Feldgrau Posted July 5, 2001 Author Share Posted July 5, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PawBroon: Thanks Andreas but that specific MOD is Shane's actually. I had been testing it for some time and it's not widely known that he was doing one... You'll have to get in touch with Feldgrau directly for an ETA on that one. It looks just like mine in a completly different way (IE good).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Opps! Did I let that slip in the pic? Silly me; that mod isn't completed yet.... As Marcel has said, this is one which is still in beta stage. It is being reviewed by Mssrs. Vie, Molek, et al., but I think it'll be a bit longer before it is ready for the battlefield. However, if there is any interest, I could post a few I.P. pics. Also, is there any interest in a mod for my vote of the ugliest tank in the ETO- the Churchill VI / VII / VII / Crocodile? I have started one which is only in alpha stage, but it has been on the back-burner for a while now. Is anyone interested in this AFV? Regards, Shane Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoopenfaust2 Posted July 5, 2001 Share Posted July 5, 2001 I'm ready willin' and able...and interested Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SS Sniper Posted July 5, 2001 Share Posted July 5, 2001 We can always use a new mod SS Peiper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted July 5, 2001 Share Posted July 5, 2001 Nice mod - its always nice to see folk doing the 'other' vehicles rather than just the Panthers, et al. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: I think you are safe, as I mentioned in my email, by using the 76 on blue/red - this seems to have been the unit sign for self propelled units of all armoured divisions, British or Canadian. snip... In any event, here is an example for the Fourth Canadian (Armoured) Division. You could substitute any British or Canadian Armoured Divisional marking for the Division sign, the Unit sign (76) would stay the same. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Not quite true IMHBIO (... Humble But Informed ...). Each regiment had a unique number so the redcaps and others could instanly identify them on the move. Although, looking through my copy of Fortys' "British Army Handbook" I see you may indeed be correct. For Armoured Divs he has the RHA regts identified by the number 76, and RA regts using 74. The LAA Regt is 73, and the AT Regt (incl the TDs) was 77. Also, I'm fairly sure the Brits didn'thave any SP regts in their grunt divs, but the Canucks had at least one such regt - maybe at corps/army level? 14th Canadian Fd Regt I think. FWIW, in an Inf Div the numbers for the 3 RA regts were 42, 43, 44. Now, Forty gives these numbers as 'examples' of numbers for an armd and inf div, so whether he has picked a div at random, and taken their numbers as typical, or whether ALL divs used the same numbers is unclear. Regards JonS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted July 6, 2001 Share Posted July 6, 2001 14 Field used Priests, not Sextons - and only for the initial phases of the Normandy invasion. I think they converted back to towed guns, along with the other two field regiments of the Third Division, a few weeks after landing (?) All divisions used the same number. See my site at http://members.home.net/canuckmain/ or see The British Soldier by Jean Bouchery, an excellent book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted July 6, 2001 Share Posted July 6, 2001 Um, I never said they had Sextons or Priests - only that they were SP Your numbering schema concurs with Fortys. JonS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mord Posted July 6, 2001 Share Posted July 6, 2001 Also, is there any interest in a mod for my vote of the ugliest tank in the ETO- the Churchill VI / VII / VII / Crocodile? I have started one which is only in alpha stage, but it has been on the back-burner for a while now. Is anyone interested in this AFV? HELL YES! Mord Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted July 6, 2001 Share Posted July 6, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JonS: Um, I never said they had Sextons or Priests - only that they were SP Your numbering schema concurs with Fortys. JonS<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Then you are quite correct. I think all three field regiments of 3 Cdn Inf Div had SP 105s for the invasion, actually. Yes, I too would like to see another Churchill mod. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts