Brightblade

Originally posted by Andreas: "Gefechtsaufklärung" isn´t what you say here. You have to differ between Gefechtsaufklärung and forced recon. Gefechtsaufklärung doesn´t necessarily mean to fight for recon. It defines the level of the recon. In the German army (as probably in many other armies too) there were/are different levels of recon troops with different missions. Division and higher leveled recon used/uses special equipment and vehicles (like the PSW) and usually operates 80 - 200km behind the enemy lines. Their job is to scout for high level artillery positions, enemy HQs, supply lines and the like. Usually they are ordered to avoid contact with the enemy whereever possible. Lower leveled recon for brigades, regiments, battalions or companies use whatever is available for the job, a tank platoon in a tank battalion, an armoured or motorized infantry platoon in a Panzergrenadier battalion, plus whatever the commander of the mission has and thinks might be useful for the lucky fellows. This is called "Gefechtsaufklärung", as it is used shortly before or even during a battle (Gefecht). It has only a short range (5 - 8km in front of the friendly lines) and the job is to detect and report enemy positions so the initiator of the recon mission can adjust his plans for battle. In many cases the Gefechtsaufklärung will have to engage the enemy during their mission, but it´s no necessity. Sometimes (if there is enough time) they are ordered to avoid enemy contact, to see without being seen. In other cases they are ordered to get information at all costs("Aufklärung erzwingen" = forced recon), engage the enemy wherever they meet them. Hope I managed to explain the difference. [ December 12, 2002, 09:29 AM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

If it took really 60 sec for a Panther´s turret full rotation, we should be thankful that it´s only "slow" in CMBO. I tested the turret speeds of different vehicles some time ago. IIRC "fast" is 7 sec for 180°, "medium" is 13 sec for 180°, "slow" is 22 sec for 180° and "very slow" (Tiger only) is 30 sec for 180°. In the meantime I can live with the slow turrets for tanks, but I can´t understand why the turrets of Pumas and especially of 234/1 are rated "slow".

Maybe someone else already suggested that for a patch but I didn´t find it anywhere. So, would it be possible to include the option to select the standard PBEM folder in CMBB? It would help people like me who continue playing CMBO because if we used the CMBO folder, we wouldn´t have to switch between different directories when recieving or sending files.

It seems that after the gun is damaged, not even a remote flexible MG is able to fire. I had a StuG IIIG in a recent game, which lost its gun very soon. You still could target enemy units, but it never fired. It had 17 ammo for the MG the turn it lost it´s gun and it still had 17 ammo when it got knocked out in turn 44 of 45 by a `zook Oh, and it never fired, no matter if the TC was unbuttoned or not, though that shouldn´t make any difference as the MG is remote after all... [ November 18, 2002, 09:08 AM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

Is there any way to create an operation basing on a meeting engagement? Both sides should be of equal force and comparable equipment, the map should favor neither side. Could it be done with a destroy operation? Which loss ratio should be selected?

In the Tigerfibel there is a picture of a Tiger and a description of what it endured in battle. Dieser Tiger erhielt im Südabschnitt in 6 Stunden: 227 Treffer Panzerbüchse _14 Treffer 5,2 cm und _11 Treffer 7,62 cm. Keiner ging durch. Laufrollen und Verbindungsstücke waren zerschossen, 2 Schwingarme arbeiteten nicht mehr, mehrere Pak-Treffer saßen genau auf der Kette, und auf 3 Minen war er gefahren. Er fuhr mit eigener Kraft noch 60 km Gelände. The translation is about: This Tiger recieved in the southern section in 6 hours: 227 hits by ATR _24 hits by 5.2 cm and _11 hits by 7.62 None penetrated. Roadwheels and track links were destroyed by hits, 2 [schwingarme, sorry, don´t know how to translate that] didn´t work any more, several ATG hits were directly on the tracks, and it drove on 3 mines. It still drove 60 km offroad by itself. -- This was certainly an exceptional example and was used to motivate the Tiger crews (they don´t say what sort of mines it was, so it might have been tank mines but as well anti-personnel mines). But it surely showed what punishment a Tiger could take and still it survived.

