Panzergrenadiers....or not?

[Nidan1]

Hi DevilDog, Semper Fi, Is the Marine Corps scheduled to get Bradleys, or are they sticking with LAVs and AAVs?. I know the Bradleys are equipped with firing ports, so theoretically infantrymen could fire while inside the vehicle, I know that a SDKFZ HT is in no way compared to a Bradley AFV, but I'm just curious as to which way the Corps is going with mechanized war fighting.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Da Beginna:

Believe it or not German infantry used also their Opel Blitz to hunt enemy infantry while going full speed and balsting out of every possible spot. Ouf course this was extremely rare (I only remember one incident - after Sevastopol) but the later Opels had a little hatch for an lMG on the right side of the roof...

The rear mounting in the halftracks is ment for a second MG. I'm not shure why there is non, but I think it is for the squads lMG.

Afterall, it might be possible to shoot your weapon from a HT, especially while it is stopped - BUT I can live pretty good with the fact that it is NOT modelled. It is just a game and you can't put everything in...

Sorry for my English

Your English is fine. Can you print a quote regarding the use of 2 wheel drive trucks for cross country pursuit and mounted infantry operations, or point me to your source? I apparently have some reading to do!

[DevilDog]

Nidan 1:

The Marine Corps is planning on replacing the currant AAVs with the AAAV system in the near future last I heard. But I haven't kept up to speed since I got out. I doubt that the new AAAVs will have firing ports as its primary function is amphib - to get the marines from ship to shore, just like the old LTVs. The personell carrier mission is secondary, although that's where the 'TRACs get the most use during training.

[Captain Wacky]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

If anyone has ever ridden in a military vehicle going cross country, the silliness of expecting a soldier to fire a weapon - accurately or not - is self-evident!

You're not kidding. It's hard enough to stand up in an AAV going cross-country (or even dirt roads), let along fire with any accuracy at all. I've got to believe that anything but area fire with an MG out of a moving halftrack would be wildly innaccurate.

[Bastables]

Originally posted by Nidan1:

Hi DevilDog, Semper Fi, Is the Marine Corps scheduled to get Bradleys, or are they sticking with LAVs and AAVs?. I know the Bradleys are equipped with firing ports, so theoretically infantrymen could fire while inside the vehicle, I know that a SDKFZ HT is in no way compared to a Bradley AFV, but I'm just curious as to which way the Corps is going with mechanized war fighting.

The new M2A2 and A3 Bradleys onlt have firing ports either side of the rear ramp, for coving fire during dismounts, not for delivering broadsides at a full rate of knots

[The Oak]

A personal weapon does not have stabilization, and would not be accurately fired from any AFV doing Max cross country speed. If personal weapons are fired from an AFV, it would most likely be done from a temporary halt (bounding over watch) or from a slow and constant (STAB) speed (traveling over watch).

The most probable Panzer Grenadier tactic would be do dismount their 251s at the "assault position" (last covered and concealed position before the objective), and conduct a flanking maneuver while the 251s establish a base of fire to allow the infantry to assault the objective.

An APC is a "battle taxi," and is vulnerable to everything but small arms fire. Why risk "charging" your platoon of 251s against possible Russian ATR and Pak fire if they can use their MGs to suppress while the Panzer Grenadiers flank?

Certainly because the 251 is open topped (similar to the M113 with the roof hatch removed), infantry could conduct suppressive fire if ambushed, as was done in Vietnam on occasion. A long time ago I thought the M113 was invulnerable to small arms fire...until a drill SGT said: "do you want to sit in it while I fire an AK-47 point blank at the aluminum armor?"

Incidentally, firing ports were removed (or covered) in many modern IFVs to allow the addition of armor (passive and active). Similarly, modern MBTs no longer use hull MGs as a "firing port" weakens the glacis armor.

[JaegerMeister]

Right here goes guys, hopefully this helps, its a direct qoute from a book titled "Fighting Techniques of a Panzer Grenadier".

"The SDKfz251 drivers were prepared to simply ignore or drive through small arms fire, but the

presence of enemy artillery or AT guns usually forced the halftracks to seek cover.The squads machine gunners might well engage targets on the move,as could the rest of the squad if necessary from the sides of the vehicle. Often when advancing, the SDkfz251 could utilise a motorised version of fire and movement, advancing, stopping and firing to cover the other halftracks. A halted halftrack provided a decent fire platform but was extremely vulnerable. As a result, it was not recommended to stop for more than 15-20 seconds in hostile terrain. The normal dismounting procedure was through the rear of the vehicle. However in emergencies, the squad might well jump over the sides. This was often performed on the move at slow speeds"

The book does go on to say though, that after the initial few months of Barbarossa "due to the heavy losses suffered amongst the halftracks when accompanying tanks into the heart of battle, the Germans quickly resorted to de-bussing at least 400m or so in front of enemy positions"

Hope this helps people out !

cheers

[Da Beginna]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

Can you print a quote regarding the use of 2 wheel drive trucks for cross country pursuit and mounted infantry operations, or point me to your source? I apparently have some reading to do![/QB]

Sorry I don't remember the name of the book and I don't own it. I don't think that PanzerGren were involved just Mot. Infantry. The Opels weren't operated cross country - just mobbed up fleeing Soviet Inf. from Sevastop after the fall of the fortress.

Greetings to Canada!