Dandelion

Thanks Jon, as always you're a pearl. Sorry for the late reply, took me some time to consume these links. Read both documents straight through, this is pure candy for people like me. And you, I would presume. Tell me, did you ever find a way to change the color of the beret? Or is it quite simply impossible? And the obvious question - why is it named both Provost and MP? Provost does not even sound very English. Regards Dandelion

Well the first I would try out would be playing ready made campaigns. There are some that aare very long and the battles certainly each affect the next. A handful comes with the package, but dozens are player-made. I have not tried many of these myself and would gladly pbem one with you, that is new to us both, except I'd be able to start in three weeks at the aerliest due to my present obligations (got quite a few games running, but many are closing the end). Would this be interesting to you? You can also try the CMMC at http://www.cmmc2.org/. At present, the list is full but believe me, there will soon be dropouts and if you are on the waiting list, you'll soon be in. It is CMBB nowadays tho. Regards Dandelion

Interesting, Must admit to not having thought of matters in terms of points like this. Well, firepower points, but not purchase cost. I guess I play too many scenarios and too few QBs I'll try these things out right away, and see if I cannot also become successful at this. Many thanks. Regards Dandelion

Sounds interesting, and also reflecting actual use of these pieces. I know the Germans brought them along at every occaasion, so obviously you are doing something right and we are doing something wrong, as the Germans would have quickly discarded the guns had they not been helpful. The 75mm is nicer than most others not least as it is rather difficult to spot and identify. The smaller the better. I have great respect for 57mm guns because I never find them before they find me. I try to move the pieces too. Arty keeps destroying my prime movers tho. And like I mentioned there is the setup time even if I do get them moved. You know of any tricks here that might help? Regards Dandelion

Hi all, I have some questions on UK organisation. In spite of there being comparatively rich material on the net, these issues, mostly on special forces, elude me: 1 Army and Royal Marine Commandos, particularly those serving in 3rd Commando Brigade. The precise organisation of these? I find only scetchy and, on top of it all, contradictory sources on them. 2 What happened to 5 Commando brigade after Madagascar? 3 What is the difference between provost and military police? 4. Did 3 Commando Brigade (or unit in it) have any scottish or Irish connection? (Well apart from very probably having individual soldiers from these regions). They are sometimes popularly illustrated as having bagpipers on D-Day. 5. The arm of service colour band, sometimes worn on the shoulder beneath the divisional emblem - what did it look like for commandos (and RM Commando if differed)? 6. Any organisational info on the WWII SAS, SRS, Popski's private Army, SBS or Boom patrol? I am in need of org from Rgt and down (to individuals). ...and Mr Dorosh(or anyone else), you wouldn't by any chance have a bmp armpatch with Commando and RM commando armtitle would you? I mean the textpatch worn at the very top of the shoulder. Regards Dandelion

Mr Dvorak is being far too modest. You should go there Lee, if you have the time. Slovenia is a country of forested mountains South of Austria, along the roots of the Alps. Like Croatia, she is catholic. The whole country looks like something out of a fairytale. I can truthfully say I have not seen her like anywhere, with dramatic narrow valleys, mountain streams and sylvan forests. Ljubljana, the capitol, looks like a picture on a christmas greeting card. I am not sure of what it means, but as Ljuba means love I am sure it means something nice. I used to live in Vienna when I noticed the grace and beauty of slovenian women (I was younger then). It turned out to be a well recognised fact among the Viennese. First time I crossed the border to Slovenia was when she was still Yugoslavia. The harassing, utterly corrupt border guards were unable to dimnish the sight of this small country though. It was literally breathtaking. I remember thinking that this would be a good place to settle. Once the guards were gone. As it was, Slovenia won her freedom rather peacefully during my years in Vienna, the guards went away and she focused on recovering a promising but underdeveloped economy. There were no jobs to be found, especially with my very restricted understanding of the language. So I settled with a Swedish woman instead, by the lakeshores of Mälaren. Always did have a soft spot for Slovenia though, I dare say you won't find as friendly, accomodating and hospitable people anywhere else in Europe, except maybe in some of the other Balkan countries. I hope all is well with her, it is now five years since last I visited. I like the term Old Europe, Lee. As I like the term Old World. It lends the dignity of age and serenity of memory to our far too busy modern life. It also helps me to answer the question where I am from, which keeps reappearing here Not sure what to answer. My family is largely German, though initially Walloon immigrants to Germany. But there are Norwegian and Swedish branches too, as well as the obligatory branch of immigrants to the USA. I have lived in Germany, Norway, Austria, Hungary and presently live mostly in Sweden. I feel...European. But you can think of me as German or Swedish, I certainly do not mind either of the two. Anyway, I doubt that anyone in Iraq will be able to post here for a while. Regards Dandelion

At the end of every battle, a no-mans-land of 400 meters is created. That's what pushed you back. You either lost or went even in your last battle. If your line is just South of St Come du Mont, there will be no Germans in the town. They will start exactly 400 meters from your forwardmost position (easily gagued by LOS line). Staying put in defensive positions is not normally advisable in an operation like this one. Remember you have to advance 30% of the map or you loose. The answer I believe to your situation is the what Patton meant by "grab him in the nose and kick him in the butt". Use scouts (half-teams - select the halves that get the most automatic weapons) advancing 1-200 meters ahead of your main body of troops. Make sure they advance stealthily and keep your main body out of long range sight at all times. The patrols will sooner or later hit enemy positions, or detect enemy troops advancing. You now know where he is, but he does not know where you are (except for the patrols he might have discovered). Don't engage with the patrols, just use "withdraw" if they end up in a firefight and crawl away. You are facing German paratroops (and some SS I believe), who have superior firepower to you, especially at short ranges. So in order to succeed, you will have to create local superiority. Having pinpointed the enemy positions, choose a target force to destroy. Assemble at least 2:1 odds in numbers and any support you can assemble, and attack this force. Shell him while advancing towards him with your assault group, and if you are planning to overwhelm him, smoke him too. You isolate the enemy force either by setting up ambush positions covering possible approaches for enemy reinforcements, or by using smaller patrols who engage all other enemy formations at longer ranges. Or both. Use your many MGs to harass the enemy at long range. They need only engage and annoy, to keep heads down and people busy. i.e. tying them down. When the fighting has begun in earnest, make it a rule never to remain in any place with anybody longer than 2 full minutes. Shells will be coming in. You can attempt to force the enemy to use his support for smoke screens by skillful use of your tanks. You can also trick him into using it on minor targets, such as you patrols. Hope it helps Dandleion

Actually Lee, I am having much the same experience, with any nationality. I have really tried to copy the manner in which the Germans used their infantry guns - and they did, very actively. But it just won't work. No matter how I group them for defense, they are unable to make a difference. Mutual support, close protection, interlocking fields of flanking fire, frontal cover and reverse slope - the works. Sure, they get one or two shots fired, but then comes enemy support and they are history. No realistic way of moving them, and even if you do, the time required to set up anew means you won't be able to use them for quite a while. So I also usually buy a spotter rather than the gun if I can. Regards Dandelion

Well I've never dared to try any of them smokes. Always been afraid that I'd like it too much. I'm just naturally imaginative and excitable. If I am not mistaken, the British started calling the Germans "The Huns" during the early stages of WWI. The only reason I ever heard of was the behavior of the German troops, especially in Belgium. There were rumors of them being mean to the Belgians, burning homes and raping nuns. They were likened to the Huns, and then it stuck. I've met Englishmen seriously believing the Huns were a Germannic tribe (and that the English were not). But I also never really got it. The Angles and Saxons (or Jutes) were never part of the wars against the Huns. Nor were any celts. So why would these horsemen be a living part of English tradition? The Germannic tribes, on the other hand, were either defeated and enslaved (Ostrogoth, some Burgundians, Heruleans etc) or victims of genocide (the Worms Burgundians). Or, they took part in the defeat of the Huns (Visigoth, some surviving Burgundians, the Franks etc), paying a heavy price. So the Huns are a natural part of German tradition (the bad part, in "Niebelungenlied"). Maybe the English simply wanted to hurt their feelings. I am not sure what the equivalent insult would have been. Maybe to call Lloyd George "Mordred" or something. Regards Dandelion

I'm looking for a Pbem opponent for a playtester game, a B&T scenario for CMBO. It would entail sending feedback to the scenario creator and I suppose it would help if you had some experience of other scenarios to compare it with. The scenario is sized "large" and US vs ...well, Axis, as you put it . According to the designer, the Axis side would be the most demanding to play. Would this be interesting to you? Personally I suppose I am experienced. Though I have no idea of wether I am any good at this or not. You see, I have played almost all my "vs human" battles within the CPX and CMMC. And as playtester. I don't like QBs, they bore me, whereas a well made scenario really lifts the CMBO to it's utmost peak. Regards Dandelion

