Fallschirmjager units with Haft-Holladung antitank charge

[Kestrl]

I was reading in a book i own and it has a photograph of a Fallschirmjager unit with a Haft-Holladung magnetic antitank charge 3 Kg (6.6lb) able to penetrate 140mm (5.5in) of armour. I don't see any reason why not to add this to CM2 since engineering units have satchel charges. I got this information from Hilter's Sky Warriors by Christopher Ailsby.

Thanks

[Mr. Johnson--]

With the lack of AT weapons in the early years of WW2, BTS is probably be forced to make sure to model what few weapons available to the infantry on both sides.

[Stalins Organ]

I imagine there will be a fairly generic "Anti-tank-mine" for infantry.

[Gen-x87]

Remember in the early parts of the war the armor was not that thick on either side. So some crude weapons like the 88 flak and some lighter AT weapons will probably do the trick.

The thing that will be interesting once they get to the early part of the war is the German players like myself will have to use tactics to kill Allied armor with our PZIIs and PZIIIs No more just standing off and picking off Allied armor with Panthers!

Gen

[SenorBeef]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gen-x87:

Remember in the early parts of the war the armor was not that thick on either side. So some crude weapons like the 88 flak and some lighter AT weapons will probably do the trick.

The thing that will be interesting once they get to the early part of the war is the German players like myself will have to use tactics to kill Allied armor with our PZIIs and PZIIIs No more just standing off and picking off Allied armor with Panthers!

Gen<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah, that damn crude flak 88mm. Give me a bundle of grenades any day.

[offtaskagain]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gen-x87:

Remember in the early parts of the war the armor was not that thick on either side. So some crude weapons like the 88 flak and some lighter AT weapons will probably do the trick.

Gen<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That piece of crap 88 can't do anything.

[Guest Berlichingen]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gen-x87:

So some crude weapons like the 88 flak <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ok, I'd usually limit this sort of response to the pool, but this one calls for it...

What the hell have you been smokin'?

[Triumvir]

Playing any kind of German troops in the early war _will_ be interesting, whether Soviet or Allied. Working around the cardboard armour of the PzIIs, IIIs and IVs will undoubtedly make all our uberstompinRedAlert players scream 'BTS, fix yer game or somefink!"

If the Soviets get to buy _1_ elite KV-1 in 1941, I guarantee you that KV1 will feel _exactly_ like an elite KT feels in 1945. 1 shot, 1 kill for him; n shots, 0 kills for the Germans.

It'll be interesting having to play "Allied" tactics with German troops.

[Stalins Organ]

Hmmm...don't think so Triumvir - for starters there are things that can kill KT's in 1945 that are fairly common (like Fireflies and Typhoons!), and there sure as hell shouldn't be any elite russian troops in 1941 at all!!

[JasonC]

"shouldn't be any elite russian troops in 1941"

Russia fought Finland in 1940 and Japan in border incidents in the late 1930s. Zhukov was already developing tank doctrine after his experiences in the latter conflict. He did not yet have the authority to make his reforms widespread.

In particular, when the Siberian troops, vets of the Japanese war, entered the battle of Moscow late in 1941, they gave an excellent account of themselves. They stopped Operation Typhoon and took the initiative.

Certainly, the Russian army as a whole was caught by surprise in the invasion, and not in form. Purges had reduced the ranks of the field-grade officers. But pretending there were not capable commanders and experienced veterans on the Russian side even as early as 1941, is simply silly. There definitely were.

[Kestrl]

I'm not talking about 88mm AT guns or if there is going to be elite russian infantry units in 1941. I was wondering if FJ infantry units are going to have magnetic AT charges to use against russian armor.

[Berlichtingen]

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

I was wondering if FJ infantry units are going to have magnetic AT charges to use against russian armor.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Probably, or at least have some close range AT capability. The Germans were one of the few nations to have their infantry actually train in AT close assault. They trained against their own armor. I believe the russians also trained against armor... the french and British on the other hand lacked that fore thought

[Triumvir]

In fairness to the French and British, given that doctrine allowed for AT guns and tanks to be distributed among infantry, training infantry in close assault probably didn't seem as important as it should have. The Germans had more direct experience from WWI of being overrun by armour than either, and trained accordingly.

It's like the US Army; there is basically no ADA (no puns!) in the US Army because that function has been fulfilled by the USAF since 1945. If stuck under enemy air superiority, US troops could be pretty severly mauled, as they were in the opening stages of the Korean War.

If you don't anticipate ever having to use something, eventually your practice with it will wither away.

