Czech, Slovak and Polish TOEs?

[Count D'Ten]

CMBB is a great toolbox for creating late 30's "What If" wars. The Romanians switching sides late in the war make Czech 38's and Bofors ATGs available on both sides. Add captured equipment to bring early Russian armor in on the Axis side and you have a great start.

But I haven't had much luck finding solid information on 30's Czech (and therefore Slovak) and Polish infantry organization and equipment. I don't even know how typical French infantry were armed and organized in 1940. Can the multilingual experts in this forum help? :confused:

[junk2drive]

As soon as the Axis History Forum is back on line I recommend you search the posts for your info. I know there is a lot there. Photos too.

Here is a link to spwaw.com's the Depot, Military History forum. Look at the ones by David Lehmann. He has put together tons of info on pre-WWII and WWII French military. He posts at AHF also.

[Count D'Ten]

Thanks, junki. Tracing through I do find that the French light infantry (as shown in CMAK actually) are armed much like the Romanians (it was after all a French ally and was trained in the French style). I suspect the same for the Poles, but can't prove it yet. But I don't know for sure who was the military ideology-patron saint for the Czech's in the 30's.

Hopefully even more will turn up.

[JasonC]

The Poles actually used US support weapons and German rifles, in a uniform 7.92mm caliber. Their squad SAW was the BAR in 7.92mm. Their company level HMG was the US M1917 Browning, again in 7.92mm. Their main infantry small arm was a copy of the German Mauser with a shortened stock, effectively a K98 of their own. They used Brandt style 81mm mortars at battalion, and a 46mm mortar of their own design at company. They had a home grown SMG design in 9mm but very few of them.

As for their gun park, they had a large number of 75mm or 76mm field pieces like the French 75 or Russian ZIS-3 basically, and used them at ranges of a few km. They had as many again of larger pieces, 100mm and up, that fired from longer ranges but typically by plan rather than reactively. The field pieces were their best AT weapons at that stage. They had some relatively ineffective 37mm ATGs as well, but not enough of them.

I hope this helps.

[Zalgiris 1410]

Originally posted by JasonC:

As for their gun park, they had a large number of 75mm or 76mm field pieces like the French 75 or Russian ZIS-3 basically, and used them at ranges of a few km. They had as many again of larger pieces, 100mm and up, that fired from longer ranges but typically by plan rather than reactively. The field pieces were their best AT weapons at that stage. They had some relatively ineffective 37mm ATGs as well, but not enough of them.

JasonC is essential correct, the Poles got there Brownings from the US from after WWI, French 75mm & Russian 76mm light field guns from WWI and after, (not ZIS-3's exactly though but the 1902 version which they, the Poles had converted to 75mm in 1926 AIUI) also they had 100mm howitzers and 120 fortress guns from Austro-Hungarian stocks.

The French tried to help to build Poland up to some extent as a repacement for Russia on Germany's East by ensuring that it had 81mm Brandt mortars, some 155mm howitzers, 40mm bofors AAG's, and a few Renault 35 light tanks. The British also supplied them with some Vicker tanks from with the Poles developed their on version during the 30's similar to the Russian T-26.

The Poles had some kind of Rodom pistol of their own and a 7.92mm ATR that fired tungsten, which the Germans later picked up upon and I have a higher oppinion of their 37mm ATGs than JasonC considering the thinness of all those early Panzers but as with everything else the Poles just didn't have enough of them to go all around their boarders.

Sorry I don't have anything on the organisation side of the tables but I'll be watching this space.

[JasonC]

The 37mm might have penetration enough against thin early war Panzers, and no doubt a lower sillouette than a 75mm field gun. But include behind armor effect considerations and the 75mm field gun beats it, hands down. One hit will almost always kill, even plain HE.

[Zalgiris 1410]

Duh, a 75mm ATG is better than a 37mm ATG of course. My point of emphasis is in relation to considerations of how technically obsolette those Polish 37mm ATG's were facing thin armoured early Panzers. You seemed to imply that they were hopelessly if not completely outclassed and ineffective.

I agree with your point JasonC about the benefits of 75mm field guns over 37mm ATG's and in my fantasy TO&E I imagine that each WWII Division had an artillery Brigade of two Regiments, one of Howitzers and the other of Field Guns... :cool: especially long barrelled and with high velocity performanced!

[JasonC]

They in fact had plenty of 75mm pieces in every division and used them for direct fire, at ranges out to 2-3 km but with line of sight. Larger pieces, 100mm plus, were typically limited to one battalion per division, and higher level artillery units (corps and above), used indirect by arranged fire plan typically.

A serious AT position being a field artillery battery at the edge of a woods or village, supporting a company to a battalion of infantry, would be entirely typical. Incorporating divisional field pieces into gun lines was standard practice on all sides, from the introduction of tanks in WW I clear through 1942.

37mm ATGs, on the other hard, are marginal weapons in any army. The Germans found theirs mostly useless, Brit 2 pdrs in NA were only marginally better, US 37s were useless in NA and Italy and even the 57mm was largely useless late. They have all the drawbacks of a barely mobile crew served weapon (compare to infantry AT e.g.) and none of the versatility and hitting power of a real, serious gun.

[Zalgiris 1410]

O'h, fair point again JasonC: 75mm Field Guns "used for direct fire, at ranges out to 2-3 km but with line of sight."

I see where you are coming from here but if it is done with all the field guns then there is no indirect fire support and concentrations of defensive shell fires are going to be significantly retarded.

Incorporating divisional field pieces into gun lines was standard practice on all sides, from the introduction of tanks in WW I clear through 1942.

I know that especially ever since I read Herbert Sulzbach memoir "With the German Guns Four Years on the Western Front". Herb Sulzbach was a commander of a 77mm field gun batterie and describes such an arangement during 1918, of IIRC two guns forward per batterie!

That said that's all fine for a static front with plenty of extra artillery in the rear, while OTOH the smaller caliber ATG's require less set up time and were slightly more manuoevreable etc, and I'm assuming more suited to mobile or fluid operations which the Polish campaigne was.

Otherwise another way to look at it is this: after the German Howiters hand suppressed or knocked out those all those Polish 75mm field guns firing direct LOS then they ought to still have their 37mm ATG's to deal with Panzers and protect the infantry...

[ December 07, 2005, 07:53 AM: Message edited by: Zalgiris 1410 ]