Kingfish Posted November 3, 2006 Share Posted November 3, 2006 Would you happen to know the OOB of the divisional Cav for 2nd NZ div circa April '45? Also, would anyone know the link to the site that covered the Tiger battalions? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andreas Posted November 3, 2006 Share Posted November 3, 2006 http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=30;t=004994 All the best Amdreas 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Other Means Posted November 3, 2006 Share Posted November 3, 2006 I smell a lovely scenario on the way. Yumsters. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted November 3, 2006 Share Posted November 3, 2006 Andreas - I don't get the relevance of your link? Kingfish - it had been re-roled as a leg-infantry battalion by then. IIRC, it was called Div Cav Bn, and the compaines were referred to as sqns, but that was all window dressing. In org and role it was just another inf bn. In late-44/early-45 it was finally acknowledged that in Italy two inf bdes weren't enough for an inf div. So, the LAA Regt was disbanded, the MG Bn was disbanded (sort of), the Motor Bn reverted to a regular inf bn, the survey bty was drastically reduced, as was the A-Tk regt. The manpower freed up was used to create another infantry bde, so the Div entered 1945 with three inf bdes and an armd bde, although in practice the armd bde was divided up amongst the inf bdes (one armd regt per). The MG Bn was nominally disbanded, although in practice what happened was that each inf bn gained an organic MMG Pn, so it's hard to say how much manpower was actually freed up that way - a bit, I suppose, from the Coy and Bn HQs, plus of course the fourth MMG Coy in its entirety (27(MG)Bn retained the four MMG Coy structure from the early war after the other CW MG Bns went to a three x MMG + one x 4.2-in mtr org. The 4.2s were allocated to the A-Tk Regt) At the same time the engineers created an armoured assault sqn, with bridging tanks, AVsRE (although these weren't equipped with the petard, AFAICT), dozers, etc. 2(NZ)Div had a very eclectic organisation ... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfish Posted November 3, 2006 Author Share Posted November 3, 2006 Originally posted by Andreas: http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=30;t=004994 All the best Amdreas Brilliant! Much abliged. BTW, is the alanhamby site essentially the same as the Sturm-whatever site? Originally posted by Other Means: I smell a lovely scenario on the way. Yumsters. Stay out of the kitchen, the sauce is not ready. Originally posted by JonS: Kingfish - it had been re-roled as a leg-infantry battalion by then. IIRC, it was called Div Cav Bn, and the compaines were referred to as sqns, but that was all window dressing. In org and role it was just another inf bn.Ok, that I didn't know. I knew about the LAA regt and 27th MG Bn. The MG Bn was nominally disbanded, although in practice what happened was that each inf bn gained an organic MMG Pn, so it's hard to say how much manpower was actually freed up that way - a bit, I suppose, from the Coy and Bn HQs, plus of course the fourth MMG Coy in its entirety (27(MG)Bn retained the four MMG Coy structure from the early war after the other CW MG Bns went to a three x MMG + one x 4.2-in mtr org. The 4.2s were allocated to the A-Tk Regt)I'm reading 'After the battle - issue 132'. In it there is a story about Lance-Corporal John Tucker of 27th Bn., who on April 12th single-handedly destroyed two Panthers from 26th Pz Division. The mag describes the 27th attacking at night with two companies up, one back, so they must have freed up a considerable number of men. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted November 4, 2006 Share Posted November 4, 2006 Well, 9th Bde was consisted of 22 Bn (the motor bn re-roled as straight leg), 27 Bn (MG Bn re-roled as straight leg) and Div Cav Bn (recce regt re-blah blah). In their pre-transformation states, none of those units were large enough to become a full inf bn, but full inf bns they nevertheless became. The difference was made up from the LAA regt, plus misc other odds and sods re-roled as inf and drafted into those three new bns. BTW, the iconic Quad had disappeared as a gun tractor by this stage too, replaced by ... US 2-1/2s maybe, or UK 3-tonners. Sumfink anyway. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted November 4, 2006 Share Posted November 4, 2006 Kingfish, Tiger tank battalion resources http://www.chsk.com/steppenwolf/tigers.htm http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/tigers.htm http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/tigers-02.htm http://www.lonesentry.com/panzer/tiger-tank-abteilung.html Swinging the Sledgehammer (CGSC paper later published as book SLEDGEHAMMERS) Hit access this. http://cgsc.cdmhost.com/cdm4/item_viewer.php?CISOROOT=/p4013coll2&CISOPTR=304&REC=2 Hope this helps. Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfish Posted November 5, 2006 Author Share Posted November 5, 2006 OK, time to throw a few more ingredient into the pot... Does anyone the identity of a Panzerjager company which was deployed in the vicinity of Sesto Imolese during mid-April '45? This unit was supposed to have been the third prong of a planned German counterattack on the New Zealand bridgehead over the Sillaro river. It may have been an independent unit or part of a larger formation. I do know that this section of the river was held by the 4th Fallschirmjager division, with the 278th Volksgrenadier deployed north of the town. The 26th Panzer Div was also there, although I'm not sure if they were in a reserve role or held part of the line. On the allied side, what Corp level artillery would have supported the Kiwis? The attack on the town was phase two of the general spring offensive launched on April 9th. BTW, thanks to everyone for their help so far. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted November 6, 2006 Share Posted November 6, 2006 Kingfish, That's groggy, even by your standards! Hope I found you the right Tiger battalion info. Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted November 6, 2006 Share Posted November 6, 2006 Sorry K, can't help much with that, other than to repeat my mantra about the OHs, which presumably you've already mined. Oh - somthing you might have missed though: There is a part of the OH called "Episodes and Studies", which comes in two volumes. One of the Studies is entitled "The other side of the hill" (or something like that) and tells the German story for a number of the battles 2(NZ)Div was involved in. ISTR that one of them is somewhere in the Po Valley/along the Senio, which might be useful. OTOH, I think it is mostly about the earlier fighting (in Feb?) to eliminate the last German bridgehead on the south/east bank of the Senio. Still, you might want to check it out. Oh, I helped Los with a scen several years ago which IIRC was to do with fighting very near to where you are talking about. I'm on the road for the next couple of days so I can't tell you the name or what info I gave him, but send me an email and I'll do so when I get back. You might want to contact Los too - most of my stuff was about the NZ Div, not the Germans. Speaking of which - be aware that the stock OoB for an NZ inf bn in the CMZK editor is very inaccurate. Regards Jon Edit: The corps level guns spt will be available in the Arty OH. I'm pretty sure that it included - amongst other things - a British SP Fd Regt, equipped with 105mm Priests. These aren't in the CMAK editor, so you'll have to make do with either 25-prs, or use US FOs for it. Both have obvious disadvantages. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockinHarry Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 Some good info about various Tiger units strength and composition: http://orbat.com/site/sturmvogel/tigers.html info about independent AT units can be found on a related page: http://orbat.com/site/sturmvogel/pzjgabt.htm If you know the designation of a particular (german) army or corps, you can do a simple site search (CTRL-F) for this unit and see what´s going to be highlited. This way I found out about lots of army corps support units. In case of the german Panzerjager company supposed as "attacking" force in the vicinity of Sesto Imolese, the schwere Panzerjäger-Abteilung 525 (Nashorn) might be one candidate, if it´s an independent unit. Much more likely your german Panzerjager company was a normal divisional AT unit, as part of the mentioned divisions, comprised of Stugs or Hetzers ect. The Sturmvogel site also holds useful info about independent artillery, MG, Sturmgeschutz, Engineer and other units: http://orbat.com/site/sturmvogel/heer-obscure.html 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfish Posted November 12, 2006 Author Share Posted November 12, 2006 Originally posted by JonS: Speaking of which - be aware that the stock OoB for an NZ inf bn in the CMZK editor is very inaccurate. What are some of the things I should change in order to get a more accurate OOB? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted November 12, 2006 Share Posted November 12, 2006 Off the top of my head: * delete the flamethrowers * add a MMG pn (but they used trucks, not carriers) * don't forget LOBs (about 10%) * bns were understrength (as well as the LOBs), but they did maintain the four-rifle-coys to an inf-bn (unlike the British in-bns, who had re-orgged to a 3-inf-coy/bn scale) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfish Posted November 12, 2006 Author Share Posted November 12, 2006 Thanks for the quick reply. When you say they retained the 4 rilfe company org does than also take into account the support company that CMAK adds to a '45 Battalion? BTW, the map is coming along nicely, don't you agree? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted November 12, 2006 Share Posted November 12, 2006 Originally posted by Kingfish: [QB]When you say they retained the 4 rifle company org does than also take into account the support company that CMAK adds to a '45 Battalion?Meh, ... I don't know. I haven't looked at the CMAK '45 orgs for ages, but I do remember - last time I did look - thinking how porked they were. NZ org 'should' have 4 x rifle companys, plus the various spt company pns (mtr, a-tk, carrier, etc) BTW, the map is coming along nicely, don't you agree?Looks like something Dorosh cooked up in the midst of an ASL-fuelled nightmare 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted November 12, 2006 Share Posted November 12, 2006 Originally posted by JonS: Looks like something Dorosh cooked up in the midst of an ASL-fuelled nightmare I'll expect a mention in the Designer's Notes, KF... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted November 13, 2006 Share Posted November 13, 2006 BTW, what is the large curved 'road' on the map? It looks a little like a modern highway, which I wouldn't expect to see in Italy at that time. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted November 13, 2006 Share Posted November 13, 2006 Originally posted by JonS: BTW, what is the large curved 'road' on the map? It looks a little like a modern highway, which I wouldn't expect to see in Italy at that time. Could be a gravelled railway embankment. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfish Posted November 13, 2006 Author Share Posted November 13, 2006 It's actually a monorail. Ever since I downloaded the new CMAK patch I've been experimenting with different terrain tiles. You should see the fully functioning drawbridge. 0 to 60 degrees in less than 20 seconds. Almost as fast as me. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted November 13, 2006 Share Posted November 13, 2006 o_O 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted November 14, 2006 Share Posted November 14, 2006 Originally posted by JonS: I helped Los with a scen several years ago which IIRC was to do with fighting very near to where you are talking about. I'm on the road for the next couple of days so I can't tell you the name or what info I gave him, but send me an email and I'll do so when I get back. You might want to contact Los too - most of my stuff was about the NZ Div, not the Germans. My bad - it was Rune, and the scenario is called "The Last Offensive". Emails I have regarding it are dated March 2004. General briefing is as follows: Title: The Final Offensive Type: Meeting Engagement Date: April 16th, 1945 Location: West of Sesto Imolese Region: Italy Weather: Day, Clear, Farmland Terrain: Dirt Wind: Breeze from the W Turns: 45+ Best Played as: Best played as Two Player, or as Allied against the AI. AI should be free to place. Author: Tim 'Rune' Orosz Background: The Eighth Army started its final offensive in Italy on 9 April 1945, under the biggest artillery and air bombardment of the Italian Campaign. The object was to enter and take the Po Valley. The hurricane of fire caught the Germans by surprise, and the Senio River was quickly crossed with only moderate enemy resistance. The attack came from Indian, Kiwi, Polish, British divisions, along with the Jewish Brigade. 2nd New Zealand Division had crashed through the Germans' "Irmgard Line" on the Senio River on the first day, then the "Laura Line" on the Santerno two days later, and the "Paula Line" along the Sillaro on the night of 15th-16th April. The German 98th Infantry Division had been shattered after a week of constant fighting, with many prisoners taken, but reinforcements were arriving and resistance was stiffening in front of the Kiwis. By dawn on the 16th April 2(NZ)Div held a two mile wide bridgehead across the Sillaro River with two brigades. The Germans had to regain the river line to hold in this area, while the Kiwis sought to beakout and advance to the next river line. Both sides brought fresh forces up, and they would meet in the rich farmland west of the Sillaro. Semi-Historical, about 5400 points. Sources: http://members.aol.com/ItalyWW2/Imola.htm 4th New Zealand Armoured Brigade in Italy by Jeffrey Plowman and Malcolm Thomas 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfish Posted December 17, 2006 Author Share Posted December 17, 2006 Jon, Is the New Zealand div and 2nd NZ div really one and the same, with just a title change, or are they actually 2 seperate formations? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted December 17, 2006 Share Posted December 17, 2006 Same unit. Originally it was ... wait. Let me go back a bit. In WWI we raised 1(NZ)Div (or, if it wasn't called 1 Div, it was still the first div we'd raised). At the start of WWII we made a comittment to raise another infantry division, which would be called the New Zealand Division. Which was all well and good, and things stayed that way until ... erm ... sometime around CRUSADER - Alamein. So, late 41 to mid 42. I forget the exact date. At that time the div ... Oh, wait some more. On 7 Dec 41 the Japanese decided to get into the game, and we comitted to raising another division for service in the Pacific. At taht point it became necessary to differentiate between them and since this was the third division we'd raised it was called 3(NZ)Div. At about the same time the division in the ME was renamed to 2(NZ)Div. Notwithstanding that, it was often referred to internally simply - and arrogantly - as "The Div". In addition to 3(NZ)Div, raised for service overseas, a couple of divisions were raised for local defence in case the Japanese ever tried landing in NZ. These were 4 & 5 Divs, but their structure was even more ecclectic that 3(NZ)Div. Meanwhile, in the ME there was a requirement for a deception unit. As it happened, 2(NZ)Div was supported by a very extensive base area structure because The Div was a national army as well. Furthermore, Freyberg was the Div GOC, but also i/c all NZ Army personnel in the ME/ETO. All these base formations were re-orgged and re-titled 6(NZ)Div under command of a MajGen, whose name escapes me right at the moment. In addition to the deception role, it also took a considerable administrative burden off Freybergs shoulders, though he still remained i/c, or SNO (Senior National Officer) in modern parlance. Erm. Hmm. Long answer to a simple question. The short answer is: they are different names for the same division. Incidentally KF - if you are ever considering doing a D-Day (6th June 1944) scen involving British/CW forces, drop me a line. I have some archival goodness that would probably be most useful, most especially for GOLD but also in a general sense for JUNO or SWORD. [ December 17, 2006, 04:29 PM: Message edited by: JonS ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John D Salt Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 Originally posted by JonS: [snips] Incidentally KF - if you are ever considering doing a D-Day (6th June 1944) scen involving British/CW forces, drop me a line. I have some archival goodness that would probably be most useful, most especially for GOLD but also in a general sense for JUNO or SWORD. Can I briefly misdirect this thread into a side-road, and ask if you have (or for that matter anyone else has) anything on the action of 47 Royal Marine Commando at Port-en-Bessin on D+1? I visited the memorial stone to 47 in the Garden of Remembrance at Eastney Barracks yesterday, and I think it's about time I started on some serious archive-thrashing to try to get the whole story. All the best, John. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 No, I don't think so sorry ... although ISTR something about RMs scaling cliffs to KO a pillbox there. Hmm. Where was that ... the British OH maybe? I'll have a rummage. 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.