Dandelion

Yes, the non-extractable Garand clip, how could I forget. Prevented mounting of a scope too didn't it? Should have been a magazine of course. I was thinking about the M2 as well, but became unsure. Was it available in WWII or was it a Korea enhancement? Cheerio Dandelion

John, Found some more during the day here. On the Hochgebirgs-Jäger-Btl.1-4 No. 2 of these raised questions. Checked it up. It started life july 20th 1942, created from a cadre coming from II.Ausb.Btl. of the Hochgebirgstruppen in Innsbruck (WKVII). I found the reason for renaming it. It was in the Kuban bridgehead and melted away, was merged with the Felders.Btl.54 and the amalgated unit was known from february 12th as Geb.Jäger-Btl.54. Having checked that up, I felt compelled to check the others as well. - No 1 is born on july 20th 1942 as well, but with cadre from the I.Ausb.Btl. of the Hochgebirgstruppen in Berchtesgaden. It serves rather brielfy until dissolved in the winter 42/43, the remaining men being reposted to Geb.Div.1. - No 3 and 4 both started life in november 20th 1943, both created from a cadre taken from I./Geb.Jg.Rgt.98 then serving in Dalmatia. These had a mtn artillery battery attached(!). Anyway, in december 1944 No 3 is adopted as III./Geb.Jg-Rgt.296 and so rejoins the ordinary Geb.Jg. ranks. No 4 remains as is. on the Jäger-Bataillon 1-14 Checked them up to find a connection with other Jäger units. There actually is one, of sorts, with the Skijäger brigade. When No:s 2, 4, 5, 9, 11 and 12 were disbanded (in the winter of 43/44), they donated all remaining personnel to the Skijäger brigade. No:s 3, 6 and 7 were never disbanded.. No:s 1, 8, 10, 13 and 14 were disbanded with the men going to infantry divisions 252, 292, 137, 292 and 253 respectively. On 10. Radfahrer-Jäger-Brigade Found some on it. It was created in january 1945 consisting of Radf.Jäger-Btl.I., II. and III./10, all with five companies. The men were cadre from St.Pz.Gren.Brigade 18 and Aufkl.-Lehr-Abt.I. It fought in Ostpreussen (Braunsberg) for all of its brief lifespan (i.e. february 1945). --- Cheerio Dandelion

Not that it matters much, given the limitations of the game engine in this particular respect, but the divisional Pioneer battalion (of a German Division that is) was issued with 38 small dinghies, and 36 larger ones. In addition, the divisional bridging column (type B or "light") carried a further 20 and 24 respectively. Small dinghies were 3 meters long and 1,15 wide, could carry 3-4 men. Weighed only 50 kilos unpumped and took only 5 minutes to pump up, frequently used in the coup-type crossings of the early war. They used them for improvised bridges too, connecting them and laying up to 24 meters of prepared planks (or simply ladders) as ad hoc bridges. Such could carry men with heavy weapons, but not motorcycles or heavier. Large dinghies were 5,5 meters long, 1,9 wide and could carry 12 men (6 employed with paddling) plus a pioneer acting pilot. Alternatively, they could jam a Pak with crew into it (it carried about 1,5 tonnes), but even 5cm Paks became a poroblem getting in and out. The pumps (there were 2 in the battalion) were rather noisy and took time, so these were usually prepared some way off from the crossing. As the rubber sides were sensitive, it took 8 men carrying it in handles (150 kg) to get it down to the shore. With some generosity in interpretation, the CM generic assault boats will vaguely resemble these. And designing scenarios, one might consider that any German division would be able to set afloat 60 squads, or about a battalion of men, in such 'assault boats', even with rather short notice. The battalion also had 6 Sturmboote, assault boats. These were wooden thingies with outboard engines, capable of carrying 6 men plus 2 crew. Rather fast, some 15 knots. They were mostly used for towing pontoons though. There was also a M-Boot of course, which was more or less a floating workplace, not intended for assault but for working with bridges. The division had 8 ferries/pontoons with 4 tonne lift capacity. These could be connected to increase capacity. Thus 4 such could form a ferry of 16 tonne capacity, and all 8 had around 20 tonne capacity if joined. These ferries could be used as pontoons, being 3,2 meters long and actually portable (by 20 men). If desired, sections could be partially waterfilled so the pontoons "swam" just beneath the surface, hiding the pontoon bridge from aerial recce, but making crossings cumbersome and risky for any non-terrain vehicles. Maximum length varied with desired lift capacity. If was normally built for 4 tonnes (135 meters max, able to carry IGs, Paks and such), 8 tonnes (85 meters max, able to carry light artillery and all non armoured vehicles of the division) or 16 tonnes (55 meter max, able to carry just about anything except tanks). That´s the regular light bridging column, Panzerdivisions had even greater capacity of course and at corps lever there were heavy bridging columns. Took about 8 hours to finish a maximum length pontoon bridge, regardless of capacity. Getting a ferry operable took 1-3 hours depending on size. A bridgehead would normally have to hold such volumes of time before substantially reinforced, and in case of a ferry solution the reinforcemenets would only trickle in. Of course, enemy intervention would delay all efforts even further. For larger jobs, e.g. the Meuse, concentrations of up to 15 such bridging columns were deployed, taken from many divisions and corps units. In the beginning of the war the Germans were quick to replace pontoon bridges with solid ones, because they continually needed mobile bridges for the advance. During the years of retreat, they were less keen. Cheerio Dandelion

