Guest Germanboy Posted February 6, 2001 Share Posted February 6, 2001 Originally posted by Major Tom: Actually, would a 20mm Flak produce more casualties than a 0.5inch HMG when firing at an open field? I would assume so. Following reasons: The 20mm round is HE with a contact fuse. Practical ROF is 220 rounds/barrel. The quad could actually do continuous fire on two barrels, while the ammo was changed on the other two. So we are talking 440 practical ROF and continous ROF, not bursts, which is probably a lot higher than what the M2 could achieve. If you aim the rounds at the ground where the poor targets walk they are in for a lot of trouble. The modern round is a mix HE/Incendiary, I don't know about the old one, but this would mean that a single round could cause a lot of casualties. Real Life™: Parts of 3rd British ID were held up at Verson by a few 20mm guns with no infantry cover (the gunners died over their weapons) when they tried to enlarge the bridgehead over the Seine. I also read an account by a US combat surgeon about a Sergeant who lost his arm, seared off by a 20mm round. Due to the heat of the round, the wound was cauterised immediately, letting the guy survive. These were very effective weapons, and if they are well-sited, CM is modelling it well. ------------------ Andreas Der Kessel Home of „Die Sturmgruppe“; Scenario Design Group for Combat Mission. [This message has been edited by Germanboy (edited 02-05-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Commissar Posted February 6, 2001 Share Posted February 6, 2001 *whew* Now that jason provided us with his usual quality essay-long post, I feel a bit safer. Still, I'll try to keep the mixing down to a minimum, making a few exceptions here and there when I feel Airborne could be useful - if anyone asks, Ill blame it on history Bruno, You putz, we were talking about Russian words, not Polish ! The two languages are similar, and many words in Russian mean the same/sound the same in Polish, and vise versa. When my Polish buddies talk, I can usually understand half the conversation Oh, and buy one of those small Russian-English dictionaries if you dont believe me you klutz ! Now, for some seriousness: I was recently reading up on some U.S. Cav actions in the war, and would like to ask someone for a realistic-looking setup for a Cav force. I know the light vehicles like the Greyhound and light tanks like Stuarts have to be in, but what else? HT's? What types of infantry? Thanks in advance, Cheers! ------------------ "...Every position, every meter of Soviet soil must be defended to the last drop of blood..." - Segment from Order 227 "Not a step back" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Tom Posted February 6, 2001 Share Posted February 6, 2001 Thanks for the correction and clarification Andreas. Yet again your actions cause me dishevelment!!!! Fortunately this time it was not a PBEM game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skipper Posted February 6, 2001 Share Posted February 6, 2001 > Oh, and buy one of those small Russian- > English dictionaries if you dont believe > me you klutz ! You better believe him, cause he is right. iirc my english lessons , Babushka = Grandma. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Germanboy Posted February 6, 2001 Share Posted February 6, 2001 Originally posted by The Commissar: I was recently reading up on some U.S. Cav actions in the war, and would like to ask someone for a realistic-looking setup for a Cav force. I know the light vehicles like the Greyhound and light tanks like Stuarts have to be in, but what else? HT's? What types of infantry? There is a really good website for the Mech Cav. http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/Quarters/9517/ In short: Greyhound M8 HWC Jeep MG HTs ordinary infantry. Stuarts (later M24 Chaffees) M20 Utility car M3A1 Scout Car Very little or none by way of arty, IMO - they would operate off map very often, too far away from the tubes, or with no clear indication of where they were. ------------------ Andreas Der Kessel Home of „Die Sturmgruppe“; Scenario Design Group for Combat Mission. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Michael emrys Posted February 6, 2001 Share Posted February 6, 2001 Originally posted by The Commissar: I always thought that Airborne units would be used with regular grunts. You know, after they were parachooted to some poor, bombed out part of Europe, they do their thing and the regular infantry catch up with them. Er, no. This particular form of mixing of troop types was extremely rare. You could make some kind of case for mixing Paratroops and Glider Troops, but even that was not the preferred way to go about it. Look up the subject of unit integrity sometime. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanonier Reichmann Posted February 6, 2001 Share Posted February 6, 2001 OK Andreas, interesting test results. I'll concede the point based on your testing and the fact you COULD be bothered to go to the trouble. I'm far too lazy for such an excercise so my frustrating experience with the 20 mm Flak gun must simply be down to bad luck or poor positioning or both. Regards Jim R. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Germanboy Posted February 6, 2001 Share Posted February 6, 2001 Originally posted by Kanonier Reichmann: OK Andreas, interesting test results They are indeed, but it was Vanir who did the testing, not me. I can attest that a quad 20mm is a lot more effective than a single barrel one though, since I tested that at some point. The quad managed to stop a platoon attacking over open ground all by itself, the single barrel did not. ------------------ Andreas Der Kessel Home of „Die Sturmgruppe“; Scenario Design Group for Combat Mission. