he had killed. 6.9. The encircled Soviets tried to break out but were destroyed. 13.9. The Regiment was attached to the 4th Division. 17.9. I/JR35 was employed to guard another encirclement that was created by JR26. 18.9. The regiment was attached to the Group O and sent to Onkamus. 20.-22.9. The regiment attacked at Neukkilampi 23.9. Repulsed a heavy counter attack. 24.-28.9. Advanced under heavy combat to Olkkoila-Muujärvi - road to block Soviet supply and withdrawal routes. 2.10. Blocked the road at Kenjakki. I/JR35 tried to attack West towards Olkkoila but was repulsed and the other batallions attacked East. 8.-11.10. Attacked at Nivajoki. 13.10. Attacked to Suununjoki. 20.-24.10 Heavy battles at Juotjärvi, slow advance towards Mäntyselkä. Here the elite Soviet 126th Regiment was encircled between JR35 and JR26 and lost all its heavy equipment. The 126th Regiment was commanded by a Finnish communist Valter Valli and 40% of its men were Finns, Karelians, Ingrians, or from Vepsä. That is, they had Finnish roots. After the war Valli claimed that the only reason why he lost his heavy equipment was because his division commander ordered him to hold (and later counter attack at) Mäntyselkä at all costs. The 126th regiment was one of the toughest Soviet units in Karelia. One reason for this was that a lot of the COs and NCOs were renegade Finns who would face the firing squad if captured. 1.-2.11. Was repulsed when trying to advance to Tsopina road. 3.-5.11. Tried to outflank the defences but was driven back when a Soviet unit managed to outflank the flanking maneuver. 6.11. Was transferred to army corps reserve. Also committed a few diversionary attacks to distract Soviets. 15.11-2.12. Took a part in the Karhumäki operation. The regiment advanced under combat in the left flank of the attack group. The regiment walked a large half circle and ended North East of Karhumäki. At this time the regiment was once again with the 4th Division. 5.12. Started to advance towards Hiisjärvi and repulsed a counter attack. 6.12. Reached the Murmansk railroad where the attack was stopped. I don't have data on the regiment's casualties. Roughly, the regiment's war path started near the old border a little South of Hyrsylä. From there they advanced towards Lake Onega, passed it from the West, and ended up North of it blocking the Murmansk railway. - Tommi