John Kettler

Which one is Charles? My bet is on the one in the middle. Regards, John Kettler

Wodin, etc., A charming gentleman named Daniel Borris has joined the CoC fold. He is a big time miniature soldier collector and has spent half a century doing it. Talking 9000 figures, part of which was the Donald Featherstone Collection. Featherstone was my first exposure to warfare in miniature via Desert War in Miniature, which was war in the Western Desert. He authored a pile of wargaming books, and Mr. Borris also has the original manuscripts for many. He generously decided to share his collection by video on YT, and here is the first--of 21! Regards, John Kettler

donfluff, Was rather surprised to see the monster AAV-7 (in Woodland, no less) trundle up and disgorge such a horde--until I recalled how many it carried. Though it rivals a school bus in size, it's not to be messed with, provided it has good SA so doesn't get turned into scrap by an RPG or nastier. The debarking was bizarre, but once the troops were out of the vehicle, it was cool to watch them crawl forward. Their speed of movement as they advanced to the mosque, though was like watching Slow Motion film, and I didn't understand it. And I bet Mr. Major Wound wasn't impressed with "no man left behind" then, either. The smoke seemed anemic in terms of obscuration power, but that could've been some sort of rendering issue. Never played CMSF, so have no idea what connection, if any, exists between the depiction and actual performance. Other than that, your guys kicked butt and didn't have to pull back and call for FS. donfluff and White2Golf, Turning now to representing force quality with different facet count dice, the way it's used is unusual, but 1) it seems to work well, and 2) the concept, per se, isn't alien to me at all, having played the original D&D which did the same thing for various weapon types. Loved the "see my agent" quip! mjkerner, The only rules listed I recognized were Force on Force. Never heard of the others. MOS:96B2P, I sure thought so. Had such a gaming itch after watching that video. Told my retired Cav Scout brother about the game, but he may or may not watch the video, after nearly being blown up by a VBIED, among other things, during his tour up in Anbar Province with the 3rd SBCT while on patrol in an armored Hummer mit MK19. Regards, John Kettler

Kaunitz, For what it is, it's a very good vehicle, on par with our M18 in terms of ground pressure and thus, able to operate where no other armor could in the Pripyet Marshes. My interpretation of what I've read is that there were three firing ports for that DT: forward, left and right side, with the ability to also use it for AA work by removing the weapon and pointing it aft. You can see the right side port (with DT protruding, I believe) on that translated page, in that fisheye view of an Su-76M. These things said, I've never had the opportunity to see one, Also, this AFV, not tanks, would be the go to for shooting in infantry attacks. See MIlsom, Soviet Armour 1917-1970, for proof. Regards, John Kettler

Found this grog goodie while investigating 6 pdr crew personal weapons. This says the brace of 6 pdrs at Arnhem Bridge deserve the principal credit for demolishing Grabner's valiant efforts to bounce the bridge. Please note engagement ranges for some instances of use. One lovely bit of info concerns the complete listing, by round type, brought in for these two highly successful ATGs http://arnhemjim.blogspot.com/2016/12/the-6-pounder-anti-tank-guns-at_10.html Regards, John Kettler

Kaunitz, Oops! "Was inadvertently ambiguous, a "gift" I have had for ages. Its" refers to the SU-76M. Regards, John Kettler