[Mr. Johnson--]

Sorry Kestrl, Yes, I would think they will have them. But I'm not sure if they will start the war with them. You'll have to con a bigger grog than I in here.

But as too omg the Russians will have heavy tanks, We don't just have to use the engine for historical engagments. We could have a Russian Blitz into Germany in 1941 also.

Red Thunder and Beyond!!

[JasonC]

"If stuck under enemy air superiority, US troops could be pretty severly mauled, as they were in the opening stages of the Korean War."

US forces were certainly severely mauled in the opening stages of the Korean war. But not for any lack of air superiority. The USAF entered the fighting before any US ground troops, which first reached the front from Japan well after the NK breakthrough of the ROK positions.

And got air superiority - indeed, supremacy - rather quickly. The entire NK airforce was about 100 planes, about half Russian Yak fighters and half Sturmovik ground attack, light bombers. The US had hundreds of jet fighters and soon equal numbers of naval aircraft as well.

Eventually the Russian air force did intervene in Korea, from bases around Vladivostok, with numerous MiG-15s. Those had rather serious air combat with US fighters, and some with UN allies, and also shot down some US bombers.

But #1, that was long, long after the NK ascendency and after the US air build-up for the war, and #2 they never got air superiority themselves again, nor even seriously took it away from the US and UN forces. They were heavily outnumbered, and only continued to operate because their bases in Russia were politically immune from direct attack, for fear of escalating to general war.

Just some Korean war trivia.

[Triumvir]

Interesting; I seem to remember Hastings talking about Sturmoviks hitting US ground troops in _The Korean War_ but I may have misremembered. I know about the Russian intervention, and still am surprised at the kill ratios.

Speaking of incorrect information, I've had the profound displeasure of running across an author -- not a historian -- called James Lucas. You've probably skimmed some of his stuff, but never buy it -- I never thought I'd actually see a Nazi hagiographer being sold at a mainstream bookstore.

What can you say about someone who says that 2SS Das Reich arrived at the Normandy battleground "after minor delays?" Excuse me, Mr Lucas, but did you mean "after minor delays including setting fire to and shooting 642 men, women and children at Oradour-sur-Glane?"

[von Lucke]

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

It's like the US Army; there is basically no ADA (no puns!) in the US Army because that function has been fulfilled by the USAF since 1945. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

As someone who's trained with the Stinger missle launcher, and seen the Avenger ADA system in action, I can only say, "huh?".

I'll take the US Army's lack of ADA versus a low-flying Su-25 any day...

[Triumvir]

Hmm.. a Stinger has an effective range of 6km (pushing it) and the Avenger has a range of about 2km. Compare that against a SA-8 or SA-11 with ranges of 10 to 20 respectively.

I know about the Patriot, but that's more a theatre defence system than a battlefield protection system; there isn't the same comprehensive ADA coverage from low-level to high-level in the US army as there is in others.

Not to mention that there's one Stinger platoon for a battalion, against one SA-7 in each section for a Russian-pattern infantry section.

Of course, this is because there's no need for comprehensive ADA -- that's what the USAF is for. But if the USAF is ever stripped away, I'd rather take the low-flying SU-25 against Stingers/Avengers, thankyouveddymuch. Up against Rapiers or HUMRAAMS... I'd rethink.

But the fact that AAMs are re-used as SAMs speaks volumes.

[von Lucke]

You neglected to mention the Vulcan PIVADS (about 2.5 km range) and the Hawk missle system (about 40km for the gen III).

True, both these systems have been retired from the active army, but some Reserve and National Guard units (my NG unit fielded Hawk missles only 5 years ago!) still employ them.

And given the Su-25's abysmal record in Afganistan against 1st gen Stingers, I'd still take one on. Especially since the Frogfoot relies on it's 30mm cannon, unguided rockets, and a variety of free-fall or laser-guided bombs to engage soft targets, means it'll be well within 2km when I engage it.

[JasonC]

Some additional detail about the air war in Korea, for Trimuvir.

The total NK air force was 40 Yak fighters (mostly Yak-3s it seems), plus another 60 2-seat Yak trainers, 70 Sturmovik light bombers, and 10 recon planes.

The ROKs had 10 each of liason planes, trainers, and P-51s. The last were actually controlled by the US advisor group (KMAG), and there were no ROK pilots trained for them yet. They were turned over to the ROKs anyway, as soon as the war broke out. But essentially, South Korea had no air force whatever.

