Barticus

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Madmatt: You are just gonna have to wait to see precisely how this is accomplished though...It IS rather cool though I must say...and works wonderfully... Madmatt<hr></blockquote> Yah yah, go ahead and rub it in Matt, want some salt for the next time? B

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by 109 Gustav: Lets hear it!<hr></blockquote> Of course, I have no way of verifying this story, but I have heard it told several times now from trustworthy sources, so here goes. The Government of Canada is throwing some sort of shindig at which there are both Canada's Minister of Defence as well as the Soviet Ambassador to Canada. During a conversation, the Minister mentions that it is a shame the Canadian War Museum does not have an example of the T34, the tank which revolutionized armour design. The Ambassador says that "he can arrange something". Several weeks or months later (depending on the version of the story) the War Museum receives the T34/85. I know, I know, it sounds kind of funny, but it still makes a good story. Having seen the tank in question, it does seem believable in that the tank is in excellent shape, and is displayed with the driver hatch open and the interior illuminated. The display also boasts a Pzkpfw II, Pzkpfw I, one of the Italian tanks (M38 or M40), the hulk of a Sturmgeschutz III, Centurion, several Shermans, a half track and a dozen other vehicles I have forgotten. .....so now you know. B

I make it a point to go there at least once every summer, the exhibits change often enough to keep it interesting. Have you heard the story on how the museum got the T34/85?, it's a fairly good one. As well, there is a wargaming club that meets at the war museum every second Sunday (or is it Saturday?), if you're interested in that sort of thing. I have previous commitments that prevent me from participating, but I usually manage to make it to their twice yearly open house. B

Durn it Hoop, you still gettin' kickbacks?? Well, I'll just have to phone my MP and get this mess straightened out right away! (mmmmmmm......pie)

OK, let's go back to '39. What if France had marched on Germany as soon as they could after the invasion of Poland? Regardless of the quality of the French troops of the period, could Germany really have faced two continental armies at the same time? B

Uh oh, another Ottawan. We seem to be taking over the board!! Muwahahahaha [HACK] hahahah [CHOKE] *ahem* B

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Rex_Bellator: Speak for yourself, it hasn't been a month since my last bone.<hr></blockquote> Tooooooooo much information!!

Would it be a safe assumption to say that superstructure, as it applies to AFV construction, is the fighting compartment in a non-turreted armoured vehicle? Otherwise, would it not just be the turret? B

I know the 25-pounder had provisions for use as an AT weapon. IIRC, a unit of British 25 pounders won a unit citation of some kind or other earlier in the war (France 1940?) for providing indirect artillery support in-between German attempts to over-run their position with armour. I have the book at home and will try to find the exact reference. B

MrSpkr and USTanker, Micheal is correct. I was alluding more to the fact that the PIAT has a trajectory like a rainbow, and Cpl Russel (masquerading as Sean Connery) must have been Micheal Jordan's Grandfather in order to hit at that range. You are also both correct in that shaped charges will penetrata X amount of armour, if they hit, regardless of the range of the target. Any way you want to look at it, one HELL of a good shot! B

196m with a PIAT!? Hmm, must have hit the TOP armour B

Well, I brought this topic up a long while back, and I believe the quasi-semi-not-quite-official answer was "maybe". With the Eastern Front being dealt with now, then the early war and meditteranean (sp?)theatres (with an engine re-write in there somewhere), BTS is going to be very busy for the next few years. After that.......who knows? B

Would it be out of line to suspect a firm release date?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gunny_ Bunny: No CMBB will not make CMBO obsolete. Go look at the pics at CM-HQ the only difference is the Russians are fighting. Everything seems to CMBO. Don't expect much from CM2 GB<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well, don't be too hasty here. The screenshots that have been published are of, esentially, a pre-beta and shouldn't be used to base your opinions of the final product on. Speaking for myself, even if the graphics are no better, I will still be more than interested in the Eastern Front to pick up a copy as soon as it's available. B

Sorry Dave, no it won't. Both machines will need the specs to run the game, then you can use TCP/IP to play each other. Sorry. Bart

Excellent!

Thanks fellas.

Holy crow Jason, do you actually DO anything other than read Russian production figures? B

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ParaBellum: IIRC the T-72 used a 7.62mm coax MG and a 12.7mm MG, not the 14.5mm. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yes, the co-ax is a 7.62mm, but the KPV has been used as an AA mount. The footage I mentioned was from Chechnya and showed a tank commander firing the 14.5mm from his hatch. If it was developed after WWII, I guess we won't see it in CMBB (darn).

Anyone have any information on this puppy? I think the Russkies used to mount them on their T-72's and I have seen some rather impressive footage of one firing. Otherwise, I have no idea when it was developed, deployed etc.

No, it isn't. The German 37mm AT gun had an option where it could fire a hollow-charge rocket off the end of the barrel, pretty much as was shown in that episode. The puppchen looks like, well, a beefed up panzerschrek on a wheeled carriage and an over-sized splinter shield. B

SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM (spamedeeeee, spamedee spam!) SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM [edited cuz someone already got the sacking bit ] [ 09-14-2001: Message edited by: Barticus ]

Useless trivia time. Later models of the T-34 had two hatches, one on either side of the turret. This particular version was nick-named "Micky Mouse" by the Germans. Brewing up one of these T-34's earned a rather grim moniker: "Mickey Mouse tips his hat" B

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hanns: The Enfield (and Springfield) being copies of the Mauser are similiar in their ease of use. The only problem is after each shot you must reacquire your target.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well Hans, I have to disagree with you on this particular point. I don't know about the Springfield (which Chesty Puller preferred over the Garand, BTW) but the Enfield is not a copy of the Mauser, but instead, as a reply to the Mauser. Now, there is nothing wrong with the Mauser action, and in fact, is the more accurate of the two. There is a very good reason that most modern bolt action rifles are noted for using the 'Mauser action'. The Enfield, however, was developed as an answer to the original Kar98. A quick comparison will reveal some of the results, Mauser used a 5-round stripper clip, Enfield a 10-round box magazine. The Enfield was the first 'short-throw' bolt action, which resulted in it's excellent (for a bolt action) ROF, while the Mauser, using the longer 8mm round, has a lower ROF. The Brits wanted a rifle capable of putting out a good volume of fire and they got what they wanted. The original version of the Enfield actually had a mechanical device to prevent the magazine feeding so it could be used as a single-shot weapon until such time as the extra firepower made available by the box magazine was needed. At the time, the British government was fixated on the price of ammunition, or something. I have never mastered the trick, but some of the lads at the rifle range could crank off the entire magazine and their shooting hand never leaves the trigger! As far as re-acquiring targets, if you ever watch a good shot shooting at moving targets, he NEVER has to reacquire the target, regardless of the type of weapon used. He focuses, the weapon comes up, the shot goes off, if he misses he cycles the action, but HIS EYES NEVER LEAVE THE TARGET, hence, no need to re-acquire. When I read about the weapon becoming an extension of yourself, these guys prove the point. I have never been, and probably never will be, that good, but it sure is impressive to watch. OK, enough preaching, otherwise, Hans, you make some good points, but I felt I had to jump in here.

Bravo! Golf claps all 'round!