Stalin's Organ

Well 5 Sturmtigers were probably within 3 km of each other too........ My beef is with the rarity cost applied to obsolete equipment, not the costs for the latest super-kitty. For example on hte Russian web page there's an account of what might've been the last T40 in active service with a tank Brigade at Leningrad in 1944 - now I haven't checked the game for how muchrarity that would get, but IMO there should be none - at least not as a points cost! Rarity for old vehicles should probably be in terms of numbers, not points. IMO it's silly to be charging as much for a T40 in 1944 as a T34 (at a guess) when the T40 is a "filler" - it's there, there's a place in the Brigade for it, and they use it. It's not expensive - it's a cheap afterthought! Similarly with all sorts of obsolete equipment - they were retained/used because they were all that was available - something I'm sure we all know, but which rarity as it's incorporated now doesn't simulate.

I argued somethign like this a few months ago - it ain't gonna change tho.

And the tactics used by the British Army in 1918 would be bad in what way? </font>

Yeah by El Alamain they got it right - in a WW1 kind of way! The problem with British combined armes was that htere wasn't any in theearly part of hte war. The tanks went haring off on cavalry charges on their own, and hte infantry got over-run as they lacked AT support - orrather they only had hte typical early war paltry TOE of AT guns. The NZ division had a running fight with 8th army over armoured support, eventually solved by attaching a Brit armoured brigade to the division itself, and in Italy by convertign a couple of NZ brigades to armour - the Division ended up with somethign like 5 or 6 Brigades IIRC, 25,000 men and over 12,000 vehicles by the end of the war!! But other commonwealth infantry divisions (ingluding Brits) weren't so lucky as to have the undivided attention of hte politicians at home, and units like the South africans and Indians often completely lacked armoured support when they needed it most because the tanks supposedly assigned to them were swanning off somewhere else.

You mean shorts like the guy standing in front of hte tank above, or like any well dressed young chap on the street these days??!

New Zealand Fireflies in Italy: A 17-pounder Sherman from C Squadron 20th Armoured Regiment during final drive through the Po Valley. This is the VC version of the tank. Note the countershading under the front half of the barrel. A Sherman IC Firefly of 18th Armoured Regiment crossing a Bailey Bridge in Italy in 1945. Note the use of counter-shading in white under the front half of the 17-pounder barrel. Both images are from the 4th NZ Armoured Brigade page.

Dietrich didn't do the original Lilli - she covered it in both English and German. The original was a German poem from WW1 written by Hans Leip, a soldier, put to music by Norbert Schultze in 1938, and recorded by Lale Anderson in 1939. However nothing much happened to it until it was broadcast in 1941 to the DAK, and was quite popular with German soldiers in WW2 - it was their singing and humming it that caught the attention of hte British in the desert, even in German. American soldiers also apparently liked it in German but only when sung by the rather gorgeous German born Dietrich. Dietrich's version had been a surprise hit with the English and her English recording was apparently rather hurried. IMO it'd be nice if a copy of the original could be used rather than Dietrich's - it was hte DAK that MADE this song, and it was truly international in its appeal. Last Saturday it was featured on a local radio programme, which sparked my interest! [ April 09, 2003, 03:29 AM: Message edited by: Stalin's Organ ]

No - not really!! Cremona is a brand of porridge!

Of course it's a marketing decision - the AK is the single most recognisable formation of hte Mediterranian war from all sides. IIRC no Tigers reached the AK - but they did reach, and fight in, Tunisia, much to the discomfort of the rather green US infantry - (in)famously at Kasserine pass. The Afrika Korps, was, of course, only a part of the Axis army in Nth Africa, and comprised of specific units - IIRC 15th & 21st panzer divisions (the 21st was earlier the 5th Light Division?). All other units, such as the 90th light division, and Ramcke Brigade and later formations were part of Panzer Armee Afrika (PAK), along with various Italian units. Rommel never actually commanded the DAK (Deutch Afrika Korps) - he was the overall commander of the PAK. One thing about the African campaign is that there's NO doubt about what equipment was used and when....well almost none - no doubt grogs will find a bit to argue about!

Nah. No need to bother with the New Zealanders. After all, they were simply bit players and can more than adequately be represented by Aussies. </font>

Ditto! Now a couple of points - someone mentioned "there were a few Greeks in Crete" - well there were thousands actually - 3 regiments in the Maleme and Galatas sectors, 3 in the Suda Sector, 2 in hte Herakliion sector - 9000 in all. Of course most were poorly equipped and ill-trained - but they were there! And if Crete then why not Greece?