The far east air force (FEAF), based in Japan, was second only to Europe in overseas US air power. Before the attack it had 1172 aircraft, counting transports and recon, planes under repair, etc. Of major combat types, it had 504 P-80 jet fighters, the main type. It was effective for air-to-air combat, especially against any sort of prop plane, but was a gas-guzzler and so had limited range and payload for strike missions. Plus 42 F-82s, in most respects similar, 47 P-51 prop fighters with better range, 27 B-29 heavy bombers, 73 B-26 medium bombers. So, 600 fighters and 100 bombers basically.

The B-29s were on Guam, and not all of these planes were combat-ready. About 1/3rd of them were on the day of the invasion, but most of them were out of range of Korea. That quickly changed. More planes were taken out of storage, transfered to closer airfield. The first B-29s flew up to Japan on 29 June. And on the 30th, Stratemeyer (FEAF air commander) asked for 500 more aircraft and got approval for them, though with some longer-range P-51s substituted for jets he had requested.

The US flew 163 sorties over Korea on the 3rd day, 27 June, and shot down 7 Yaks that day without loss, the first air combat of the war. 2 days later on the 29th, Mac flew in for his first ground visit, where he saw a DC-3 that had been destroyed by strafing, on the same airstrip he landed on. He brought along an AA MG detachment with 4 quad 50s, which shot down one Yak that attacked the airfield while he was on the ground, but at a conference a ways away. That day Mac issued an order to attack the NK airfields - "Stratemeyer to Partridge: Take out North Korean Airfield immediately. No publicity. MacArthur approves".

Mac got authority for that order from Truman on the 30th, the day after he gave it. After a further recommendation that ground troops were needed, Truman authorized sending two divisions to Korea and establishing a naval blockade of the north on 30th June, the 5th day of the invasion. Incidentally, on the 28th the Brits had put their far east fleet, including one light carrier, at Mac's disposal, and on the 29th the Australians did likewise for two ships they had in the area, and one P-51 squadron they had in Japan. Canada, New Zealand, and the Netherlands also sent ships.

The first carrier airstrike on the north was launched on 3 July, a week after the invasion. The target was NK airfields around the capital. Ammunition for the ROKs was being airlifted in from Japan as early as the 28th.

TF Smith air-lifted into Korea on 1 July. They soon reported that friendly air was hitting friendlies with some regularity. The front line was very poorly known, and liason between the ROKs and the air force in Japan was almost non-existent. Air strikes were moved farther north to avoid friendly fire incidents. TF Smith's actual engagement with the NKs came on 5 July. It was overcast, which prevented friendly air from helping.

A different unit got CAS and reported tanks destroyed by it on 9 July, the first time US ground forces in Korea used directly called CAS (at Chonui). Later air recon saw 100 burning NK vehicles left by these strikes (see below, passage from the official history). Interdiction strikes had been ongoing since the end of June. By two weeks into the invasion, and days into US ground involvement, tac air was making itself felt in a major way.

"On the afternoon of 10 July, American air power had one of its great moments in the Korean War. Late in the afternoon, a flight of jet F-80 planes dropped down through the overcast at P'yongt'aek, twenty-five air miles north of Chonui, and found a large convoy of tanks and vehicles stopped bumper to bumper on the north side of a destroyed bridge. Upon receiving a report of this discovery, the Fifth Air Force rushed every available plane to the scene- B-26's, F-80's, and F-82's-in a massive air strike. Observers of the strike reported that it destroyed 38 tanks, 7 half-track vehicles, 117 trucks, and a large number of enemy soldiers. This report undoubtedly exaggerated unintentionally the amount of enemy equipment actually destroyed. But this strike, and that of the previous afternoon near Chonui, probably resulted in the greatest destruction of enemy armor of any single action in the war."

The loads typically carried on Korean airstrikes were as follows. P-51s carried 6 rockets and 2 napalm canisters, plus strafing with 6 50-cals. P-80s usually just carried 2 napalm canisters and strafed, also with 6 50-cals. Carriers supported with F4U Corsairs, carrying 8 rockets, 2 napalm canisters, and strafing with 4 20mm cannons. Occasionally HE bombs were carried in place of napalm, while B-26 mediums were regularly used for HE raids. B-29 raids dropped hundreds of tons of HE at a time on strategic targets, though their raids were relatively infrequent.

More on the whole subject from the official history -

"In the first month of the Korean War, close air support of ground troops was a vital factor in preventing the North Koreans from overrunning all Korea, and in gaining for the United States the margin of time necessary to bring in reinforcements and accumulate the supplies needed to organize the Pusan Perimeter. By mid-July the U.N. Air Force had all but stopped movement of enemy troops, armor, and truck convoys during daylight. This imposed the greatest difficulties on North Korea in supporting its front-line troops, and it slowed the North Korean advance.

