John Kettler Posted August 6, 2006 Share Posted August 6, 2006 Found this while rooting around Missing-Lynx and thought I'd share it with you. http://www.missing-lynx.com/library/axis/finland/sturmi1bg_1.html Regards, John Kettler [ August 10, 2006, 03:48 AM: Message edited by: John Kettler ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted August 10, 2006 Author Share Posted August 10, 2006 And this is an entire site devoted to Finnish armor--mostly World War II, but also Winter War and some modern. See high resolution color shots of AFVs you only saw before in B&W. Be sure to check the updates! http://www.andreaslarka.net/ Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Enigma Posted August 11, 2006 Share Posted August 11, 2006 Still havnt finished the Sturmi article, great stuff so far! am impressed by : Finnish Sturmis destroyed a total of 87 Soviet tanks in June and July 1944, while losing only eight of their own vehicles. 42 of those it would seem where claimed by 5 Sturmi's! :eek: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted August 11, 2006 Author Share Posted August 11, 2006 the_enigma, That's the way it seems to go when it comes to combat productivity. The same sort of thing was noted regarding American fighter pilots. You had the incompetents who got shot down without accomplishing anything, often taking buddies with them, the unaggressive ones who did nothing but at least managed to stay alive, the somewhat ballsier and more talented ones who managed a few kills, some aces and double aces, then you had Foss, Boyington, Blakelee, Mahurin, etc., etc., capped by Bong with 40 kills. When the Dragon antitank missile first came into service, the Army envisioned it as a weapon anyone could fire--until field trials established that a handful of men in any given unit got some 80% of the hits. This led to setting up a separate MOS specifically for dedicated Dragon "gunners." The studies I've seen on combat productivity speak of men called "natural killers" who are few in numbers but do most of the casualty infliction. These are your Hartmanns, Sgt. Yorks, your Kozhedubs, your "Killer" Kanes, your Kretschmers, Pooles, Burkes, Haras, Rudels, Murphys and Wittmanns. It matters not whether the battle occurs in the air, on the ground, at sea or even underwater. The basic pattern remains the same. An aggressive, savvy few who know themselves and know their equipment inflict by far the bulk of all the losses. Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Enigma Posted August 11, 2006 Share Posted August 11, 2006 Finishing it off just before i could not get my head round why after the war they took off some of the improvments they made, armour plats, storage etc. :confused: Yep have read, although not studies, that there are the few dudes spread throughout the rest who are as you said natural born killers or talented enough with there equipment (tanks etc) Gonner start reading through that 2nd link while ive got some downtime here. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted August 11, 2006 Author Share Posted August 11, 2006 the_enigma, I'd guess that part of the answer may well lie in how fast antiarmor developments came right after the war: bigger guns, nastier HEAT from both guns and manportable launchers, widespread adoption of APDS, Gen One ATGMs, to name but a few. Seems to me that a decision was made to drop all additional weight in pursuit of improved mobility and automotive reliability, with the objective being enhanced survivability for a vehicle whose armor was now grossly overmatched. The additional weight used to protect the lower hull side against ATRs, for example, likely made no sense in the face of the RPG-2, but increased vehicle speed and reduced wear and tear on drive train, tracks, and running gear definitely did. You may also be seeing the resurgence of the buttoned down by the book types who'd find a combat configured vehicle "unmilitary looking" and "irregular." Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted August 11, 2006 Share Posted August 11, 2006 Originally posted by the_enigma: Finishing it off just before i could not get my head round why after the war they took off some of the improvments they made, armour plats, storage etc. :confused: The extra weight causes extra strain to running gear, and the improvements make it harder to service the vehicle (eg. the logs on sides hardly made it easier to change a track). Keeping all vehicles in good condition is more important during peace time. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Enigma Posted August 11, 2006 Share Posted August 11, 2006 Thanks guys You may also be seeing the resurgence of the buttoned down by the book types who'd find a combat configured vehicle "unmilitary looking" and "irregular." lol 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.