Is it just me who thinks the commercial for CMBB flashing on this site is hilarious? "Hitler stormed across Europe". It is probably just me, but I can't help but picturing this tiny man in his too large coat, boots and hat, with his little moustache, running like hell with a determined look on his face, all across the Flanders, the Balkan mountains, the Galician fields... It's a little like when they write "Saddam fired missiles against Kuwait". I can't help but seeing this admittedly larger guy laboring with this huge missile in sweat and rage, trying to get it onto the racks... Is it just me laughing my stockings off at these farcical scenes? What, is it improper to mention who the guys who actually stormed across Europe actually were nowadays? Then how about "War" raged across Europe? Or be plain. "The Nazis", "The Germans", "The Central Powers", "Most of Central, Southern and Southeastern Europe as well as part of Northern Europe" in fact almost all of Europe stormed across Europe. Or why not the Anglo-cute "The Jerries" stormed across ladidadi? Well perhaps that takes the drama out of it a bit. Say, "The Huns" stormed across ladidadi. Although I've never grasped what ethnic connection there ever was between the Germans and the Huns. Or how about the Roman connection: "Hitlers legions" or the "Nazi Empire". Makes them sound both dramatic and bad guy-ish without actually pointing any finger at anyone. Except Hitler. Or the US/Religious touch, "Forces of Evil" or "Empire of Evil" or "Tide of Darkness" type of subtitle. Definately makes them sound very bad guy-ish. Of course, CMBO should have had an equivalent flash. "Roosevelt storms ashore at Omaha Beach", "Churchill drops all over Arnhem", "De Gaulle eliminates the Colmar pocket", "Hitler takes a beating in the ruins of Caen". Sorry, it is improper to laugh at ones own jokes. Just a thought. Dandelion

...in the above answer I presumed you were advancing, as an attacking foe will rarely choose field guns. D

Actually I am rather of the opinion that you were - a few support rounds and they're off. If they are a real pain and your artillery is too weak to nail them, put a smoke shell on them during your critical advances. You can force them to keep their heads down using area fire too, having machineguns spraying their general direction. Not ultra effective, but in my humble opinion usually enough to be able to advance. Mortar shells work primarily by shrapnel, so the gun would have to be in the open or among trees (treeburst) for them to have great effect. Or actually able to directly observe their fire with according accuracy. If they are dug down anyplace but in a forest, you'll have a problem using mortars. I can see that a dug in gun behind a wall would be problematic. If the enemy is regular or inferior, I've used half-teams to knock them out. One can normally have two or three of those crawl up to adequate distance and angle and place a few rounds in a gunner or two. That will usually persuade the crews to reevaluate their situation and bugger off. I've tried that on quality crews too, like veteran paras, but it didn't work at all. Crews just ignored their dead mates, traversed their guns and blew my people away. You'll have to have some time to spare of course, as infiltration takes time. There's usually the problem of extricating the patrols. No problem against the AI. But human foes tend to get agitated about such raids and hunt them down, murdering them to the last man and writing letters explaining their deep satisfaction with this outcome. Of course, the odd foe will actually group his field guns mutually supportive and with close protection teams and other such authentic stuff. I've run into this. Never managed to infiltrate. Unless you actually advance all over him, artillery, smoke and area fire are the only answers I ever knew to such a situation. I have had opponents using very fast vehicles against my guns. They come as close as they can in cover, then run back and forth, zigzaging forward, so the gunners can't traverse the gun fast enough to hit them. I always felt this is gamey. Of course, I douldnt swear no daredevil M8 crew never did this. Regards Dandelion

Old Europe

Small addition to clarify: With AAMG I mean a machinegun mounted on top of a turret (bzw) intended for use against aircraft. The Coaxial machinegun would be the one mounted alongside the main armament. Of course, the AAMG was also "coaxial" in the sense that it pointed rear or forward and was in effect limited in its arc of fire by the position of the turret. The AAMG can also be "Bow mounted" in the same sense, e.g. on the US Priest. But above I mean only the turret variant All the best Dandelion

