Andreas

Of interest to scenario designers, in a book from 1949 that details the effects of the Roer battles on the county of Jülich, I have come across the re-print for a number of Stützpunkt (emplacement/fire base) orders, with a neat bit of detail. The text is always the same, so I will only quote that once, but the equipment is listed in fine detail. The orders were found by a priest in a house north of Altenkirchen.

I know that the 21.ID was involved in the Amiens bridgehead, but am away from my sources at the moment. Depending on where I left their unit history, I should be able to get you some info before the weekend.

I would assume he had a current version as well. Both of his B-Abt. were 2. Welle formations (B26 and B30), so they would have gotten decent equipment and training on this, I would assume. But assumptions are the mother of all F-ups, as we all know, and they had to make do with French lMGs. For a vehicle in a chosen position, I believe you could make it work, with the appropriate training of the crew, and some time before the proverbial hits the fan. You also need decent LOS conditions, of course. I assume height estimation would work because they would be told the range to target from the Auswertestelle (~FDC), before firing the ranging shot, and they could then use the grid (that was apparently what the grid was used for). My grandfather would really only know about using them to fire for artillery. That was what he did, and he never told me he used them for other things. He said they did not splay them out completely, usually, but it is possible he did not understand the question completely. I asked how they were adjusted, and I am afraid I did not get all of the answer. I'll try that again tomorrow or Wednesday. But yes to both your questions - range estimation with two known ranges perfectly possible, and good to estimate heights once you knew range. As a side-note, there was apparently a very small stereoscopic range-finder, or something that looks like it, that was handed out to mortar teams and maybe HMG teams. I have a picture of a German soldier of an 81mm mortar team using one in the Baltics in '41. Edit because I think I got my Wellen wrong. [ August 23, 2004, 11:39 AM: Message edited by: Andreas ]

According to my grandfather, who I asked about this yesterday, the scissors scope could not be used for rangefinding on the hoof. He was very insistent about this, and I asked him a number of times in a round-about way. You could use it for range-estimation when you had prepared adequately: a) you needed to know exactly where you are on a map you needed at least two independent measurement points, called "Brechpunkte" (break points), to which range had to be accurately measured before from the location of the scissors scope When a) and were present, you could calculate range, and height (of air bursts) When these were not present, you could not. The way they estimated range in counter-battery standard procedure was relatively simple. They did not. Instead they used triangulation. Measure flash from three different points. Draw lines. Where the lines meet on the map, the enemy gun stands. No range estimation in this process, only direction finding. The main benefits of the scissors, according to him, were that it was a very high quality bino, and it could be used from behind cover with minimal exposure of the scope, and none of the viewer. Another benefit was that it had a firm mounting.

Hi Lorrin Can you drop me an email please? Cheers Andreas

Wouldn't that be my 'J' for 'junk' folder? BTW Paul, I think the doesn't have the one where the Home Guard is... oh well... either.

Boggsy is doing something wrong. Clearly. Otherwise he would be on the list. Of course, insulting me by using vile, abominable terms such as 'marketing' does nothing to get him on the list.

Martin - if you take the numbers by Greiner & Degener and divide them by four (4 sections in a platoon were standard in 1941, IIRC), you end with the following frontages for sections: Attack 35-60m Defense 50-125m Rearguard 100-250m This is the autumn 1941 edition of their book (8th printrun, revised a few times), and in the introduction states that it is revised to take account of Poland and France, and the new infantry training guidelines from spring 1941. Both authors were Colonels.

Agree with Dandelion here. Two possibilities to reduce force density/extend frontages on a map exist though; - add some HQs that can extend command range (slightly unrealistic, but you can always reduce the overall number of men, e.g. by using the loss function, or by deleting a squad here and there) - split squads into teams (reduces firepower and morale, but otherwise good way of extending the range of your force) In general the problem that Dandelion describes seems to lead to force densities that are too high for a given map. For me as a designer one goal is to achieve maximum map size for the forces I want to see in play.

Well, isn't that in Wales?

You know, I knew you would post something like that. You are getting predictable Boggsy.

I am a Member, not a number!

