British and German Platoons for Chain of Command

Started by xccam, 28 August 2018, 07:30:56 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Dr Dave

Quote from: toxicpixie on 29 August 2018, 11:07:49 AM
Given that despite their ubiquity no one could quite decide what to do or how to use their Carriers, it's no way unfeasible to have one stooging around "supporting" the infantry. Probably having just brought up a vital under armour (ho-ho) delivery of cigarettes, tea and bully beef sandwiches ;)

Come for the sarnies & cuppa, stay for the gun fire!

Spot on - a veteran I knew (D coy, 1st Worcesters, 43rd Div) had to ask ME what the carriers were for. He never understood them. Bringing up stores and carrying out wounded seems to have been their main role. BUT they are the most manufactured AFV of WW2!

Terry37

"My heart has joined the thousand for a friend stopped running today." Mr. Richard Adams

Sunray

Quote from: Dr Dave on 29 August 2018, 01:39:44 PM
Spot on - a veteran I knew (D coy, 1st Worcesters, 43rd Div) had to ask ME what the carriers were for. He never understood them. Bringing up stores and carrying out wounded seems to have been their main role. BUT they are the most manufactured AFV of WW2!

Correct.  Memories of the carrier had faded before my time, but as you noted with the images that Nobby pulled up about Korea, it was ubiquitous - it a bit (12mm max ) of armour, it was tracked, and it could to 30mph on a good day/surface.

That little bit of armour and superb traction gave the ability to cross a killing ground rendered impassable by small arms fire.  The most common threat to battle field mobility.  Its not HE or AP, but the humble round of ball ammo will - with minimum orders of fire control - kill you.   8)

Getting ammo, men, and scrans up the line, and wounded back down.  That must be worth a +1 in any rules.  The British army 'marched' on the humble carrier.

Without it, we are back to the leather personnel carrier.  

Ian makes two historically correct points: First about how sections/platoons and companies are described.  He is also spot on about the PIAT.   A fact not always appreciated by rule writers.  

xccam

Whilst Sections may have been numbered I am happier with them lettered to make them more distinct from the German squads in any as yet hypothetical campaign. At the risk of upsetting purists, it works for me.

As for the PIAT, from what I've seen it was up to the company CO to distribute the PIATs an Platoons were as likely as not to have one with them, but I could be wrong. Either way the TooFatLardies have one in every platoon HQ (although this could be to prevent new players instantly losing if an enemy turns up with a single armour asset).

steve_holmes_11

Excellent look: do you have a bit of the 1-2-3 basing going on there too?

Sunray

Quote from: xccam on 29 August 2018, 08:37:18 PM
Whilst Sections may have been numbered I am happier with them lettered to make them more distinct from the German squads in any as yet hypothetical campaign. At the risk of upsetting purists, it works for me.

As for the PIAT, from what I've seen it was up to the company CO to distribute the PIATs an Platoons were as likely as not to have one with them, but I could be wrong. Either way the TooFatLardies have one in every platoon HQ (although this could be to prevent new players instantly losing if an enemy turns up with a single armour asset).

Point taken. If its late war, a lot of British platoons  on point had MG42s- but you won't find that in official weapon issue.   

At this level of skirmish, a AT weapon adds balance. The Typhoon will never appear when you really need it.  :)

Keep us posted on the game please.

Dr Dave

Quote from: Sunray on 29 August 2018, 09:32:22 PM
Point taken. If its late war, a lot of British platoons  on point had MG42s- but you won't find that in official weapon issue. 

Careful on the MG42. The Worcester's had theirs for a few days then had to get rid of the lot. The neighbouring bttns thought Jerry had broken into the positions when the Worcesters used them at night. Very different beast and sound to the mighty Bren. Curiously, I know firearms designers and trainers who despise the MG42 and think it worse than useless! Too heavy, too hungry, too many barrel changes. Fine in a fixed position - rubbish when moving forward.

Techno

Super work on those figures !!  :-bd

Cheers - Phil

Sunray

Quote from: Dr Dave on 29 August 2018, 10:24:29 PM
Careful on the MG42. The Worcester's had theirs for a few days then had to get rid of the lot. The neighbouring bttns thought Jerry had broken into the positions when the Worcesters used them at night. Very different beast and sound to the mighty Bren. Curiously, I know firearms designers and trainers who despise the MG42 and think it worse than useless! Too heavy, too hungry, too many barrel changes. Fine in a fixed position - rubbish when moving forward.

Yes, the MB42 has a distinctive rattle. But it was the first of the GPMG - and set the bar.  The Germans - unlike the Brits were trained to fire in short bursts - 3to 7 rounds.   

