Wol

YAG 10 6 X 4 here http://www.autogallery.org.ru/yag10.jpg Ya6 5 ton 2X4 data here http://www.autogallery.org.ru/yag6.htm The best place I can find for Russian trucks: http://www.autogallery.org.ru/ see here for soviet tractor data http://www.autogallery.org.ru/m/traktora.htm cheers

Never mind tow them... YAG 10 heavy lorries were also used to carry them to provide reliable mobility for 76 AA guns. There are a couple of pics in "Soviet mechanised firepower 1941-1945" by Zaloga and Magnuski and in Zaloga and Grandsen's "Soviet Tanks and combat vehicles of WWII" I was playing a campaign in 1941 and I bought a truck and 76 AA gun and whoops, no re-deployment!

Komsomolets tractors are not towing vehicles for medium AA guns! Nor are Komintern, Voroshilovets or STZ 3/5 as far as I know (Though all but the Komsomolets tractor probably could). The komsomolets I have never seen tow anything bigger than a 76 field gun, and usually 76 regimental guns or 45mm ATG. A YAG 10 Heavy truck would be a suitable prime mover. As far as I can tell its just a BUG. ANd a rather large one!

You are all very sick. I recomend re-education through socialist labour. The best Tank is the T-35m38 closely followed by the T-28E.

Cheers Foxbat, As you can see, the T-26E are all quite different from the normally armoured T-26. i will send some pics I took at parola.

I find that I cannot attach pictures, so have sent some pics Foxbat and umm some one lse whose name I cannot recall (sorry) If you wish for them you need to send me an email cheers

Foxbat, That T-26s is an m37 with new conical turret but slab sided upper hull (as opposed to T-26s m39 - depending on whose nomenclature you use)which has the sloped hull armour as well. In any case it is not a T-26E. As far as I can tell , no T-26 m37s were equipped with applique, only the T-26s m39. The applique plates were fitted on massive bolts, fitted to the armour with round heads, about 14 on the upper hull plates alone. What you might being seeing are the vertical join lines in the welded turret construction (an inch or so wide) which make it look superficially as if the LH armour is protruding. Your vehicle also has the earlier welded turret mantlet, the later version was drop forged and was quite noticeably rounded along the edge, although I do think that some T-26 m39 had the earlier mantlet too (but the only evidence of this is on finnish vehicles, and they may just have swapped turrets). In the T-26E the mantlet was covered by applique again, mounted on large bolts. I will send some pics when I can get back to my scanner, but in the meantime here are some T-26m39 with early and late mantlets at Parola http://www.pp.htv.fi/jveijala/tankit/tank3.html cheers

I note that the T-26E has extra plates added to both turret and front hull and sides. I note also that There is a pic of an OT 134 with extra armour on front and sides of turret (at least, although this photo is poor, might have no extra hull armour). Another of an OT-133 clearly shows identical mounting bolts (and again, armour all round), as T-26E although different styles of applique on mantlet and 3 piece as opposed to one piece upper hull applique. Sources seem to disagree on T-26 m 37 & m39 hull & turret front base thickness, but all seem to agree that it was brought up to 50 mm

You are so sure? According to Zaloga, he gives 'Mechanized equipment of the RKKA on 22 June 1941' as including 508 KV (all types) 500 T-28 967 T34 So There are as many T-28 as alll types of KV (and necessarily more T-28 than KVI or KVII separately), and half as many T-28 as T-34 (all marks). This seems like a pretty significant number to me! And in addition, crews had time to learn how to use them (the last 12 being built in 1940), and they had time to iron out many of its mechanical deficiencies.

Strt send me an email, no trouble Wol

Being generous i would even allow the Finns a few T-28s

Okay maybe no T-35 or Lee/grant (sob), but a T-28 (or two) (hell let it have 2 fixed BMGs) would be wonderful. Please... There really were a lot more of them built than many other vehicles in the game, and they were probably about as numerically important as T-34s and KVs in June 1941.

Ahh a man after my own heart, starting with ancient history... Milsom J & Zaloga S, Russian Tanks Of World War 2 (Airfix magazine guide 22) 1977 Grandsen J & Zaloga S, Operation Barbarossa (Tanks Illustrated no 16)1985 Grandsen J and Zaloga S, The Eastern Front (Arnour camouflage and Markings 1941 to 1945)1983 Grandsen J and Zaloga S,Soviet Tanks and Combat Vehicles of World War Two 1984 There are many more, these just happened to be to hand whilst I was looking up some data on the T-26. If you have any special requests let me know and I will see what I can scan/send.

bump

That Finnish T-50, like all but one photo of T-50s that I have (and I can source only 4 different ones) has applique armour added all over (except the finns have removed some on their vehicle). Note the commader's cupola, an excellent light tank. BTW 1) All source that I have (Zaloga various but I can give chapter & verse if you like),Milsom, Grove, Grandsen all list the T-26 m37 and 39 (aka T-26s) as having 25 mm bow armour, or bow and Turret armour (m39). Only Russian battlefied shows it as 15mm. Does someone have a definitive answer? In the game, all T-26 m37 & 39 are listed as having 15 mm armour. 2) Zaloga lists BT-7A as carrying 50 rounds, you list 35 3) OT-133 should have turret offset to Right as on OT-134 4) all pictures I have of T-26E have added armour on turret and hull front and sides, and this is consistent with all other data I have have from Zaloga et al. You show it as having only additional front armour. 5) why don't the late model BT-7/Bt-7m have connical turrets? Can you show me the error of my ways oh BTS Wol

If the Komsomolets tractors are not going to be included (and I cannot find them), How would someone like to mod the carrier? Wol

T-50??? where are/will you be?

I cannot find the T-50s in the game, I was setting up a Finnish scenario and intended to use them aginst those dastardly Finns. I take it that they are not in the game, but might be in the patch (all 63 of them)?

Kwazydog, you need to keep taking those pills! Something more important than the T-28 (never mind-fall on knees in awe - the T35) when you included all Sturmtigers as a desperate sop to the genitally impaired! Still I hope that you bring them in sooner rather than later. I have some nice pics from the Pansarimuseo in Parola! Thanks for a FANTASTIC game. ps the T-26E in the only picture I have has applique armour on the sides as well I think. cheers Wol

bump

We want the T-28 and we won't wait!.... well I guess we will. I would most like to see the T-28. If you can have a twin turret T-26, then a 3 turret T-28 should be no problem. Just give it 2 bow mgs, I will not get upset if the sub turrets do not move, and voila!. Preferably two or 3 versions too, early, later(with L-10 gun) and late with bolt on armour. How hard can it be pleaseeeeee Waaaaaaaa! cheers Wol

Just to re-iterate my main worry. The endless (in a single round) opening up and closing down, whenm uder fire form a rifle batallion at 400 m. Surely I can tell them to button up?

Are that Uberman and his radio. I suppose all T-26m39 will be eqiuipped with radios anyway? I do not mid the occasional glance to look for flags, but every 20 seconds????

A few things... I assume that TRPs represent fully registered solutions, and that means each unit actually doing some ranging, (although possibly, if all batteries of a regiment are co-located, then perhaps each battery might not have to range seperately). That is why I think that you ought to pay the opportunity cost per battery. In practice, it is quite likely that the same TRP will be targeted by several batteries (I have no issue with that), just the costing of it. I think that OBA and table top artillery should be at least as carefully researched and presented as AFV and inf. Red God of War is just that. It was responible for the vast majority of all inf casualties. It seems to me to me at least as interesting as the other stuff too (Yes I am still taking the medication). The national differences are particularly interesting (Imagine playing CMBO and actually being able to bring down a standard linear concentration (STONK). It would be sad to think of all those grognards playing with mickey-mouse artillery rules whilst worrying about the light level in their Zeiss X20 Optic sight in a dusk scenario) Given the engine, this may be about as good as it can get, but I wonder what it would take to patch the engine to allow a bit more variety in the fire patterns. cheers Wol

I played a QB which included 3 assorted T-26s. The enemy were nearly all German inf. When I let these beasts loose at about 400m on the helpless Jerrys, an odd thing happeded. The crew commanders kept popping up and down like yo-yos. No really, sometimes 2 or 3 times per turn. They would do this even if I told them to button up! They were Reg and Vet, and must have enormous biceps (fit or what!) They would fire the odd round, maybe the MG, up scope, maybe acquire new target, then downscope etc etc endlessly through the turns. Naturally one was eventually shocked by rifle fire, but if they will keep hopping up and down like AOD with a crippled sub, (you remember, flat out porpoising while you try to make repairs) what do they expect. They could all actually see lots of targets even when buttoned up, so I do not think they needed to surface to acquire targets. Seriously, is this a bug? It seems so to me. When I say 'button up there is a whole rifle batallion 400 yards away', I expect my loyal crew commanders to obey! Not pop up and down several times a turn trying to get there head shot off.