Had a little test running with Sturmtigers. A 3000 points plus 50% assault (about 7800 points) on two Sturmtigers, but infantry only. One them managed to fire eleven times and caused more than 1400 casualties and knocked out 24 mortars. The other one only fired three times and inflicted "only" about 350 casualties and destroyed eleven mortars. Pretty impressive, more than 100 infantrymen per shot... Then the AI surrendered... :cool: [ November 15, 2002, 08:27 AM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

It seems like the 88 could be used for indirect fire, thought not necessarily for artillery purposes. I read about a story where the platoon leader of a Tiger platoon decided to use his guns in a different way. The platoon rested behind a hill with a spotter in the top floor of a building so he could see over the hill. Suddenly a company of T34 appeard on the other side of the hill (I can´t remember if they were on march or preparing for rest themselves). The platoon leader evaluated the situation and then he decided this: it was too dangerous to attack a whole company of enemy tanks with only one platoon of Tigers, but something needed to be done anyway. He knew the trajectory of the 88L56 was quite flat, but it was still curved. So he ordered his Tigers into positions and ordered to aim at the crest of the hill. The spotter in the house watched the shots and gave corrections. The enemy was completely surprised by this fire and it took quite some time before they noticed where the fire came from. This way the platoon managed to take out several T34 (can´t remember the exact number)before the rest of the company mounted and escaped.

One company to guard a whole division on a march? Wouldn´t be much, don´t you think so? AFAIK the Escort company simply protected the division´s HQ. Such a HQ has a lot of equipment and can´t pack and move too fast. But it is a very desireable target for the enemy - if he knows where it is. So it needs protection. Something of everything, AA against aircrafts, AT against enemy armoured recon or (less often, but sometimes it might have happened) against enemy armoured units which have broken through the front line and are threatening the HQ before it can evade, and infantry against enemy commando forces/airborne sent to take out the HQ. And of course against enemy infantry which may have broken through the front together with the armoured units. [ November 10, 2002, 02:13 PM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

Originally posted by MikeyD: That may be true for older tanks, I don´t know much about it, but in newer tanks it works a little bit different (at least in the German Leopards which I already had the pleasure to steer). Turning the steering wheel not simply uses brakes on the tracks but works with the gearing mechanism by changeing the power distribution from equal (driving straight) in a way to make the tank turn where you want it to turn. At least that´s what they told me in the driving school how it works.

[deleted because of a double posting] [ November 04, 2002, 03:17 PM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

That´s not quite true. German tanks had steering wheels very early. AFAIK already PzIII had a steering wheel, maybe even the earlier models. Shermans on the other hand had those brake handles (you pulled one handle to slow down one track), and probably even long after the war, as long as they were in service. The M113 APC still has them nowadays. [ November 04, 2002, 03:16 PM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

Originally posted by Bastables: I never heard about that method, but that does not mean it´s not correct or wouldn´t be used of course. Only it seems to me like this formula is probably useful to determine the necessary supply, but not for anything else, lest for fighting crews. Other people might be more interested in the acutal engine usage, be it per km or per 100km. Still seems strange that they give very different numbers in the Pantherfibel, published July 1st 1944 by the Generalinspekteur der Panzertruppen, Generaloberst Heiz Guderian. It´s a big difference between a range of 150km and 250km on road.

Originally posted by Sirocco: [ja:kt], according to my dictionary. How do you pronounce Jadg? Bastables, typos are OK, but as you misspelled it in each attempt in this thread, I thought it might be something else (nothing wrong with not being German ). Unfortunately I didn´t quite get the meaning of your last posting. I´d be really nice if you explained it to me (I´m only a German and my English is not the best). In the Tigerfibel (D 656/27) they say one litre of fuel is sufficient for 200m of movement. So 5 litres would be needed for one kilometer. In a example they say that with one load of fuel the Tiger can drive from Magdeburg to Berlin on the road (100km) or from Magdeburg to Brandenburg off road (85km). In the Pantherfibel (D 655/27) they say that a full load of fuel (730 litres) will be enough for 150km on a road or 100km off road. [ November 04, 2002, 06:41 AM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

They say 100km and 80km for the Tiger in the Tigerfibel, but I´ll look that up again.

