Roach

I recently started using an X800 Pro VIVO (Asus) and I haven't had any problems running any of the CMs - well not yet anyway!

The individual rifle companies were split up into boat teams for the purpose of the landings as opposed to their normal platoon formations, with each of the men within the boat teams having their own designated tasks, such as wire cutting, demo teams, etc. The engineers came in on their own craft, not mixed in with the infantry rifleman boat teams. The timetable of who should have been landing where, when and in what can be found here: http://www.6juin1944.com/assaut/omaha/olanding.html Hope this is of some help.

Having accompanied Doctor Sinister on his trip to make sure he didn't try to drive anything away, I can confirm that the guy at the museum definitely said the engine was from the King Tiger. He was also less than certain that the Tiger would actually be fit to take part in the Tankfest; he said that it was planned to use it but he didn't seem like a man who was convinced that it would make it. It is undoubtedly running but you get the distinct impression that they are expecting something to go 'bang' every time they press the go button.

This will only be a terribly sad thing to have done when Mrs Sinister finds out. What kind of flowers should I send to you at the hospital?

As far as I can tell, the tall hedge in CMAK acts in much the same way as Bocage in CMBO - German vehicles can't pass through it but after July 44, Allied vehicles can.

Aha, a good point. I don't recall whether or not he said it was buttoned (I'll see if I can find the recording). Although assumption is obviously a dangerous thing, I think it fairly likely that it was buttoned because of the fact that he was able to creep up on it. Plus of course, it also had a rifle company desperately trying to divert its attention and shut the beggar up. As for an engine fire, again, I'll try checking the tape or see if any of the guys recall better than I do. But I'm pretty certain that he didn't mention what specifically might have caught fire first, i.e., the engine. I think that all he was aware of at the time was that he set it on fire, it kept burning, two of the crew tried to bail, and that the tank was then no longer a problem. After the event I think his thoughts were mainly occupied with the notion that a flamethrower is not a nice way for anyone to meet their maker, not even the enemy. I can't say I disagree.

Whilst in Normandy in 1994 for the 50th D-Day Anniversary, a few friends and myself were giving a few 29th Division Veterans a Jeep Tour around some of the places that they had fought over. During the course of the day one of the 29ers recounted one of the most moving stories I have heard from a Veteran. During the advance through Brittany, this particular 29er’s Rifle Company had been held up by a single German tank which was proving impossible to dislodge. The decision was made to try and burn the tank out and a flame-thrower was duly brought forward. Volunteers were asked for and nobody, naturally enough, volunteered – they all regarded anything to do with a flamethrower as a suicide mission. The 29er in question was one of those not wishing to volunteer their services and this in spite of the fact that he had been trained to use the flamethrower back at the Weapons Training Centre in Woolacombe, England – because they did regard it as a suicide mission he was keeping very quiet about his training. Unfortunately for him, one of his buddies (the Vet smiled one of those smiles at this point!) let it be known that he knew how to use one – and so in spite of his silence he found himself strapping on the flamethrower anyway. Using the available cover as best he could (and with little hope of success and even less enthusiasm for the task in hand) he managed to get within, what he judged to be 40 yards of the tank, and at that point he was able to successfully aim, fire (quite literally) and burn the tank. He watched two of the crew trying to get out; one failed entirely, the other, on fire, managed to make it out and got approximately 25 yards before he collapsed. The Vet wasn’t certain whether that was because someone had made a mercy shot, or if he had simply succumbed to his wounds sustained in the tank. The Vet later discovered that there had been a third crewman in the tank. After he had burned the tank, he told us how he just didn’t know how to feel about what he had done, but that he had shrugged off the flamethrower and left it where it lay and NEVER used one again. The look on his face said everything about how he felt about it. Most definitely a sobering thought. As for the tank itself, he wasn’t exactly sure what it was, only that it wasn’t a big one – so obviously not a Tiger! But, it was nevertheless big enough to hold his Company up, and so, that made it big enough. He also mentioned that it appeared to have shut off its engines and was solely using machine guns, so it’s possible it may have already become disabled, which no doubt may have helped him get close enough to do what he had to do. If so, then luck was definitely on his side that day. But even so, whether the tank was disabled or not, he had still managed to successfully use the flamethrower to knock it out – no mean feat in itself, and one that has left a lasting impression on him throughout his life.

