gunnergoz

Actually, the Brazilian division was equipped and fielded by the US and had virtually no British equipment or connections that I'm aware of. 40 Years later the Brazilians were still tinkering with fielded variations on the M3 Stewart tank they'd recieved during the war.

I know it's been said here often enough, but it's worth recalling that the WW2 German infantry squad was described by more than one author as an LMG accompanied by a bunch of ammo bearers. US squads, with Garands and 1 or 2 BAR's were actually a better balanced assault or defense force, in theory anyway. A BAR with a 40 rd mag and quick-change barrel would have been wicked, but it would no longer have been a BAR, as they say...it would have been a BREN and we all know how well they were regarded.

The Japanese were also excellent camoufleurs, in particular their cave bunkers in places like Okinawa and Iwo Jima, were almost impossible to spot ahead of time. In jungle terrain such as New Guinea, they built mg bunkers that couldn't be identified until you were almost on top of them. WRT camo uniforms and patterns, as neat as they may seem to be, the fact is that movement will spoil the effect of the best uniform or pattern. Nowadays, camo uniform patterns are almost more for identification, morale building and elan, than anything else. The USMC just adopted a modified Canadian pattern with one primary stated purpose being that the Corps wanted its members to look different from the other US patterns in use.

A joke, right Sergei? Actually, doesn't anyone have easy access to a real T-34 for a reality check? There are a lot of them around on display and quite a few in private hands. That's what I'd use for reference, not some photos...Why guesstimate when we still have the real article to go by? Just my 2 bits.

I have a similar collection, though not so extensive...perhaps 40-50 pieces from .50 Boys AT rifle round to 155mm projectiles, WWI and later. Unfortunately I have to sell it off since I'm moving overseas and cannot take it with me. Anyone interested can contact me in the forum for details.

And I pick November of THIS YEAR!

Not a helmet, actually a soft, wide-brim hat that is still worn on ceremonial occasions. I seem to recall WWI Adrian-style helmets with the Bersaglieri plumes, as far as old helmets go. Any photos of that out there?

One nice thing about BFC and their games is that they have tried very hard to differentiate between "objective" factors like armor thickness/angle versus "subjective" factors like psychological profiling of nationalities. Once one, even in jest, opens up the "subjective" can of worms...well, things tend to go downhill pretty quickly. As to political correctness, it seems to be a modern response to individual insensitivity about cultural and racial sterotyping. I used to (many years ago) enjoy the give and take of ethnic and national (and occasionally racial) humor. I have since outgrown that, in part because I understand now that such behavior disrespects others and demeans me.

Yeah, but how many divisions did the Pope have?

A little early for cabin fever, isn't it?

Pershing and IS-2 series also used extensive castings for hull and turret, which is quite efficient weight-wise. The tiger IIRC had wider tracks and a far more complex interleaved suspension system, which also added weight.

I half expected to see Humphrey Bogart stick his head out of the side hatch of the M-3 Grant...superb job guys! The modders will have a real hard time topping this one out of the box!

AFAIK "Honey" and "Ronson" were appelations applied by troops in the field. The "civil war generals" names series was of British ordnance department origin. The US Army originally referred to its vehicles by "M-series" names, leading to a lot of confusion, since there were simultaneous M-3 lights and medium tanks, M-3 halftracks, M-1 Garands and carbines, etc. The Brits helped sort it all out rather nicely and gave us a lasting legacy to boot.

Whatever it is, don't tailgate it on the freeway...

Not having seen the guide, I still wonder how valuable the guide would be to someone who DOESN'T come to the forums much, just bought the game, and saw the ad and ordered out of curiosity to learn more about the game. I.E. not just a non-grog, but a non-lurker/poster. I suspect there are a few of those out there and there will be more once retail store sales pick up. Anyone?

All these color photos have an incredible pathos that the b&w ones lack for the most part...it's just my own jaundiced eye, no doubt, but after so many thousands of b&w WW2 photos have etched themselves into my eyes, the color ones are a jolt and get me to really looking close. Its more visceral, somehow. Probably because we're wired to see/think/remember in color. Or somefink. [ May 29, 2003, 12:04 AM: Message edited by: gunnergoz ]

What's really sad is that a great part of the APG collection USED to be stored in a large hangar and was in relatively good shape. During the 60's and 70's Vietnam years, the money dried up and the collection was moved outdoors and parts of it were even scrapped. I was there about 20 years ago, and the outdoor items were in pretty pathetic shape over all. The Army's handling of this collection is a travesty, nothing less. Bovington, in England, is paradise for armor buffs. I'm embarrassed about the comparison, actually. This subject really gets my blood boiling... :mad:

I rather suspect that they're referring to the round machinegun magazines found in the vehicle...I forget which model it was, but at least one Russian tank MG was loaded via circular drum magazines mounted flat on top of the receiver...much like the WW1 Lewis gun did. I'm REALLY impressed with the amount of unexploded ordnance they brought up from the river bottom...soup to nuts variety. Russia is still littered with untold quantities of this stuff. And it's still deadly, too. There used to be a Russian military archaeology fan club web site but I've lost the URL for it...can anyone help?

It was an entirely different 88mm gun on subs, unrelated to land flak 88 and using different ammunition. IIRC the flak 88 had higher m.v.

Goes to show how much attention I've been paying of late...just saw the BFC front page news and now understand this is all planned out. As they say...Neeeevermiinnnnd!

My Russian wife does not object to my playing CMBB at all...as long as the "Fritzes" are being cooked, blasted, pummeled, baked and stir-fried on screen for her listening and viewing pleasure! I've never DARED play as German around her...

Sorry if this has been discussed before, I've been away from the forum a while... Looking throught the EB website, I found this ad: http://www.ebgames.com/ebx/categories/products/product.asp?pf_id=234950 So CDV is going to sell the product (at $29.99 yet) over here in the US? I thought that was prohibited...?

Rex, it's an ALPHA for cryin' out loud...give them time and I'm sure it will be historically correct as can be...

OK, so let's review here: 1. Pz IVD EARLY WAR INCARNATION was not up-armored, side skirted tank we later saw, especially in the H, I, J versions that I think many people are recalling. Look at your reference books...the early IV's were tin boxes, not meant to engage at...short range. 2. The DshK was a HEAVY machinegun. Accent on the first word. Big slug, lots of propellant, long barrel and...short range. 3. 1 + 2 = 3: Bad mix for the panzer.

IIRC, the Pz IVD was an early version, still in the "support tank" category, meant to provide supportive HE fire from a distance. It's armor was proof only against rifle-caliber rounds and against shell splinters. I could easily envision a .50 cal round doing a number on one...don't forget, the Pz IV's of this generation had lots of open view slits and slots...less use of periscopes. So, while I don't have my armor thickness charts handy, this does not surprise me much, especially if this took place at fairly close range. Use the panzer as it was historically and this might have been a different story.