Kaunitz, According to this somewhat tortured translation of an Su-76 article, the AFV was fitted with a DT MG, the same one as the bow gun on a T-34. http://weaponews.com/weapons/10521-stories-about-guns-the-su-76m.html (Fair use) " In addition, the sheet of the conning tower to the left of the cannon was installed 7. 62-mm machine gun dt." The ammo is for that MG, not handing out as party favors to infantry. That MG would be dismounted for commander's recon, too, and he would dip into the dozen grenades routinely carried on the SU as standard practice. He would have an SMG, his pistol and the grenades and would be covered by the guy with the DT. From what I can tell, crewmen had 710 rounds, at 47 rounds per magazine for a DP/DT MG, works out to a rather anemic 15 magazines on an AFV supposed to shoot in assaults. There's also this from Tank Archive. http://tankarchives.blogspot.com/search?q=su-76m (Fair use) "The 1944 modernization also equipped the vehicle with a DT machinegun, and ports in the sides from which it could be fired. The MG could be mounted on the rear to fire at airborne targets." Prior link indicates it has a forward port, so it would appear it's got three plus the ability to fire aft as an AA weapon." AA use automatically implies high volumes of fire, further bolstering my case. Do I believe the Su-76M crew would hand over a few DT magazines in fraternal socialist support of the ammo poor frontoviki? Yes. Do I believe they'd hand over the entire ammo load of a key weapon? Absolutely not. If that's what's happening, then I would argue some sort of fix would be appropriate. If I misunderstood what you said, please clarify. Am disadvantaged here, in that I can't go consult the game, since I don't own it, so don't know its standard in game ammo loadout. Regards, John Kettler

quakerparrot67, Welcome aboard! If I think about it, I'll check. Guess I could do a name search and see what pops. (Leaves page briefly, then returns) Eureka! This is the link to his post and embedded pics. https://www.facebook.com/groups/1444501242432741/search/?query=monte cassino Regards, John Kettler

Whether you're interested in future warfare, WW II or both, this superb MILITARY REVIEW article from early this year should give you lots to think about. The author is pushing for making the current 9-man squad bigger, by adding a super capable, tech loaded 3-man Scout-Recon team. This, mind, is after the Marines have upped their firepower by ~3 x, downsized their squad and added a new position: Systems Operator to handle digital data, squad UAV, etc. In order to make his case, the author shows how WW II experience led to downsizing from 12 to begin with and why he sees a need to expand the squad back to its previous size by adding a 3-rifleman Scout-Recon team loaded with tech. He also drops a bombshell on squad maneuver during WW II and presents some harrowing numbers on the attrition rate at the Battle of Aachen. https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Journals/Military-Review/English-Edition-Archives/March-April-2018/Kamara-Infantry-Rifle-Squad/ Regards, John Kettler

One of the CoC guys posted this, and after watching it, I'm truly impressed. Superb visual aids, atmosphere out the wazoo (you'll see) and combat vets, some with three tours in Iraq. This looks like the BTDT and bought the T-shirt factory convention. Seemed like a great idea to share this, since CMSF2 is coming. LongLeftFlank will love this city section, the roundtable is insightful (full version on their site), and there is state-of-the-art miniature wargaming tech in use, too. What the veterans have to say about how they feel about doing modern wargaming is fascinating, and I'm glad the issue was discussed, for I'm wary about how I handle anything to do with war in Iraq combat with my brother, who barely got home in one piece after a VBIED encounter while on patrol in a MK19-armed armored Hummer. Was barely clear of it when it blew. Just enough not to be hurt. Others in his unit were not so lucky, and from a variety of combat causes. Regards, John Kettler

One of the guys on the CoC boards posted this little marvel. There seems to be a disagreement (see Comments there) as to the correct identity of the larger AFV, but regardless, it's a joy to see them, having only even B/W somewhat blurry wartime footage. These tanks are acoustically stealthy, shockingly so. Like that they're fully kitted out and the crews are, best I can tell, in proper uniform. Regards, John Kettler

Combatintman, Back during the Cold War, I got to see some fine examples of that myself on engine maintenance day, but the wag in me can't help but observe the uninformed, confronted with "bay and shedding," might think it was either a canine issue or something to do with a marine environment. Regards, John Kettler

In researching Russian Rifle Company (and below) TO&E, I came across this, which covers the subject from Barbarossa to the end. It is rich in info, is apparently a data file for a WW II game system I never heard of, and there is nothing for sale there, so I hope the Mods are okay with that. See what you think. Regards, John Kettler

May've gotten the organizational level wrong, but this should provide some insights for a bunch of units. Soviet Wargaming http://canuckcommander.pbworks.com/w/page/14311324/WW2 Soviet Wargaming Regards, John Kettler

Ref Germans, what I've read is that their late war TO&E was far better suited to defense than attack. Definitely true for VGD. Remember, their squads are smaller, hence, more brittle than the larger American squads when they start taking casualties. German squads often didn't have full TO&E, either, so a 2 X MG42 squad might have only one. The big American squads are more resilient (presuming same stats) than the Germans. While the BAR team (often, teams--2 x BAR) formed the base/s of fire, the Americans put out enormous amounts of rifle fire that the Kar 98 couldn't match. Brother George knows way more about this than I do, and my CM experience is both inadequate and super rusty (CM brain still offline), but I have learned some things the hard way in BA and CoC. Would observe, though, that the CMBB Strategy Guide had a simply enormous number of different German infantry formation types, so would expect a lot more variation than what seems like a canned German squad organization. As for the Russians, their later war Rifle Battalion TO&E had 2 x Rifle Company and 1 x SMG Company. The latter was used to deliver killing blows to a disrupted foe via shock action. Thus, running into a formation whose weaponry was almost exclusively SMGs could and did happen. Where else are the SMG troops? On the tanks! Scale was, I believe, an SMG Platoon per Tank Company. If I did the math right, it works out to a half squad per tank. Regards, John Kettler

In response to my discourse on CoC anbout Panzer Grenadier tactics, one of my gaming colleagues informed me Bren carriers were used similarly. After expressing confoundment, I asked for a link. Back came highly refined grog gold! This Australian training film may well fundamentally alter your understanding of the combat capabilities of a UC. Sure did for me, to the point where I was practically gasping aloud. This is my new gold standard in WW II period training films. The wee beastie shown has a Boys in the firing port, as well as a mortar and a Bren above and behind that part of the AFV. Prepare to fundamentally revise your understanding of the UC's method of operation. Regards, John Kettler

Gah! "..most information-dense piece..." Sorry about that. Regards, John Kettler

If you have any interest in handheld AT weaponry, this is a must read. Not only does it discuss the PzF story, but provides the context in which at arose, described how dire the German situation was, what interim weapons were and so on. Hands down, this is the most information defense piece I've ever seen on the Panzerfaust, probably because it originally appeared in Small Arms Review. Found it while trying to settle a debate on whether PzFs were shipped with warheads separate. https://www.smallarmsreview.com/display.article.cfm?idarticles=1828 Regards, John Kettler

Wicky, I did read the quote, which as to do with having enough 251s to develop the requisite tactics. Ibid. both quotes. (Fair Use) "It was only at the time of Barbarossa in 1941 that large numbers of SdKfz 251s became widely available and enough to equip full battallions of Panzer Greadiers within a Panzer division. Now, the Germans could experiment with fighting directly from their half-tracks." But if you'd read a bit further, you would've seen this: (Fair Use) "The SdKfz 251, drivers were prepared to simply ignore or drive through small arms fire, but the presence of enemy artillery or anti-tank guns usually saw them seek cover. The squad's machine-gunners might well engage targets on the move, as could the rest of the squad if necessary from the sides. Often when advancing, the SdKfz 251s, could utilise a motorised version of fire and movement, advancing, stopping and firing to cover other half-tracks. A halted half-track provided a good firing position but was vulnerable. As a result, it was not recommended to stop for more than 15-20 seconds in hostile terrain. " The fire and move scheme works just as it does for tanks firing from the short halt. It is precisely what my brother was talking about, too. Have read elsewhere that drivers were supposed to zigzag to make their vehicles harder to aim at, thus, hit. Note, though, that in the PG training film, the 251s are in an area under some sort of mortar or artillery fire, but the action continues. There is no breaking off. Generally speaking, Russian infantry had poor protection vs tanks for most of the war. Relative to troop strength in frontline combat, ATRs were scarce and ATGs scarcer. There was no ATR in each platoon, and Individual AT grenades, even at Kursk, were so sparse the infantry got mass deliveries, at their fighting positions, of materials to make Molotov cocktails. The situation improved later. Our perception of massive quantities of Russian AT means is driven by the fact the Russians had large formations of dedicated antitank weapons, which were carefully positioned where they had the most leverage, if committed from several echelons up. If you sent Panzers into an area held by an ATR or Destroyer (typically ATG, but sometimes, SU) Regiment, life would cease to be boring! Am well aware that the Western forces were another matter altogether, because not only did they have scads of 251 eating infantry weapons, but because they had lots of super responsive--relative to Russian FS--FS of their own. The Germans may've dissed American troops as combat soldiers, but they were afraid of our artillery. They also thought the 25 pdr was a kind of machine gun because of its extraordinary ROF. From what I've seen of battle accounts from the ETO, post-D-Day, where the 251s got eaten alive were the times where their movement was stopped (by bazooka, PIAT, ATG, roadblock, etc.) and the FA pounded the oft almost nose to tail AFVs to scrap in short order because of it. Once counted a string of 14, that way, all victims of artillery fire. Believe that was from one BoB fight. This one's probably from aerial bombing, but it gives some idea of what I mean. Appreciate suggestions and observations. also note there's some ground replowing from another OP as well. Theor was a link in that other thread to a page from an original PG manual. Regret to say the graphic is no longer viewable. Regards, John Kettler

This site has first class English translations (with exacting attention to layout pics, etc.) of a bunch of Panzer Grenadier manuals, as part of a much larger program of manuals. Both of these manuals are from 1944, so fall directly into the CM time frame. https://www.germanmanuals.com/REmanuals.html Instruction for the Panzer Grenadier and Panzer Troops Ausbildungsvorschrift für die Panzertruppe - HDv 298/3a - Instruction Manual for the Panzer Troops - Leadership and Fighting of the Panzergrenadiere. Volume 1: The Panzergrenadier Battalion. This manual contains a surprising amount of basic tactical rules and how the panzer grenadiers and leadership are to behave in specific situations. One of the 12 appendices explains radio secrecy, what must be encoded, and what can be disguised in radio, phone, and telegraph traffic. Dated August 5, 1944. 145 original pages, 115 in the new format, containing all text and illustrations of the original, including a few pages with color. This manual covers subject material not found in any other manual I've translated. This manual and the one below are must haves for those interested in the Panzer Grenadier troops. Check the table of contents for a complete listing of subject matter. Please reference "Panzer Troops" on your order. $20 - includes U.S. first class postage. Original Cover Cover Contents Page 13 Page 36 Page 81 German Army Infantry Instruction - Panzergrenadiere Squad Level Combat Training - WW2 Era Gefechtsausbildung der Panzergrenadiere - Combat Instruction for the Panzergrenadiere {Motorized Rifleman}. A collection of tasks for the guidance of the recruit instructor in the combat instruction in the context of the squad with 2 light MGs, armored and unarmored. 196 pages, dated 1944, with 28 sketches. This book is filled with 21 lessons for the instructors to use as scenarios for training the recruits, and explains the how and why of combat operations with detailed practical examples, and the proper behavior of the squad members. This is an exceptional manual for learning how the German Soldat was trained in realistic combat situations. Training scenarios include the squad in attack (near, medium, and far distances, armored and unarmored), the squad in defense, the squad as combat sentries, reconnaissance (armored and unarmored), night fighting, and lots more - you really need to see the table of contents below. It has been a while since I enjoyed translating a book this much. This one is a "must have" if you want to know how the German soldier was trained to fight in the field. Most of the sketches have the enemy represented in red, which has been reproduced in this book. This manual is written for the recruit instructors as a guideline for teaching the recruits, who are expected to already know the basics. Recommended prior reading is H.Dv. 130/2a (above), as it is an excellent basic training manual. HDv. 130/11 (above) is also referenced in this book. Now you can read about the WWII German training as close to real thing as you'll ever get. Please reference "Squad Training" on your order. $32 - includes U.S. first class postage. Original Cover Cover Contents Page 28 Page 95 Page 169 Regards, John Kettler

The received wisdom in CM circles seems to be that 251s are battle taxis which unload hundreds of meters from the foe, but I would note that we also had plans to fight from our ARMORED INFANTRY halftracks, including firing bazookas. Here is how German war artist Hans Liska depicted the 251 in battle am Ost. This is very much like the "Welcome to Africa!" given by the DAK veterans to a newly arrived TORCH unit. The welcome consisted of an attack out of the setting sun, lots of shooting and grenade throwing, an about turn and disappearance into the darkness. That story is in the anthology of battle stories released by BFC in support of CMAK. https://www.amazon.com/Battery-Commande… Here is a brief description of Panzer Grenadier tactics, which included, depending on the situation, fighting from the halftracks. If we ever get Barbarossa this would be pretty common. Brother George, quite the student of German tactics and a retired Army Scout of 20 yrs. experience, gagged when I talked about 251s as mere battle taxis, pointing out they leapfrogged each other in what we would call bounding overwatch. http://axisafvs.blogspot.com/2015/03/panzergrenadier-tactics.html Mutual support (mostly from MGs) is clearly shown in this excellent Panzer Grenadier training film, as is the fact the 251s are rolling close to the the foe before debarking infantry. The shot up foe is then subsequently flamed by Flammpanzers driving smack into the enemy occupied area and making like dragons, with the multiple flame projectors providing tremendous arcs of fire. There are no CM battle taxis anywhere in this film. As noted in the article, tactics change considerably if facing a serious AT threat. Regards, John Kettler

"They Shall Not Grow Old" is presently UK only release, but it looks spectacular. Regards, John Kettler

Found this today, a CGSC Master's Thesis on the German Spec Ops Missions for the Battle of the Bulge. German Special Operations in the 1944 Ardennes Offensive Major Jeffrey Jarkowsky, USA U.S. Army Command and General Staff CollegeATTN: ATZL-SWD-GD Fort Leavenworth, Kansas 66027-6900 http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a284495.pdf Regarding certain questions via PM, I made a typo in OP. It was Einheit Stielau, not as written. Name derived as follows. Above, page The commando company, the "Einheit Stielau", named after their commander, SS Hauptsturmfuehrer Stielau,23 Footnote references Pallud, p. 64. Original cite says: Jean Paul Pallud, Battle of the Bulge: Then and Now, (London: Battle of Britain International Prints Limited, 1984). Axis History Forum couldn't produce first name of Einheit Stielau's CO, but there's some good stuff there otherwise. Nor could a bunch of other sites I visited. Weirdly, it's not that difficult to find first names for the other COs in PzBr 150. https://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=227386 But I'm a persistent cuss, and a failed page cite on AHF led me to a searchable name. Am pretty certain this is the man. Believe the award records lagged his promotion. No other Stielau I could find under that name was even close in rank or SS. https://forum.axishistory.com/search.php?keywords=lothar+Stielau by Bernd R 23 Mar 2009, 13:22 Forum: Axis Biographical Research Topic: Awardholders / unit Replies: 2757 Views: 706312 Re: Awardholders / unit ... 30.03.1945, SS-Hauptsturmführer, Stab Solar Army Honor Roll Clasp (2) Stielau, Lothar Regards, John Kettler

After finding this fascinating site while doing some research, I came across this oh so CMBS topical article. Site covers lots of stuff of interest. https://www.geopolitica.ru/en/article/new-confrontation-between-russia-and-ukraine Regards, John Kettler

One of the CoC guys was trying to get a handle on how to depict the pseudo American force Skorzeny barely cobbled together, and it got me into research mode. Found some useful stuff, but this is probably the grand prize, since it's official intelligence, not a secondary or tertiary article. Anyone live near Kew? http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C4552494 Regards, John Kettler