That was the best caption so far. Spoken by the SS-man facing the camera no doubt. A further suggestion; "Guys, guess what... riflerounds just bounce off SOMUA 35s... who would have known... anyway I got their attention and they're all coming over here now... think MG bullets will bounce off too?... Guys?... come on talk to me guys, what do you think?.." /D

I second that. /Dandelion

MPi, not Mpi. The Heereswaffenamt evaluation of the MPi40 was somber. "Very sensitive to moist, cold and dirt which cause frequent jams. Unreliable safety, causing several casualties. Even a rough landning on earth will trigger the mechanism causing uncontrolled fire. Troops normally improvise and secure the safety with a string, and avoid carrying loaded weapons. Feeding from magazines often malfunction, causing jams. Troops use magazines not quite filled to counter this. Magazine shape still cause problems when firing prone." Et ceteraaaw. Some of these problems were solved, most of them not. The MPi18/38/40 replaced pistols in the equipment tables, and were thus initially considered self defence weapons only. So it's not just an Anglo-Saxon approach. Well, most Germans are technically Saxons, and to a Finn all of them are, but you know what I mean. Still, it all sounds real primitive to me. M1 Garand and carbine seem the most intelligent mass-scale WWII solutions. Toting bolt actions and tuna-can smg's cannot have been very satisfying regardless of model. But of course, I would at any time prefer to have Kingfish's mudbaked exwife as sidearm instead. Cheers Dandelion

John, My replies bounce, it seems your e-mail is out of order? At any rate, I post the answer here since I know you check in regularly from work. I have changed the numbering of your questions, to fit me better. I bunched some questions together as they sort of had the same answer. Also it looked less intimidating that way But I think you will have no problem following me below. Generally speaking I understand your confusion here, checking your sources I also became slightly confused. I'll try and deliver a more systematic and hopefully comprehensible explanation. --- 1. Jäger Divisions First unit to appear with the name Jäger was the Jäger-Regiment 141 (Welle 10, summer 1940) but it was converted to a Gebirgsjäger-Rgt. that summer. In December 1940 (Welle 12) four (sister) infantry divisions (97, 99, 100, 101) were organised and trained for combat in medium mountain terrain (Kampf im Mittelgebirge) and heavy forests (Waldkampf). Organisation (KStN) was identical to Gebirgsjäger, but equipment (KAS) was not. They were designated Leichte (Light) divisions. Of these, the 99th was converted to Gebirgsjäger-Division 7 in the autumn of 1941. A further three (sister) infantry divisions (5, 8, 28) were converted to light divisions in the winter of 41/42. With the conversion of 99th, there were thus six remaining such (5, 8, 28, 97, 100, 101). All of them were renamed Jäger-Division on june 28th 1942 (the regiments and battallions changing names from Infanterie to Jäger). These were reinforced in the autumn of 1942 by the four infantry divisions of Welle 15 doing service in Croatia (ID 704, 714, 717, 718). They were reorganised, renamed and renumbered (JD 104, 114, 117, 118). In the course of this transformation, the manpower of these divisions were "considerably youngered" (erheblich verjüngt), thus replaced by category A-C conscripts, which none of these had had initially. The 100th was destroyed in Stalingrad and it proved impossible to recreate it in any larger size than regimental combat group, due to lack of correct category personnel. However, it was "replaced" by Reserve-Division 187 which was converted to Jäger-Division 42 in november 1943. It took until late february to complete the transformation, again due to increasing shortage of fit troops. The Jäger retained the Gebirgsjäger organisation (e.g. they were two regiment divisions) and by and large similar equipment. Training also resembled gebirgsjäger, but had greater emphasis (more weeks spent) on forest combat (Waldkampf) and no high mountain training or equipment at all. Personnel was category A to C, i.e. youngest and fittest selection with evident motivation, but not volounteers or special in any other way, so not really comparable to commandos as your source suggests. At this point thus 10 divisions plus a rump. It was peak strength and the only regular Jäger units of the army. Of course, there was in addition the normal allotment of A.u.E.Btl., Reserve and Lehr units not attached to the divisions (but to the WK). Most of these served in the Balkans, as they were well adjusted to fighting partisans in the difficult terrain there. 2. Jäger Battallions The 9th that you mention formed part of a special anti-partisan force, not really related to the other Jäger units. In the winter 41/42 partisans on the Eastern front became such a problem that a number of WKs (II-IX, XI, XIII, XVII, XVIII) were ordered to immediately create ad hoc Jagd-Kommandos of three companies each, trained and equipped for anti-partisan warfare. They carried numbers 1-9, 11 and 12. They were dissolved the following summer, and replaced with 14 specially raised Jagd-Bataillone (so numbered). These were later renamed Jäger-Bataillone, and your source refers to the 9th of these. All came from WKI. The term "Jäger" here had another origin. These battalions had no organisational relation with aforementioned Jägers. Equipment and training was resembling military police rather than line infantry. The battalions had five companies, the fifth being PzJg. By tradition, German military police have their own connection to the historical term "Jäger", which I will leave aside here. These guys are not who you are looking for anyway. 