SGT_Gold

I'm game for the scenario, please send it my way. rspilot@nyc.rr.com Thanks

Whatever we do, let's agree on a spot.

In Vietnam, the Marines had to change their tank crews as often as once per day due to the effects of non penetrating AT weapons. I think it was the battle for Hue, but I can't remember exactly at this point. I was quite suprized to hear about this, but now it all seems to make sence.

The allied forces knew about the bocage, but the battle plan didn't call for them to have to fight through it for an extended period of time. According to the D+ a few weeks plans, the allies were susposed to be well through that part of France. The germans were defending and the ability to cut through the middle of the bocage wasn't really necessary to their mission. The invention of the hedgegrow plow, aka the 'Cullen device' is named after the SGT who invented it. Belton Cooper's book 'Death Traps' has some good info on this and Cooper was an ordinance officer who was involved in the tank conversions. Both Cooper and Steven Zaloga have noted that most tank crews didn't want to bust through a hedgegrow and face flanking fire from the dug in germans. The history channel really plays it up, but most historians who have studied the Normandy campaign have noted that it was a useful but sparingly used device. An interesting set of stats on the Normandy tank losses can be found at: http://www.nymas.org/

It's the other way around. The sherman had a hydrolic system, which dosen't depend on engine RPM for speed. It was one of the reasons that the ronson, I mean sherman was so flamable. Hydrolic fluid goes boom under fire.

When I was in Germany I saw what I knew was an ambulance being used for ammunition resupply. The medical vehicles all had different roofs that made them impossible to misidentify. Being an MP, I asked the observer if that wasn't the biggest violation of the rules of war he had ever seen. He replied that as long as the red cross is hidden from view, the vehicle was a combatant. I looked it up and it's the insignia, not the type of vehicle that conveys protection. During field problems the OPFOR used to drive up to our aid stations in a marked red cross vehicle, open the rear doors, and open fire. I got my ass in a sling for arguing that using a red cross vehicle for combat action voided the protection. I won my arguement, but I got in a little trouble for lighting up an ambulance later in the exercise.

I for one would like to see two different units, sharpshooter and sniper. They are trained to different standards and are used for different missions. As someone who could group 20 rounds through a standard M-16 12" at 300m I was NOT a sniper, but I might have been a sharpshooter. Given the 8 round ammo load for the sniper, they aren't going to do too much damage unless you fight from the front. Keeping company commanders and arty spotters at a safe distance is a good test of your tactical ability. If a few snipers are playing havoc with your battle plan, it's time to rethink your mission.

Loosing yoru rifle could result in stockade time unless your unit was over run or you escaped from a POW camp.[/QB]