Big Jim
-
Posts
111 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by Big Jim
-
-
Agreed with JonS on Keegan- and Carlin.
Now, that is backing up what you say with a fact- not just saying "US troops sometimes had a bad supply situation because of PRIDE". We could be making progress.Originally posted by Volkov:As far as the equipment goes...Yes NOT ALL THE TIME we US troops so adiquitly equipt. There are short falls, Read about the Battle at Guadancanal. The ammo and food was at the front of the LSTs..and it ended up on the bottom of the supply piles...I can remember needing 5.56 and getting 60mm motars,,,hmmm...A family member was in the 11th Airborne Division in the PTO,, he tells me a great story about needing ammo and rations...they gave him snowshoes....And to keep in line with the CMAK...the US deployed the M3 Grant/Lee with a 37mm round with 60% charge...not very well planed out...You see as Americans we unfortunaly are reactive...not very proactive..
-
lolOriginally posted by Volkov:No, Not enough pictures
-
F my manners,,,its against my nature,,,being from NYC grammer isn't important...so a big F to grammer too. [/QB]</font>Originally posted by Volkov:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Big Jim:
Now we just need to work on your grammar... and your manners.
-
I did with the post to Dorosh....see above. </font>Originally posted by Volkov:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Panzer76:
Give it a rest.
-
Cheers guys- would love to see a King Tiger in action!
I feel an expedition coming on...
-
Cold War CMx2 would be quality- although we would lose the historically accurate scenarios which abound so wonderfully on the CD and download packs, gaining an operational level would be excellent.
I can almost see a turn being carried out now... oh no, there goes my T-72.
Anyone here read Tom Clancy's 'Red Storm Rising'? Might recognise the sig line...
-
What is the best WWII museum anyone has ever been to, anywhere in the world? Fancy going to one this summer (in UK, preferably), but can't make tankfest.
-
Makes a huge difference in accuracy if the FO is in command I've found.
-
-
I see your point- being fully prepared rather than being caught with the proverbial trousers down would definitely make a difference initially.
No enforced relocation of industry would also matter- but I remember a thread a while back about Germany winning alone: the German economy reached its peak in 1944, when the Soviets were knocking at the door of the Reich. Surely a Soviet invasion would have kick-started the Germans into 'Totale Krieg' from the get go, and combined with a highly professional army which hadn't gone through 3 years of war already in the depths of Russia might have actually led to a German victory- or a negotiated settlement reminiscent of Brest-Litovsk imposed on the Bolsheviks in 1917.
The French air force and RAF didn't make that much of a difference in 1940 either, and although airpower was central to the concept of Blitzkrieg, I don't think it would make a huge difference. It would depend on how good the Soviet pilots were, and they were nowhere near as experienced as the Luftwaffe.
No, the more I think about it, the more I think it would have been an utter disaster for the Red Army to attack in spring 1941.
-
Hitler might even have approved as the Germans were already preparing for Barbarossa, so they could have let the Russians come at them (Battle of Masurian Lakes and Tannenburg 1914 style) and then wiped the floor with their army (1941 style).
I think the greatest difference would be political- would Britain and the USA condone an 'unprovoked' attack? This may have had an effect in that even if Russia then still won against Germany, the Anglo-American armies might have then clashed with the Red Army...
-
Do they fire as often though? And it usually gets your men cut to pieces if you assault with them at low ammo... I learnt that one the hard way!
-
I think you should crack open a bottle of wine to celebrate!
Hoping I can make a few games of 2006 myself...Congrats!
-
Now I don't know who to believe. The article in Signal said German troops were the most accurate...Originally posted by Volkov:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Big Jim:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Volkov:
US marksman ARE better.
</font>
-
I think they were called Mulberries. But probably not spelt like that...Originally posted by Michael Emrys:I think the truly amazing thing about Normandy was the artificial harbors. Even though one was wrecked by the June storm, the remaining one outperformed the combined expectations for both. This was an engineering feat of the first order and one of Britain's greatest contributions to the war.
Saw a programme on TV about the people who designed the Sherman DD (?), that was pretty handy for giving fire support on Normandy beaches. When it didnt sink.
-
Now I don't know who to believe. The article in Signal said German troops were the most accurate...Originally posted by Volkov:US marksman ARE better.
-
I don't know, all those examples seemed suicidally brave to me and lucky not all to be posthumous...(hence the VC I suppose). Are such manouevres SOP in any army?
BTW, people from Newcastle are all as mad as a teapot.
-
The Enfield had to be recocked or whatever between shots, whereas the Garand could fire eight shots without taking the sights away from the target. This may have had some effect, but I'd just want to get a few shots off and get my head down if I were a grunt...
As for US marksmanship being better, I seriously doubt. No amount of training can surpass 10 minutes of combat experience, as I'm sure anyone on this forum would agree with.
Would splitting your squads into a LMG and SMG section go someway toward addressing the ammo problem?
-
I always was under the impression the Germans wanted the Caucasus to deny the Russians oil as much as gain it for themselves.
What's the use in a tank army three times as big as the German tank army, with no fuel to run them?
-
To be fair, Hitler was playing to win the war- not come to a negotiated peace in which he would no longer be leader of the Reich. Ardennes was a pretty far fetched idea, but stuff like the holocaust meant Nazi Germany could never reconcile with the Allies, only face utter destruction or victory.Originally posted by Buffy the Panzer Slayer:Look at the Ardennes offensive. There was no way Hitler could have won!
Italy, Japan = bad news
Hungary, Finland, Romania = good news
Hitler chewed off way too much in one go- Britain first, then Soviet Union, then America would have been more easily faced at once. Did he never play Risk?!
-
Bah- the day before my finals start.
Just found where Dorset is as well after a quick search on google and the very friendly and helpful 'naturist UK' website...
-
From what I can see the average height seems to be about 1cm or so- but then I do only have a 17" monitor...
-
SAS best special ops unit (how many of the many other spec ops units from WWII are kicking around today, and still the best to boot?).
The Kiwis and the Finns were pretty hardy little buggers, but in an overall sense- tactically, strategically, and in tenacity: the Germans. They had the new ideas, the skill and the balls (stupidity?) to take on the three most powerful countries in the world. And almost win. No prizes for second place though, eh?
-
The Wehrmacht Katering Korps:
"Ach nein Hans, we are having sausages AGAIN!"
The famous German treatise on armoured warfare was originally titled "Achtung Wurst". By all accounts irritable bowel syndrome caused more casualties than the entire allied bombing campaign...
What does "L/xx" tell me?
in Combat Mission: Afrika Korps
Posted
A combination of doctrine and production difficulties seems to be the general consensus- I suppose going on WWI, you wouldn't have much of an idea how armoured warfare would develop...
Does anyone know if the original Panther design before the invasion of Russia was going to be designed with the lethal 75mm L/70(?), or had they not got to that stage of design?