frozen engines

[Chad Harrison]

i know that CM2 will factor in a fitness level for the infantry. now heres my question: will extreme weather conditions have a detremental on MG being prone to have a greater chance of a "jam" and taking longer to "unjam"; also, will vehicle have a greater chance of becoming immobile because of the extreme weather conditions? i know it played a HUGE role in early GER/RUS war, and i want to know if we can expect to see it in CM2? (sorry, my search engine never brings anything up in under 10 minutes)

[Schrullenhaft]

From what I can recall Steve mentioned that some extreme weather effects may make it in. Most likely these would be jamming machine guns. I don't know if there is any intent on including engine failure though. Some larger weapons migh also be factored in for failure (frozen gun blocks, firing mechanisms, etc. on canons).

[JonS]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Schrullenhaft:

... I don't know if there is any intent on including engine failure though...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

IIRC, engines won't freeze during a CMBB battle. Once the engine is up and running, and warmed up, its unlikely to suddenly freeze up. If any engines were going to fail, it would be before the CMBB battle began (that old 'its outside the scope' mantra again). Then it would be up to the scenario designer to explain, for example, why that 'platoon' of reinforcements only consists of one PzKpfW III.

[Hilltopper]

Didn't I also read where the weather would impact the morale of the troops? Sounds logical.

And I certainly hope there's Russian dog mines in CM2. No eastern front would be complete without them!

[Chad Harrison]

so no in game "engine freezes", (even from a tank that has been idleling for a long period of time?) and the MG's will have a greater chance of breaking along with other ordanance. yet, if the engine was idle for long enough, how likely would it be that it would freeze or malfunction? any wiser persons than myself capable of answering this?

[Mace]

I'd agree with JonS, it's a moot point in that the armor normally wouldn't be able to start up prior to participating in a battle and thus wouldn't even be able to make it to the jumping-off point (ie the one PzKpfw III platoon requested, 1 PzKpfw III arrives).

One area where it may have implications though is a Soviet attack in the early hours of the morning on an lagered armoured unit.

Mace

[Doug Beman]

Chad, a tank engine at idle runs only slightly cooler than a tank engine at full-out. To wit: a tank engine which is running, regardless of RPM, will not suddenly freeze up.

DjB

[Chad Harrison]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mace:

I'd agree with JonS, it's a moot point in that the armor normally wouldn't be able to start up prior to participating in a battle and thus wouldn't even be able to make it to the jumping-off point (ie the one PzKpfw III platoon requested, 1 PzKpfw III arrives).

One area where it may have implications though is a Soviet attack in the early hours of the morning on an lagered armoured unit.

Mace<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

good point though jon and mace. for the scale of CM, and regularity, it proboable would not add much. though it was a problem in reality.

[JonS]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chad Harrison:

... even from a tank that has been idleling for a long period of time? ... yet, if the engine was idle for long enough, how likely would it be that it would freeze or malfunction? any wiser persons than myself capable of answering this?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm not going to get into a contest about relative wisdom

Isn't an idling engine, by definition, warm? I think that would prevent it freezing. Where are those damn Canuckians when you need em - they must have to deal with this nearly every day of the year. I'm guessing 340 out of 365?

Regards

JonS

[tss]

Chad Harrison wrote:

so no in game "engine freezes", (even from a tank that has been idleling for a long period of time?)

A tank idling in the combat field _will_ have its engine on for the whole time, unless there is a severe fuel shortage.

Starting up a tank engine was then not a simple "turn an ignition key". Right now I am looking at the startup procedure of BT-7 tanks (or, to be exact, BT-42 assault gun, but the chassis was BT-7). The procedure has 12 steps (+ a five part checklist):

1) Turn off the main power switch.

2) Open the oil valve.

3) Open the main fuel valve of either the right or the left fuel tank.

4) Set the fuel intake selector to the same fuel tank.

5) Use the (manual) air pump to get a 0.2 bar pressure to the fuel tank.

6) Turn the "ryyppy" [don't know the English translation, old cars had this also to help ignition] on for 3-4 seconds.

7) Lubricate the axle of the water pump by turning the switch number 7 two or three times.

8) Turn the magneto selector to "both".

9) Set the middle clutch to position 1.

10) Press the main clutch pedal.

11) Press the accelerator pedal.

12) Give a signal to the rest crew, turn the crank of the auxiliary magneto with your right hand and start the engine using the crank shaft with your left hand. Only in an emergency you may use the quick-start button.

I don't know how long it took in practice for an experienced driver to get the BT-7 rolling, but I would suspect that it would be at least 10 seconds, way too long to be comfortable when the enemy is near.

and the MG's will have a greater chance of breaking along with other ordanance.

I don't think that MGs should have a greater malfunction rate. However, there should be, IMO, a possibility that when a MG opens fire the first time in a scenario, it is frozen and can fire only with greatly reduced rate of fire. This was a _very_ common occurrence with green troops, and happened occasionally also with experienced men.

Also, tanks have one additional place that is suspecticle to freezing: turret. For example, when Finns attacked Karhumäki in December 1941, most of the Finnish tanks were frozen up and only the sole T-34 and two T-28s were running. Both T-28s had severe problems with turret travelsal, and in fact one of them froze completely and the gun had to be aimed by turning the whole tank, which was a pretty difficult procedure because T-28 was notoriously difficult vehicle to turn.

- Tommi

[JonS]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tss:

6) Turn the "ryyppy" [don't know the English translation, old cars had this also to help ignition] on for 3-4 seconds.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Could 'ryyppy' be a carburettor heater? You find these on aircraft engines also.

Regards

JonS

PS - thanks for posting the proceedure. Interesting...

