Kanonier Reichmann

Problem with that is that a buttoned tank is much slower to react to a threat than an unbuttoned one leaving it vulnerable to ambushes with the unit getting the first shot usually winning the duel. By all means do the unbuttoning/buttoning trick if you know there's a sharpshooter threat out there but otherwise I would prefer to have the better reaction time to threats. Regards Jim R.

Or Rumanians or Finnish or...... Regards Jim R.

Considering the MG-42's had a higher rate of fire than the MG-34's by a factor of about a third it's hardly surprising. The '42's were pumping out bullets so quickly that it sounded like canvas ripping. From my understanding, even current day HMG's with all the advances that have been made with technology have deliberately lower ROF's than the "ancient" MG-42 due to the potential jamming problems. Regards Jim R.

Not the best shot I've seen of him but still a cool guy. Dangerman anyone? Regards Jim R.

Here's another WWII film that hardly ever gets a mention but is a classic (IMHO) in terms of it's anti-war message. Too late the hero starring a very young Michael Caine & Cliff Robertson. It was Altmans 3rd film in a series of war films he made in the 1960's to early 70's and I'm sure it reflected the times with its anti war theme carrying a strong message regarding the Vietnam war. Regards Jim R.

Not quite true. HQ's couldn't act as spotters for halftrack mounted mortars in CMBO. Regards Jim R.

Brilliant, thanks Jon. Just what I was looking for. I'll send you an email to follow up on your other offer as well. Regards Jim R.

The trouble with interleaved roadweels as I understand it is that they may provide a superior ride for the tank crew but at the expense of over-engineering (common German problem) and creating the likelihood of mud and stones and other crap building up between the wheels and causing breakdowns. Good in theory... poor in practice. I guess that's why you don't see that design after the war but mainly Christie style suspension and road wheel designs. Vertical & horizontal volute systems seem to also have fallen by the wayside although I'm not quite sure why they may not be in favour still. I'm guessing complexity and inferior flotation compared with a Christie system? Anybody know for sure? Regards Jim R.

Thanks for all that info. Jon & Andreas. I don't suppose you happen to know what the typical vehicles were that equipped the reconnaissance regiment and in what proportion? i.e. roughly 2 Humbers to every Daimler sort of thing? Regards Jim R.

Thanks for that Michael. I've been trying to find a site using Google and various search words/phrases that has some sort of history of actions the 46th Infantry Division fought in Italy but all to no avail so far. If such a site exists I guess any AAR's will provide information on how often and to what extent AFV's were attached to the division and hopefully some more info. on the types of veicles the reconnaissance regiment had. Regards Jim R.

I thought I would ask if anyone is in the know on how much transport was typically assigned to a British infantry division and, I guess, more specifically the 46th Infantry division around late 1943 as it fought its way up the Italian theatre. I'm currently involved in a campaign where there's a bit of a query on how much armoured transport was typically inherent in the division (i.e. Bren Gun Carriers, halftracks etc) compared with just the trucks. Also, I'm hoping someone may know how often a section or two of tanks would be attached to the division for specific battles or was the armour always operated independantly from the infantry division command structures? I know for instance the 46th had a reconnaissance regiment but would this typically only have vehicles such as Humbers and perhaps Daimlers or were there ever any MBT's as part of such a regiment perhaps? Any help would be appreciated. Regards Jim R.

Posted by the enigma: They don't sound like very exciting memoirs if it's about their time down on the farm with the cows. Regards Jim R.

But with no light being offered to it. Regards Jim R.

I assumed that CMAK pretty much treated them the same as woods cover in all respects. If I'm wrong I'd certainly like to know as well. Regards Jim R.

Hear, hear. An eccentric to be sure but a lovable eccentric all the same! Regards Jim R.

Yet if you're playing against the AI (cough, cough, splutter) there is absolutely no delay at all from the get go! :eek: Regards Jim R.

You can't tell as such when you give the command but provided you used the "I" key rather than the "T" key then the arty will fall in a wider pattern than normal. Regards Jim R.

What was the weather like on the morning of the kill? Regards Jim R.

There! I've just seen it again! 666 It's bloody everywhere I tell you! Regards Jim R.

Based on what's been stated above I think I can be pretty confident in saying that Theatre of War definitely will have German forces in them. Was that your question? Regards Jim R.

Perhaps the date on that combat report of the 1st of April gives it away? Regards Jim R.

Perhaps the date on that combat report of the 1st of April gives it away? Regards Jim R.

Whatever happenned to that classic battle set in the desert where it starts at about turn 5 with the Germans in convoy penetrating a British encampment? That was a very clever design with good to and fro battles all over the map. I highly recommend it if anyone is interested and it can be found but I seem to recall it has to be played against a human opponent due to the way the battle is set up with the convoy already in train. Regards Jim R.

O.K., but my point was, why so much armour (up to 108mm) on the lower hull front when it should be the least exposed part of the tank when facing the enemy? Doesn't make sense to me when surely that armour could be put to better use in the upper hull & turret areas which would generally be more exposed. Regards Jim R.

That's one of things I also couldn't understand about the Sherman design. Why did it have such a relatively well armoured lower hull compared with the upper hull & turret when surely the designers should have been placing more armour in the more commonly exposed areas. I'm assuming that it's taken as given that tankers usually try to reach hull down positions to reduce their exposure & therefore difficulty for the enemy to hit them. Regards Jim R.