I know just the guy to answer this, but he seems to have gone off the air completely. I'll give you an answer of less solidity, as my sourcebooks are nowhere near his on this particular topic. The PzKpfw models that I know of had factory-made AAMG mounts were IVJ, VG, VIE, and VIB. So did the StuG III and StuH series. These mounts were fixed to the commanders cupola itself and could be fired in the axis of the main armament, though in a wider arc. Looking at pictures, though, one clearly finds that not all tanks of these models chose to utilise these mounts, and especially in Africa other models seem to have arranged their own AAMG mounts. I have even seen bipod MG34's welded to the turret. But by 1944, I have not seen any pictures from the West showing panzers with mounted AAMGs. Of course, it's not like I have seen every picture there is. APCs and ACs all had AAMG, though not necessarily flexible ones. I am not sure why the use of panzer AAMG was more or less discontinued. Anyone? From what one can read, the use of machinegun barrages was effective in forcing enemy ground attack to keep their distance. Regards Dandelion

Interesting, So interesting in fact, I might get going on a German counterpart, and send it to you for comments. I am thinking: basis perhaps 9th SS or 12th SS, would need to be a bit shorter as these divisions had away-time from the western front. Thought, rather than suggestion: if this is to follow the destinies of a tanker crew (Commander), I rather get the wish to "fight it out" using only level 1 and 2 view. But I can't really, on a medium or large map. So I was pondering. Shouldn't the maps be a lot smaller and the clashes too? And what does Sardaukar mean? All the best Dandelion

Nate, Join the brothers. Inspecting their updated memberlist, I see the names of practically everyone I ever heard of in the CMBO saga. What's more, it is the only english speaking club that I know of. And there is B&T. Not a club as such but a fellowship of designing and testing scenarios. I find it rewarding to be a playtester there. Most of these designers are very skilled at creating stimulating challenges. You'll recognise most of the names there too. Then there is of course the CMMC. Not a club as such either, but certainly a congregation of a wide mix of skill levels. Pretty demanding in time and effort to be part of it though. Or indeed start a new club It's not as we have too many of them around. To cure the Airborne habit, run some scenarios with ordinary UK/CW infantry. The lack of automatic weaponry and emphasis on ranged combat will undo any derogative sideeffects of airborne addiction. Of course, there is no getting away from the PIATs... Regards Dandelion

Hi there, Carentan is a 30% operation. Meaning you are expected to advance 30% of the map. And yup, 9 battles. It's a long one. Smiled some in recognition when I read your posting. Carentan was one of my ab-fabs too and I struggled a lot with it. As German, though. I really learned to hate the NoMansLand function. Having beaten severe assaults off by tooth and nail for 20 long minutes, it was an outrage to be forced to retreat a drastic 400 meters for no reason at all. Of course, the terrain became ever more beneficial for defense. But still... Don't go through the bocage. If the enemy is there, bypass him. He will be forced to abandon his position and retreat (lest he be cut off), and you can block his withdrawal by controlling the roads (he will use the most covered route South, you can be sure). If you go through the bocage, not only will your advance be slowed to a crawl, but you'll be exposed to as many potential ambush situations as there are hedgerows. Bocage is lousy cover and between them just open field. The left road is much longer than the right, it being angled in a 45 degree while the right one goes straight South. So you won't get as far along it as on the right if you follow it. But you need not follow it any longer than tops to the roadblock. After that, you can make a left turn (to the East) and head for that small village, which I recall has a church. From there, you are out of bocage-country and have good roads leading straight South. Of course, further South another problem will appear, but I'll leave that to your future battles. The enemy has plenty of antitank weaponry. Carried such. Any advance along roads without infantry clearing the roadsides first is a definite caveat. As I recall it, I managed to eliminate the bulk of US armour (handled recklessly by the AI) in the first battle, and I don't recall them ever appearing in convincing numbers after that (one or two only, easily stalked and finished off). So I think your supply is limited. All the best Dandelion

