Jump to content
Special Upgrade 4 Tech Tips

urefinger

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    85

  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

 Content Type 

Posts posted by urefinger

    The Peng Challenge Telethon for Australia: How Many Times Can You Just Look Away?

    in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin

    Posted

    I have one or two questions, if i may (which I will ask regardless of your feelings on the matter) firstly: What is coventry when it is used in your context?

    secondly: Who are the knights of the pool?

    and thirdly: what is the cubic m(2) storage area of your combined vagina's sand-wise? - naturally assuming a density of about 4kg/200cm(2).

    Furthermore, i would like it to be known that I do not consider myself witty and neither - in my opinion - are you. I post merely to piss you off and waste your time, becuase it amuses me so to do it.

    good night to you, you princes of maine, you pricks of peng.

    0

    Of modern tanks and their ammo + others...

    in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin

    Posted

    thanks for all your replies, i really didnt expect such a good response.

    what im getting here is that a heat round - when it works - can be far more effective i.e. produce a better penentration than a APFSDS round. i still think that if an abrahams came up against e.g. a t72 it would shoot it with APFSDS to make SURE they got a penentration (faaaaar worse that a heat round simply bounces off and you only alert the enemy to your prescense)but i heat round might say, be used againt tank that was already shocked or knocked out by AP to "brew it up" or used against APC's as a more effective - and cheaper round? (that was a fairly long question tongue.gif ) i really dont see its use as HE my uncle who was actually IN the armoured says it has practicly NO anti-infantry effect (when watching a program about the sas he likened it to "a flashbang"...

    but what about HESH - is it actually a anti-fortification round? or what? im pretty dam sure its an anti armour round too and if so, why? (uncle refused to comment because he never fired it or heard of it)

    I really dont think the designers of the depleted uranium round had any thought of the radioactivity being the prime reason for its manufacture, during the course of a battle the contaminated crew would'nt be impaired by it at all and provided they didnt say, spend the next three days in the tank, would probably survive.

    thanks again and any other genral information on tank ammo is appreciated...

    sometimes when i see a t34 brew up on cmbb it makes me quite sad as i remember the tale that my uncle recounted to me about having to listen to his driver and friend mark williams burn to death in his tank... :( we should take a moment to rember tankers all over the world who died like this.

    0

    Of modern tanks and their ammo + others...

    in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin

    Posted

    Just recently i picked up a copy of jane's guide to AFV's or something similair and it struck me just how many modern MBT's still carry HEAT rounds...now i had assumed that the only use for heat rounds was in tanks with very low muzzle velocities (e.g. infantry support halftracks (german) or MBT's like the churchill) as the muzzle velocity makes very little difference to a HEAT shell - if any at all - but it would appear that comparitivly modern MBT's like the german leopard still carry it. the ammo storage is something like 12 HE 18 APFSDS-T (armour-piercing-fin-stabilised-discarding-sabot-tracer) and 6 HEAT

    now, the ONLY possible reason I can think of for these MBT's to be carrying around HEAT rounds when they've got APFSDS to fire out of there nice 6 metre long 120mm guns is that APFSDS sabot rounds lose their momentum quite quickly over long distances (im sure we all know the equasion M=WxV) and so when firing at the maximum range of the gun, the gunner might choose to load heat knkowing that the amount of energy lost from the tungsten projectile would be so great it would fail to penentrate the armour. What do you think? any other theories (my friend suggested that seeing as HEAT rounds effectivly melt armour (they burn through it) if you hit an enemy tank that was inpenentrable to normal kinetic energy rounds twice in the same place with HEAT you might get through seeing as the metal is already very weakend)

    also - I've noticed a lot of tanks including right-up-to-the-minute ones e.g. the brittish challenger tank (and possibly the american abrahams - but information on that little bugger is still clasified) carry HESH rounds (high-explosive-squash-head) that - and im not entirely sure here can someone check this out? - supposedly STICK to the armour, or splatter against it if you prefer. And then detonate blowing chunks off the internal armour which then bounces around the crew cabin...but why carry this round? is it effective against the armour that the tanks rounds could'nt penentrate with the idea being "if you cant get through it's armour then you can at least try and kill its crew" i imagine it'd take a bloody big shell to pentrate 200mm of armour but i can imagine about 5 pounds of shaped charge blowing bits of metal off the inside wall (especially if the armour was thick but brittle)

