Dandelion

Ah, that explains it, many thanks to you all. Does anybody know if any other allied troops used helmet markings of any kind, including ranks? This is excepting national emblems, such as the Polish ones at the front of the helmet. Also, a naïve questions but - the helmet markings (rank or unit) seem not to work well with nets or other helmet camouflage. Didn't at least the paras use helmet nets? Regards Dandelion

I see, I had it all wrong there. I thought they actually painted the rank insignia as such on their helmets. So I've always thought that any guy I saw on a picture with one bar on his helmet had to be a (1st) Lt Well now that I have you people here I might as well take full advantage of it and add a question - the symbols/markings sometimes painted on the side of helmets (we see it for example in the Band of Brothers series), which level of unit did they represent? (Btl, Rgt, Div etc). Regards Dandelion

While I have your attention, I'd also like to ask about the man immediately in front of the trooper we have been discussing. His visible elbow seems to have a square shape protruding around it, as if padded. Were there such pads sewn in to the M43? If so, anyplace else than elbow? Finally, he has a strange white line on his helmet. So has a man further up ahead in the column, though different shape, and I can't identify any of them as any rank. I am familiar with paratroops painting ranks in white at the back of helmets, and some units wearing unit formation signs on the left of the helmet, but this looks like something else? What is that? Regards Dandelion

Well I'd have to agree she looks sort of boxy, the Cromwell, but I feel the extreme forward position of the tower and the general box-carish hull gives her that crafty, obnoxious yet boyish cockney quality Think 'slick' as in Jason Statham, model Snatch or Lock Stock. :cool:

I have two of them. Panther. Surprise? Guess not. Its her whole apperance of being so...full of purpouse. But actually she is a primadonna. Whining and moaning all the time, working only after some serious persuasion, and even then only at double wages and never for very long. After that she's back at the striking and complaining again. Oui oui, je suis une Rockstar. StuG. The opposite of the Panther. Rugged, robust, reliable, not very anything but always around. The image of the workhorse, or mule rather, its even mis-shaped and unproportional. One cannot help but liking it. The Sherman looks the image of the American handyman. Full of extras and just-in-case and this-might-be-good-to-bring-alongs, its kind of bubbly appearance and stubby nose gives it a lively appearance. "Top of the mornin to you, you had a problem with the plumming?" The Sherman is lovable. And there is the Cromwell, the image of an East-side cockney cocks-of-the-walk. Fast, slick (all rubber) and never to be trusted, yet lovable and charming, growing on you in a strange and not always pleasant way. It'll shy away from confrontation but always reappear where you least expect it. "Cauuuse you wan' i', i's a deal, i's a steal..." Though I prefer having them someplace else than I am, I still like them. Cheerio Dandelion

Aha. Didn't know about the M43 hood either. Sounds like a good idea as such, and a modern-ish solution. I guess they eventually developed better material for it. Well it could well be the angle and motion of the soldier only. The cut looks a little strange also I think, but maybe its just an illusion from the photograph. Isn't it a bit tight over the youknowwhat, and a bit short, for an American jacket? Was the M43 not open in the front? Or did it have a button at the bottom, frontside? The cut here looks almost like the French Chasseur Alpin jacket of 1940. The thingy there around his waist (more like around his ribs really), were those on all M43? I'd explain exactly what I mean if I knew the English word for it But its the ribbon-ish thingy just above his webbing combat belt, usually sewn in to get a body-fit on lightwieght material jackets, so as to not make the jacket baggy in the middle so to speak. In modern jackets/parkas they're often of elastic material, or regulatable by cord. Or both. The Germans had one on their mountain parkas too, being modelled on prewar ski-sports parkas as they were. If you know what I mean, please share the English word for it Regards Dandelion

Yes it looks rather like the German mountain parka, in the cut and in the ...whats-it-called-in-english thing around the high waistline. But it appears a little "sloppy", the material looks a little too soft for a German parka. Maybe it becomes softer after much wear. Also, it has shoulderboards. Of course, he could have put those on himself, but as the US troops didn't (?) wear anything on field jacket shoulderboards I don't see why. Regards Dandelion