Can someone confirm that the chaps in this picture are British paras??? http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/2WWsealoin.htm

Martin Those are quite ideal standards as far as the late-war German situation goes. In AG Centre before Bagration, divisional sectors were up to 32km in 4. Armee sector (3 divisions, a further 6 divisions had 22-27 km, and one had 17km), defended by 6-9 battalions. In 9. Armee, Korps sectors were 123km (5 divisions), 69km (3 divisions) and 114km (2 divisions!). For IX.AK, the battalion frontages were: 252.ID - 30.1km I./461 - 7km (46 men/km) III.461 - 5.3km (57 men/km) III./7 - 8.3km (48 men/km) FuesBtl 252 ID - 6.0 (59 men/km) I.7 - 3.5 (80 men/km) Korps-Abt. D 30.8km IR171 I./171 - 3.4 (80 men/km) FuesBtl 56 - 6.0 (59 men/km) DivGrp 262 RgtGrp 462 - 5.4 (67 men/km) Rgtgrp 482 - 6.3 (56 men/km) IR234 III./234 - 4.7 (79 men/km) II./234 - 5.3 (74 men/km) These strengths probably exclude battalion supply echelon and refer to what the Germans called 'Gefechtsstaerke'. It looks to me as if the sector information is based on ideal, textbook circumstances. Greiner & Degener, in their 1941 handbook 'Taktik im Rahmen des verstaerkten Infanteriebataillons' (a textbook for German officers) give the following frontages: Attack Battalion - 400-1,000m Company - 300 - 500m Platoon - 150 - 250m Defense Battalion - 800 - 2000m Company - 400 - 1,000m Platoon - 200 - 500m Rearguard Battalion - 1,600 - 4,000 Company - 800 - 2,000 Platoon 400 - 1,000 Regarding depth, they say that breadth = depth. I.e. if your battalion is spread out 600m, then your reserve company should be 600m to the rear. They also counsel that the situation and the lay of the land can make significant adjustments necessary.

I thought I had answered that by looking into Godfrey's 'History of the DCLI'. The answer to your question is 'Carriers'. Since we are talking British Army here, I guess it is safe to assume that 'carriers' does indeed mean Carriers, and is not a stand-in for 'a vehicle that I could name but shall only refer to by a generic term.' Or not?

Eisenbahnbaubataillon Glossary Same gauge.

You are too kind. I actually considered it broken, and hence never released it properly. As for the kangaroos - there is almost certainly some mishtake there. 214 Brigade was held in reserve initially, to go up with 4th Armoured Brigade later, if conditions allowed. Nowhere in the copious notes cribbed from other histories that make up Delaforce's 'The Fighting Wessex Wyvern' is there any mention of Kangaroos. In Godfrey's history of the DCLI in WW2, it is said that 214 Brigade was supposed to exploit to the Orne in 'carriers' (this is mentioned twice). When they finally went into action, it was on foot.

All building mods by Juju, trees by Ed, wide horizons by MikeyD. An A13 cruiser standing by. (all tanks done by Gordon Molek) The new Valentines are thrown into the battle. Close support cruisers are getting ready to cover the advance. A thrown-together tank formation gets ready to defend a village in the North Downs A pillbox in a Downs village (Gautrek) The somewhat revamped interface, done by Junk2Drive - B&W pictures, General Ironside fighting for the British. We are getting a nice range of scenarios together, too. Remember, all still works in progress.

The pipes may well be plastic, looking at the picture I took. There are metal pipes in this neighbourhood as well, but it is difficult to get a decent picture of them. On the larger buildings, in particular the Westminster one, but also probably the Wimbledon one, outdoor metal plumbing should be okay, since they both were higher-status buildings, from my interpretation at least. I can't believe we are having this discussion.

If you ask more, I will have to go through my book boxes after all trying to find it, and then you'll owe me beers if we ever meet. One beer per box that I open. Your choice. Ps. I make sure to start from the wrong end.

Can you wait until October? My main book on this is in storage.

Of course it is - it always is. Just ask my girlfriend, she'll agree with you 100%. Now MikeyD - email!

Great stuff!

Say old boy, isn't that a pink hippotamus yonder? Now have you sent me the maps, eh wot?

[Whistles innocently] Nothing... Just asking [/Whistles innocently]