Sirocco

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kanonier Reichmann: Another case of the benevolent treatment of other countries troops by the then British "Empire".<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> ------------------ "He belongs to a race which has coloured the map red, and all he wants are the green fields of England..." - Joe Illingworth, Yorkshire Post War Correspondent

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kanonier Reichmann: Another case of the benevolent treatment of other countries troops by the then British "Empire".<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> ------------------ "He belongs to a race which has coloured the map red, and all he wants are the green fields of England..." - Joe Illingworth, Yorkshire Post War Correspondent

I was wondering whether briefings might be used for Quick Battles in CM2. I think perhaps if the CPU created "vague" briefings it might reduce the use of gamey recce tactics, and produce a more realistic overall experience. ------------------ "He belongs to a race which has coloured the map red, and all he wants are the green fields of England..." - Joe Illingworth, Yorkshire Post War Correspondent

I bought two FT teams in my last PBEM, and put one in a building behind which a StuH 42 was hiding, to provide it with some flank security. When a British squad made a dash for one of the VP flags it entered another nearby building and the FT team promptly flamed it, set the house on fire, and the British squad fled. That VP flag was never seriously threatened again. ------------------ "He belongs to a race which has coloured the map red, and all he wants are the green fields of England..." - Joe Illingworth, Yorkshire Post War Correspondent

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Croda: My point was that comparing the fighting on Gold, Juno, and Sword, to that on Omaha and Utah is comparing Apples to Oranges.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I think you'll find that there might have been more fighting on Gold, Juno and Sword than there was on Utah, but opposition on all of them was much lighter than on Omaha, which was the exception. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Croda: I'm also noticing that those of us who don't know the war inside and out appear to be very much Stephen Ambrose and the History Channel educated. Kind of amusing, I must say.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> But the results of that aren't amusing if you're British or Canadian... ------------------ "He belongs to a race which has coloured the map red, and all he wants are the green fields of England..." - Joe Illingworth, Yorkshire Post War Correspondent [This message has been edited by Sirocco (edited 09-29-2000).]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jeff Heidman: What are you ranting about?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I think the fact you omitted the British and Canadians might have been the issue he was referring to... ------------------ "He belongs to a race which has coloured the map red, and all he wants are the green fields of England..." - Joe Illingworth, Yorkshire Post War Correspondent

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software: I haven't a clue what can be done to prevent wild charges by light AFVs into the rear with the intention of knocking out tanks from the rear.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The only real solution is a long term one; an increase in the complexity of the games AI which will give each man "consciousness", the ability to evaluate his environment fully, and to therefore reject tactics of this kind. But that, of course, is something not possible with the current level of widespread computing power. ------------------ "He belongs to a race which has coloured the map red, and all he wants are the green fields of England..." - Joe Illingworth, Yorkshire Post War Correspondent

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Faust: Target a sniper onto a tank with exposed commander and he will shoot. Sometines there is a yelp and the hatch closes immediately. On checking the ss's kill report, no kill.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The sharshooter would find it hard to be sure of a kill, and that is reflected in his stats. Whether the tank commander is killed, wounded or shocked, the tank is now buttoned, which should be your main concern. ------------------ "He belongs to a race which has coloured the map red, and all he wants are the green fields of England..." - Joe Illingworth, Yorkshire Post War Correspondent

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CrapGame: I like the Hetzer when it can be positioned well.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The only experience I've had with a Hetzer was in a current PBEM game. I found a nice ambush position for it, but it missed the first shot and then succumbed to that infamous "gun hit" occurence... ------------------ "He belongs to a race which has coloured the map red, and all he wants are the green fields of England..." - Joe Illingworth, Yorkshire Post War Correspondent

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Berkut: Ask any british tanker veteran, what tank they preferred. 8 times out of ten they would opt for the sherman and the Lee Grant. It was a simple question of hitting power. British tanks and Tank guns never kept pace with developments in german armour.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Hitting power..? Sherman and Grant..? The American tanks were liked because they were, generally, built to a better standard than the British tanks and were therefore more reliable. I would characterise the Shermans as the workhorses of the British armoured divisions in the later war years. ------------------ "He belongs to a race which has coloured the map red, and all he wants are the green fields of England..." - Joe Illingworth, Yorkshire Post War Correspondent

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PzKpfw 1: You may not be aware of this but the photos used in the Concord "Panther" book specificly on page 63 to document "Solution B" usage has been proven to be an fabricated photo<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I wasn't aware of that. I do wonder how this subject can be better understood when instances like this occur. ------------------ "He belongs to a race which has coloured the map red, and all he wants are the green fields of England..." - Joe Illingworth, Yorkshire Post War Correspondent

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Flipper: I'm just using hindsight after all it is history we are discussing is'nt it?.. The fact that two ss panzer division's in reality one almost full strength panzer division were astride the main objective turned this operation into a disaster.That make's montgomery the ignorant one<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> And that's a perfect definition of hindsight. Operation Market Garden was intended to shorten the war, and as such it had the best possible motives, that it didn't succeed was down to a number of factors. But looking around for villians is, IMHO, a much poorer alternative than accepting that in the real world of decision-making mistakes are made, and sometimes those mistakes are compounded by bad luck. But then that argument doesn't sell books. ------------------ "He belongs to a race which has coloured the map red, and all he wants are the green fields of England..." - Joe Illingworth, Yorkshire Post War Correspondent

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sailor Malan: if you read my signature, you will find that Arnhem was an unusual move for Montgomery.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Offhand I can't recall the name of the operation, if it ever received one, but there was a plan to drop an airborne division behind Caen, with an armoured corps, if I remember correctly, racing around the German flank to link up with the paratroops. Market Garden didn't appear out of thin air as a plan. Whatever Montgomery's weaknesses as a person, the attacks on his ability, it seems to me, are completely unwarranted, and often seem to be seated in either ignorance or hindsight. ------------------ "He belongs to a race which has coloured the map red, and all he wants are the green fields of England..." - Joe Illingworth, Yorkshire Post War Correspondent

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Dredloc: I have been waiting for this feature forever. It's been talked about, but so far I haven't seen anything. I wanna know how manny people would be interested in a full battle playback feature.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I do think that the game would benefit from some kind of post-game feature, whether it's full-length movies, or a more detailed AAR, something along the lines of that in the CC series - with men recommended for decorations for their actions by their superior. The ending now just seems to be an anti-climax in game design terms, after all the tension and excitement of the actual game. And the battles were discussed in detail afterwards...

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kingfish: I don't see how that is possible. Like I said in my previous post, in order for someone to know how long it takes to get from A to B he must know what lies in between A & B.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well, what if the commander/squad leader estimates the time from A to B, with greater room for error in that estimate dependant on the length of the move, and the terrain they're moving over..?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PzKpfw 1: Apperently you got the wrong impression from my posts tone for lack of a better expression, its not what I meant to impart I apologise.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> And I apologise if I misinterpreted anything in your previous posts. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>The Picture on that site is the most common refrence photo used to show IR equipped Panthers, its been reprinted in almost every book dealing with the Panthers development.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Having gone over the source material I have again several times, I think Fahrgerat 1250 was what made up "Solution A". The photograph I have is of "Solution B", and that has triple image converters, one for the commander, gunner and driver. The identity of those converters - and whether they were different at all - is unclear.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PzKpfw 1: Oh I don't doubt it Sirocco, F.G. 1250 is the identification used to describe the complete unit, I listed the componets as they were identified last post, do you see Fahrgerat or Zielgerat used ?...Their is very little data available on Germman IR, it is one of the most ignored tech aspects in modren print of WW2 as info is so hard to find, & what we do have is sketchy at best<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well, in that case, I'll ask a question John - what does "F.G." stand for..? Might it not stand for Fahrgerat..? You mention that data is limited but then absolutely refute something that might expand upon what you know. The position I have is that perhaps Fahrgerat 1250 was sometimes used on it's own, and sometimes it was used in conjunction with other devices, to form "solutions". The picture that IntelWeenie posted is different to the picture that I've seen, which has three IR converters, but that might be of "Solution B". Without more detailed information this is all speculation, and no-one should assume they have all the answers - that's always a dangerous position to take.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PzKpfw 1: my point is the F.G. 1250 & the "Sperber". are the same unit.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> "A Marder II (75mm Pak 40) was fitted with a 30cm search light and the Zielgerat 1221 on the superstructure, and with a Fahrgerat 1253 driving device, which was mounted inside the vehicle in front of the driver. Mounting was lateral, and the driver could see through the left side visor using the Fahrgerat as a lateral periscope." [source: "Panther" - Thomas Anderson & Vincent Wai"] I have the feeling the Sperber should be the term used to describe this, and that "FG 1250" refers to one device that made it up. I don't claim to be an expert on this, but from what I know that seems more logical. The book includes a photograph of a Panther Ausf. D with a triple light/image converter set for the commander, gunner and driver.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PzKpfw 1: This is a description of the F.G.1250. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I take your point. But "FG 1250" is suggestive of Fahrgerat 1250, which would lead me to wonder whether the Zielgerat 1128, 1221 or 1222 was used in conjunction with it to form Sperber. Well, interesting discussion of an obscure topic.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Any knowledge of additional books that mention the FG1250 / Solution A / Solution B ?