    any thoughts on anything i just raised - try to put it in laymans terms plz tongue.gif

    also - has ANYBODY made or is working on a mod to allow us to use modern untis (especially MBT's) in cmbb battles or is this not possible due to a lot of countries still having the armour of their tanks classified an so on? i can imagine nothing better than cmbb EXCEPT cmbb with t72's, challengers, leopards, abrahams etc etc etc tongue.gif

    thanks in advance for taking the time to read and to reply.

    0

    another allocation of armour question - plz help

    in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin

    Posted

    jason - you have NEVER read spike milligan's war diaries, being a member of the 56th heavy regiment i would assume that he knows ever so SLIGHTLY more than you about the weapons that he directed (and you dont even know who he is)

    his friend - edgington - was a gunner in the same regiment he was and the were hit by about 20 105mm shells all of which failed to explode, thus proving they were ap

    0

    another allocation of armour question - plz help

    in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin

    Posted

    more on spike milligan http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/tv_and_radio/1843963.stm

    i REALLY suggest buying one of his war diaries, they are hilarious and compelling stories (and true ones at that)

    an example:

    (spike milligan and bmb donaldson are testing the wireless sets in A and B "Monkey" trucks)

    DONALDSON: Can you hear me spike? over.

    MILLIGAN: yes, reading you clear at strength ten. over.

    DONALDSON: any other problems? over.

    MILLIGAN: no, this s bloody stupid, i can hear you without the wireless. over.

    DONALDSON: you got any pipe tobbaco left spike? over.

    MILLIGAN:....

    DONALDSON: spike?

    MILLIGAN ....

    DONAlDSON: this is stupid. im coming over

    by the time he had arrvived i'd managed to stuff about 2 pounds of tobbaco into my pipe and get it all lit, the entire rer portion of monkey truck A was wreathed in blue smoke and was lying - asphixiated - over the wireless. im not a cruel man but donaldson had a pipe bowl which he hid in during air raids. a fill-up for him meant a whole new lend-lease agreement with the yanks...

    0

    another allocation of armour question - plz help

    in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin

    Posted

    and jason i DO get it i was just asking whether these independendt brigades were designed or stripped from other units and ure answer is obviously they were purpose made... dont pop a vein

    NB - fo's dont have ap ammo in cmbb or cmbo but they certainly DID have it in real life becuase spike milligan (famous in britain) was formerly in 56th heavy regiment "D" battery (they were re-equipped with 7.62 inch long range howitzers during the war, and twice in his books he recounts firing ap at german armour and bunkers using AP to penentrate them and one time sitting with his back againjst a farm wall in italy with his best mate edgington recounts curling into a ball as he heard "jerry" 105mm coming over (could tell be the sound) and making (in his own words) "whheeeeeeeeeeee - PLOP" a few seconds later his friend edgington asks "why's he dropping ap on us then?"

    so AP shells were used in indrect FO observed fire missions coz its straight from the horses mouth

    im also trying to find a page that i saw about a year ago with a MASSIVE list of all types of shells from ww2 (naval and land) which also proves what i say. it sticks in my mind as it ggives details of early U.S. naval proximity-detonating shells (which used a very small internal radar)

    0

    another allocation of armour question - plz help

    in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin

    Posted

    mayeb we could find a modder and request a few infantry, guns, fo's and support weapon scenarios (i think infantry div moved some of their at guns forward to the battle insted of just being a holding point in the rear in order to beat off ( no laughing ) any possible armour counterattack. furthermore i believe larwe quantities of ap ammo were assigned to fo's for that specific reason.

