WesWorld

When to the Nordmark's Army thread and very interesting units.

A lot of artillery, mortars and AT weapons made the Infantry Divisions very dangerous to face. I still have my doubts of having FA batteries directly attached to the Infantry Regiments (regular FA guns a little too heavy to be manhandled by grunts IMHO) But the small size of the Army should allow for a certain degree of motorization in the artillery branches.

The Armored Divisions also are very powerful. IIRC the German original Panzer divisions have a similar quantity of tanks but less infantry. IMO they should do OK.

Small Army but it seems a tough nut to crack. Hope their Reserve units are up to the task also.

The FA battery attached to the Infantry regiments IS a bit of a question mark, but whether it's a problem for the infantry will depend a lot on the size of the guns: if they're around 75mm, it probably won't be too bad; if they're 105mm or larger, it's not going to be real good unless they're quite short barreled and ranged.

The armored division looks a lot like the original (2 armored regiment) German panzer divisions, though as you say, that formation had a slightly different infantry organization.

Yup, the army is actually starting to take shape, and the Coastal Rangers still have to be posted (they number in the region of 34 regiments)

The situation with reserves is more fluid, mainly because I haven't got that far yet.

As to why the layout for the armored divisions looks so similar, is because I used the same basic layout, though Nordmark has slightly different formations to the Germans.

What's the problem with 105mm+ FA in the artillery regiments?

As for those FA Batteries, where'd they come from?!?!?!?!

oh well back to the drawing board

Are you using the 10.5 cm kanon m/34? From what I can see, that's a good gun.

(Bulgaria is using Swiss-made m/34s, too.)

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine
What's the problem with 105mm+ FA in the artillery regiments?

Nothing at all, in the artillery regiments. What Perderdor was commenting on, and I was seconding, was FA batteries attached to the infantry regiments.

Oh, okay. I missed that. I was about to comment that Bulgaria attaches FA in the artillery regiments, and I was somewhat alarmed that I might require a change...

Which reminds me that Bulgaria needs to get some new 105mm howitzers to start phasing out the old leFH-16s...

Fixed the FA batteries attached to infantry regiments, they have been replaced by an additional mortar platoon, and another infantry gun platoon.

The divisions seem to be lavished with a lot of artillery. Indeed very powerful; Due to the small size of the Army I can see a lot of motorization in the artillery branches plus a well kept road and rail sytem to allow the fast shift of troops from different sections of the Kingdom to try to stem any attacks till the Reserves arrive.

You haven't seen anything yet! The coastal Rangers are positively swimming in Artillery

Fusilier? Have any Nordic country used that designation? Jägare (Rangers) is probably a better name IMHO for both Fusilier and mountain troops.

On the Coastal Rangers:

First, 2 LMGs per squad is probably excessive for the period.

Second, the weapons mix in the artillery and field batteries is ... odd. Pack howitzers are small, light weapons that often can be broken down into multiple loads so they can be moved more easily by men or animals, the 110mm field howitzers .... not so much, and the field guns not at all. I'm not sure there IS such a thing as a 3" pack gun, the barrel won't break down and it's going to be a good deal heavier than that of a 3" howitzer. What you have is some light, mobile, weapons that are tied to heavier, far less mobile weapons.

Third, the batteries are quite to very large: 10 guns in the artillery battery, 13 in the field battery, and they're of different types and trajectories (which will surely make fire direction and control very difficult).

Most of the weapons for the Coastal Rangers were specified by Peng back during the South Georgia War. I must admit a desire to rearrange things, but it is not likely to happen till they are deployed again, or during the next major exercise (something which I should really have a go at organising)

I don't have a problem with the weapons, per se (other than the "pack guns"), just the idea of trying to organize a single battery to include both. At least break them into separate batteries so they can deploy seperately.

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
I don't have a problem with the weapons, per se (other than the "pack guns"), just the idea of trying to organize a single battery to include both. At least break them into separate batteries so they can deploy seperately.

Agree with Hrolf. Pack weapons and heavier guns means that in practice they will be two different task forces if in the same battery; it would be impossible for them to operate together except in a prepared position.

I agree. I've been studying artillery doctrine for writing the Yugoslav War, and mixing artillery types in the batteries will make for odd command and control. You mightn't have enough men in the battery headquarters to run two separate fire-missions at the same time, and the difference in guns is fairly substantial; so only half of the battery will be able to fire at any given time, unless they're laying down preplanned barrages.

Better to devolve the guns into smaller but more similar units, IMHO.

A reorganisation is going to happen, but i first need to scrip the chaos of a live fire exercise.

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
I'm not sure there IS such a thing as a 3" pack gun, the barrel won't break down and it's going to be a good deal heavier than that of a 3" howitzer.

Wiki says...Skoda produced 75mm, 90mm, 100mm, 105mm and a prototype 150mm mountain guns between 1915-1939. The last took 6 carts and 3 animals to tow the barrel assembly. Generally the 100-105mm range seems the largest commonly fielded.

The MV was in the 450m/s range for the later ones, not far behind the old British 18pdr "gun", and substantially more than the old British 4.5" "howitzer".

Quoted

Originally posted by Kaiser Kirk

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
I'm not sure there IS such a thing as a 3" pack gun, the barrel won't break down and it's going to be a good deal heavier than that of a 3" howitzer.

Wiki says...Skoda produced 75mm, 90mm, 100mm, 105mm and a prototype 150mm mountain guns between 1915-1939. The last took 6 carts and 3 animals to tow the barrel assembly. Generally the 100-105mm range seems the largest commonly fielded.

The MV was in the 450m/s range for the later ones, not far behind the old British 18pdr "gun", and substantially more than the old British 4.5" "howitzer".

So sounds like Skoda at least thought here was a market for such a beast. I can't see it, myself, mountains are not good terrain for high-velocity guns, the dead zones behind crest lines are awfully large.