Andreas

I don't question that at all. I just questioned the idea that these 17,000 rounds mattered over the course of 'battles'. If you look at the rounds/gun produced in other applications, it is clear that 17,000 rounds is not a lot. Even at the outer edge of the envelope that Jon presents (which excludes losses in transport/depots, losses in lost tanks etc), it seems to be very little in terms of ammo loadout. I am just bein anal here, because I can

Tell that the GroBdeutchland div. who was poundered from a massiv bombardment, nearly whiped out the whole div. Such scale of AIr-op was clearly needed for a sucsesfull breakthrough. </font>

Grog Dorosh, AKA Pestilence is better informed about Elite Forces of the Reich - I have some weird (and probably wrong) recollection that some part of GD at some point was sent to Normandy. Well, where is Pestilence when you need him...

You just have a Sherman trundle along - no need for an extra squad.

That must have made a mighty powerful impression on those mounted knights, to say nothing of the housecarls! Michael </font>

I detect some possible hyperbole here. 17,000 rounds, in the larger scheme of things, is really not that much. I would be interested how they could play a vital part in later battles[!]. Just an example - for 710 10cm K18 in 1939, ammo production was 93,000. For 800 guns in 1940, 1.26 million rounds were produced. [ November 27, 2003, 10:02 AM: Message edited by: Andreas ]

Now also here. Again.

Email working again now. No idea what happened there.

I think this is the point where I am supposed to say: 'w00t!' Or sumfink. Finally my life is whole again.

What kinda links you lokking for? Soddball's the missing link... that what you're looking for? </font>

You can always pray to Famine. He does have even less fans than Pestilence. (One would not think it possible).

You effing clueless wally. You twit. You honourable Kentdweller, you afterthought of evolution, who the effing eff do you think you are? You do not have the clout to proclaim yourself the God of recently deceased pubic lice, let alone the God of anything as important as we (and I am speaking solely of us here) are. So get back under your stone and whimper at not being hated by anyone. Not enough anyway that they would bother to let you know about it anyway. Shove off.

What kinda links you lokking for? Soddball's the missing link... that what you're looking for? </font>

a) no it did not Grossdeutschland was nowhere near Falaise as a division (elements may have been)

I presume so. Here is some info in German from another forum. Basically says it was developed in WW I to deal with trench steel shields, used against tanks, and was a variant of the 8x57 round. Tankettes, early tanks in the 20s, and other vehicles were designed to be 'SmK' proof, i.e. save against MG fire.

I guess it is called an 'HMG' in CM because that is what the Germans called it 'sMG' stands for 'schweres Maschinengewehr'. AFAIK the Germans did not have a medium machinegun between the lMG and sMG34/42. Not one they called that anyway - I guess one could say that they actually did not have a HMG. I believe in the original design, the MG34 also got something that IIRC was called SMK ammunition, which was basically AP. By the late 30s, armour had probably increased to such a degree that it was a bit pointless.

Tell that the GroBdeutchland div. who was poundered from a massiv bombardment, nearly whiped out the whole div. Such scale of AIr-op was clearly needed for a sucsesfull breakthrough. </font>

At least the former is probably better shelved in the 'fiction' section.

At least the former is probably better shelved in the 'fiction' section.

Soviet late-war doctrine did not really feature all-out tank battles. If German tank formations were detected, it was usually recommended to go over to the defensive in the sector where they were operating, and reinforce that sector with independent AT brigades and SPAT regiments. The main problem faced by the Soviets in late war was the delivery of HE at the point of their advance, against dug-in Germans. In order to understand the choices made for particular weapons equipment, it is necessary to understand the doctrinal role of the AFV it is fitted on. The IS series of tanks took over the role of heavy breakthrough (actually assault would be more fitting) tank from the KV series. It operated in conjunction or parallel with the heavy assault guns to provide direct fire support in the assault. Tanks would probably only be encountered in a counter-attack to seal the breach, and one would expect AT guns brought forward immediately behind the assault troops (or indeed supporting them in the assault) to take on any armoured counter-attack. The T34 with its perfectly alright, but not great, 85mm gun was the tank for exploitation and pursuit. In this type of operation, tank on tank fighting was again not desired. But when it was necessary, the T34/85 could hold its own, especially by making up with numbers for lesser individual quality. I am working on a series of scenarios for Red Army studies that will show how this doctrine was implemented on the ground.

Phew - for a moment I thought MtJS was asking for the famous COMMENTATOR tank of TODAY (Radio 4, 6-9am), commanded by John Humphries and driven Sarah Montague. The voice files would of course be very interesting: JH: 'Answer the question minister! I have asked you a very clear question. Are you, or are you not, in favour of decent tanks?' M: 'Well, let me first say...' COMMENTATOR: KABOOOM SM: 'And now it is time for 'Thought for the day' with the Battalion Padre, the very reverend 'Kill em all, let God sort em out'' Scary.

So now you are endorsing bestiality? :eek:

Heh! No need to be offensive. I think you are breaking forum rules. I am not a 'city boy', I have you know that I work in Westminster.

I would not call it an oversight, but more likely a conscious decision. That there are lots of Indian speakers around is out of the question. I could just step outside my flat and haul in a dozen on very short notice. The problem is to get them in front of very decent recording equipment (the reason my voice is not used - apart from my inability to voice-act - is that I do not have recording equipment good enough), and then to pretend they are being shot at, or sumfink. Which maybe more of a problem. But that is just my guess - I was not even involved in the process, Matt will know the answers.