As the last gentleman has already said, the horizontal bars indicate all NCO ranks, while the vertical bar indicates all officer ranks - this was true for all army units and not just the paratroops. I'm fairly sure there was a regulation length for them, but I feel just as certain that there were variations - hence the apparently much shorter stripe on the man at the front. As for the apparent padding, the M43 jacket was not produced with any kind of sewn in pads. I think that this picture, as you say, merely 'seems' to be padded. The square effect might be caused by a quick in the field patch repair (DIY padding of a sort I guess), or even due to a rolled up sweater or shirt sleeve underneath. Or maybe even a handy elbow-sized piece of loot!

Yes, drawstring waist it is. The cord drawstring was internal (which is probably the nature of drawstrings) and was standard on the M43. There were/are six concealed buttons for fastening at the front (no zipper), from the neck right to the bottom. I think that like most uniform jackets, they can ride a little high, or a little low depending on the individual and how well fitting his issued jacket was. For what it's worth, there was also a fur-lined liner jacket available for winter conditions that was to be worn in conjunction with and underneath the M43 combat jacket. This was not unlike the winter combat jacket (tanker's jacket) in some respects of its design, but instead of a zip for fastening the jacket, it had six buttons that attached through sewn-on cord loops.

Actually, they probably weren't an afterthought at all (so I was wrong!) otherwise the M43 combat jacket wouldn't have had the buttons under the collar to start with. So, in fact, just an ineffective piece of wet weather gear after all!

Indeed, not very popular at all. They are thin, basically a single layer of the M43 combat jacket material, and not particularly waterproof - hence not much practical use (although you do occasionally see them in photos), and therefore not greatly appreciated as the finest piece of wet weather gear in the world. I suspect (but am quite possibly wrong!) that they were a bit of an afterthought. Mint examples used to be available ten-a-penny a few years back (and probably still are), so it seems quite likely that they were not on general issue until very late on, with the surplus stock becoming exactly that!

As far as I can see, this looks very much like an ordinary M43 combat jacket, with the hood attached. Made from the same material as the combat jacket, the hood buttons under the collar and also to the epaulettes, and is designed to fit over the helmet.

As far as I am aware for certain (and even then I am probably wrong!), the only units in the ETO that briefly wore the camouflage uniform were elements of the 30th Infantry Division and the 17th Engineer Battalion of the 2nd Armoured Division.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Michael emrys: Therefore, the attacking player must to some degree take matters into his own hands to restore the balance of battlefield intelligence. <hr></blockquote> I agree. Whereas the universal CM big picture is that the reconnaisance has been done, my own personal big picture is that I don't have a clue what is behind the next hedgerow and I want to sneak a look at it before I send all my boys for a walk in the sun...

The thing I find a little annoying is taking fire from behind a hedgerow and not being able to indiscriminately lob shells from my 60s on to the other side of the hedgerow in the hope of scaring the impolite guys into going to bother someone else somewhere else. Essentially, my mortar crew can see the hedgerow, they can hit the hedgerow, so why not be able to throw something the other side of it?

I was about to post a question on this topic myself as to whether friendly fire was modelled. I have been play testing a night scenario this week and I have noticed that on several occasions my US Infantry opened fire on each other. I was a little amazed because after playing CM for a year I hadn't noticed this before and was wondering if it was a glitch, my imagination or something intentional - whatever, I was pleasantly (or possibly unpleasantly) surprised by this 'new' feature of the game!

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Enoch: The guy in the making of special said the Tiger was built on a T-34 chassis. He could be wrong I'm just repeating what he said. I doubt it is an authentic Jagdpanther but it looked like a pretty good replica. Of course I onlt got a 2 or 3 second glimpse of the thing.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The Tigers in Bob are built on T34 chassis' just like SPR. And the Jadgpanther is also a 'reproduction'. I forget what they built it from now; it's underscale but looks good, and it's a runner - if I can find my BoB pics I'll post a picture for your delight and delicatation.

Sounds interesting so - yes please! step_b@hotmail.com

The Marders in SPR were converted Hetzers; the Tigers, T34's a la Kelly's Heroes. The one in SPR that gets killed at the end has just been used for set decoration in Band of Brothers; the SS infantry ran about like headless chickens because that was what Mister Spielberg wanted them to do; similarly, all the other cock-ups on the movie were due to the fact that it was JUST a movie... and on movies time is money and there is never enough time. As one of the low-level (low-life? ) technical advisors on SPR and BoB I will quote the phrase we were always told whenever we tried to rectify a glaring mistake - "We're making a movie not a documentary." And that my friends is how Hollywood invented World War Two. Peace.

29ID is a pet subject so I'm very interested in taking a look at this one; please send it along. Thanks. step_b@hotmail.com

Does anybody have any suggestions as to which terrain tile would be the most expendable and least missed in order to be re-worked as a sand only tile to use with Clubfoot's totally excellent Utah conversion?

There were no heavy bunkers on the top of the bluffs at Omaha; a few of the tobruk variety strongpoints were about as heavy as they got on the top; this doesn't include the concrete ammunition and shelter bunkers etc. There were only four main bunkers on the beach itself, between the base of the bluffs and the sea wall. At the eastern end (1st Div area) there were two bunkers positioned to face west along the beach. Similarly at the west end, at the mouth of the Vierville Draw (29th end), were two more facing east, again positioned to fire along the length of the beach. SPR is a good representation of Omaha Beach only as far as the 'feeling' factor goes; the physical, geographical accuracy of the beach, and the time they take moving off the beach is (i.e. serious penetration after twenty minutes as opposed to three hours), to put it mildly, a crock. The large bunker at the top of the bluffs that you see in SPR when Hanks is being briefed for his fantasy adventure certainly did not exist on Omaha; the 'bunker' was actually built for proposed Pointe du Hoc scenes, of which that type of bunker is indeed accurate. I agree with a previous reply; Omaha viewed at dawn or dusk is an eery place. I have been many, many times and it never ceases to move me. If you ever get the chance, go see it - it will give you all the perspective you will ever need. [ 04-19-2001: Message edited by: Roach ]

Yes, I understand the concept but this kind of defeats the object of what I'm trying to achieve with the scenario; so downsizing the size of the units isn't really what I want to do. But thanks for the suggestion anyway. As it is, in this case, I'm simply being a little more conservative with the wire placing - what the hell else was I gonna do?! - and bear it in mind when I choose the next scenario. Thanks again for the input, Cheers.

The piece of track link on the sandbags is just set dressing for the scene after the Tiger was destroyed - the bits went up and then the bits came down again, and this bit 'landed' right next to Mister Damon to catch the attention of the eagle eyed. These sandbags are those positioned down at the bridge as opposed to on the 'Alamo'...

Just thought I'd add my two-penneth worth to simply confirm (and probably unnecessarily by now) that of course the Tigers on SPR were fake. I'm not sure about the connection with the Bovvie Museum as far as the people who put them together are concerned, as a company called Action Vehicles built, put back together and kept running all the vehicles in the film. As is quite obvious, the 'Tigers' were built around T34 chassis' (just as they were in Kelly's Heroes - and quite possibly using the same plans) and look pretty impressive in the flesh (or steel) - until somebody stands next to it at which point the obvious size difference quickly destroys the illusion. Talking of destruction, the main reason that no attempt was made to make use of privately owned armour collections for the German tanks is that film companies like to see things go bang - especially if its German. It is somewhat difficult to convince the owner of a rare armoured vehicle that the hire fee is well worth the sight of their precious vehicle being stuffed with explosives and blown to kindom come (a la Tiger in SPR) to the appreciative howls and applause of the gathered film crew! Also, and somewhat conversely, for those of you who see green machines as an endangered species, you don't want to know how many 'less rare' US vehicles got trashed in the name of art! One specific example is how a fairly serviceable GMC was blown into tiny pieces for no other reason than to be used as set dressing - they didn't even film the destruction! One final piece of information to bore you with: the Tigers from SPR were, or should I say, have, been recycled in Band of Brothers and, for you lovers of German vehicles out there, if you drooled uncontrollably at the Tigers, you're just going to go crazy for the Jagdpanther the vehicle boys put together for BoB. It has to be said that the vehicle hanger on BoB was even more impressive than it was for SPR: Tigers, Jagdpanther, Marders, Stugs (you can judge for yourself when BoB hits the screen as to what they are made from!), and more and varied soft skins than you could throw a stick grenade at! Wait and wonder guys but one final thing - no matter how good these things are going to look in Bob, they're still gonna lose!