If you want extreme realism, as in measurable, scientifically exact, go for the report of the No 2 Operational Research Section (and subdivision Teams). This unit was in service with 21st Army Group in the NWE 44-45. The many reports are not published, but the Imperial War Museum will be able to help. I am sure it will radically change your conceptual frame of reality permanently Jokes aside, their report is stunning and I have never understood why it was never published (it is not secret, nor was it ever). Examples of interesting facts, these concerning the effect of rocket air support, are that they note that in reality, one needed 350 rockets, fired in 44 sorties of Typhoons, to obtain a 50% chance of hitting a small gun position. They conclude that the effect on morale, primarily the boost of friendly morale, was the only discernable effect of rocket firing Typhoons. No reports are "live", they just record all they find. Shellholes, vehicles, angles, casualties - everything. Personally, in terms of literature on the war, I have a passion for Divisional history books. Divisional historians are qualified to make qualitative compilations, including plenty of personal accounts but also maps, datas and details. Things are set in a context and make more sense than do the accounts of poor bloody infantrymen hiding in their holes, knowing nothing except that they are permanently assigned to the s_ end of the stick of fate. Nowadays there are dozens of such to be found but my favourite remains the history of the 12th SS Panzer Division by Hubert Meyer. As a single book (well, two actually), it really comes close to having it all. In the Bundesarchiv, works of less talented writers (but equally skilled historians) can be found, such as the one I am quoting in my signature. But of course, these are not the individual mans story, although titbits of such appear. Personal accounts tend to be just that - personal. Reflecting an individual experience which may and may not be congruent with what can be called objectively observable truth. If the latter even exists (I am not so sure). Thus I do not encounter much of this in my research (oh tonnes of brief interviews, but not coherent personal accounts in the shape of complete books). Kurt Meyer wrote his Grenadiere, a personal account from a man always at the center of action and certainly honest - in a way. He was still a convinced Nazi when he wrote it. He was also a very emotional man, passionate even, which is reflected in his style of writing. Am I recommending it? Well sure, to study his concept of reality. But really, if you want to know what it was like, for individuals participating, write to one of the many many camaraderie organisations for veterans in Germany or Austria. Perhaps surprisingly, I find they tend to be remarkably service minded and extrovert (I have never tried ex-SS though), and make me feel I am not asking stupid questions even when I certainly am. The benefit of such contacts is that you can ask that particular question. Did you use your general service knife of a special knife when peeling potatoes as penal duty at barracks? I mean, some details are simply never written down... Sadly, the Germans were not at all as organised and structured as they are rumored to have been. After many years of research, I have found all of it to be one huge misunderastanding. Germany was in a state of confusion bordering absurdity, which reached its tragicomical climax during the even more absurd Nazi state. No ends meet I promise you. Nothing was organised, not even crime. - - - About the bayonet, I agree with John and am of the humble personal opinion that offensive spririt must be taught in order to appear, thus in quite contrast to it being impossible to teach. Of course, I am regrettably not Canadian, and little do I know of what natural inclination to extrem aggression that might hide underneath the surface of these otherwise outwardly so kind and warm folk? All The Best Dandelion

