Apologies to WAB Admin/ mods and fellow WAB'ites

[subba]

I recieved a well deserved timeout and infraction for seeking the ban of a fellow WAB'ite recently. That was clearly out of the ambit of laid out forum rules and regulations. I apologize for my transgression.

Most debates even the contentious ones here tend to be polite. Some people do come in here pretty early on and start generally denigrating others without noticing the fact that much debating here is in good taste. However that was no reason for me to transgress.

Regards

Subba

[T_igger_cs_30]

Well said Subba, it happens to us all irrelevant of age or experience at times, I to allowed emotion to creep into a thread myself just recently, and on reflection I didnt feel good about it I could have handled it much better, so I decided to shut up.
nice to see you back

[Ray]

Very commendable and brave of you to accept your error.

It makes you stand tall amongst us.

Well done!

[dave lukins]

Originally Posted by subba

I recieved a well deserved timeout and infraction for seeking the ban of a fellow WAB'ite recently. That was clearly out of the ambit of laid out forum rules and regulations. I apologize for my transgression.

Most debates even the contentious ones here tend to be polite. Some people do come in here pretty early on and start generally denigrating others without noticing the fact that much debating here is in good taste. However that was no reason for me to transgress.

Regards

Subba

Subba me old mate,great to see you back..It was heated on both sides. It wasn't the "heat" but who threw on the most coal Welcome back!!

[subba]

Thank you Tigger, Ray and Dave Sirs for your encouraging words. They do mean a lot to me. It is indeed a privilege of sorts to engage in conversation/ debate/ discussion with people of your experience, calibers. In real life one seldom gets such opportunities. For me it's a learning curve. Positive at that. It benefits only people like me to be criticised or encouraged by folks of your stature.

My 200 plus post opinion on WAB is a thumbs up so far. Only jerks like me sometimes let get their harmones better of the grey cells.

[RustyBattleship]

Subba:
I'm half German and quarter Irish so you know what kind of a tempermant I must have. Particularly while approaching 71 qualifies me as a grumpy old man.

I, too, have to refrain from the send button on some of my replies, get a drink of water (or another shot of Vodka) and look at how stupid and out of line my statement is.

I hit delete almost as many times as I hit send on this board. But it's still entertaining, informative and fun.

[dave lukins]

Originally Posted by RustyBattleship

Subba:
I'm half German and quarter Irish so you know what kind of a tempermant I must have. Particularly while approaching 71 qualifies me as a grumpy old man.

I, too, have to refrain from the send button on some of my replies, get a drink of water (or another shot of Vodka) and look at how stupid and out of line my statement is.

I hit delete almost as many times as I hit send on this board. But it's still entertaining, informative and fun.

and the other quarter WAB!!

[glyn]

Welcome back, Subba (you impetuous creature!) You don't need to apologise to me for anything.

[Julie]

Originally Posted by subba

I recieved a well deserved timeout and infraction for seeking the ban of a fellow WAB'ite recently. That was clearly out of the ambit of laid out forum rules and regulations. I apologize for my transgression.

Most debates even the contentious ones here tend to be polite. Some people do come in here pretty early on and start generally denigrating others without noticing the fact that much debating here is in good taste. However that was no reason for me to transgress.

Regards

Subba

You're now a member of the "Been there, did that club." Glad you're back.

[Officer of Engineers]

Originally Posted by subba

My 200 plus post opinion on WAB is a thumbs up so far. Only jerks like me sometimes let get their harmones better of the grey cells.

Gentlemen, I don't know but I think we've just been called old foggies.

Subba, for what it's worth, I took no offence. Parihaka examined the situation alot more closely and acted accordingly. In the end, this is just an internet board, we may sound frustrated at times but this is not a life and death situation.

Just be aware, the mods and admins cannot read every post. I have the Field Mess to look after and I strategically read a few post here and there which already curtailed my postings. I don't have time to put as much thought into my posts as I used to at times trying to anticipate where the next outburst might be.

I have other boards to admin also and I'm already in the middle of a debate with a Chinese poster on the other board who disputes the Allied version of Kap'yong.

[subba]

I hit delete almost as many times as I hit send on this board. But it's still entertaining, informative and fun.

Rusty battleship sir, and i manage that only 5% of the time.

Therein lies the difference sir..

(you impetuous creature!)

Glyn sir, that was what i was telling RB Sir..if i manage 10% i will survive these boards. If i manage 50% i would have to achieve something in life to do so..I'm glad to be here and interact with some of you folks.

You're now a member of the "Been there, did that club."

Julie Ma'am..thanks a lot for your encouraging words as a mod. But do i get to some special tag to go along with that club?

Or should i have pressed the 'delete' before posting that?

[astralis]

Col Yu,

CDF? if not, could you link me?

[subba]

Gentlemen, I don't know but I think we've just been called old foggies.

Absolutely NOT, OOE Sir!

I was and have referrered to the affinity to press delete/ send function before thinking. I hope my last post wrt to Glyn/ RB sir's clarify that point.

[Officer of Engineers]

CDF

Board Message

Posted by: simonov Mar 3 2007, 09:56 PM

What Peng De huai tactics in Korea to face Allied fire power? is it true the human wave taht West historian said?
Posted by: LCol. W Yu Yesterday, 12:57 AM

Nothing out of the ordinary as per the PLA's Handbook. The problem is that the Chinese often over-estimated enemy strength, believing a battalion when it was only a company, mainly because of the volume of fire and thus, they mass accordingly.
Posted by: yexu Yesterday, 12:31 PM

QUOTE(simonov @ Mar 4 2007, 02:56 AM) *

What Peng De huai tactics in Korea to face Allied fire power? is it true the human wave taht West historian said?


Defensively, elaborate tunnel-bunker systems. Offensively, night attacks. "Human wave"? That's more for the popular imagination than serious history.

QUOTE(LCol. W Yu @ Mar 4 2007, 05:57 AM) *

Nothing out of the ordinary as per the PLA's Handbook. The problem is that the Chinese often over-estimated enemy strength, believing a battalion when it was only a company, mainly because of the volume of fire and thus, they mass accordingly.


Do you have some concrete examples to back up that assertion?

On the other hand, the Western forces often wildly over-estimate the number of PVAs they were facing. The one example which immediately comes to mind is the battle of Kapyongni, in which the Canadians claim till this day they were fighting the entire PVA 118th division, when in fact they were only facing one under-strength battalion, 3rd battalion of the 354th regiment, 118th division.

Posted by: LCol. W Yu Yesterday, 08:22 PM

QUOTE(yexu @ Mar 4 2007, 12:31 PM) *
Do you have some concrete examples to back up that assertion?


Choisin

QUOTE(yexu @ Mar 4 2007, 12:31 PM) *
DOn the other hand, the Western forces often wildly over-estimate the number of PVAs they were facing. The one example which immediately comes to mind is the battle of Kapyongni, in which the Canadians claim till this day they were fighting the entire PVA 118th division, when in fact they were only facing one under-strength battalion, 3rd battalion of the 354th regiment, 118th division.


Wrong. 500 bodies were collected after that action by the Australians, Americans, and Canadians. That's well over a battalion.

Posted by: yexu Yesterday, 09:07 PM

QUOTE(LCol. W Yu @ Mar 5 2007, 01:22 AM) *

QUOTE(yexu @ Mar 4 2007, 12:31 PM) *
Do you have some concrete examples to back up that assertion?


Choisin

QUOTE(yexu @ Mar 4 2007, 12:31 PM) *
DOn the other hand, the Western forces often wildly over-estimate the number of PVAs they were facing. The one example which immediately comes to mind is the battle of Kapyongni, in which the Canadians claim till this day they were fighting the entire PVA 118th division, when in fact they were only facing one under-strength battalion, 3rd battalion of the 354th regiment, 118th division.


Wrong. 500 bodies were collected after that action by the Australians, Americans, and Canadians. That's well over a battalion.


LOL, you got anything more specific than Chosin? Besides, Chosin was at the very beginning of the war. Even if the PVA were unfamiliar with the level of enemy firepower then, that wouldn't have lasted more than a few weeks.

As for Kapyongni, whether you want to admit it or not, Col., your Canadians wildly exaggerated the number of PVA forces they were fighting in that battle. I have dug up the official Korean War battle history of the 40th corps and also the personal memoirs of Li DeZhang, the commander of the 3rd battalion in that battle, the evidence is conclusive, there were no other PVA forces involved in that battle other than the 3rd battalion. "500 bodies"? Well, the 3rd battalion did lose over two thirds of its men in that battle, and that means 300-400 men lost. With a little exaggeration here and there, the figure is not totally out of the ball park.

Posted by: LCol. W Yu Yesterday, 09:45 PM

QUOTE(yexu @ Mar 4 2007, 09:07 PM) *
LOL, you got anything more specific than Chosin? Besides, Chosin was at the very beginning of the war. Even if the PVA were unfamiliar with the level of enemy firepower then, that wouldn't have lasted more than a few weeks.


Do you want the recounting of the entire battle?

QUOTE(yexu @ Mar 4 2007, 09:07 PM) *
As for Kapyongni, whether you want to admit it or not, Col., your Canadians wildly exaggerated the number of PVA forces they were fighting in that battle. I have dug up the official Korean War battle history of the 40th corps and also the personal memoirs of Li DeZhang, the commander of the 3rd battalion in that battle, the evidence is conclusive, there were no other PVA forces involved in that battle other than the 3rd battalion. "500 bodies"? Well, the 3rd battalion did lose over two thirds of its men in that battle, and that means 300-400 men lost. With a little exaggeration here and there, the figure is not totally out of the ball park.


Sorry, that does not fit with known data. 4 battalions were involved in that battle from the Allied side. 3 RAR, 2 PPCLI, 1 Middlesex, 16th Field Gun, "A" Coy, 72nd Heavy Tank. The Canadians were only on Hill 667. At all times, the Allied side were on the defensive, mounting only local counter-attacks. We know for a fact that the Baker Company, 2 PPCLI had managed to kill an entire Chinese company of 70 when they tried to wade through the water at night. They were machined gun to the man.

With the 3 RAR count of the day before, that puts two entire companies out of action. There is no way you ca convince me that any Chinese commander thinks a single battalion is still combat capable after that and plus the assault on Hill 667 was done at the battalion level with a two pronged company attack before the Canadians called in artillery strikes on their positions.

There is no way you can tell me that a single battalion can take on four spread out units, suffer two company strength casualties, and then mount another battalion level assault on Hill 667 after that.

Posted by: yexu Yesterday, 10:35 PM

Well, like I said, whether you want to believe it or not. Throughout the nights of April 22 - 23, the only PVA unit that went into action against units of the UK 27th and Canadian 29th Brigades was the 3rd battalion of the 354th regiment. Units of the 353rd regiment went into action on the 24th, but that was already in the waning stages of the battle.
Posted by: LCol. W Yu Yesterday, 10:59 PM

Aha, that's the problem!

The Battle of Kapyong is considered to be from 22-25 April. The Chinese withdrew contact on the afternoon 25 April. So, no, the Canadians did not exaggerate.
Posted by: yexu Yesterday, 11:41 PM

Um, two battalions (3rd of 354th and 1st of the 353rd) vs. claims of the entire 118th division? Also, the entire 40th corps suffered less than 2200 casualties (killed and wounded) during the entire first phase of the 5th campaign, vs. claims of 1000+ killed in the battle of Kapyongni alone? Exaggerations abound.
Posted by: LCol. W Yu Today, 12:28 AM

QUOTE(yexu @ Mar 4 2007, 11:41 PM) *

Um, two battalions (3rd of 354th and 1st of the 353rd) vs. claims of the entire 118th division? Also, the entire 40th corps suffered less than 2200 casualties (killed and wounded) during the entire first phase of the 5th campaign, vs. claims of 1000+ killed in the battle of Kapyongni alone? Exaggerations abound.


500 bodies were collected. No exaggeration on that. Based on standard WIA/KIA ratio. that means that the 118th suffered all their casualties at that battle even based upon your own numbers.

[astralis]

col yu,

much appreciated. sorry for the OT discussion, but are there any good korean war books or articles which you could recommend?