3. Skijäger ...were not the same as Jäger, and so it is not surprising you were unable to find them. In December 1943 a Skijäger-Brigade 1 was created, containing Skijäger-Regiment 1 and 2. Organisation was 9 company regiments. This was expanded in December 1944 to 14 companies per regiment (and the brigade was reinforced with some divisional units and renamed Division (still 1st)). The brigade-division served on the eastern front. This was the sole regular Skijäger unit of the army. However, during the winter of 41/42 several regular infantry divisions formed Ski-Bataillone . These were irregular units, created ad hoc by assembling personnel from ordinary infantry regiments, all dissolved with the coming of thaw. 4. Luftwaffe Jägers The "parallel" series 4-21 Jäger divisions that you mention were Luftwaffe units. The Luftwaffe divisions raised in the winter 42/43 were transfered to the army november 1st 1943 for completion of training to reach acceptable standard. They were supposed to convert to the "Inf.Div. n.A. 44" KStN (organisation) and by and large they did. Generally speaking they were all renamed "X. Feld-Div. (L)", thus no division was called a Jäger division. Nor were any of them organised or equipped as such. But all regiments were renamed "Jäger-Rgt. (L)", in spite of not a single one using the organisation or equipment of a Jäger unit. Nor were they in any way trained as Jäger. During the course of the war, all of these units changed designations and names in a most confusing and unagreeable manner. Just look for the (L) and if you see it, write the unit off from your research. 5. Oddballs Units you have or will encounter, who do not "fit in". - The Radfahr-Jäger-Brigade 10 of which you ask was formed in january 1945. I know zip about it I'm afraid. Might be just a paper product. I'll check to see if I can find anything on it. - Same goes for the apparently independent Reserve-Jäger-Regiment 1, later Jäger-Regiment 20, which served in the Balkans, hunting partisans. If this was a real Jäger unit or a MP-type unit I don't know. - In march 1945 the division "Alpen" was created, containing Jäger-Regiment "Alpen" 1 and 2. I severely doubt this unit was ever beyond paper. - Freijäger-Regiment 16 was a pure antipartisan unit, consisting of russian troops, not German. Belonged to the Osttruppen. There were no other "Freijäger" units. - Küstenjäger-Abt. 800 was a military intelligence unit, belonging to the foreign ministry, not the army. But it served as a commando-type force in the Brandenburg division. They were not Jägers in the sense you research. 6 Traditions Like most armies, the German had a system with units carrying the traditions of historical ancestral units. All German battalions in existence in 1938 carried the traditions of one or more such historical regiments. In some cases, the historical units were Jäger units. You already have a good picture of the historical development of this term. Here it can suffice to say, that some battalions were called "Jäger" in spite of not being such, because of these traditions. These are not who you are looking for and fortunately they are easily sorted out. Any battalion called Jäger, forming part of a regiment not called Jäger, carried a tradition name. The sole exeptions, with entire regiments carrying tradition "Jäger" names, were Jäger-Regiment 1 and 2, serving in the Brandenburg division, but actually belonging to the Panzerwaffe, not the Jäger. 7. Africa The "Leicht" divisions serving in africa had no relation to those converted to Jäger. The German army had a flexible concept of the term "Leicht", it could mean light anything. Light infantry, light motor, light armour etc. No, the "Gebirgs-Jäger Rgt 756" was not the only gebirgsjäger unit in Africa. It was merely the only unit named Gebirgsjäger in Africa. But the regiment was an abnormity, and actually there were no Gebirgsjäger troops in Africa. The story was that in november 1942 three divisions were formed under the covername "Kriemhilde", and all regiments and divisions thus formed were referred to as "Kriemhilde" formations (thus ID 326, 334 and 338, not only the 334th, as your source seems to suggest). Eight regiments were involved, and these ranged from fortress units manning the atlantic wall to Ersatz troops of varying quality. The 756th was one of these. It was raised in WK XVIII mainly from Ersatz personnel from the Gebirgsjäger. Organisation was however ordinary Grenadier (Welle 1.). The regiment formed part of division 334, which was an ordinary Grenadier division. It was destroyed in Tunis, and when recreated in France the 756th no longer carried the "Gebirgsjäger" name. It was all an administration hickup really. So, much ado about nothing there. 8. Hochalpenkorps Actually all four independent Gebirgsjäger-Bataillonen created in 1942 and 1943 were renamed Hochgebirgsjäger-Bataillone 1-4. Number 2 was then renamed Gebirgsjäger-Bataillon 54. Can't seem to find out why, but it was. The "korps" was not an organisation but a reference to the WK training cadre and a collective term for the personnel of the four battalions. You know, like the Marine Corps is not formally the size of a US Corps, but still a corps They were not the same as the Heeres-Gebirgsjäger-Bataillone. There were only two of the latter, numbered 201 and 202. --- There you go. I somehow feel certain you will return with those other "minor" questions on the Gebirgsjäger formations within short Cheerioops Dandy

