Brian

[Normally I'd post this in the General forum but being unable to, it can go here as I note a rash of similar posts] Gentlepeople, today is ANZAC day, 25 April (our time). It is upon this day, the one day of the year, that Australians and New Zealanders have especially set aside to remember and honour our war dead. It was this day, in 1915 that our troops, stormed ashore upon the Gallipoli peninsular in what was ultimately a doomed adventure. It was this event, which we as nations consider set ourselves amongst other nations more than any other. At this time, a special poem has great significance for our veterans, it is Ode to the Fallen by O.L. Binyon and from it is extracted what is known as The Ode of Rememberance which runs: "They shall grow not old. As we that are left grow old Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn At the going down of the sun and in the morning We will remember them". They shall not grow old..." Here is the full text of the Ode to the Fallen: With proud thanksgiving, a mother for her children England mourns her dead across the sea Flesh of her flesh they were, spirit of her spirit Fallen in the cause of the free. Solemn the drums thrill: Death august and royal Sings sorrow up into immortal spheres There is music in the midst of desolation And a glory that shines upon our tears. They went with songs to the battle, they were young Straight of limb, true of eye, steady and aglow They were staunch to the end against odds uncounted They fell with their faces to the foe. They shall grow not old. As we that are left grow old Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn At the going down of the sun and in the morning We will remember them. They mingle not with their laughing comrades again They sit no more at familiar tables at home They have not lot in our labour of the daytime They sleep beyond England's foam. But where our desires are our hopes profound Felt as a well spring that is hidden from sight To the innermost heart of their own land they are known As the stars are known to the Night. As the stars that shall be bright when we are dust Moving in marches upon the heavenly plain As the stars that are starry in the time of our darkness To the end, to the end, they remain. The Ode is usually recited as a toast, facing the west and is followed by a minute's silence. So, if possible, I ask you to please raise a glass and spare a thought for the thousands of our dead, who have sacrificed themselves in the many wars we have fought in, sometimes with your nations, sometimes apart, but always so that they gave their tomorrows, if necessary, in order that we might enjoy our's, free from tyranny, free from injustice and free from oppression. Interest in ANZAC day has waned and is now waxing again within Australia, as more people come, with the passing of the old diggers, to understand the debt that we as a nation owe to them. Each year, upon this day, a service is held at dawn, where ever Australians are and we honour their sacrifice. This year, one will be held in East Timor, Bouganville and now Afghanistan. At Gallipoli itself, many young Australians will gather, undertaking what is now considered a pilgrimage to remember their grandfathers and reat-grandfathers. There too, a dawn service will be held. I, personally will be at a dawn service. Hopefully, as I have observed over the last two decades, numbers will again be up on last year's. More Australians, young and old, joined together observing and honouring the ultimate sacrifice that 102,626 Australians have made. If any of you are interested in knowing more about the traditions of ANZAC day then please, consult this web page for more information. If any of wish to know about the Australia's Military History, please consult site, there you will find the most salient points. Lest we forget. [ April 24, 2002, 09:10 PM: Message edited by: Brian ]

[i know I am about to regret what I am about to do but it is a boring day at the office and I am feeling slightly suicidal...] As two incarnations of the Doctor pointed out, to said uberDaleks, upon seperate occasions (Incarnation III and IV) "Ha! If you're the masters of the universe, lets see you climb those!" Running up a set of stairs. Rather destroys the myth of invincibility that, now doesn't it? BTW, did I win anything in the betting? [ April 24, 2002, 05:13 AM: Message edited by: Brian ]

I'd be very interested to know what the sources are that give those hit probability numbers, please. The following numbers are from PRO document WO 291/180, "Accuracy of anti-tank gunnery." They give the probability (%) of a static anti-tank gun hitting a static hull-up tank target with first round. Range (yards)___6-pdr____17-pdr 500_____________87_______98 1000____________33_______46 1500____________12_______20 2000____________03_______10 2500_____________________05 All the best, John.</font>

It was in one of the Iron Chef's threads IIRC. Personally, I'd rather see a WWI game - it wouldn't take too much to modify the engine to handle that period IMO.

Won't AP and HE (in most cases) have different trajectories? Or is this tactic meant to be used on short distances where this shouldn't be that much of a problem?</font>

Both right! Award yourselves a coveted Gold Star or would one of you like a Hippo stamp? Its a shame this tactic is not available in CM. I'd like to be able to nominate what round to fire if I want. I definitly want to be able to stop my tanks from wasting inappropriate ammunition against the wrong targets. I've often had a tank run out of HE and keep firing AP at infantry targets in the open.

I wasn't going to mention this but I've fired Brens (.303in and 7.62mm), M60 GPMGs, L2a1s, L1a1s, F1 SMGs and F88s from the prone, hip and shoulder. All were quite easy to use and control. Admittedly, accurracy was a bit of a bitch beyond 25-100 metres from the hip but it was achievable, particularly with the fully-automatic weapons (as long as you're prepared to waste rounds "walking" them into the target). Part of our SOPs was to fire our rifles/MGs from the hip upon first contact as that was where we carried them when patrolling (not at the shoulder as the Poms do). We're also taught to turn the body, keeping the muzzle aligned with the eyes as we scan our alloted arcs as we walk.