Bastables, believe me, it´s litres per 1km. The Tiger for example had a range of 100km on a road and of 80km off road. It had several hundered litres of fuel on board. I can´t remember the numbers of the Panther right now, but they were similar. Even nowaday tanks use so much fuel (the Leopard 2 about 4,5 litres per km on the road, about 7 litres off road). The gas turbine of the Abrams needs even more... BTW, it´s Jagd, not Jadg... [ November 04, 2002, 06:04 AM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

Bastables, interesting numbers you offer. 6 litres of fuel per 100km. For a tank that´s extraordinary! Many modern cars use more than that... Guess you meant litres per 1km. That´s realistic. And Foxbat, what are talking about ugliness of the Jagdpanther? Beauty lies in the eye of the beholder, I know, but for me the Jagdpanther absolutely is a beauty. [ November 04, 2002, 05:30 AM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

Unlimbering seems to take much too long. After all, gun crews are quite numerous. The 88 Flak was crewed by 10 men, later by 8 men. All of them were trained to do their specific part of the job. If a gun is going to be used for artillery purposes (indirect fire), it will certainly take some time to get ready to fire (determine the position), but what does it take to get ready for direct fire? The twenty seconds they say here don´t sound too far off. And what´s that time it takes until a gun can fire after it´s pushed or pulled only a few meters? Is that realistic? What is there to do for nearly one minute to get the gun ready to fire? Are there any artillerymen here with some experience with field guns (I guess SPA is something completely different)?

Originally posted by Andrew Hedges: Noone escaped the map, else there would be men OK on the German side. No, the three PSW and the SPW just moved along the border of the map to the position where they got knocked out and, well, got knocked out. I think this scenario is very hard if not impossible for the Germans to win. Don´t know why it is called a probe, the enemy is entreched very well, so assault would be more fitting. The only efficient action of any of the vehicles was to take out one AT gun, without harming the crew in any way.

You are right, these casualties might be killed friendly troops, but IIRC the PSW killed one AT gun and was knocked out very soon after by one of my mortars. I summed up all kills in all units´ kill lists. The Soviets claimed 63 casualties (I did not forget the knocked out AT gun), but the Germans suffered 67 casualties. The Germans claimed four casualties, but there was only one wounded soldier on the Soviet side. If the three remaining claims were indeed friendly troops, one more might have been lost to a mine field and then the numbers would be correct. Unfortunately there is no kill list for mine fields, not even after the battle. Anyway, I really don´t believe that the PSW or the 50mm mortar missed their targets by so much that they hit friendly troops. [ October 17, 2002, 09:34 AM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

Did anyone else notice a wrong number of casualties? When I played Cemetery Hill with a friend today, I suffered one casualty. However, a PSW 222 claimed two casualties and a HMG and a 50mm mortar also claimed one casualty each. It might not be very important and I don´t know how much this influences the outcome of battles (if it happens in a larger scale), but I thought maybe someone might know and tell me. Here is a link to a screenshot with the PSW´s kill list and the AAR. [ October 17, 2002, 09:28 AM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

No, Sturm squads have their MG firepower reduced. I guess you mistook the Sturm squads for the Sturmgruppen. You are right there, a Sturmgruppe doesn´t have the decreased MG firepower. Sturm platoons are available in Grenadier Battailons ´45 and they are armed as I said above. But where did you find a dual MG Gebirgsjäger 44 squad? I looked for it in every single month of ´44 and ´45, for WH Mountain and SS Mountain, but I could only find Gebirgsjäger 44, armed as I said above. [ October 13, 2002, 09:19 PM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

Bastables, sorry having to contradict you, but if you had read my posting you quoted, you´d have noticed that the Sturm squads do have K98, even two of them. They suffer the loss in firepower for the MG anyway. OK, it´s not as bad as in a heavy SMG squad, although 23 to 20 is not that much of a difference.

All right, the MG2 (machine gunner´s assistant) is certainly useful and has enough to do, so when he is distracted by using his own weapon a certain decrease in firepower for the MG should be OK. But it seems like the MG2 is always using his own weapon, as there is no difference in firepower for all other weapons in any squad, which is a bit strange to me, but as the other weapons have a very low firepower at more than 100m, that probably won´t really matter. To reduce the MG´s firepower at close distance seems to be realistic (the MG being too inflexible at close range and the MG2 being busy), although IMO to reduce it by 60% or 54% is a bit steep. And why do only certain squads suffer from this reduced firepower? What is it about the Gebirgsjäger and the Sturm squads? The Gebirgsjäger squads have 2 Kar98k, 6 MP40, 1 lMG42. The Sturm squads have 2 Kar98k, 2 MP40, 4 MP44, 1 lMG42. The Sturm squads have a reduced firepower for the MG, the Gebirgsjäger don´t. Why? Because of the 4 MP44? Were they that bad, worse than the MP40? [ October 13, 2002, 04:48 PM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

Anyone out there to enlighten me? I don´t want to die as stupid as I´m now...