Hi all This picture from the Trailblazer homepage displays troops of the 70th crossing the Saar. What caught my attention was the rearmost man to the right. What kind of jacket is he wearing? I haven't seen any hooded US ones of this cut before. Cheerio Dandelion

Hi all, Does anybody know if the size of a foxhole matters? If a 2 man MG team creates a foxhole on setup, and a 7 man squad then occupies it, are the men thus in cover? Regards Dandelion

Berlichtingen I can't figure it out so I'm going to have to ask: what does that signature mean? The Bauhaus group bought a game? Cheerio Dandelion

Yes Jon, that was for you, and thanks for the input. I was sitting here wondering about - yes - the German recoilless, the 105mm airborne one. Well, it wasn't airborne really but... Do you know if there was any relation? Between designs I mean. And how did it perform in Korea? Swords, bandoliers, spurs and Thompsons..? "The vets coped magnificently and it was mainly due to them that the division's losses were only 1.6 per cent of the total, or 140 horses. A further 722 were admitted to hospital on arrival." Englishmen actually admit their horses to hospitals? Sie spinnen, die Engländer... :eek: Regards Dandelion

Jon, Why was the 105mm designated 106mm? Regards Dandelion

About the FO (V.B.) - my vote is that its ok, but rather not. It rather depends on the environment and ranges. The leIG was used in a very frontline-ish manner. It would not normally be positioned farther back than the AL - i.e. max 1500 meters behind the MLR(HKL). In some accounts I've read, they'd fire direct fire until forced to abandon, then sneak back and try to recover the gun in the cover of darkness. Not always succeeding. In CM, the setup time for a leIG is short enough - and movement speed fast enough - to actually make quite possible its use as direct support. So I think its a dashy ingredient to have one on-board. Well that's my vote anyway. Regards Dandelion

Well, yes, to all, as: The V.G.D. K.St.N. from 09.1944, as issued by the Ob E[rsatzheer], contains four types of charts, formally numbered I.-IV. I'll call these "types" in lack of better ideas. These charts, b.t.w., are virtually identical (it says they're not identical, but I haven't found the discrepancy yet myself) to the OKH charts for infantry division 1945 So if you have those you won't need the V.G.D. charts. Anyway... A division using only type I. charts would have a total strength of about 11 000 men. A division using only type IV. charts about 5 000 men. The others there between. The regiments (Grenadier or Füsilier) of type II.,-IV. divisions were authorised two battalions of four companies (type I had five companies each). In addition, type II and III have two regimental companies (type I has three, type IV has one). Companies 9 and 10 (same as 11 and 12 in type I) were Infanteriegeschütz and Panzerjäger respectively. Type IV had only the equivalent of kompanie 9(11). Hq companies had no number, thus 1.-8. formed the battalions, with every fourth (4. and 8.) being a heavy company. Type I, with five companies per battalion, had two heavy companies per battalion, namely companies 4.,5.,9. and 10. Infanteriegeschütz-kompanien type I and II were authorised leIG(8) and sIG(2). Type III companies replaced leIG with GrW. Type IV were authorised only GrW. Panzerjägerkompanien type I and II were authorised PaK 40. Type III only three such, type IV none at all. The divisional Panzerjägerabteilung also varies with type, from sfl PaK 40 to no heavy weapons. The WK was not forced to strictly use one specific set of charts (I.,-IV.) per division, it could and would mix freely within the division itself. Much in a way resembling the mixing of 'Welle' charts. In addition, field adaptation meant that authorisation did not necessarily manifest itself in actual weaponry. So, there were probably type I divisions with the entire divisional Panzerjägerabteilung equipped with handheld AT only, at some point in time or other. Similarly, there were probably type IV divisions that used PaK 40's in their Panzerjäger platoon of the regimental company. In fact, one would probably be hard pressed to find any typical unit, let alone one following authroised charts, at all. I am familiar with the Handbook and reading it certainly put me in awe of allied intelligence services during WWII. Still, it was issued in may 1945 and is known to contain several minor errs, confusion of facts and incomplete informations. One would normally have to doublecheck statements if possible. On the topic of Volksgrenadier regiments, the Handbook gives information that correlates with German sources, but it is incomplete. The chart displayed is looking a lot like a type I organisation sans authorised amounts of heavy weaponry - thus very credible as a real life version of the theoretical K.St.N. charts, in a shape actually encountered by the allies at the front. So, this all ends with all of us being right. Even the source stating PaK 40's for the infantry gun company might actually be right. One has to at least admit the possibility. Ok... ...so lets move over to the next topic. What type of socks was the typical field chaplain of a turcoman labour battalion was authorised to wear when serving in southern Ukraine? - Autumn models mind you... Regards Dandelion

