CWC-2 Army Lists

Started by Leon, 21 May 2022, 12:04:29 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

pbeccas

Loving the Chinese list.

Big Insect

QuoteLoving the Chinese list.

Much appreciated  :-[  - it was a devil to research due to the various/assorted designations for the different equipment (e.g. a Type 59 can be a rifle and an MBT for example). Plus the fact that there are/were so many different prototypes and export models. It's really easy to go off down a research 'rabbit-hole' and get 'fixated' on a specific vehicle type, only to discover it was never used by the PLA and only a handful of prototypes were ever made!

I've also got very interested in the multiple arming of the later MBTs, with each potentially having their own separate ATGW launchers and even SAM capabilities. Hence I've started to add Upgrades to Armour units as well as to Infantry.

There is a post Vietnam War Vietnamese on its way (not far off) - so that 1979 Sino-Vietnamese border clash will be possible; and also a post Korean War (is that an allowable statement??? - maybe a post 27 July 1953 ceasefire) North Korean War list on the stocks as well. I'm also planning a Royal Thai - but that might take me a while as I've got to keep myself on-task with the published release agenda.
So for now, it's a couple of African list next on the drawing board.

Just need somebody (Leon???) to produce some Cold War Chinese in 10mm and we're off  :D
Cheers

Mark
'He could have lived a risk-free, moneyed life, but he preferred to whittle away his fortune on warfare.' Xenophon, The Anabasis

This communication has been written by a dyslexic person. If you have any trouble with the meaning of any of the sentences or words, please do not be afraid to ask for clarification. Remember that dyslexics are often high-level conceptualisers who provide "out of the box" thinking.

Smartbomb

Loving all these lists! Great work guys, thank you.

ingtaer

Quote from: Big Insect on 09 July 2022, 11:24:51 PMMuch appreciated  :-[  - it was a devil to research due to the various/assorted designations for the different equipment (e.g. a Type 59 can be a rifle and an MBT for example). Plus the fact that there are/were so many different prototypes and export models. It's really easy to go off down a research 'rabbit-hole' and get 'fixated' on a specific vehicle type, only to discover it was never used by the PLA and only a handful of prototypes were ever made!

I've also got very interested in the multiple arming of the later MBTs, with each potentially having their own separate ATGW launchers and even SAM capabilities. Hence I've started to add Upgrades to Armour units as well as to Infantry.

There is a post Vietnam War Vietnamese on its way (not far off) - so that 1979 Sino-Vietnamese border clash will be possible; and also a post Korean War (is that an allowable statement??? - maybe a post 27 July 1953 ceasefire) North Korean War list on the stocks as well. I'm also planning a Royal Thai - but that might take me a while as I've got to keep myself on-task with the published release agenda.
So for now, it's a couple of African list next on the drawing board.

Just need somebody (Leon???) to produce some Cold War Chinese in 10mm and we're off  :D
Cheers

Mark

Did you develop a "cheat sheet" to help you keep the naming conventions straight? I am having a terrible time of trying to work out what is what and could do with the help! I am not familiar with PLA/N gear at all and mini manufacturers seem to have little consistency.     

Lord Kermit of Birkenhead

It is confusing - this is from the old TTG Modern Equipment Handbook published in 1994.

Type 59 - a dierct clone of the T54/5 some of which were delivered prior to the Sino-Soviet split
          from 1985 it had APFSDS ammunition
Type 59/II is same with the L7/M68 105mm
Type 69 is same with upgraded sights II adds APFSDS and was futher upgraded in '85 with better sights
Type 79 has the 105mm
Type 80 is also known as Type 69 III. Has chobhan on the front plate - 5+ save vs ATGW ?
Type 85 has the Choham and 2 versions M has the 125mm  A the 105mm

There are also several upgrades for the type 59 which were being offered in 1990 involving Chobham, ERA somke dischargers and upgrading to pasive Night Fighting gear.
FOG IN CHANNEL - EUROPE CUT OFF
Lord Kermit of Birkenhead
Muppet of the year 2019, 2020 and 2021

Big Insect

Quote from: ingtaer on 10 July 2022, 01:19:15 PMDid you develop a "cheat sheet" to help you keep the naming conventions straight? I am having a terrible time of trying to work out what is what and could do with the help! I am not familiar with PLA/N gear at all and mini manufacturers seem to have little consistency.     

I didn't get that far I'm afraid.
The basic structure for the MBTs is pretty much as Ian has laid out - but even with that you have to be careful, as adding the 'Chobham' equivalent armour was only on some tanks - and even then it is not clear if these were not just some sort of 'experiment' that was then left in place, as the designers attentions moved on elsewhere  ;D
It is also why I chose to stop at 2000 as the later tanks and AFVs/APC get even more complex.
'He could have lived a risk-free, moneyed life, but he preferred to whittle away his fortune on warfare.' Xenophon, The Anabasis

This communication has been written by a dyslexic person. If you have any trouble with the meaning of any of the sentences or words, please do not be afraid to ask for clarification. Remember that dyslexics are often high-level conceptualisers who provide "out of the box" thinking.

rim66

I was just looking at the Falklands list and saw the Carl Gustav - I was at a talk by Maj Gen (Retd) Aidrian Freer a few weeks ago and he mentioned that they did not function in the conditions and so were not used - he was 2ic A Coy 3 Para at the time.  That said, I am pretty sure the Naval Landing Party used them so they should be there, but thought I would mention it for anyone wanting to do a force for the latter part of the conflict.

I hope this helps/is of interest.

Kind regards,

Richard

Big Insect

Thanks Rim66 - it's an interesting discussion - as CGs were issued to the Paras for the Falklands campaign then we need them depicted in the lists.
However, I was not aware that CGs were subject to weather/terrain issues. That is interesting. I'd like to know more?

Most useful. Thanks
Mark
'He could have lived a risk-free, moneyed life, but he preferred to whittle away his fortune on warfare.' Xenophon, The Anabasis

This communication has been written by a dyslexic person. If you have any trouble with the meaning of any of the sentences or words, please do not be afraid to ask for clarification. Remember that dyslexics are often high-level conceptualisers who provide "out of the box" thinking.

John Cook

The RM certainly had them and used a CG to engage the Argentine frigate Guerrico.  In a more general context, the CG was a Swedish weapon used by the Swedish army in arctic conditions without any problem.  It also deployed regularly with British forces exercising with AMF(L) in Norway.  As bits of kit go, it is about as simple as they get.  I never heard of any problems with the weapon, in any theatre.  I wonder if Freer is talking about MILAN, though I've never heard of issues with that either.

Lord Speedy of Leighton

Quote from: rim66 on 12 August 2022, 02:31:06 PMI was just looking at the Falklands list and saw the Carl Gustav - I was at a talk by Maj Gen (Retd) Aidrian Freer a few weeks ago and he mentioned that they did not function in the conditions and so were not used - he was 2ic A Coy 3 Para at the time.  That said, I am pretty sure the Naval Landing Party used them so they should be there, but thought I would mention it for anyone wanting to do a force for the latter part of the conflict.

I hope this helps/is of interest.

Kind regards,

Richard

Strange, everyone I know who was down there swears by both CG and Milans!
You may refer to me as: Lord Speedy of Leighton.
2016 Pendraken Painting Competion Participation Prize  (Lucky Dip Catagory) Winner

John Cook

Quote from: Lord Speedy of Leighton on 12 August 2022, 03:44:54 PMStrange, everyone I know who was down there swears by both CG and Milans!
It is,  I never heard of any climate related issues with either weapon in any theatre.

rim66

First I had heard of it too and absolutely agree it should be in the lists. He was very clear that the LAW was excellent and very much in demand and that they used a couple of MILAN during Longdon, so both those seem to have been used.  The issue seems to have been the fuzes so it could have been a bad batch and I agree the RM used it during the invasion.  Maybe it was just becoming an issue as they went in to action?  He really didn't say anything more but I thought I would throw it out there.

Kind regards,

Richard