Dear visitor, welcome to WesWorld. If this is your first visit here, please read the Help. It explains in detail how this page works. To use all features of this page, you should consider registering. Please use the registration form, to register here or read more information about the registration process. If you are already registered, please login here.
This post has been edited 4 times, last edit by "perdedor99" (Nov 24th 2007, 2:56pm)
Quoted
Originally posted by The Rock Doctor
It's a good start, Perd. Nice work. Some comments:
-The National Cadre was "Government Service" rather than a more narrow "Military Service". I expected a large number of the uptake to be put to work on large-scale civil engineering projects like flood control works in Bangladesh.
-The main unit in the Army had been the division, with units often taking a name associated with their geographic base - ie, "Deccan Highlanders" - or something associated with their past (such as the divisions named for venomous snakes).
-I'd used the term "Field Force" instead of "Corps", just to be different.
-I didn't envisage any princely states remaining within the Empire; early experience with the colonial powers indicated that the Europeans could and would play rulers against each other for thier own profit. Subsequently, rulers of places such as Bengal would have a role in the imperial government, and retain much of their fortunes, but the governors would serve at the Raj's pleasure, and the entirety of the military would answer to the Raj. It would be a single, monolithic government.
-Anyway, the current ruler has just two sisters.
-There is some background on my views of the Indian Army towards the bottom of this forum.
-Describing the Imperial Corps of Commandoes and the Camel Corps might be fun projects to consider in the future.
This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "Hrolf Hakonson" (Nov 28th 2007, 3:03am)
Quoted
After three years of serious experimentation, the Indian Army is equipping its first combat unit with armored vehicles. The First Jagganatta* Battalion will be deployed to the Eight Field Force, which is situated along the border with British Pakistan, later in the year.
The battalion is expected to consist of three combat companies, each with a different type of vehicle. One company will be equipped with Sher (“Lion”) tanks, which are reported to be equipped with a 1.4" cannon and four machine guns. Another company will field the Gadaa (“Bludgeon”), which carries four 0.6" machine guns and two light machine guns. The third company will operate armored cars mounting two 0.6" machine guns on a wheeled chassis.
All three vehicle types are the result of experiments performed by the army’s 48th Motorized Cavalry Regiment, based near Delhi. That unit has tasked with developing and testing a range of motorized vehicles with military applications.
*OOC: Jagganatta is the term from which the word juggernaut is derived; it refers to a practice in which devoted worshippers would throw themselves under the wheels of carts and wagons bearing religious decor.
This post has been edited 2 times, last edit by "perdedor99" (Nov 28th 2007, 3:35am)
This post has been edited 2 times, last edit by "Johan" (Nov 28th 2007, 6:10pm)
Quoted
Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
I've got serious issues with the Argun tank and Satyaki APC. The Argun is, basically, a slightly earlier, faster, version of an Israeli Merkava, and much too large and well developed for 1934-35. especially when India has not fought against any armor-using foes. The same issues already raised against other fully-tracked APCs apply to the Satyaki: it's too early and too expensive for such a vehicle.
Quoted
Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
There's little reason for crew protection to be paramount in Indian armor design: if there's one thing that India has, it's personnel. They may not be trained yet, but there's no shortage of personnel (unlike the Israeli situation).
I'm doubtful that the Philippine and Asir experiences would show any reason to replace the existing vehicles, there weren't any armor-vs-armor encounters and few enough times when the opposition was even equipped with anti-armor weapons. WW is not, seemingly, as far ahead of OTL in the realm of tanks as it is in aircraft, perhaps a year or two but not 3 or more years ahead. What Russia is building, as I recall, is a good deal smaller and lighter than the Argun (while the text said 30 tons, the design is only 20, though the secondary turrets will increase that to perhaps 22 tons).
This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "perdedor99" (Dec 1st 2007, 5:01pm)
Quoted
Originally posted by perdedor99
yes, they is a reasoning for crew protection, training spend on the crews is a necessity and is easier to give a new vehicle to a crew than to train a new crew and make then proficient enough compared with the other one.
Forum Software: Burning Board® Lite 2.1.2 pl 1, developed by WoltLab® GmbH