Broompatrol Posted July 18, 2006 Share Posted July 18, 2006 German armored cars and and 1/2 tracks generally get a lot of praise for being innovative and advanced. But in CMAK play it seems to me that the emphasis on specialized designs over utility and transport ability seems to put them at a disadvantage. I seem to be able to do much more damage with universal carriers by being able to move infantry around than with say a puma. It seems that whenever an AC pokes its head out it ends up either popped by a gun, capped by an anti-tank rifle or brewed up by a tank. Extrapolating to a strategic level: Does anyone think that perhaps the Germans wasted resources on so many fancy designs when they may have been better off with a truck and a MG? Cheaper and more felxible than a sausage shaped vehicle with a steering wheel on both ends. (Hans didn't know if he was coming or going! :eek: ) All this being said I admit I am by no means an expert on the uses of AFV's and the like and welcome anybody to school me on the proper use of these vehicles in CMAK and their real world histories 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted July 18, 2006 Share Posted July 18, 2006 CM is not really that great a testing ground for AC usage. Check the "Humber, Daimler...etc." thread for more information on how ACs were actually used. CM is more devoted to actual firefights as part of larger battles. These would have occurred for the most part after the reconnaisance for which the ACs were created. They would not normally be present for this kind of fighting. They were never really intended for heavy fighting, but to observe and report. Consequently, they tend for the most part to be lightly armed, mostly just for their self-protection against small and lightly armed opposition. The Germans did create a few more heavily-armed cars for specific tactical reasons, but other than the short-barreled 75s for support, those are generally viewed as mistakes and not many were made. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andreas Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 I think it is quite indicative that the current Bundeswehr SPW Luchs has kept the two-driver lay-out and the eight wheels, added amphibious capabilities, and moved back to a 20mm/MG combo as armament. That shows to me that Michael's assessment is quite right. If you take your SPW somewhere where you need heavy guns, you shouldn't be there. All the best Andreas 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 When my brother was in Bradleys in the Armored Cav's Scouts (2/11 ACR) in Germany during his Army days, his unit got to meet the "'Rads" (short for Konrads, the American term for their FRG allies) and see the Luchs. They were green with envy over not only how much better suited it was for recon, but also how quiet and not the size of a house. Having been around roaring, snorting Bradleys briefly at Ft. Benning and seen how they towered over M1s, I think the Germans made a wise choice. And if I would've had to face the oncoming Warsaw Pact hordes as part of screening for delay from successive positions, I would've been deeply grateful for the instant exit option attendant from that driver in the rear. Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andreas Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 The Luchs is actually quite a sizeable vehicle (due to the requirement for it to be able to swim, while having eight wheels, I believe). I like the little French critters that they had a lot of during the Bastille Day Parade. Much smaller, also swims. VBL 2e BB VBL on Wiki All the best Andreas 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 Originally posted by Andreas: That shows to me that Michael's assessment is quite right.[smoothly] But of course. [/smoothly] Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stoat Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 I didn't think the Puma was in CMAK. I haven't found any of the Sdkfz 234 variants, including the /2 Puma. The only 8 rads in the game are armed with 20mm or short barreled 75mm cannon, none with a 50mm gun in a revolving turret. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 Have you looked in CMBB? Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stoat Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 Originally posted by Michael Emrys: Have you looked in CMBB? Michael Why would I? This is a topic about CMAK vehicles, posted in the CMAK forum. Kind of hard to compare the Puma to British ACs in desert warfare, when the Puma isn't in the game with desert terrain. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonC Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 Andreas - I'd rather have a BRDM. A lot more armor, a turreted AA caliber MG or ATGMs. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andreas Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 Not as cute All the best Andreas 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 I read somewhere that Germany backed away from their committment to wheeled armor as the war progressed. Remember, this was in the days before 'run flat' tires and - in much of the world - universally paved roads. Those muddy Russian Spring thaws probably soured them on the concept of all wheels. The U.S. by 1945 had officially decided the way to go was fully tracked as far as possible (and affordable). U.S. HT production had already been shut down mid '44! Even today Stryker's become famous for the quantity of tires it eats, and the wheeled vehicle's universal tendency to dig itself in further when bogged (anyone who's got his car stuck in a snowbank in winter can attest to that). The one useful advantage of wheeled armor is its ability to keep up with convoy traffic on paved roads. And its much lower life cycle costs. I suspect much of German AC's fame had more to do with how 'cool' they looked rather than any real fighting ability. Sorta the same with the Hetzer, which was a bit of a nightmare to fight in, despite looking really cool. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 Originally posted by Michael Emrys: CM is not really that great a testing ground for AC usage. Check the "Humber, Daimler...etc." thread for more information on how ACs were actually used. CM is more devoted to actual firefights as part of larger battles. These would have occurred for the most part after the reconnaisance for which the ACs were created. They would not normally be present for this kind of fighting. They were never really intended for heavy fighting, but to observe and report. Consequently, they tend for the most part to be lightly armed, mostly just for their self-protection against small and lightly armed opposition. The Germans did create a few more heavily-armed cars for specific tactical reasons, but other than the short-barreled 75s for support, those are generally viewed as mistakes and not many were made. The British included ACs with 75mm guns (the British Mkv 75mm) in their Recce Regts. In the case of the AEC, this 'simply' involved swaping the 2-pr turret for a Crusader turret. The Staghound III also had the 75mm gun, while in Italy - and I think in NWE - they also made use of the M3 75mm HMC that the US had tried to use as a TD in North Africa. These heavier vehs made up a fairly small part of each regt though (somewhere around 20% I'd estimate). Most of the actual recce work was done by the lighter vehs. [ July 20, 2006, 02:41 PM: Message edited by: JonS ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stoat Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 Originally posted by JonS: In the case of the AEC, this 'simply' involved swaping the 2-pr turret for a ?Cromwell? turret. It was a Crusader turret with a 75mm gun. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 Originally posted by JonS: ...they also made use of the M3 75mm HMC that the US had tried to use as a TD in North Africa.Yeah, I haven't heard of them being used for anything but indirect fire though. Have you? I'd be interested. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 Originally posted by Michael Emrys: I haven't heard of them being used for anything but indirect fire though.No, just indirect AFAIK. But, having said that, reporting on them is on the whole very sparse, so who knows. Then again, I'm reasonably confident that the British would be aware of the US' experience of them in NA. [ July 20, 2006, 07:01 PM: Message edited by: JonS ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 Yeah, I think they regarded them as more or less mini-Priests (with a bit less armor?). Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stoat Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 Originally posted by Michael Emrys: Yeah, I think they regarded them as more or less mini-Priests (with a bit less armor?). Michael The Brits used just about anything with a gun to provide indirect fire in the late stages of the Italian campaign. I've seen pictures of a company of Churchills lined up providing indirect fire support. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 I suppose they might also have been used for direct fire against anything that wasn't likely to threaten retaliation, like an MG nest at more than 500 meters, say. I doubt they did much of that though. Michael 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.