[Pzman]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JonS:

I'm not going to get into a contest about relative wisdom

Isn't an idling engine, by definition, warm? I think that would prevent it freezing. Where are those damn Canuckians when you need em - they must have to deal with this nearly every day of the year. I'm guessing 340 out of 365?

Regards

JonS<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Damn Canuck right here... Its (where I am) 45-50 out of 365 but anyway... its not that bad once the engine is going... no problem at all.

[ 08-01-2001: Message edited by: Panzerman ]

[Stalin's Organ]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JonS:

If any engines were going to fail, it would be before the CMBB battle began (that old 'its outside the scope' mantra again). Then it would be up to the scenario designer to explain, for example, why that 'platoon' of reinforcements only consists of one PzKpfW III.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well that's an interesting idea - % chance of each reinforcement element actually arriving - no 2 games ever the same!

[Chad Harrison]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tss:

Right now I am looking at the startup procedure of BT-7 tanks <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

wow, that is quite a process. thanks for that information. the only military vehicle i have driven nowadays was a hummer and that was the good old turn the knob ignition! historically, does anyone know where all the extreme winter problems came from? i know they had problems with the armor/ordanance/MG's, but was it just frozen engines (before starting), and frozen pieces of MG/ordanance before firing, or during/after firing? that would clear things up in my mind. i just know when i played adv. squad leader, there were increased break down possibilites to the equipment, and a small possibility that a tank would become immobile with every "start" of movement. enlighten me please

[Chad Harrison]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stalin's Organ:

Well that's an interesting idea - % chance of each reinforcement element actually arriving - no 2 games ever the same!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

good realism, but i can hear the whines already about unequal battles.

[JonS]

er, well, yeah I suppose it could be done that way.

What I was actually talking about was something along the lines of:

"In reserve you have a platoon of Pz IIIs at 15mins readiness. However, due to the extreme cold don't be surprised if they don't all turn up"

in the scenario briefing. Then have a number lower than a full platoons worth set to turn up around the 15 minute mark. The difference between what you expected and what you recieve - even though set by the scen designer - simulates the ones that couldn't be started or had other problems.

Actually, that could be used to simulate any manner of mechanical or other problems, not just cold ...

Regards

JonS

[Andrew H.]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chad Harrison:

historically, does anyone know where all the extreme winter problems came from? i know they had problems with the armor/ordanance/MG's, but was it just frozen engines (before starting), and frozen pieces of MG/ordanance before firing, or during/after firing? that would clear things up in my mind. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think the biggest problem with vehicles was the oil -- it would become thick like molasses and not flow. Sometimes tankers would keep a fire burning beneath the engine overnight so that they could start it the next day.

I'm not sure of all of the problems that MGs had -- but it would seem that a weapon with very fine tolerances might not deal well with having ice-caked ammo belts fed into it. On the other hand, something like the MP-44, which you would think would be delicate, operated very well when muddy of frozen or both.

To some extent you might get some metal fatigue, too, if a small piece of metal is repeatedly cooled down and then heated up to a high temperature.

I have heard anecdotal reports that German troops kept freezing their tongues to flagpoles, too.

[John Kettler]

Both sides had problems starting engines under the extreme cold of the East. The Germans had special oversized blow torches which were used. The Russians often simply built a fire. I've also seen wind protective barriers erected which reached halfway up the cab of a truck, blankets, etc., employed.

Concerning ordnance, problems with sights have already been mentioned, breech mechanisms could and did jam, weapons wouldn't traverse or elevate, delicate components might even shatter. U.S. troops under severe winter conditions could and did urinate on weapons to free their mechanisms and get them to operate.

A matter for rexford, Jeff Duquette et al. to consider would be armor embrittlement due to extreme cold, a lower grade version of what happens to a rubber ball dipped in liquid nitrogen, then dropped onto a hard surface.

I've got some studies around here on winter warfare. I'll see what I turn up.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Username]

Is the BT7 a diesel engine? There might have been glow plugs or something.

[Radar]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Doug Beman:

Chad, a tank engine at idle runs only slightly cooler than a tank engine at full-out. To wit: a tank engine which is running, regardless of RPM, will not suddenly freeze up.

DjB<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes but the radiator can form ice in the fluid and get blocked by the thermostat causing the engine to overheat...it can happen in very cold weather...it can happen while the engine is running too...

[Michael Emrys]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chad Harrison:

so no in game "engine freezes", (even from a tank that has been idleling for a long period of time?)...yet, if the engine was idle for long enough, how likely would it be that it would freeze or malfunction? any wiser persons than myself capable of answering this?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If the engine is running, it will generate enough heat to not freeze. After the first winter, the Germans would detail a member of the tank crew to get up in the middle of the night to run the engine for a few minutes to warm it up enough to stay thawed. Failing that, they would build a fire under it in the morning.

Michael

[Michael Emrys]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chad Harrison:

i just know when i played adv. squad leader, there were increased break down possibilites to the equipment, and a small possibility that a tank would become immobile with every "start" of movement. enlighten me please <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Never played ASL, so I don't know exactly what they were up to with that, but it sounds vaguely bogus to me. Only think I can think of that would justify exactly that kind of treatment would be ice and frozen mud forming in the running gear while it was motionless.

Michael

[Michael Emrys]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JonS:

Actually, that could be used to simulate any manner of mechanical or other problems, not just cold ...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Great for simulating breakdowns of British armour in the desert war. But I still prefer the uncertainty of a random number failing to show.

Michael

[Xarkov]

At cold temps., doesn't diesel fuel start to gell? That would be a big problem too.

Also I have seen pictures of german tank crews runing their tank at night to keep their tank engines from freezeing.

[Radar]

Also if you don't have full tanks there's a good possobility for condensation forming in the gas tank. When the tempurature falls it can freeze..