Advertisement
by Zeinbrad » Mon May 19, 2014 8:30 pm
by The Akasha Colony » Mon May 19, 2014 8:46 pm
by Austrasien » Mon May 19, 2014 9:05 pm
by Hurtful Thoughts » Mon May 19, 2014 9:16 pm
Zeinbrad wrote:Post-Apocalyptic Army time.
New Lazuran Army equipment.
Standard infantry soldier
x1 Gustloff Volkssturmgewehr
x4 magazines.
Two grenades (That often explode in the users hand).
x1 Volkspistol.
x2 magazines.
Officer.
x1 Volkspistol.
x3 magazines.
x1 flare pistol.
Vehicle crewman.
(Commander)
x1 MP 3008.
x2 magazines.
(Regular)
x1 Volkspistol.
x2 magazines.
Vehicles.
-Panzer I.
-Panzer II.
- Pre-War Panzer III equivalent.
-Pre-War Halftrack.
Thoughts?
Mokostana wrote:See, Hurty cared not if the mission succeeded or not, as long as it was spectacular trainwreck. Sometimes that was the host Nation firing a SCUD into a hospital to destroy a foreign infection and accidentally sparking a rebellion... or accidentally starting the Mokan Drug War
Blackhelm Confederacy wrote:If there was only a "like" button for NS posts....
by The Republic of Lanos » Mon May 19, 2014 9:17 pm
Zeinbrad wrote:Thoughts?
by Anacasppia » Mon May 19, 2014 9:25 pm
Anemos Major wrote:Forty-five men, thirty four tons, one crew cabin... anything could happen.
Mmm... it's getting hot in here.
by The Akasha Colony » Mon May 19, 2014 9:27 pm
Anacasppia wrote:On the topic of hand grenades, does a stick actually confer any significant advantage in ease of being thrown or throwing distance?
by Zeinbrad » Mon May 19, 2014 9:28 pm
Hurtful Thoughts wrote:Zeinbrad wrote:Post-Apocalyptic Army time.
New Lazuran Army equipment.
Standard infantry soldier
x1 Gustloff Volkssturmgewehr
x4 magazines.
Two grenades (That often explode in the users hand).
x1 Volkspistol.
x2 magazines.
Officer.
x1 Volkspistol.
x3 magazines.
x1 flare pistol.
Vehicle crewman.
(Commander)
x1 MP 3008.
x2 magazines.
(Regular)
x1 Volkspistol.
x2 magazines.
Vehicles.
-Panzer I.
-Panzer II.
- Pre-War Panzer III equivalent.
-Pre-War Halftrack.
Thoughts?
U rang?
IRL, the germans simplified their grenades with the model 43 (dispensing with the stick) and the lighter M39 'egg' grenade.
-Volkpistol probably means a Walther-copy, or a markov...
Interesting use for a german flare-pistol. They also functioned as sawn-off shotguns. As such, having both a handgun, and a hand-flare-shotgun at the same time would be redundant.
Also, since range will be an issue, due to not issuing scopes to everyone, pistol-range engagements are likely simply to ensure headshots, so submachine-guns would seem the norm, even if it meant re-chambering rifles with a Pederson-device in 7.62mm Mauser.
-The MP-40, although handier in close-quarters, does not jive well with the german bayonet-practice of maintaining a standoff-distance.
As for artillery, I'd suggest checking the history of the 15cm SiG L11.
-In addition, look into using narrow-gauge rail.
by Carpathus » Mon May 19, 2014 10:21 pm
The Akasha Colony wrote:Carpathus wrote:
Too big as far as troop numbers or numbers of division?
muh sparky? Je ne comprends pas...
Generally, they should have 2-4 primary combat units, but instead they have between five and eight. The US Army had a hard time with just five when they tested the pentomic division structure, but that had more supporting arms (which are needed here as well).
by Questers » Mon May 19, 2014 10:56 pm
Yes.Carpathus wrote:The Akasha Colony wrote:
Generally, they should have 2-4 primary combat units, but instead they have between five and eight. The US Army had a hard time with just five when they tested the pentomic division structure, but that had more supporting arms (which are needed here as well).
Ok. Lets say (on the motorised division for example), I axe the cavalry brigade, 3 infantry brigades, and merge artillery and air defense into one, making:
Motorised Infantry Division
---- Motorised Infantry Brigade
---- Motorised Infantry Brigade
---- Motorised Infantry Brigade
---- Artillery and Air Defense Brigade
---- Support & Logistics Brigade
by Carpathus » Mon May 19, 2014 11:35 pm
Questers wrote:Yes.
Now: your division is lacking a LOT of assets in this structure, unless those assets are self-contained within the brigades (if they are, those brigades would be able to operate independently, like a US BCT.) Where are the pioneers, for example? Road security troops? Divisional intelligence and communications?
Idk about merging artillery and air defence.
The Infantry Brigades could do with a breakdown.
by Questers » Tue May 20, 2014 12:28 am
Yea, a BCT can operate on its own. For 96 hours I think. So if all the assets are self contained, thats ok.Carpathus wrote:Questers wrote:Yes.
Now: your division is lacking a LOT of assets in this structure, unless those assets are self-contained within the brigades (if they are, those brigades would be able to operate independently, like a US BCT.) Where are the pioneers, for example? Road security troops? Divisional intelligence and communications?
Idk about merging artillery and air defence.
The Infantry Brigades could do with a breakdown.
I just found this chart I'm going to base the infantry units off of. This would give the brigade more support units specific to the brigade, plus the units under the S&L Brigade that serve the division. The brigade combat teams put artillery at the battalion level, but this chart (I believe about WWII) places them at the brigade level. Which would be best in this case?
Motorised Infantry Division
---- Divisional Headquarters Company
---- Motorised Infantry Brigade
---- Motorised Infantry Brigade
---- Motorised Infantry Brigade
---- Field Artillery Brigade
---- Support & Logistics Brigade <-----This would contain any other special units the division might need
by Imperializt Russia » Tue May 20, 2014 12:40 am
Also,Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.
by Carpathus » Tue May 20, 2014 1:08 am
Questers wrote:Yea, a BCT can operate on its own. For 96 hours I think. So if all the assets are self contained, thats ok.
The reason is that a BCT has to be contained within itself, so they allocated it artillery (and give arty units at division for the div commander too.) In WW2 a division wouldn't separate into independent units in the way a BCT can, so the structure is more rigid; it gives more control to the DIVCOM.
by Kouralia » Tue May 20, 2014 2:07 am
Carpathus wrote:Questers wrote:Yea, a BCT can operate on its own. For 96 hours I think. So if all the assets are self contained, thats ok.
The reason is that a BCT has to be contained within itself, so they allocated it artillery (and give arty units at division for the div commander too.) In WW2 a division wouldn't separate into independent units in the way a BCT can, so the structure is more rigid; it gives more control to the DIVCOM.
This is the final division setup I'm gonna run with.
Motorised Infantry Division
---- Divisional Headquarters Company
---- Motorised Infantry Brigade
---- Motorised Infantry Brigade
---- Motorised Infantry Brigade
---- Field Artillery Regiment
---- Support & Logistics Brigade
and infantry brigade breakdown
Motorised Infantry Brigade
---- Brigade Headquarters Company
---- Motor. Infantry Battalion
---- Motor. Infantry Battalion
---- Motor. Infantry Battalion
---- Motor. Cavalry squadron
---- Field Artillery Battalion
---- Engineer Battalion
---- Support Battalion
I'll then use this base formula to change the other divisions around.
by Carpathus » Tue May 20, 2014 2:28 am
Kouralia wrote:No Division level engineers or Air Corps support?
by Imperializt Russia » Tue May 20, 2014 2:33 am
Also,Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.
by Vedria » Tue May 20, 2014 2:45 am
by Carpathus » Tue May 20, 2014 2:49 am
Imperializt Russia wrote:Helicopters, including attack helicopters, would ideally be best integrated directly into Army units. American and Russian divisions both featured small attack helicopter units, of approximately one squadron IIRC.
by Imperializt Russia » Tue May 20, 2014 3:01 am
Carpathus wrote:Imperializt Russia wrote:Helicopters, including attack helicopters, would ideally be best integrated directly into Army units. American and Russian divisions both featured small attack helicopter units, of approximately one squadron IIRC.
Do you mean an air force sized squadron or a cavalry sized squadron?
Also,Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.
by Kouralia » Tue May 20, 2014 3:05 am
Imperializt Russia wrote:Carpathus wrote:Do you mean an air force sized squadron or a cavalry sized squadron?
The Russian Motor Rifle Division circa 1980 featured a Helicopter Squadron of up to 18 aircraft, six attack helicopters, six scout helicopters and four medium helicopters (Hind, Hoplite and Hip, respectively). Two additional Hip aircraft to the sixteen listed are airborne command posts. It was estimated at 200 personnel.
FM-100-2-3 lists this as an "estimate" and also notes that some units carry additional Hind helicopters.
Advertisement
Return to Factbooks and National Information
Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider]
Advertisement