Speaking standard K.Stn.N for a VGD, Kompanie 9 was supposed to contain leIG 18 and sIG 33 guns. Kompanie 10 - if any - was supposed to contain PaK 40. Of course, there will be any amount of adjustment to reality here. It rarely pays to look at standard authorised tables at this point in the war. Kompanie 10 was often an infantry company, bicycle borne, carrying large amounts of handheld antitank. Kompanie 9 could in turn be assigned any manageable gun, including PaK 40's even. Or indeed the Feldkanone Andreas mentions. Regards Dandelion [Edit - got the company numbers wrong first time out] [ June 25, 2003, 12:49 PM: Message edited by: Dandelion ]

Harry Ink, Holy trinity you know. A third work, a third hobbies and a third family. Of your time awake. It works for me, and as my woman has about the same philosophy, it works for her too. I don't think she notices my gaming much, she's consumed by the pursuit of her own hobbies and interests. She shares my political interest of the WWII era, but not the military or technical aspect. She's also interested in research as such - methodologie and so on. So we can discuss many parts, and we do - and the rest I come here to debate with you guys. She knows many of you too. She's more curios than a cat and always was. When I laugh til I cry at one of Lees silly jokes, she'll invariably come running, demanding to read it. Same goes for fascinating stories about traditions of toasting in her Majesty's Navy, or traditional pipe tunes (she loves bagpipes). When people introduce themselves in letters - pbem opponents usually - she'll also grow unendurably curious (thats me not enduring her onslaught). Its just her incurable interest in the lives and realities of people living in faraway places. Then follows the inevitable "no I can't ask him that, he'll think I'm a nutcase and refuse to send me any more turns" debate of mine and hers. She's a pearl. The pearl. Hope things work out for you too Harry. The battling for personal space without the causing feelings of rejection is a growing pain of a relation I guess. So one can be hopeful it will work out eventually. Regards Dandelion

Hi Eif, and welcome You have the opponent finder forum right here and the proving grounds here, both of which will provide lots of opponents. Cheerio Dandelion

Why not have a chat with Mr Wilder over on B&T. He has made a scenario on the actions of Mr Pool. Chances are he has some research material on the man. The material on the homepage on Mr Pool all seems to stem from the same source; an article by a 'Sgt Woolner' in an unspecified issue of Yank from 1945. All other sources are qouoting this article. Reasonably, there will be other material at hand on the man, hopefully some official US Army such. And share what you find please. It has great promise to be interesting. Mr Pool has, according to the count, annihilated an entire full strength SS-Panzerdivision all on his own. The article reveals it is not actually a tank count, but a vehicle count just like it says ("infantry vehicles" etc). The article mentions his strafing roads at Falaise, packed with fleeing Germans. He would have been able to destroy tonnes of vehicles there. But I don't see why anybody would print a figure on how many bicycles, horsecarts and field kitchens Mr Pool shot up. So I can only deduct the claim is 258 fighting vehicles. And with that we are back at the SS-Panzerdivision. Cheerio Dandelion

The German infantry squad was really considered an extended machinegun team, very much in the manner described for the role of the BAR above. It could and would break down in two parts. Not so much 'halves' though, even if the end effect was about the same as in CM terms. The two parts consisted of the machinegun team (gunner, loader and NCO) and the rifle team (the rest). It would normally deploy in this manner, in most situations (combat march, defense, assault etc). The default reaction to crisis would be to deploy the MG to the left flank of a squad, if possible somewhat rear of the riflemen. This was a drilled and thus automatic reaction, if the squad leader wanted it anywhere else, he would have had to make it known. It could also break down into pairs (rotten). The men were paired up from early on and part of combat training was based on the combat-pair. In particular combat in difficult terrain, such as urban and forest combat, but also particular tasks such as scouting, securing flanks etc. It was usually such a pair that was sent forward to scout ahead (of a platoon or company). For qualified or very dangerous scouting missions, two pairs would often be sent, normally at least one of which would be an NCO pair, thus forming 4 man teams. The machinegun team, btw, was also a such combat-pair, as were Panzerschreck teams. The pair also had many other functions as organisation, e.g. when setting up camp, the rotating fixing of chow and such. Both roles in a pair were well known and drilled and thus people could be switched and still function in any pair, but of course there was an emotional element as the guys got to know eachother and all that. I believe other armies used like or similar structures. Cheerio Dandelion

Well, A company would normally be assigned 3-600 meters of frontage, with 4-600 meters depth to go with it, if defending. As in main line of defence that is. A company could be detailed up to 1000 meters if merely delaying. Considering your position, a frontage of recommended 300 and tops 400 seems reasonable. The measure is not between rightmost and leftmost man, only the stretch of terrain you dominate. As you can't secure flanks really, and you must defend the flag (and thus cannot deploy on a flank), the enemy obviously has the option to flank and surround you. All-round defence will be the answer to that. Thus depth will reasonably be restricted to being the same as the frontage. Reserve platoon in the centre, for reinforcing of threatened areas. Defence can fall back upon the centre when things get rough. I'd split a squad of the reserve platoon and use both teams as scouts, to keep an eye on the enemy. If you keep them out of battle they'll be alright. I'd keep my head down too. Very much so in fact. Avoiding all combat ranges. Cheerio Dandelion

Aha! That explains it. I was under the impression the Tigers were simply pressed into the existing Panzerbataillon structure of the Panzer-Lehr, which of course would have been an awkward practice. Very useful link there Andreas I must say. Have some reading to do

Possibly, but I really had something more humble in mind.

Lee, Basically I feel I already have CM, and so am now waiting for the release of the new engine. Its not that I hate add-ons as such. But CM:BB is Eastern Front, which is not a place I really want to go. I'm German. I'm a natural Francophile, harbouring oceans of unanswered, frustrated love and admiration. I need to - really must - go there and conquer French villages by brute force every once in a while, to compensate this torturing feeling of rejection and inadequacy. If I can't have her, noone will! Also, and probably most important, I'm part of CM:BO. The BTS used an open process, inviting everyone to participate. The CM:BB is just a game off the shelf to me. But don't worry Lee, I'll remember to put the light out before I leave, as I'll be the last one to go... Don't worry about me, just leave me here... I'll be fine... Promise... you move on to more interesting things, its no problem, wouldn't want to bore anyone... I'll just...guess I'll just be around here for a while... reading through the old posts, from when people played CM:BO... *sigh*... those were the days...*sob* *sob* Ah yes and Martin - is that patch fixing machineguns and optics for CMBO available yet? Cheerio Dandelion

Harry, Found a note on the Bundesarchiv designation for ID12. While rummaging. Not sure why I scribbled it down but once way back I did. Its RH26-12, and apparently there were about ten meters film when I checked in the mid-90's. So quite a lot on this unit. Didn't bring any home though, sorry. The Wehkreis II (Stettin) has RH 53-2. I've got much of it here actually. Sorry I can't return the courtesy of running over to the archives and check raised issues. Its a bit of a hassle, as you have to write them and get appointments (unbedingt), and normally they demand you come for a first recon trip to make your request more precise (their system is so vast and complex it itself requires research, but starting at RH (or RS for SS units) is halfway to target), and then you have to line up for time at a reader. They're still badly weighed down by the bazillion of researchers all nationalities and academic degree (including German private individuals by the thousands) rummaging through the DDR files, so one has to wait. Its kind of old fashioned, I know. I've heard many great things about the accessibility of the USNA. The BA is nothing like that. But its getting better. Regards Dandelion

Lee? Et tu? Egad. But...Why? Why can't we all just...get CMBO? Getting awfully lonely in the trenches here, rather come to think of the Kurt Weil "cannonsong". You know: "Johnnie is a write-off and Jimmy is dead, And Georgie was shot for looting" Yeah well I'm still here and I ain't yielding an inch. No CMBB across the bridge, Il ne passeront pas! No Pasaran!