During the first month, the U.N. air arm comprised U.S. Air Force, Navy, and Marine planes and some Royal Australian Air Force planes and troops. By the end of July, the U.N. ground forces in Korea were receiving proportionately more air support than had General Bradley's Twelfth Army Group in World War II.

In mid-July, the FEAF Bomber Command began an ever heightening attack on strategic enemy targets far behind the front. The first such target was Wonsan on the east coast. This communications center linked Vladivostok in Russia Siberia with North Korea by rail and sea. From it, rail lines ran to all the North Korean build-up centers. The great bulk of Russian supplies for North Korea in the early part of the war came in at Wonsan, and from the beginning it was considered a major military target. In the first heavy strategic bombing of the war, FEAF hit this busy port city, on 13 July, with 400 tons of demolition bombs. Three days later, thirty B-29 bombers struck the railroad marshaling yards at Seoul.

One of the important bomber missions was to deny the enemy use of the pontoon bridge across the Han River at Seoul, and to destroy the repaired railroad bridge there. Several attempts in July by B-29's to destroy the rail bridge failed, but on the 29th twelve bombers succeeded in hitting the pontoon bridge and reported it destroyed. The next day, forty-seven B-29's bombed the Chosen Nitrogen Plant at Hungnam on the northeast coast.

In the meantime, carrier-based planes from the USS Valley Forge, which was operating in the Yellow Sea, on 22 July destroyed at Haeju in North Korea six locomotives, exploded eighteen cars of a 33-car train, and damaged a combination highway and rail bridge.

By 27 July, the FEAF Bomber Command had a comprehensive rail interdiction plan ready. This plan sought to interdict the flow of enemy troops and materiel from North Korea to the combat area. Two cut points-(1) the P'yong-yang railroad bridge and marshaling yards and (2) the Hamhung bridge and Hamhung and Wonsan marshaling yards -would sever rail communications with North Korea. Destruction of the rail bridges over the Han near Seoul would cut rail communication to the battle area. On 28 July the Far East Air Forces gave to the Bomber Command a list of targets in the rail interdiction program, and two days later a similar plan was ready for interdiction of highways. On the third day of August, FEAF issued to the Fifth Air Force and to the Navy lists of targets for co-ordinated interdiction attacks south of the 38th Parallel. In general, the Han River divided Fifth Air Force and FEAF Bomber Command zones.

By the end of July, the Far East Air Forces had flown as many as 400 sorties in a day. Altogether, it had flown a total of 8,600 sorties-4,300 in close support missions, 2,550 in close interdiction, 57 in two strategic bombing strikes, and 1,600 in reconnaissance and cargo sorties.

As the month neared an end, the first fighter plane reinforcements from the United States reached the Far East. On 23 July, the 27,000-ton Navy carrier, Boxer, setting a Pacific crossing record of eight days and seven hours, arrived in Japan with 145 F-51 Mustangs borrowed from National Guard air squadrons. On 30 July, the Far East Air Forces had 890 fighter planes - 626 F-80's and 264 F-51's - but only 525 of them were in units and available and ready for combat."

The basic overall point is simple enough. The NKs had scores of Yak-3s and IL-2s, and faced hundreds of P-80s, P-51s, and F4Us. They never had air superiority, beyond the first week even. US units had powerful CAS within the first week of being engaged, in some of the very first fights. In the early part of the war, with the front lines fluid and liason poor, ROK and US ground forces probably sustained more losses to friendly fire mistakes from US and UN airpower, than from the NK airforce. And after the first month or so, with almost unlimited US air reinforcements reaching Japan by sea and no replacements for the NKs, it was a thousand plane modern air force against surviving remnants, on harassment raids at best.

For what it is worth.

[Gremlin]

Re: German man-portable AT weapons (including the Hafthohlladung) used on the Eastern Front, you may find this interesting:

http://www.combat-missions.net/bootcamp/gremlin/panzerknacker/panzerknacker.asp

[Kestrl]

I know you will have elite russian infantry in 1941if you setup a battle as a QB, You could have elite infantry in every single battle you play. I don't care about modern day AT weapons and air support because they won''t be in CM2.

[Berlichtingen]

Just a quick question...

What do air superiority in Korea or modern ADA have to do with infantry AT capabilities in the early years of WW2?

[von Lucke]

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

Just a quick question...

What do air superiority in Korea or modern ADA have to do with infantry AT capabilities in the early years of WW2?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ummmmmmm --- nothing?