B. The explanation of Mr H is actually exhaustive, though wrapped in a veil of local jargon. It can all be alternatively expressed as follows. The forum, initially quite functional, became subject to heavy pollution upon publication of the actual game (CMBO). Contamination came with the large influx of new gamers and grognards, some of whom were afflicted, in many cases with incubated diseases appearing only after a period of apparent rationality. Admin tried various strategies to combat this. Individual extermination proved too laborious and ineffective. Admin turned to containment strategies, with special refuse threads (Peng, Waffle), eventually expanding to entire refuse forums (General forum). Though in no way waterproof, these systems did manage to decrease contamination to endurable level. What my fellow posters are trying to tell you, in their various ways, is that you will become associated with your immediate surrounding. If you spend time in refuse threads, it will become difficult to get attention if you ever have a serious question you want to discuss. Not only will it be presumed you are trying to create new polluted areas, your fellow trolls will escort you wherever you go, and saturate your threads with insurmountable amounts of slapstick. Posts will then be sealed by admin, to prevent further spread. So don't go there unless you want to stay there. Cheerio Dandelion

Anytime Jason. Say, are you/were you a CMMCer? Cheerio Dandelion

I take it the question concerns only wireless connections. The lowest infantry echelon equipped with wireless sets was initially the battalion, with the signals troop containing 4 "Tornisterfunktrupps" ('portable-radio squads') each with a wireless set and 3 men. Normally, 2 wireless connections were established within the battalion net, and these would normnally double an established wirebound connection, thus acting backup. The battalion was responsible for the battalion net, i.e. connections with the companies and neighbour battalions, as well as any attached units. Communications to regiment was thus the responsibility of the regimental signal platoon. Which, incidentally, also contained 4 Tornisterfunktrupps. At divisional level there was the signal battalion, with a wireless company equipped with wireless sets of quite another capacity than the "d" found at lower echelons. Battalion nets - like the nets of all other echelons - were established via communication posts. There was one main wireconnection ("Stamm" or trunk) and ideally a backup line. The battalion had 6 fieldphones, and these were placed along the line in communication posts. In photographs, you very often see the typical improvised small sign with either a white lightning (wireless) or "F" (wire), marking such a post. The runners at company level thus ran or rode to such posts, delivering their messages which were then relayed. If the company did not have a communication post with a field phone of its own of course. But returning to smaller units - after 1940, wireless sets were issued to the heavy companies of the battalions, and the regimental infantry gun companies as well, replacing old blink devices, flags etc. These sets were used for firecontrol purpouses within the company, and were also normally used as backup only. The infantry gun companies could also utilise the divisional artillery organisation for communication and fire control. Most battallions in the infantry arm of service followed the exact same pattern of organisation and equipment. Or had minor variations - e.g. Recon battallions with the same organisation but with one funktrupp equipped with a more powerful radio. In the artillery, the batteries (equiv. to companies) had 1 portable wireless set (equipping the VB, or Forward Observer, of that battery - he had a field phone as well of course) plus two non-portable wireless sets for fire control purpouses. At battalion level and up, the signal organisation was basically doubled. For the battalion and regiment net, organisation and equipment was the same as the infantry. But in addition, battalions had a special signal platoon (AVT), and regiments a similar such (AVKo), both tasked with firecontrol and communication with the units being supported. Both types had 4 wireless sets each, half of which were portable and the other half being heavier devices. And on top of this, the AVO (Artillery liaison officer, responsible for communication with Division, which normally meant contact with the ARKO, divisional artillery commander, as Jason mentions) had his own wireless set. As Jason also mentions the short wave radios ("d" or Dora) found at echelons below division weighed more than 20 kg, being separated into a transmitter and a receiver each of 11 kg, carried as backpacks. They had a theoretical maximum range of some 15 km (morse - only 5 km speach connection at best), and were "Wechselsprech", whatever you call that in English (could only have one line open, and only send or receive, not both). In practice, German infantry rarely used transmits of speach at all. Ranges were too short to be useful and connections too bad. Morse was the norm. The two men carrying the radio were hooked to eachother by the powersupply cable, one meter or so in length. The section commander carried a third, also very heavy backpack, containing the antennas, batteries, accessories and spare parts. Wireless connections were unrealiable at best and thus communications in the German army remained wirebound throughout the war. The wireless was appreciated for its capacity of filling gaps. It took only 5 - 8 minutes to ready a wireless (it took several hours to establish a battalion wirenet) and it could be used during movement. It follows that radios were used only by combat units. All other units relied entirely on wire and runners.