    0

    the posters on peng are mong mong mongs...

    in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin

    Posted

    HI! and welcome to the "mong" challenge the aim is to cordially invite other people to rather whizzy jolly games of cmbb. a good example would be:

    "I say, care to join me in a cracking game of cmbb?"

    "why, yes old sport. delighted!"

    a bad example would be:

    "SIR! I question you heritage and furthermore i consider you to be the ignorant son of a blacksmith!"

    "F*CK YOU YOU STINKING PIECE OF INBRED LIMEY HEMAPHRODIDIC SH*T!!!!!!"

    so lets all knuckle down and have a good old roister doister , eh? what what?

    0

    another allocation of armour question - plz help

    in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin

    Posted

    ahhhhhhh thank u i see now

    many thanks

    but is it just me or do we only tend to see armour scenarios in cmbb. i mean ive played a few with infantry and support alone but if these type of forces made up the bulk of the line and - indeed - quite often bent the line with their attacks i think we need to see a LOT more of infantry and artillery scenarios

    but say a infantry div was beimg routed by a mechanized russian div would a armoured corps be sent to help - or would they let them break through and run out of steam? also,these tank formations that occasionally backed up the infantry dis (attached armour) would these be stripped from other units or purpose created?

    0

    another allocation of armour question - plz help

    in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin

    Posted

    OK i still feel my question is un-answerd and the example of the city was a bad one (because cities are easily surrounded and tanks are of little use

    *rubs eyes* - right then. ASSUMING there is an enemy defnsive line several belts thick in typical countryside. it is attacked with an infantry div or two. apart from the treches guns atg's and howitzers the enemy are defending themselves with. they also have tanks. they use these in both defence and counter attack. surely an infantry div would not be expected to fight off armoured counter attacks with their puny man handled atg's? you would HAVE to allocate tank support - if not an ENTIRE panzer div then at least a battalion of tanks from a nearby one - am i right?

    0

    another allocation of armour question - plz help

    in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin

    Posted

    ive read all your replies (and thank you for the detail) but i STILL dont think anyones actually answred my original question. i will clarify it with an example.

    army group centre are advancing on kiev (this is hypthetical) the recon battalions form various div's do their work and locate the main defensive belts and probe the enemy lines and maybe even take samll towns. then, the battle for the city proper begins starting with taking out the outer lines of defense. assuming 4 infantrie div's are assighned to the task.....now what? surely its almost impossible to break a in depth defensive line with only infantrie and a puny amount of attached armour support? (not counting atgs and other artilery (be they guns OR howitzers or even gun-howitzers) yeah ok, in SOME regions its only the infantrie that CAN fight (forests - i mean MASSIVE ones or mountains) and i suppose you COULD hold a line with only an infantrie div' (given the attached atg's and the small amount of armour for plugging gaps in the line) but for major operations you'd have to attack the enemy with a panzer division (and its attached panzergrenadiers moving with the tanks) OR - seeing as the majority of div's were infantrie. you'd provide the infantrie for the attack (perhaps with the panzergrenadiers) and mix in tanks from other nearby panzer divisions. i just DONT see any other way infantrie could take a part in major operations.

    i ws lead to the idea from numerous scenario briefings that went something like "and on the 23rd the 145th infatrie div supported by the 82 panzer div attacked a small village at down" leading me to belive that to div's might mix at a battalion level for a small time....

    0

    another allocation of armour question - plz help

    in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin

    Posted

    to the first reply: mbluhhh? im sorry most of that went over my head. perhaps though i might simplify the question and possibly your answer?

    did divs mix? (NOT on a full sacle bu would an armour div "give tanks" to and infantry battalion to support them OR - as i think you said" infantry divs would sometimes have a SMALL amount of armour with them for tricky situations

    to the second post: thnx. one more thing - did these reconnasince battalions mainly comprise armoured cars for the purposes? sometimes supported by heaveier armour for e.g. taking a small village....?

    thanx for the responses - its just kinda hard to get my head round the different situations and the difference between "tactical" engangements and the "strategic" organisation of troop movments

    0
×
×
  • Create New...