dieseltaylor

YD In the first example you give does that mean in game the unit would be off air until such time as the radio was mended?

I must admit to being uneasy with providing a stealth delivery system for "nuclear weapons" to any minor country where blackmailing a major may be a card to play at some future time. And Germany paying a third of the cost! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolphin_class_submarine

Womble - nice idea but really is it a good thing that in a game that dropping out of the radio net should be a feature when there is nothing going on? Realism gone mad? Fine in a simulator but fun in a game - I am not sure myself but others may differ.

Childress. The game file for Argie was available so for the keen it was worth getting ..albeit V1.00. So my captures are the same incident but viewed differently.

Interesting stuff. Not acting hastily seems good. Witness Israel currently where the officer/spy class is very much less bullish than the politicians about war with Iran. And saying so publicly. Seems that distrust of politico's reactions as an ingrained view worth having.

Very impressive example of their reputed intelligence http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/Victoria+breakwater+edge+giant+octopus+makes+quick+meal+seagull/6552874/story.html

North Africa I suspect is doable now subject to a restricted palette of tanks. Shermans, MkIV's, Tigers etc. And if it is the scenery then Tunisia is also probably fine for representation. I am talking countryside as I know there is not the buildings currently. Think of the benefits of fewer trees and hedges : ) More tanks . open flanks, light vehicles scurrying from cover to cover. Ok restricted maybe but what a pleasant change from the claustrophobia of Normandy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shared_space I am not sure how Finlands urban landscape stacks up against other countries. In countries with high population densities in urban areas things may work which would not where the urban density is lower - but I am guessing on this.

Interesting view on perceptions - and yet again shows how suggestible himans are. BTW I was particularly struck by the unmood music- I have been to several places like that! http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/restaurants-and-bars/diners-coming-to-their-senses-20120503-1xzwv.html

Suppression by killing rather than weight of fire? Works for me.

Perhaps a more effective weapon system than an HMG http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/10/tiny-kamikaze-drone/ as deploying in 2012

Given the forthcoming IPO of Facebook it is kind of scary to see the effects it is having on life. http://www.zdnet.com/blog/facebook/judge-facebook-likes-not-protected-by-first-amendment/12191?tag=nl.e589

Thermal sensors and imaging are the secret weapon.

Great find. I looked at the first map Achtrup and downloaded it 12.1MB. Based on a British 1944 map showing part of Schleswig-Holstein at 1:25000. Very interesting to see the strip field system and actually the terrain is quite lumpy varying from 2 metres to 40+metres. Covers an area of about 7km x 11km but when blown up there is plenty of good detail for constructing a battlefield. Nicer if it were in colour

As it is relevant to this thread aswell as the other thread I picked up a second-hand book on Saturday and not read it yet but this is interesting review though I am not sure of the reviewers real sentiments : ) Quote from Amazon UK: This review is from: A Magnificent Disaster: The Failure of the Market Garden, the Arnhem Operation, September 1944 (Hardcover) We have at last, an excellent exposition of the poorly planned/executed Operation Market-Garden. All the key players are examined, warts and all. Thankfully, this book is not a Monty ("it was 90% successful") whitewash. This poorly planned operation was poorly executed by bumbling idiots who passed the buck to Polish General Sosabowski, a handy scapegoat, who early on, questioned the wisdom of the planning. Although I'm usually a Monty devotee, in this case, I must say he was not up to this task that was so quickly and poorly planned. The author reveals the vanity and ineptness of many of the other key players in the Arnhem drama. British General "Boy" Browning, deserves special mention and condemnation, at his collaboration with others in a determined effort to ignore the Dutch intelligence, which revealed a formidable German presence in the area being planned for British operations. It was also Browning who did the dirty work of blaming Sosabowski for Monty's debacle, the only individual who should have taken responsibility. It is now clear that Sosabowski was blamed for not relieving the trapped British airborne division above the Rhine, details how the British botched the relief efforts, while stating afterward that they should have followed Sosabowski's plan, which at the time they very angrily rejected. Just how the 4,500 British paratroopers were evacuated? Well, hidden for a long time, and now revealed: by a single company of Canadian engineers, a fact never fully accepted by British historians. Browning, of course, was taking orders from the vain Monty, who should ultimately be held responsible. But Browning was a devious manipulator and a poor planner; and his attitude toward the Americans was so typical of other senior British commanders: treating them with a patronizing condescension. The author also more fully and correctly presents the U.S. airborne involvement in the operation. Instead of criticizing this author's book, reviewers should look beyond its title, at the expert evidence presented, and check out the sources presented. As is often the case, critics will take aim at a writer who reveals the truth, which has been encased and enshrined in previous histories as myth.

