Jump to content

Splinty

Members
  • Posts

    2,953
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Posts posted by Splinty

  1. I don't know how relevant this is to CMBB, but in an American tank company both the Co. XO and the Co. 1SG, (Der Spiess to the Germans, and the Co. Senior Sergeant to the Russians)rode with the company trains. The 1SG handled "beans and bullets" and the XO took care of the company's organic maintainance units along with acting as liason with higher level maintainance and recovery units.

    If the CO was put out of action, then the XO would take charge of the fight. The 1SG wouldn't get directly involved the fighting unless all the officers in the Co. were out of action.

    At the platoon level the Platoon Leader and the Platoon Sergeant always rode in separate vehicles so that the Plt. Sgt. could take command of the platoon as needed.

  2. Excellent mod! I just took a look at it on my PC and it looks fantastic! I miss the great variety of Sherman mods that were available for CMBO and would love to see the rest of the series in black and green camo. Not to be too greedy would you comsider the Khaki and O.D. camo the Americans sometimes used in Italy as well? Pretty please with H.E. on top?

  3. Hi all,

    Just a note for all you guys looking for German winter mods for CMAK. The non-CMMOS winter mods from CMBB WILL work in CMAK. I've been playing the Ardennes-DeSobry op for CMAK with CMBB winret German mods installed for the last week now. I've been loading CMBB mods into it as I go and so far they've all worked.

    Great work on the Axis minor mods Dey, been getting your stuff for the past couple of days and it's all good. :cool:

  4. Originally posted by JonS:

    Sorry, I meant this book.

    Don't know about FACs in the Cold War, though I do suspect they would have made their way forward. There are, however, two points, both related to the US worth picking up.

    Firstly, as has been bought up on any number of occasions, the USMC had, and has, a very integrated and responsive system of air support, which includes FACs right up at the company IIRC. While this is a very good system, it is something that few other militaries seem to have copied.

    Secondly, the USAF (and the RAF to be fair) as an institution were never very interested in close air support. Wars would be fought and won, they believed, by big bombers carrying big nuclear bombs. Shortly after WWII the techniques and equipment for CAS were discarded, and had to be painfully rebuilt for Korea. Then they were discarded again, only to be rebuilt in Vietnam, and so on. Institutional resistance to the A-10 could be seen as a continuation of that tradition.

    By the current U.S. Army doctrine, there are dedicated FAC's from the BN level on up.
  5. Originally posted by Treeburst155:

    suicidal.....uninhabitable....prone to failure...bloody awful...excruciatingly painful...unlikely to succeed...pointedly preposterous...impossible...problematic....horrific....catastrophic....friggin' crazy...FUBAR...guaranteed to fail...hellish...darn dangerous...tactically challenging...under the gun...decidedly disastrous

    Does this help?

    Can I add stupid to the list?

    "The above remark was not meant to cast aspersions on the player, but was instead meant solely in jest. Please forward all complaints to the managment. Thank you for your cooperation.

  6. Originally posted by Treeburst155:

    suicidal.....uninhabitable....prone to failure...bloody awful...excruciatingly painful...unlikely to succeed...pointedly preposterous...impossible...problematic....horrific....catastrophic....friggin' crazy...FUBAR...guaranteed to fail...hellish...darn dangerous...tactically challenging...under the gun...decidedly disastrous

    Does this help?

    Can I add stupid to the list?

    "The above remark was not meant to cast aspersions on the player, but was instead meant solely in jest. Please forward all complaints to the managment. Thank you for your cooperation.

×
×
  • Create New...