Actually, I know some about German WWII doctrine and training in urban operations. It is not detailed to the level that I believe you are looking for, but here goes for what it is worth: German urban operations followed pretty basic patterns by the beginning of the war (1938 model of traning). Platoons fought their way along streets using the kolonne pattern of avdance, meaning in this case all Gruppen in the Zug in a row and all of them divided in half, each half avdancing along a side of the street (i.e. along a wall), looking at the opposite wall. Basically, that was it. There was encouragement to occupy high ground, meaning dominant and high buildings. There was also the striving for firelanes, i.e. to find long ranges for the machineguns to dominate. Urban operations were basically battalion sized operations and rather strictly organised - or so they wanted them. The specialists (pioniere) were not so much urban operation specialists as bunkerbuster specialists. As such, they applied their bunkerbusting skills in the urban enviroment, with no real adjustment (meaning using long poles with democharges and flamethrowers, basically). All in all, quite in its infancy and dependent upon superior firepower. We see this type of combat from France 1940 to Crete, although there is a lack of extended city street fighting during this period. After the Stalingrad (and in fact many others, like Charkov) experience, the Rat War (Rattenkrieg) doctrines (there was no such one doctrine, rather a large number of principles and lessons to be learned collectively called Rat War) began to be implemented. This entailed a whole new style of fighting in urban terrain, and closely resembles modern operations in most ways. There was an urge to get off the streets, instead advancing through the walls of houses (blowing a hole), sewers or prepared covered routes (or smoke - lots of smoke in a street battle). There was emphasis on automatic weaponry and explosives, as well as operating in small independent teams. These would be ad-hoc formed rather than standard organisation. There was emphasis of staying low at all times, using sewers and basements and leaving any floor but the ground level floor for observation and snipers only. The one exception being advance. During advance, enemyheld buildings would if possible be attacked from the roof (or top floor, coming from a hole in the wall of the top floor of a neighbour building). So you didnt have to advance upwards, as it was disadvantageous. There was emphasis on rapid perpetual movement by the small independent teams, the ideal being non-stop movement and moving from one ambush position to the next. There was also a whole new art of urban fortification, using mainly fortified cellars, as well as field engineering (such as obstructing passages systematically to channel enemy advances and, of course, booby traps). We see this style of fighting in places like Cassino (the town) and Caen. It was of course marked by the lack of superior firepower of the late-war Germans, as well as the defensive stance. Thus cutting down the combat ranges to point blank. The Germans also had the habit of setting fire to buildings, either to deny enemy use of them or simply to light the surrounding in night fighting. This was actually breach of international law and the Germans avoided it in the West (but still did it in several places, such as Arnhem), but were as usual not so inhibited in the East. Then as now, Germany was littered with mock-cities for troops to train in and soldiers were trained in urban operations in such places, or in refresher courses at the front. Training focused on entry and exit techniques of hostile environments. You know, how to stand in front of the door, who throws the grenade, in what order to we run in etc. And of course lapelling techniques (never heard of them using ropes with carbine hooks and such, but they had special ways of stepping on eachother to get over walls and so on). Also, troops had to learn a lot about demolitions and urban fortification. I have only a sketchy view of what exactly they trained, as my most detailed source on this particular subject is actually letters from an officer in such training (my grandfather). He writes of injuries during training among his men. Regards Dandelion

I am not sitting on a goldmine of literature in hand-to hand combat I am afraid, but I thought I would share some research data to get you going. Sources: The easiest way to get info is usually to contact the Bundesarchiv. But here is a link with an impressive array of sources (none specifically on your subject, but many able to help you further in your quest - note the publishers and the official documents, you can always track both) http://mars.acnet.wnec.edu/~grempel/courses/hitler/lectures/hjd_bib.html Hand to hand training was, as you probably already know, part of the Grundausbildung of recruits, while operations in urban environments were part of unit training (in the usual order Gruppe-Zug-Kompanie etc). So you'll know what manuals you need from the Bndesarchiv (of Library of Congress, or National Archives, both have huge stocks o captured German documents). You can also always contact the Bundeswehr, although service is not as immediate there, and these matters are a bit sensitive you know. Here are some publishers that I know of, that publish (or published) qualitative titles on the Heer in WWII, German perspective. Bender Publishing (these have gone fully online now andh ave a site - there is at leats one book on the German bayonet, but I think it is with a collectors perspective) Biblio Verlag Kurt Vowinckel Verlag KG Tosa Verlag (Landsberg, they have a site I think) Podzum-Pallas Verlag (they have a site on the internet I believe) Leopold Stocker Verlag (Graz, not sure they are around anymore, but they had at least 40 titles on WWII) Munin-Verlag (Osnabrück, no longer around but they had primarily divisional histories of the Waffen SS as titles, many of which are now re-issued by other publishers). Schild Verlag (München) These are no illegal publishers or anything like that, no revisionists or nazis, so you won't have to feel embarrassed asking about them. But like I said, it is sensitive, so it will help that you are not German yourself. Hope it helps some Dandleion

As to the US Army, you'll find every contemporary manual used in training here: http://www.military-info.com/Index.htm This article on the bayonet by a Canadian officer I find both interesting and entertaining, and what's more he has a list of sources that you will probably appreciate: http://members.tripod.com/~RegimentalRogue/papers/bayonet.htm Just links that sprang to mind. Which languagues do you read? German army material tends to be in German. Would you be interested in such references? Regards Dandelion?

In a QB, you don't, because you can't. You'll have to buy platoons instead. In scenario-buildning, you can just delete unwanted parts. Regards Dandelion

Well I saw this picture of an M4A1, or a bunch of them rather, having the AAMG mounted in front of the hatch. These machines were all pristine and still in CONUS just after production as I recall. It surprised me, so I remember it. But I don't know if they were going to the Pacific or West, nor if this was common practice or some extraordinary measure. Regards Dandelion