Heavy arty was destroyed/captured separately.While abn had support.At Kiev,for example,they had been reinforced by AT and arty units.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Fall of France
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by zraver View PostNo becuase they lacked the support that other infantry formations had. They lacked almost all heavy weapons larger than small mortars and had no organic transport on the ground. The Corps command had 18 76mm guns and 18 82mm mortars, each brigade had 6 guns and 6 mortars for a total strength of 36 guns and 36 mortars to support 10,000 men. In contrast a rifle division had 188 mortars and 44 guns, some of 122mm. Also factor in the much reduced supplies of ammunition an airborne unit had in comparison to a rifle division. Artillery ammo is heavy when it has to be transported by 1930's technology radial engined aircraft, it is also in great demand when the bleeding starts and quickly depleted.
Western units suffered the same problems (Arnhem). The shining light of paratroopers resisting heavy units is often cited as Bastogne, but at Bastogne the 101st was backed by an armed divisions CCB. This added a lot of fire power including a full battalion of 105mm guns
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Toby View PostAre we talking real work or sat at a desk paper shuffling?Coz if its the latter I'll leave you dead in the water..sigpic
Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Bigfella View PostGetting soft in your old age Buck. I like to make the new folk work for it just a bit. ;-)“Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
Mark Twain
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Bigfella View PostI'll bet I shuffle more paper most days than you do in a week, though probably in a different way. Would have physically handled hundreds of pieces today alone. :-)
Comment
-
Originally posted by Bigfella View PostUntil the late 1930s their land forces were better than the Germans. Better tanks in larger numbers and a land warfare doctrine that was arguably superior to what Germany had. From about 1943 onwards they were also better. Unfortunately its impossible to convey that to people who have had their heads filled by several generations of authors who treated the Germans as supermen and Russians as crude peasants who by some magical accident developed some really good tanks. Some attitudes die incredibly hard it seems.
The origin of this discussion was the idea that everyone else had to 'catch up' to the Germans. I have simply been pointing out that the Russians were ahead of the Germans when it came to land warfare doctrines and probably influenced the Germans more than the Germans influenced them. I've spelled all this out in quite sufficient detail for you to put the pieces together if you choose. If you can be bothered to read & comprehend that then I'm happy to have a discussion. If you want to continue to throw off misrepresentations and content free one liners then there is no point.
The Soviets may have had some ideas about land warfare doctrine but they were no where near the level the Germans were at. To even suggest the Soviets were near to or on par with ze Germans is silly. To even begin to have a modern armored doctrine they'd need to have radios in their tanks.
There is absolutely nothing about the Soviet army of World War 2 that is special. It was a crude agricultural peasant army. Nothing good comes from Communism.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Gun Boat View PostWell of course everybody had to catch up the the German army. The Germans were first to actually implement their doctrine on the battlefield. How can you possibly question that?
The Soviets may have had some ideas about land warfare doctrine but they were no where near the level the Germans were at. To even suggest the Soviets were near to or on par with ze Germans is silly. To even begin to have a modern armored doctrine they'd need to have radios in their tanks.
There is absolutely nothing about the Soviet army of World War 2 that is special. It was a crude agricultural peasant army. Nothing good comes from Communism.
Khalhin Gol.Did anyone even checked on the map where is that?Those who know don't speak
He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mihais View PostKhalhin Gol.Did anyone even checked on the map where is that?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Toby View PostNot much good has been coming from Capitalism recently either or have you not been paying attention?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Gun Boat View PostNothing good comes from Communism.
I'll reserve my efforts for people who are willing & able to learn.sigpic
Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C
Comment
Comment