Well, not really. Painful but not crippling in terms of activity. Decibel levels of pain threshold were commonplace in factories by the early 20th century. Today, it is equally common at any normal pop/rock concert. In fact some city cores around the world also have a daytime noise level close to human pain threshold. Yet people, even dogs live there and thrive. The firing of a ordinary Mauser 98 also causes a noise beyond human pain threshold. If you actively listen to it as it discharges, your ears will immediately go uuUUUEEEEE and you will experience pain, with short or long term damage as consequence. Sadly, I have this experience with a G3 rifle, of about equal noiselevel. But damage was very temporary. Its all about not listening. Man, like all mammals, has selective hearing. If you listen carefully your brain amplifies faint sounds for you, enabling you to here a particular sound better and distinguish it from a general noise. Goes the other way too, extreme noise can be reduced in the transfer between ear and brain. Of course, man's capacity for this "zooming" in and out is limited, especially compared to mammals like dogs and cats, and any damage caused by pressure (noise) would still be there, ignored or not. Hardly any combat account mentions pain in the ears during combat, even though large numbers of weapons discharge, all of them individually capable of damaging your eardrums for life. Soldiers tend not to think of it, at least not as anything other than general deafening noise. It will be because they are too busy concentrating on other things. During combat, riflemen will by logical necessity have become deafened by massive stress on the eardrum, though only few mention that either (probably because they don't think of it, either). After the combat, they often mention "ringing" ears, i.e. traces of damage from the noise. Permanent and temporary damage manifests itself the same way. But as long as they remain active and focused (or panicked), they can push the extreme noise aside up to a rather impressive level. If passive and inactive, man's ability decreases drastically. A little like a PC processor, the brain will not cease to operate simply because there is nothing useful to do (like moving the body), and there is no "waiting process" except counting sheep, so if not busy it translates all incoming sounds and if you start thinking about those sounds, it will amplify them for you as a matter of service. That's the dripping tap phenonema. All you need to do to go to sleep is to make the brain too busy to transalte and amplify, e.g. by reading a book or counting sheep. And for the same reasons, accounts of the horrible noise of incoming artillery hitting helplessly waiting infantry is rather common in literature from veterans. If you like a sound, your listening will become active, wether you think of it or not. Stress will be reduced on the eardrum even if sounds are very high. That's the popconcert phenonema. A StuG sprayed with MG fire would thus experience deafening noise inside, but the crew would still most probably be quite able to operate. They would be concentrating on their labourious tasks and too busy to think much of the noise. They would most probably not think of the pain in the ears either. At up to 20mm incoming hitting the hull, permanent hearing damage due to pressure is unlikely. But beyond that damage must, again by logic, have become a serious risk. And the level of noise of a 20mm shell is likely to seriously challenge any attempt at concentrating on anything. So at that point I also feel they must have been stunned, or at the very least dazed and slowed. I am however not prepared to go through with an experiment to prove my point here. Afterwards of course, for a StuG crew subjected to heavy MG fire hitting the hull, pain and headache must have been really horrible. It will have been difficult to go to sleep even if exhausted, because of hearing disorders and painful peEEep-sounds for quite a few hours. Easr will have been very sour indeed and echoing sounds will have pursued them for days. Cheerio Dandelion

A sidenote here - as the thread is about penetration or other critical hull damage I guess - is sound of HE. I read in a study of StuGs that the sound of 20mm shells hitting the armour (harmlessly) was the decibel equivalent of standing next to a jet aircraft starting its engines. Machinegun fire hitting it was in the vicinity of human pain threshold for noise. Been wondering about that ever since I read it really. The (German) "ape ears" headphones weren't efficient at all in closing sound out. Cheerio Dandelion

Edited away as I suddenly realised I was answering the wrong questioin here... [ April 23, 2004, 05:14 PM: Message edited by: Dandelion ]

Nope, it isn't all that different. In German the word "knock" means the knocking-on-door variant of knock, there's not the "knocking out" or being "knocked" meanings. So Panzeranklopfgerät means a device used for knocking on tanks in a harmless manner. I was wondering where the door came from. No big thing of course. Think I've figured it out now. I spoke with Mr Andersen earlier today and he claims to have seen the nickname of "Heeres-anklopfgerät", meaning of course "army knocking device". From here the step is very short to Army Doorknocker. I can understand the adding of the door in the English translation so as to make clear to Anglosaxons that it is the harmless variant of knock intended. A knocking device might otherwise sound like something very effective. Puzzle solved then I suppose. Always feel a certain sadness when questions meet their answers. Cheerio Dandelion

...and that "doorknocker" nickname puzzles me. I've seen that statement in quite a few English sources. But in German sources I've only ever seen "Panzeranklopfgerät" as derogative nickname for the Pak 35/36. The usual nick seems to have been the typical "Dreikommasieben" (three-comma-seven). (like the 88 was called Achtacht (eight-eight, not eightyeight)). Anyone have a "origin" on the doorknocker term? Cheerio Dandelion

Am I understanding it correctly then, that these (CANLOAN) officers served for the duration of the war in the British army? Or did they rotate or have some other limited time scheme? Was it part of a Canadian army poroject or was it literally a loan at the request of the British? Was there a shortage of British officer to prompt this, if so? All above not counting the Canadians serving in North Africa with the explicit purpouse of importing experience back into the Canadian army. Cheerio Dandelion

Yes I know, you're very near Venus, and Venus is near you, and that's all anyone ever lured out of you. I e-mailed him at the adress given on the homepage. I am hoping it can be arranged in the way you describe. Perhaps a transfer via internet can also be arranged, with the payment I mean. Paper mail takes a lot of time sending back and forth, and I only see an end in itself with this procedure when it comes to loveletters. I don't mind contributing to the postal services really, here or in Canada. What I do mind is financing diverse delivery services and most of all the global merchant marine, known only for their savage brutality against their (mainly Filipino) employees and their extremely toxic oil. But I am used to the indignity of bankrolling their piracy. Cheerio Dandelion

Mister Andersen. Welcome back. We missed you. :cool: God how I have been waiting for an opportunity to drop that line. Michael, The helmets are model 1918 with 1933 modification chinstraps. Or could be Austrian M17's but I don't think so. M18 mods were in use by the Reichswehr. Replaced by a new model in 1935, yet another in 1940 and then another in 1942. The M18's were discarded in the standardisation process starting in 1935 and was not used during the war. The M35 was rather quickly phased out of service in the regular army during the first half of 1940, but was used by various police forces and such (and by Hungary, Spain, Finland etc - and were also used to cut Paratrooper helmets from). You will react when you see a M35 as well, it appears a bit too large for the head to most observers, who are generally used to the smaller 1940 and onward models. But the M35 had no real Frankenstein-looking vents sticking out (well, very small ones). That standing guy seems to have a cuff title. If so, and if he isn't wearing a non-regulation cuff title, and if the photo is pre-1938 (and it is), we can pinpoint his unit exactly. Cheerio Dandelion

...and as I have now looked up the word personable in my dictionary, I wish to add to "resouceful (read; mad)" above, that they appear to be very personable as well, these Canadian lone characters popping up in UK unit War Diaries. But I suppose people who lend themselves to other armies like that will have been a selection of particularly curious and adventurous types. I presume such types will have to be unprejudiced and... well, personable kind of people. Cheerio Dandelion

Jon Well I had a mild interest in the matter until I saw the presentation of the book at the other end of your link there. Now I have an intense interest in the matter. This is exactly what I need. Not just for the pursuit of my above question, I have other use for this as well. Too long and boring story to explain why, but it really was a sight for tired eyes. Thank you for that tip. So I wrote Mr Fendick in order to obtain a copy, and am hoping it will be no problem that I am overseas (from him). No I didn't forget to mention to him who recommended his book to me. In fact I had no idea there was a CANLOAN system either. I thought all Canadians served in their national formations. But you know it sort of explains why every major work on the larger UK battles seem to contain at least one suddenly appearing, rather resourceful (read; mad) Canadian in the middle of where he really shouldn't be. I think of Leo Heaps and such vagabonds you know. A cheerful Dandelion

I vote we immediately close threads that have Forum members as topic. This is a IRL human being who is being poublicly debated here and the way this is turning, somebody might well be needing a lawyer soon. Martin, please. Dandelion

...But that was nothing compared to the huge binoculars brought along by Major Sarah. Ok sorry, I'm tired. I do agree with you in your analysis tho. Cheers Dandelion

Yes, the infamous Stromtruppen, always dashing so bravely to sabotage the electric current in enemy power lines... if only that would have been combined with the indecency of WW2's Liebstandard, we would all be writing in fluent German in this board. And just imagine if Britain and USA had won, we might even be writing in fluent English!!! :eek: :eek: :eek: </font>

Thanks all, knew of course I could count on you. 9 minutes is good time. So, 48 bzw 36 MMGs collected in a single unit. Any comment on the normal deployment and use? Experiences made? They keep these until the end of the war, must have been useful then? Why concentrate the MGs to these companies and not decentralise to the infantry regim... nay I mean of course brigades, instead? I'd ask if it was the same basic use as the German MG bataillons but it appears it was not. Were MG Btl assigned independent tasks or were they always distributed among other units? Any comment on the cut in numbers post-Sicily? War Establishment, not TO&E yes, of course. Like Kriegsstärke then. Good. No tables, no chairs, couches or the like. The Engländer corrupt "tableaux" into "table", they actually mean boards but they say table, or is it chairs? One must keep track of this. Or maybe it is not a corruption? In English schools maybe the teacher draws equations for the kids to see on a... table? Whitetables have replaced the old blacktables yet have they? Ok Michael I'll stop here before you reach the Teuton-humour part Cheerio Dandelion

See this is why we love the forum. Upon posting my question, I receive an e-mail with a scanned picture from the good Mr Andersen, an ardent Grog and CM cultist of some proportions, known to many here. I put it up on my homepage so we can all have a drool; Cheerio Dandelion