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruno Weiss Posted February 6, 2001 Share Posted February 6, 2001 Commissar wrote: When my Polish buddies talk, I can usually understand half the conversation Hehe, kinda like when I listen to them Britishers. ------------------ "Gentlemen, you may be sure that of the three courses open to the enemy, he will always choose the fourth." -Field Marshal Count Helmuth von Moltke, (1848-1916) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Commissar Posted February 6, 2001 Share Posted February 6, 2001 Originally posted by Michael emrys: Er, no. This particular form of mixing of troop types was extremely rare. You could make some kind of case for mixing Paratroops and Glider Troops, but even that was not the preferred way to go about it. Look up the subject of unit integrity sometime. Michael What do you mean it was rare when jason listed a whole bunch of cases where this was common (as he said)? Am I misreading something? BTW, Thanks for the info, Germanboy! ------------------ "...Every position, every meter of Soviet soil must be defended to the last drop of blood..." - Segment from Order 227 "Not a step back" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanonier Reichmann Posted February 7, 2001 Share Posted February 7, 2001 Originally posted by Germanboy: They are indeed, but it was Vanir who did the testing, not me. I can attest that a quad 20mm is a lot more effective than a single barrel one though, since I tested that at some point. The quad managed to stop a platoon attacking over open ground all by itself, the single barrel did not. Yes, thanks for the correction Andreas. My apologies Germanboy, I should give credit where credit's due! Regards Jim R. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Germanboy Posted February 7, 2001 Share Posted February 7, 2001 Originally posted by The Commissar: What do you mean it was rare when jason listed a whole bunch of cases where this was common (as he said)? Am I misreading something? BTW, Thanks for the info, Germanboy! Welcome. And the answer to your question is 'yes - you are misreading something' . Jason gave examples of use of paras in the infantry role. In those cases they still kept their unit integrity, i.e. they were not used to back up 'weaker' rifle platoons, by e.g. inserting a para squad. They fought as a division/regiment/batallion/company/platoon/squad with clear boundaries to the ordinary PBI. So on CM's level you would not see intermingling, since this would not really happen below division level. The big exception is Market Garden, where US paras and UK tankers and lorried infantry fought together. But even there they probably mixed only at Company level or above. ------------------ Andreas Der Kessel Home of „Die Sturmgruppe“; Scenario Design Group for Combat Mission. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Michael emrys Posted February 7, 2001 Share Posted February 7, 2001 Originally posted by The Commissar: What do you mean it was rare when jason listed a whole bunch of cases where this was common (as he said)? Am I misreading something? Yes. Jason mentioned a handful of cases out of hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of CM-sized battles and fire fights that occurred over the course of the war. Like Germanboy says, rarely (almost never in fact) were forces like these mixed below the company level (i.e. a company of this fighting alongside a company of that). BTW, as far as I am concerned, you paid for your copy of CM, you are entitled to play with it any way that gives you pleasure. So far as I know, no CM police are going to kick down your door and confiscate your CD. But you owe it to yourself (and to whomever you may play as an opponent) to acknowledge that you are playing in a fantasyland that has but slight correspondence to history. Since CM was intended by its makers and the hard core of its supporters to be a historical wargame, we are apt to get a tad touchy on the subject. But unless you seek our good opinion, you are not obliged to give us any particular notice. Your call. Michael [This message has been edited by Michael emrys (edited 02-06-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Egbert Posted February 7, 2001 Share Posted February 7, 2001 Originally posted by Bruno Weiss: Yeah, and you don't know what Babushka means either Commissar, you Uber playing Rusky you. I was in the Doctor's office yesterday, and there was a kids book there, "The Babushka Dolls", and I mentioned to the Nurse about our Babushka conversation. She said it's Polish, not Russian. And said it means "Old Woman's Scarf", not Grandmother, you incredible Russian dolt. Perhaps I can be of assistance here. "babushka" runs through all of the slavic languages and has many meanings according to context. 1) Scarf esp. old woman's head scarf hence: 2) old woman (one who wears old women's head scarves) 3) Grandmother (note capitalization), as in my old woman that wears old women's head scarves. Never heard of a word having different meanings? If you were paying attention you might realize that Polish, Hungarian and Russian trade alot of cultural pieces due to their similarity and proximity. Thus the well meaning but misplaced correction by the nice young lady in your post. And furthermore, I would look upon the tart in the office as an expert as well just because she seems to have a childrens book that refers vaguely to the subject at hand as well. Somehow I really can't get this to sound as lightly teasing as I would like. Please adjust ears as appropriate. ------------------ "Um,.....HELP?!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Commissar Posted February 7, 2001 Share Posted February 7, 2001 Originally posted by Michael emrys: But unless you seek our good opinion, you are not obliged to give us any particular notice. Your call. Hmm, study tomes of unit disposition to get notice of grumpy middle-aged men, or play dumb and have (historically oriented) opponent lecture me before a battle? It's a tough choice so far Either way, again, thanks for the info. Cheers! ------------------ "...Every position, every meter of Soviet soil must be defended to the last drop of blood..." - Segment from Order 227 "Not a step back" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts