John Kettler Posted September 8, 2012 Share Posted September 8, 2012 BFC et al., I just noticed this when sending my friend, Jim, a link to the CMBN CW movies. I can see leaping over the side in an overrun type attack, but it strikes me as stupid to go out over the top, increasing the risk of getting popped, when perfectly good, wide double doors are available through which to debus. Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brent Pollock (WBRP) Posted September 8, 2012 Share Posted September 8, 2012 I've wondered the same thing myself. Maybe it is the same mentality we have on the hockey bench - hardly any one uses the doors during the fast line changes and you know you're a big boy when you are tall enough to go over the boards and don't need to use that door...which is for wussies! It's more efficient to go over the side instead of having to go through the door one after t'other. Seriously, though, maybe they're worried about getting whacked by someone who has circled around behind and pops them all like fish in a barrel. Or, it's just a limit of the graphics. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted September 8, 2012 Share Posted September 8, 2012 There was a discussion about this some months ago. The conclusion was that the "over the side" leaping was propaganda PR films. In RL it was way too dangerous, gear could get snagged etc. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted September 8, 2012 Author Share Posted September 8, 2012 Erwin, Thanks! Maybe one of the insiders can tell us something definitive. Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted September 8, 2012 Share Posted September 8, 2012 There was a discussion about this some months ago. The conclusion was that the "over the side" leaping was propaganda PR films. In RL it was way too dangerous, gear could get snagged etc. Also there was a real risk of spraining or breaking an ankle. Maybe not a huge risk, but if debussing over the side wasn't urgently necessary, why take it? Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wicky Posted September 8, 2012 Share Posted September 8, 2012 BFC plz fix or sumfink If you can leap on and hang on without falling off - can't imagine them all queuing to disembark via the back door - those sitting nearest in the compartment probably would unless they're not in a hurry or are injured Shows how limited the rear not so wide and high door is for exiting in a rush 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c3k Posted September 8, 2012 Share Posted September 8, 2012 The crossbrace over the doors would be the main reason the doors would be avoided when exiting. Not too bad for entry, but getting 8 or so men out in a hurry? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wicky Posted September 8, 2012 Share Posted September 8, 2012 Over... and out So there could be different animations if a squad's orders were to vacate 'quick' or 'fast' (leap) with a small chance of minor injury, or 'move' to queue out the back door (without risk of injury). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wicky Posted September 8, 2012 Share Posted September 8, 2012 On a related note the US M3 Halftrack with a rear door, according to manual, the squad apart from a couple of soldiers and the assistant squad leader, leapt over the side to dismount. 19. TO DISMOUNT.—a. Being mounted, at the command or signal DISMOUNT— (1) The squad leader and No. 1 dismount on the right side of the vehicle. (2) The driver dismounts on the left side of the vehicle. (3) The remainder of the squad dismounts in the reverse order to that prescribed in paragraph 18a. (See also par. 7.) b. Being mounted, at the command OVER THE SIDE, DISMOUNT the squad dismounts in reverse order to that prescribed in paragraph 18b. (See also par. 7.) http://www.lonesentry.com/manuals/fm17-71-halftrack-crew-drill/rifle-squad.html 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heinrich505 Posted September 8, 2012 Share Posted September 8, 2012 John, Have you seen those babies in real life? Those "big doors" at the back aren't all that big. Aberdeen Proving Grounds in MD has a good one on display. Of course my son tried to get into the back and managed to clunk his head on the overhead crossbar. And he was just a small teenager with no helmet and gear on at the time. I could easily see how disembarking over the side would be preferred, even at the risk of spraining an ankle. If hit right they would brew up pretty quickly, so I'd take my chances launching over the side rather than logjamming up at the back. Heinrich505 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redken Posted September 8, 2012 Share Posted September 8, 2012 Panzergrenadier Training film at 2:10 min disembarking over the side: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boche Posted September 8, 2012 Share Posted September 8, 2012 And on the move... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted September 8, 2012 Share Posted September 8, 2012 I'm reminded of an anecdote someone posted awhile ago. A MOUT training course the instructor said 'We are now going to learn the correct procedure for entering a building through a window. I want to see you NEVER do this in combat.' Or words to that effect. Apparently the chance of inadvertantly injuring yourself or a comrade was just to high, but its still one of those things you need to know how to do. Flinging youself over the side of a moving halftrack may fall into the same category. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boche Posted September 8, 2012 Share Posted September 8, 2012 Plus, wasnt it doctrine for PzGrenadiers to dismount BEFORE going into combat? therefore allowing them to exit the vehicle in an orderly fashion. And then, should the worst happen then know how to jump off quickly. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted September 9, 2012 Author Share Posted September 9, 2012 Wicky, Fascinating pictures! I particularly like the bizarre first one and the shot of the U.S. soldiers (from the 97th ID? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/97th_Infantry_Division_(United_States) using a captured 251 for casevac. The M3 dismount orders are useful, too. Heinrich 505, You've now discovered the real reason AFV crews/occupants wear protective headgear--to protect themselves while in said AFV. One brief stint in a captured T-62 on static display sufficed to convince me of the truth of this assertion. Banged my head repeatedly, and I was being careful. Don't get me started on where else I got dinged! Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted September 9, 2012 Author Share Posted September 9, 2012 Redken, Nice to see you again. (Mord, was paying attention that time). Not only was the link of considerable interest, but it shows what I believe to be a Ferdinand in action! What else has such a cavernous interior? The Tigerfibel writers would have a fit using such a mighty main gun to kill a lowly MG, but the Ferdinand had neither a coax nor a bow MG. The Panzer Grenadiers are not using their 251s as carriers to the vicinity of the battle. Rather, they are using them for battle, practically jumping into the enemy trenches from them. This flatly contradicts what some have said regarding their employment and is consonant with many things seen, photographed and filmed in the early days of Barbarossa. Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baneman Posted September 9, 2012 Share Posted September 9, 2012 ...The Panzer Grenadiers are not using their 251s as carriers to the vicinity of the battle. Rather, they are using them for battle, practically jumping into the enemy trenches from them. This flatly contradicts what some have said regarding their employment and is consonant with many things seen, photographed and filmed in the early days of Barbarossa. True, but in the early days of Barbarossa, they enjoyed an overwhelming superiority almost never achieved again. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted September 9, 2012 Author Share Posted September 9, 2012 Baneman, Am well aware of that, but this training film shows a much different situation, at a time when the Germans had nothing like that superiority. Indeed, they're on the defensive here, so are most likely fighting outnumbered and relying on mobility, good tactics, solid coordination of all arms and combat experience to deal with the breakthrough. Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted September 9, 2012 Author Share Posted September 9, 2012 Redken, I'm wrong. It's an early Jagdpanzer IV, and this is reportedly the only surviving film of the critters. Terrific training film; even has fire breathing dragons! That 251 with the 20mm turret is nasty. Hull down, there'd be precious little to shoot at. Quite a tutorial in the how to of Panzer Grenadier combat planning and employment! Part 1 Part 2 Part 3 Part 4 Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.