Y'reckon? What do you base that rank assumption on? :cool:

Maybe - you recovered from the last one yet? Obviously not since you're still suffering delusions of adequacy!! But I'll send you one anyway - look out for the incoming over there Noddy

'bout time there was a MBT thread with a decent title - where's the beer? the rest of you dorks can kiss my gluteus maximus. [ March 30, 2003, 01:15 AM: Message edited by: Stalin's Organ ]

<big><big>SNARKERS YOU MORON!!!!</big></big> The Italians at Stalingrad did not fight in the bleedin' city, and a 3km square map for 1500 pts is the stupidest thing I've seen in CMBB ever!! It took me 20 minutes just to find my guys at +4 with bases on! :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: Now if you must chose maps then either make them real or I'll go to random ones!!

Don't get them there in the first place!! Be careful about deployment and movement - if you put a rifle-armed unit into a wood where vis is only 30m then they are never going to fight EXCEPT at short range, so use your own SMG-heavy units there instead. Use rifle units where they CAN use their longer range. Use your MG's at longer ranges too - MG42 and 34 MMG's slow down infantry assaults a treat even at moderate and long ranges. Fight a long range tank battle instead of a short range infantry one - use your infantry to protect your tanks rather than vice versa. In short don't play to hte other guy's advantages - play to your own - make him fight you where YOU are strong!

That would be because your name wasn't mentioned - only your status. I didn't know Oprah had a magazine Happy Duke - and I don't really care that I do know. You're right Snickers - I am incontinent - and that means I'm not full of faeces like you are. Send it on in Chocolate and peanut bar-boy - so far you're 2 for nought- I'm sure I can make it 3 without too much bother.

Turboprop engines often have a vertical bend to teh intake that serves as a filter - eg the PW100 series engines on the DHC-8 have this, and a small door to allow heavy debris carried by hte airflow to continue in a straight line and avoid hte engine - although this is primarily for ice protection. Quite frankly I do not believe the picture above is from a single bird strike - I used to work in a JT8D (727 and old style 737 engines) overhaul shop and saw lots of impact damage including multiple bird strikes and none of them came close to being that much damage - they also didn't stop the engine actually working.

I think you'll find that 105mm HE is perfectly capable of ripping the guts out of a T34!!

Somewhere there's a book about Australia's involvement in hte disastrous Malayan Campaign of 1941 - in it there's a bit about the Aussie 2 pdr AT regiment sent there - since Malaya wasn't "tank country" they were issued with HE ammo to be used in an infantry support role - they kept the AP too tho - which camein handy when the Jap tanks came down the road! Unfortunately I last saww this about 20 yrs ago, but perhaps it will strike a chord with someone? The British knew well the uses of HE - it was solely their DOCTRINE that prevented them from issuing the ammunition to tanks - the gun was an anti-tank gun, and infantry and other "soft" targets were for the machine gun(s). Statements like that of George Forty above that the 2 pdr was too small for an effective HE round smack far too much of post hoc reasoning to me and never sem to be accompanied by any actual official policy that supports the statement.

There was an 85mm field gun used by the Sov's from 1943 or 44 onwards IIRC, as well as the AA guns. The Brits tried to use the 3.7" as an AA gun in hte desert once - but had no idea what to do with it - IIRC they put a battery in an over-crowded waddi and it never fired a shot. The US 90mm was used for some AT/field work, and the 3"/76mm was an AA gun barrel on a new mount. The Sov 100mm was also developed from the naval 3.9" calibre I think, which was a dual purpose AA/A-surface weapon.

Was that barrage direct or indirect? Certainly they could shoot that far (106's), and if there's no enemy armour arround then I'd use 'em like that too and expect them to be able to shoot so far. But it'd be direct and I'd be hoping there were no enemy MMG's within sight because they would be impossible to see and have an effective range of a mile or more too - artillery has long known there's not much joy being within small arms range of enemy infantry when firing direct - I think the Brits found that out 1899-1902-ish!

yep - can't see the picture and can't link to the picture's URL

The definition of a gun vs a rocket launcher is simple - a rocket carries the propellant with it in the projectile. A projectile from a gun doesn't. The Pz-faust is a little of both - having both a charge that doesn't travel with the projectile and one that does. the German RR's were most certainly NOT "just lightened artillery" - they used pretty much the same principle as the later American models that most ppl are familiar with (well those my age at least!). The operative word is NOT Rifle - modern smooth bores are quite capable of reaching out kilometers, while recoiless rifles used for the aT role typically do/did only have rages measured in hundreds of metres - IIRC the maximum engagement range for the 106 was 800m. these days tactical rockets can have ranges of kilometers - there's no point trying to define generalities like that!

Actually close assaulting it is a GOOD bet - you can KO it with small arms fire from the rear, or grenades or molotovs from any aspect. It has no machine guns, so if it isn't covered my it's own infantry or MG armed tanks I'd go for the close assault!