Should it be obvious why this is an effective tactic? I'm missing something... :confused: </font>

Maybe - do yours look like this? A recruit fires the C9 Light support Weapon during Regular Force Basic Recruit Course 311 Exercise Final Chance. Regards JonS</font>

And I thought I was the only one with that problem. Must be the corrolis force or reversal of the magnetic field or something.

Can I take the part of Caligula? I promise to wear a toga every time I enter the forum. Regards Jim R.</font>

No, he's been out drinking, or so an informant tells me. It is obvious that alcohol has an interesting effect upon this lad. </font>

No, he's been out drinking, or so an informant tells me. It is obvious that alcohol has an interesting effect upon this lad.

Mmmm, not quite. There is one major and significant difference - the removable barrel. This allows the Bren to have a higher sustained rate of fire than the BAR. Something which should not IMO be quite so easily dismissed. While the magazine capacity is slightly larger, what is clearly superior in the Bren is its location (IMO top mounted magazines on LMGs are the only sensible location, if you're going to utilise a magazine that is). Not quite. What they did force the Germans to do was figure out how to make an LMG do the same job as an MMG. However, they weren't alone in coming up with the solution they did. The Czechs were there as well, and dare I mention it, from that lineage, so were the British. The German ideas on the LMG were formed in WWI, where they used primarily captured Lewis guns, simply 'cause it seems they couldn't produce anything themselves. Did you say, "slow"? I'd suggest it crept with the speed of a glacier if it took to the '90s to get through to them. I've heard this criticism of the Johnson weapons before but I've recently read a book on 1 Special Service Brigade (I won't call them 1 SS Brig., what was their abbreviation? where it seems they preferred the Johnson Model 41 over the Bren. While this web page suggests that the primary reason that the Johnson lost out to the M1 Garand and the BAR was because of the large installed base, rather than necessarily any technical problems associated with either design. Of the LMG designs, perhaps the Model 44 would have been the one which was most comparable to the Bren, albeit with a smaller magazine at least it had a removable barrel. Interestingly, the nascent Israeli Defence Force adopted the Model 44 LMG and manufactured it in small numbers as the "Dror" LMG. So, in otherwords, US doctrine compensated for the lack of firepower by providing it through other means? Well, speaking from the British viewpoint, yes, the section did operate with the Bren as its centrepiece. I have no idea whether it was used to "more effect" but suspect it was.

I always felt that it was an unusual choice both for the book and the movie - the Kuban bridgehead. Interesting to see something different. I felt that perhaps the best performance was always James Mason's character, attempting to show leadership, right to the end. Coburn was quite good. I am surprised that you felt that Enemy at the Gates was "Hollywoodised". Out of a matter of interest, was Cross of Iron filmed in Jugoslavia like Kelley's Heroes (and interestingly, Waterloo)?

In short, it wasn't the perfect weapon, but, it was--as someone said above, "good enough" for its job. It was good enough to be requested in ever greater numbers by the troops who used it, not because it was perfect, but because it was the best weapon available to them for the task. And, despite its drawbacks, it was good enough for good soldiers to achieve victory with. In general we can sometimes obsess about the fine points of advantage a given weapon has over others, but ultimately, in CM, as in RL, we have to find a way to make the weapons we're given good enough to win with.[/QB]</font>

Thanks. Now we have cleared that up, we can go on. I was afraid you were making the same mistakes someone else had.

Errr, are you claiming that the USA won WWI and it was the BAR which facilitated that victory?</font>

Errr, are you claiming that the USA won WWI and it was the BAR which facilitated that victory?

Double post. Oops. [ April 17, 2002, 01:54 AM: Message edited by: Brian ]

are you saying you would usually count million, milliard?, billion, billiard? ? IOW, what do you really call a fake billion?</font>

</font>

Production of the 81mm round was discontinued in 1942 due to unsatisfactory reliability. Stocks were used as long as they lasted after that. No info on 120mm round. M.</font>

Interesting comment from this web page: "Timed Fuzes Mechanical or Powder-Train Timer Fuze The shell goes off some time after it is fired. Usually, this is intended to give an air burst, which is most effective at about 20 yards above the target. However, setting the fuze correctly was tricky business. The US mechanical fuze seemed very unreliable and was only used to give a high-altitude registration burst for spotting. Wesely [2] says German fuzes were much better, about as reliable as the US VT fuze.[my emphasis] VT (Proximity) Fuze The VT fuze emits a radio signal and goes off when it detects enough of this signal is being reflected back from a hard object. The height of burst will increase if over dense foliage, swamp, water, or wet terrain; and it will decrease with high-angle fire. 1940's era VT fuzes had a minimum arming time of five seconds, so the VT fuze cannot be used for close-in defense. With the VT fuze, The minimum ranges in yards for several guns is shown below: Weapon Minimum Range (yards) 75mm Howitzer 2,200 105mm Howitzer 2,700 155mm Howitzer 4,000 8" Howitzer 6,000 240mm Howitzer 9,000" [ April 15, 2002, 11:59 AM: Message edited by: Brian ]