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I don't know of any further books, but I can contribute more on this subject from the source I have. "Solution A - Sperber (sparrow hawk): The IR set for Solution A consisted of one IR searchlight and one image converter. Inside the commander's cupola a tiny table was fitted, which was fixed in the 12 o'clock position. The table served as a platform for one 30cm IR searchlight (200W) and one image converter. Inside the tank there were a number of additional instruments. A second 12V battery supplied power to a transformer, which transformed the voltage to 17,000V. As the battery could supply this for only about 4 hours, it was charged by a generator. The commander used this IR set to direct the driver, who could see nothing at night... Additionally, the commander searched targets with his converter. When a target was detected, the commander gave the order to the gunner, either spoken or by body contact (a touch by a hand or a foot on the left shoulder would mean 'turn left'), to move the turret. When the target appeared again in the converter's sight, the platform was fixed in the 12 o'clock position. Then the commander determined the range and, when he was sure of it, gave the order to fire. The effective rangeof this IR set was about 546 to 655 yards (500 to 600m). This, unfortunately, limited the use of the formidable L/70 gun. For this reason, larger search lights were mounted on Sd.Kfz.251 APC's (the 60mm AA search light was altered to emit IR beams). These APC's had converters as well. When targets were detected, their location would be transmitted via the Fu 5 radio set to the Panther tanks of the unit, which would take over. The guns were fired using flash-proof ammunition to minimize the chance of detection by the target [source: 'Der deutsche Soldat', March 1957]" The author goes onto discuss Solution B: "The greatest disadvantage of Solution A was that it offered IR night viewing capability only to the commander. The layout of the Panther Ausf. G and the later Ausf. A's, however, did not allow for providing the gunner with image converters without greater changes to the basic MBT's design. So an intermediate solution was sought and finally found. Older model Panthers (Ausf. D and early Ausf. A), being reworked in German factories, were chosen for a most interesting modification. As these vehicles had a large moveable visor flap in the front armor for the driver, it was easy to add an image converter here... The converter could be fixed upon a tiny mount, which was welded to the frontal armor plate directly under the visor. A 30cm IR light was fitted to the right of the visor. Both the Ausf. D's and the early Ausf. A were fitted with the binocular telescopic sight, while later versions had a monocular one... The binocular sight could be replaced by two monocular telescopes. In daylight the gunner would use the left monocular for aiming; at night he would use the right one, which had a converter in front of it's frontal aperture. To the left of the periscopes was mounted the 30cm IR searchlight... The commander had an improved IR device, which was used with the Sd.Kfz.251/21 'Falke'. This was a parallel mount comprising a 30cm IR search light, the image converter and a MG 34..." [source: 'Panther', Thomas Anderson and Vincent Wai]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PzKpfw 1: For the record the F.G. 1250 was an 2 piece device with an 200 watt screened IR searchlight, and reciever gunsight with an effective range of 600ms.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I'm assuming "F.G." refers to Fahrgerat, or night driving device, I will have to leave it to a native German speaker to confirm that. When you refer to a "two piece device" I'm extrapolating from that - if FG is, indeed, "night driving device", that the other device would have been the Zielgerat, or aiming device. The range I have for "Solution A", or Sperber (sparrow hawk) is also 500-600 metres.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PzKpfw 1: The intial testing was done with 60 Panther G from 4 Panther Abt fitted with the F.G. 1250<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> According to the information I have, John, the "1250" was one of three Fahrgerat, or night driving devices, the others being 1252 and 1253. Would those tests have been carried out with one of the three Zielgerat, or aiming devices - 1128, 1221 or 1222? <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>As for an verified combat instance F.G.1250 equipped Panther's with IIIrd Pz.Korps & IV SS Pz.Korps (40 + Panthers) destroyed the Soviet 18th Tank Korpus during the Vistula Order fighting.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Do you know what combination of IR devices were used during this action?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by M Hofbauer: The medium apc received the "Uhu" (a night bird, don't know the english equivalent) <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Owl.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ParaBellum: Does anyone know something about the effectiveness of this early night vision equipment or the use in combat?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> "The first tests of these devices were started in late 1943. Standard production Panthers were sent to Fallingbostel to the Panzertruppenschule (armour school). Here, apparently, two different solutions were developed and used in combat." "In early 1945, Panzerdivision 'Clausewitz' saw combat in the Fallersleben area... Two of it's Panther tanks were reportedly equipped with IR devices (probably the Sperber). One bit of action took place on the 21st of April 1945. The last ten tanks of 'Clausewitz', followed by a Sd.Kfz.234/1 recce vehicle, approached a US antitank gun position (76mm AT gun M2) at the Weser/Elbe canal. The first attack took place at two o'clock in the morning. The Americans were alert and fired illumination rounds. The leading Panther was hit and slipped into a ditch, and the attack was halted. Then the IR Panthers took cover. After a short time they located the guns and fired some twenty rounds. The entire position was destroyed, and the gun crews and the accompanyng infantry escaped in somewhat of a panic... The attack was a success, revealing the enormous potential of IR technology." "Panther - Thomas Anderson and Vincent Wai"

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Craig Champagne: I wish that there were a command available to get the AFV commander or driver to do this. After all, it seems like they should do this on their own, doesn't it?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> This is an issue that's been covered at length - hence my earlier reply - and the basic facts are that defensive hull-down positions are much easier to attain that offensive hull-down positions. When on the defensive have a long look around the map from the "4" scale, looking for positions which give good LOS onto expected avenues of apporach. Then go down to the "1" view and look for slopes you can position a vehicle behind. When you've found a good spot place the vehicle and then check the LOS across the front and along the expected avenue of approach. Place the vehicle as far behind the slope as you can, while maintaining a good LOS. Offensive hull down, on the other hand, is much more difficult, as you don't have the luxury of shunting vehicles back and forth to make a good hull-down spot, and often you will either crest the ridge or be so far back you don't have the LOS you need.