I have no experience of the MG42, but cross trained with the Bundeswehr and their M3 variant.  It was about 26lb- same as our GPMG (FN) .  I noted the M3 had bolt change options that varied the rate of fire.(were they available in WW2???)  The GPMG could be a hungry beast - as proved in Falklands/ Goose Green - but Jesus, the weight, the hunger and the barrel changes where all redeemed by the weight of suppressive delivery.   Worth all its weight in gold for winning small arms fire fights.    If you want a really badly designed  MG, then the M60 is the lemon.

Re the PIAT, there is a de facto dichotomy between "issue" and "deployment".  Remember it is  a weapon not a crew you get. Your platoon/section will have to surrender two of the rifle group to man it.  So unless you have a clear and present threat from armour, you toss the PIAT/LAW in the PC - in my days the Bv206 /or 432 - or in WW2 in the back of the carrier .   Yes, you can yoump a PIAT/Charlie G with a rifle and full kit- but it retards the effectiveness of the rifleman when he deploys.   He will use one or the other.   The 66LAW  was a godsend. That's why its still in service. Not so much for MBTs, but as a direct support - it will also mallet a lot of APCs and light AFVs.  :)

steve_holmes_11

Quote from: Dr Dave on 29 August 2018, 10:24:29 PM
Careful on the MG42. The Worcester's had theirs for a few days then had to get rid of the lot. The neighbouring bttns thought Jerry had broken into the positions when the Worcesters used them at night. Very different beast and sound to the mighty Bren. Curiously, I know firearms designers and trainers who despise the MG42 and think it worse than useless! Too heavy, too hungry, too many barrel changes. Fine in a fixed position - rubbish when moving forward.

And yet they moved forward into Poland, Netherlands, Belgium, France, Balkans and Greece, and a hefty chunk of the European USSR.

There's a lot to be said for combined arms, knowing how to use your weapon, and having 8 spare dudes to carry the extra ammo.


Soldiers get very attached to their favorite weapons: Hence the memoirs praising the Bren, BAR and even that Russian record player thingy.
Even the (of some) Dutch thought their Lewis guns were the best (Nobody else has a 100 round drum!).

Gamers can be incredibly idiosyncratic in their attitude to new weapons.
How many times have you heard a British gamer rubbish the B.A.R. but later heap praise on the German "Assault rifle" designs.


I'm not sure what my point is here, except to point out that the armies with the biggest points weapons didn't always win.

Sunray

Quote from: steve_holmes_11 on 30 August 2018, 09:36:17 PM
And yet they moved forward into Poland, Netherlands, Belgium, France, Balkans and Greece, and a hefty chunk of the European USSR.

There's a lot to be said for combined arms, knowing how to use your weapon, and having 8 spare dudes to carry the extra ammo.

I'm not sure what my point is here.


Steve, you made your point very well  in the second line.  I was one of those spare dudes.   Sustained fire mode is still around, but its fire and movement that wins the ground. 

Cheers, 

Dr Dave

Quote from: steve_holmes_11 on 30 August 2018, 09:36:17 PM
And yet they moved forward into Poland, Netherlands, Belgium, France, Balkans and Greece...
... without the MG42.   ;)

Lord Kermit of Birkenhead

But the 34 is much the same !

In the section role the Bren was much better...the 34 and 42 have several design holidays in them, in particular no way of holding the red hot barrel when you need to change it ! In the SF role the Vickers was better, if you had liquid to keep it cool. Moving it was an absolute pig, but that was one use for a carrier !
FOG IN CHANNEL - EUROPE CUT OFF
Lord Kermit of Birkenhead
Muppet of the year 2019, 2020 and 2021

fsn

Lord Oik of Runcorn (You may refer to me as Milord Oik)

Oik of the Year 2013, 2014; Prize for originality and 'having a go, bless him', 2015
3 votes in the 2016 Painting Competition!; 2017-2019 The Wilderness years
Oik of the Year 2020; 7 votes in the 2021 Painting Competition
11 votes in the 2022 Painting Competition (Double figures!)
2023 - the year of Gerald:
2024 Painting Competition - Runner-Up!

Westmarcher

01 September 2018, 08:11:08 PM #29 Last Edit: 01 September 2018, 08:16:20 PM by Westmarcher
Yes, Lindy's standards slipped this time. Even I, who is not a WW2 miniatures gamer (but I do play the computer sim, Combat Mission), had to raise my eyebrows on a couple of occasions (e.g., even I knew a version of the MG34/42 lives on in the modern German Army - although due to be replaced soon). What about overwhelming artillery support, numbers and air superiority? The responder does not come out of it too well either IMO; a touch of indignation perhaps and totally didn't get why Lindy used the term "Spandau" (which is what the Brits called the German LMG - just as every German tank was "a Tiger" and every German shell "an 88"), spending 20% of his response on that one issue. Good finds, Nobby.
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.