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.
A number of comments, jotted down as I read through:
Night vision scopes on tanks. I am uncertain this is plausible/possible with 1940s technology. What sort of scopes are you envisioning?
Convertible armored vehicles. I have serious doubts of this working out in practice, particularly if someone tried to do this in the field. Who carts around the ‘spare parts’ and turrets to make this possible? How much specialized equipment would be necessary? Doing this sort of thing in a factory is possible, but not at first or second line maintenance units.
Technically, the 40mm Bofors gun does not exist in Wesworld, except in Irish service. RLBH (the Nordish player several iterations ago) fielded a 37mm weapon, not a 40mm.
Your proposed infantry division is far too large to be manageable. It would be rather inflexible. Given the rather undeveloped nature of the Nordish road network, the poor terrain for cross-country motorized movement and sheer expense having everyone in armored carriers would be very poor use of resources.
The level of armored vehicles is far more reminiscent of the 1960s than the 1940s, particularly for your Jaeger division. I am also doubtful that the fire support versions of the Tortuga would be practical with 1940s technology – but I’d need to see more details before offering a definitive opinion.
...while 'leg infantry' units experiment with assigned snowmobiles...
Night vision scopes on tanks. I am uncertain this is plausible/possible with 1940s technology. What sort of scopes are you envisioning?
Wiki has it that the Germans were attempting to develop an active infrared system starting around '43 or so - I'm picturing something similar, an IR illuminator, possibly hand-aimed from the commander's hatch, and a scope mechanism adjunct to the gunsight. Better than nothing, but far short of the kind of full nighttime capability we think of as 'night vision' gear.
The level of armored vehicles is far more reminiscent of the 1960s than the 1940s, particularly for your Jaeger division. I am also doubtful that the fire support versions of the Tortuga would be practical with 1940s technology – but I’d need to see more details before offering a definitive opinion.
See above, with the addition that mounting them on amphibious vehicles is a deliberate gambit to save myself the hair-pulling associated with sorting out the mess of landing craft I inherited.
The Tortuga is a Chilean design; in that service, the tank variant is equipped with a 28mm antitank rifle or a 75mm howitzer.
Given your more detailed description of your view of “night vision devices” and Walter’s very useful link, I could see something like the Infrarot-Scheinwerfer coming into existence in the middle 1940s. Germany has not yet fielded such, though testing might be ongoing. The problem, as alluded to in the Achtung Panzer article, is that only Solution A – a scope operated by the commander – would be feasible given constraints of size. The alleged Solution B – putting 30cm IR searchlights in the mantlet and the glacis – would seem to defeat the purpose of the heavy armor put there to protect the vehicle.
Given your more detailed description of your view of “night vision devices” and Walter’s very useful link, I could see something like the Infrarot-Scheinwerfer coming into existence in the middle 1940s. Germany has not yet fielded such, though testing might be ongoing. The problem, as alluded to in the Achtung Panzer article, is that only Solution A – a scope operated by the commander – would be feasible given constraints of size. The alleged Solution B – putting 30cm IR searchlights in the mantlet and the glacis – would seem to defeat the purpose of the heavy armor put there to protect the vehicle.
I don't think it would be acceptable to permit, since we've shot this idea down before for other countries, despite the initiators citing precisely these sort of links.
Given your more detailed description of your view of “night vision devices” and Walter’s very useful link, I could see something like the Infrarot-Scheinwerfer coming into existence in the middle 1940s. Germany has not yet fielded such, though testing might be ongoing. The problem, as alluded to in the Achtung Panzer article, is that only Solution A – a scope operated by the commander – would be feasible given constraints of size. The alleged Solution B – putting 30cm IR searchlights in the mantlet and the glacis – would seem to defeat the purpose of the heavy armor put there to protect the vehicle.
Not to toot my own horn that much, but if you look through this thread - Tables of Organisation and Equipment you can see how divisions and their constituent units relate to each other. I think if you consider them you will see how huge and ponderous your proposals are.
Trying to address the issue on the terms I inherited led to, what, a three month stall from me? I'm not doing that dance again, whatever happens. Alternative angles for cutting the gordian knot would be welcome.Brock has addressed some of my concerns regarding the Tortuga variants, reigning in their capabilities. Still, trying to mount everyone in amphibious vehicles does not get you away from dealing with your problem of landing craft. How are you going to get supplies ashore? What you trying to do is far too simplistic.
Forum Software: Burning Board® Lite 2.1.2 pl 1, developed by WoltLab® GmbH