Magpie_Oz

Whole stack of complex stuff here : http://www.spwaw.com/lholttg/penetration.htm#PENETRATION_VS._ARMOR_BASICS Oddly enough HV guns can fail to penetrate if the target is too CLOSE in some instances, the shot shattering as it is still going to fast.

This link http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USA/ref/FM/PDFs/FM7-24.PDF Gives a good run down on the comms in a division. If you can be bothered you can work out how many radios would be to hand.

I seem to remember the 4.2"'s being in independent "Chemical Battalions" ? because they were meant to mainly provide smoke screens?

There must be a point where a shell will simply skim the surface of a steeply angled plate, I'd think anything under 20 degrees or so. So the round would never get a 'bite" into the armour.

Potato ... Pot..ato .... doesn't quite have the same impact when you type it.

This link : http://www.lonesentry.com/manuals/german-infantry-weapons/75-mm-light-infantry-howitzer.html Gives the low down on the 7.5cm IG. From reading it it indicates that the gun fire separate loading cartridges (semi-fixed) and looking at the sight it is graduated to 5 different charges.

Did a calc using air resistance and the range drops to about 1600m (spherical projectile used)

Not so much the Regimental system itself but rather the habit of swapping units about to form battle groups so that often a particular infantry unit may not have worked with a particular armoured brigade so they were not as cohesive. That tended to extend from units not necessarily being assigned to a specific division. Buckley notes that units that had trained together in previously tended to perform better.

By that I take it you are in 'Merika ?

You can get it electronically from eBooks.com if you want it right now

Aussie men have been warned off showing their Weiners in Central Park, the New Yankers don't like finding out that not everything they have is the biggest.

I'd say, while the barrage is in progress you run the risk of being KO'd by the falling rounds (anything falling from height will hurt you). It would be safe to run through a "normal" smoke screen but perhaps not a WP one, unless it was drifting. HC or normal smoke will only choke you and give you cancer in 30 years time. WP will burn the flesh from your bones.

A lot of that stuff is on You Tube too if you want LJF

It would be good though if we had a "See what I can see" tool of some sort. Adopt the point of view of your unit in such away that you can see what they can. I think you can do this at the moment by locking view to the unt but I am never sure when I am actually at the exact point of view of the unit.

Well you have to handle Tourists, especially British Tourists and doubly so Old British Tourists with the biggest pair of kid gloves you can find.

Rather explodes the notion that the Panther is a superior tank?

It was because the tanks were more or less equal and Rommel would have been drawn into a one for one which he would lose as he did not have as many tanks, ergo they couldn't go head to head. http://bevinalexander.com/excerpts/world-war-ii/rommel-recipe-success-africa.htm

Yes, what is your point? The German Panzers won in France by avoiding the superior British and French Marques.

Which is exactly what I was saying the time frame being 40/41, noting that the bolt on plates for the H were as a direct response to the inadequacy of their armour against the 2lbr.

2 of the 3 components of tank design Sherman and Cromwell were equal Firepower and Protection but the Cromwell had a significant manoeuvrability advantage in the Bocage which was noted by both allied and German commanders. "Fritz Bayerlein, GOC Panzer Lehr, was also impressed with the performance of the Cromwell in Normandy, while German intelligence reports praised the Cromwell's mobility in the bocage ahead of German models." LHCMA, Liddell Hart, 15/15/150, Liddell Hart's interviews with Bayerlein, August 1950; IWM Bucknall Papers, XXX Corps Intelligence Report, no. 452, 19 July 1944, appendix A. So swings and round-a-bouts the Cromwell was as good as, and maybe had an advantage over the Sherman. While the Sherman may have had better armour it counted for little as both tanks could be destroyed by the Panther and Tiger guns out 2000m, there was a slight difference against the PzIv but only in the order of 200 metres or so. Given that most engagement ranges were around 1000m the difference is insignificant.

Well all I can say is that 1941 ended with Operation Crusader, the first victory for The British/Commonwealth forces against Germany, the battle taking its name from the tank.

Sorry typo, should be Pz III Ausf D in France

The M1917 did use a different cartridge, the boat tailed M1 30-06 round which gave a much greater range. The M1 Garand used the M2 30-06 round. I am not sure if the M1 could use the M1 or if the M1917 was always supplied with the M1 or if it generally used the M2 from the M1 and only used the M1 when it needed the extra range. Ok that is NOT a piss take but does highlight the problems faced with the "M" numbering system. Put simply the HMG used a different round for extra range but I am not sure if this was the only rounds they carried in the field or if it normally used the same round as the rifle. I also do not know if the rifle can use the HMG's special rounds.

Yes of course the designs had their problems which is why the Germans were able to out fight them in France, the British tanks less so as they had 3 man turrets and radios, not so the French but the main reason was tactics. The Pazners went where the allied armour wasn't. When they did stumble upon each other the Panzers got a rude shock, al la Arras. Again it was a matter of tactics, German armour would draw the Brits into pursuit and lead them into an ATG trap, mainly because they couldn't go head to head with them. Which is why an HE shell became important and why the Grant was such a godsend. Like the Panther the Crusader suffered from reliability problems which did limit its effectiveness because it needed better maintenance than could be provided however, when it worked, it did outclass its opposition. Early 42 the Pz III and IV received armour and gun upgrades that spelled the end for the Crusader, but we are talking 40-41 here. The 50mm that could take them down at 1000m was the L60 model of the Pz III J which became available in late 41, prior to that the Germans were out gunned by the 2lbr. Not sure that looking like a truck helped much. It was the flaws in the tactics and logistical support that were the problem, the designs were sound for the doctrine it's just that the doctrine was flawed.

I agree the driving "skill" or lack there of in the AI drivers is pitiful, slow in fast out is the mantra for drivers but CM seems to be go flat out, slam on chocks, have no speed and hence take 3 days to turn then go flat out again. This is actually the one and only thing I find annoying about CMSF -> BN