Nicked from somewhere elae I wonder if it is true?

Siting is English for positioning , its different in Scottish : )

I picked up a second-hand book on Saturday and not read it yet but this is interesting review though I amnot sure of the reviewers real sentiments : )

Thanks for the info. My boule at 700g makes me appreciate that they do require considerable effort to throw far. I have just checked the US MkII and that is 595 grams so a fair percentage lighter than the Mills bomb at 765 grams. Curiously it is hard to find the MkII dimensions. You are right about the Ballistics side .. : ) PS a site that quotes 3 5/8 by 2 5/16 which I make 111mm by 59mm. Lets hoope the site was accurate! *OOps and darn new site as below shows 4.5" http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/3-23-30/appe.htm Just some stats: Mills Bomb 765g. 95.2mm long diameter 61mm Stick ____595g _365mm [14inches]___ 70mm MkII _____595g 92* or 114___________59mm PPS another find ADOPT THE STANDING POSITION. .... 4 STANDARD Must throw a grenade into a circle 6 metres (20 ft) in diameter when standing 20 metres (65 feet) away from the centre of the circle. B COMMAND ADOPT KNEELING POSITION. ....... 4 STANDARD Must throw a grenade into a circle 6 metres (20 ft) in diameter when standing 15 metres (50 ft) away from the centre of the circle. C COMMAND ADOPT MODIFIED KNEELING POSITION. ....... 3 STANDARD As in cheek "B" above. . http://www.freepyroinfo.com/Pyrotechnic/Pyrotechnic_Books/Canadian_Forces_B_Gl_385_007_Pt_001_Grenades_and_Pyrotechnics.pdf

Funnily enough the question mentioned American grenades and I only have incidental data for those. If someone has US data for the same period that would be nice. But hardly necessary for the game

Funnily enough I was mulling the benefits and otherwise of the designs whilst half-asleep last night. In woodland the round grenade should on balance be more effective as they are less likely to snag on branches than a stick grenade. I doubt this is modeled in game. Methods of throwing are also interesting as underarm would be a logical way to throw a grenade through a doorway at medium distance. The perceived disadvantage of rolling may in some circumstances be beneficial as it may be possible to roll it considerably more than 40 metres in 5 seconds. Say on tarred roads or downhill. Just some stats: Mills Bomb 765g. 95.2mm long diameter 61mm Stick 595g 365mm [14inches] 70mm Because cricket is/was a big sport here a cricket ball weighs 156g and has a diameter of 71mm. I have a selection of boule and the largest is 700g and a 71mm diameter which I have to say is bordering on the uncomfortable to grip - possibly because it is not serrated unlike most boule. PS Interesting site on military paraphenalia http://www.museumoftechnology.org.uk/military.php

Some specious arguments being put up as it was a destroyed truck. And in the event of a sunken narrow road with bocage either side a overly effective device. Surely the idea is you push one end or other to make it parellel on the road allowing passage. Ultimately putting a few more HE shells in should reduce it to manageable proportions for driving over if the road is too narrow for anything else. I have not carried out any tests to see what can be down - yet : 0 pushing is not that hard

Themselves and two other soldiers within 50ft?! BtW one of the Brits pretending to surrender whilst two crew start shooting is a foul aspersion on the gallant Tommies.!! BF fix or something!

The ballsy tank crews are obviously afraid of being shot even if they tried to surrender so come out fighting : ) Perhaps its a Russian Front mentality bled to British tankers.

Slightly relevant and interesting anyway: http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/ttt07/german-tactics-against-tanks.html The following translated German document on infantry close-combat against Russian tanks on the Eastern Front was published in Tactical and Technical Trends, No. 23, April 22, 1943.