THE RED GAMBIT SERIES

Author Colin Gee

Forums

Post Reply
Forum Home > Ideas Page > US weapons

Marcus1870
Member
Posts: 17

Just curious on your thoughts about weapon systems that were coming on l ok be at the end of the war which were developed with a long we r war in mind.  I wonder that some of these systems never were fully utilized due to the peace dividend (all 5 years of it).


Any thoughts if perhaps the B-36 (designed with a fall of the UK in mind) or the F-7, F-8 , or even F-9 series fighters might make an appearance? The Midway class carriers were commissioned at the end of the war.  Also didn't the British Vampire appear sometime after the war?

I'm not sure about the timelines.  Curious on your thoughts on those in your interpretation of the alternative history.

March 21, 2014 at 11:39 PM Flag Quote & Reply

gee_colin@yahoo.co.uk
Site Owner
Posts: 910

I have always said that weapons sytems that deployed post-war would all be considered in advance of schedule, given that the contuinance of war would have advanced their need and given urgency to their development, hence the T54/55 in the books already. I dont see the Midways as an issue particularly, as naval power isnt the Soviet strong point. As an example, expect the Avenger SP to appear soon enough :-)

--

March 22, 2014 at 4:57 AM Flag Quote & Reply

Marcus1870
Member
Posts: 17

A1 Schrader?

March 22, 2014 at 6:39 AM Flag Quote & Reply

Marcus1870
Member
Posts: 17

Had t ok look up the avenger. Nice comet with a 17pdr. Now just need more centurians. :)


March 22, 2014 at 6:45 AM Flag Quote & Reply

Keith Lange
Member
Posts: 325

Would the US come up with any new anti-tank weapons? BTW, What sort of bazookas were the US troops using in RG? Were they using the original 2.36 in' models, or a larger caliber type, like 3.5 in'?

March 28, 2014 at 7:06 PM Flag Quote & Reply

gee_colin@yahoo.co.uk
Site Owner
Posts: 910

original type at first. havent gone onto the super bazooka as yet. As for new ones, I have a suspicion that the ease of manufacture of the panzerfaust might make such a thing unecessary :-)

--

March 28, 2014 at 7:58 PM Flag Quote & Reply

Keith Lange
Member
Posts: 325

gee_colin@yahoo.co.uk at March 28, 2014 at 7:58 PM

original type at first. havent gone onto the super bazooka as yet. As for new ones, I have a suspicion that the ease of manufacture of the panzerfaust might make such a thing unecessary :-)

Can the 2.36 in' knock out a T-34?

March 28, 2014 at 10:55 PM Flag Quote & Reply

Keith Lange
Member
Posts: 325

gee_colin@yahoo.co.uk at March 28, 2014 at 7:58 PM

original type at first. havent gone onto the super bazooka as yet. As for new ones, I have a suspicion that the ease of manufacture of the panzerfaust might make such a thing unecessary :-)

Then why did the Germans also adopt the Panzershreck? :-) Also, the Panzerfausts are like our LAWs-one shot weapons. Carrying a lot of them could be cumbersome.

March 28, 2014 at 11:14 PM Flag Quote & Reply

gee_colin@yahoo.co.uk
Site Owner
Posts: 910

The panzerschreck came first didn't it, mainly as a result of copying the bazooka concept? Im not actually sure about that though. The Pzschk was also a larger weapon of 88mm size, and had the disadvantage of emitting a lot of smoke. The Pzfst was a one-shot weapon that had a higher penetration and was also very useful for breaking up infantry attacks. It was lighter, more easy to use, and certainly much more easy to produce.

you will be able to find pictures of german soldiers carrying two or more Pzfst without too much trouble, and they werent issued out in the same way as bazookas and Pzschk. They were issued on availability and need, so you might find a german infantry platoon sporting a score of these, or even more.

--

March 29, 2014 at 5:11 AM Flag Quote & Reply

riese
Member
Posts: 3

The range of a panzerfaust is about 60M.  The range of a M-20 Super bazooka is about 200-300M.  I'll take the extended range any day.  It's all about the survival of me - the shooter.

March 29, 2014 at 11:13 AM Flag Quote & Reply

Marcus1870
Member
Posts: 17

Both points are valid. The ideal situation would be both. The Pzchk was more cumbersome than a bazooka, much more prone to betraying the Hoover's position but more capable than a bazooka which on record bounced a lot off of T-34/85's in Korea.

The Panz e Faust is larger u inched by a gunpowder charge and would be cheaper to produce and train in. The limited range was I improved upon as was the size of the warhead, there are several variants. A close in weapon.  The big difference would be on the mass production of then enabling it to be issued at the platoon level or even squad level.  Bazooka teams (or SMAW teams in the modern USMC) were probably part of the weapons platoon of a company.  They would have to be attached t ok a platoon and therefore not as universally available.  The Faust would much more readily available for anti infantry and anti tank work.

A mixture of both (pushers at the company level and exhausts at platoon or squad level) would be immensely lethal.

Any chance that the Germans might get super bazooka or some U.S. equipment to supplement their own (since the U.S. could crank out those items at a phenomenal rate)?  Or is the logistical system so strained that this wouldn't be possible?

March 29, 2014 at 12:15 PM Flag Quote & Reply

Keith Lange
Member
Posts: 325

Also, didn't the US have the Super Bazooka, or something like it, back in 1944? Or was it still just on the drawing board?

March 29, 2014 at 2:57 PM Flag Quote & Reply

Keith Lange
Member
Posts: 325

Marcus1870 at March 29, 2014 at 12:15 PM

Both points are valid. The ideal situation would be both. The Pzchk was more cumbersome than a bazooka, much more prone to betraying the Hoover's position but more capable than a bazooka which on record bounced a lot off of T-34/85's in Korea.

The Panz e Faust is larger u inched by a gunpowder charge and would be cheaper to produce and train in. The limited range was I improved upon as was the size of the warhead, there are several variants. A close in weapon.  The big difference would be on the mass production of then enabling it to be issued at the platoon level or even squad level.  Bazooka teams (or SMAW teams in the modern USMC) were probably part of the weapons platoon of a company.  They would have to be attached t ok a platoon and therefore not as universally available.  The Faust would much more readily available for anti infantry and anti tank work.

A mixture of both (pushers at the company level and exhausts at platoon or squad level) would be immensely lethal.

Any chance that the Germans might get super bazooka or some U.S. equipment to supplement their own (since the U.S. could crank out those items at a phenomenal rate)?  Or is the logistical system so strained that this wouldn't be possible?

I think that the reason why so many 2.36 in bazooka rounds had no effect on the North Korean T-34s was because the rounds were old and stored in conditions where they weren't exactly given the best protection against the elements. But I agree-Panzerfausts are superb weapons, but they're basically short range, whereas Bazookas are superior in range. Also, I believe that the Super Bazooka was superior to the Panzershreck in range and effectiveness. My ideal situation would be to issue the Panzerfausts like we do LAW rockets, and equip Heavy Weapons and Anti-Tank platoons with the Super Bazookas. What do you think?

March 29, 2014 at 7:14 PM Flag Quote & Reply

Marcus1870
Member
Posts: 17

Concur about the super bazooka. It  was a product that was the result of combat experience and development of technology. The pushers was crude in comparison. The pushers spurred the development of the m20 superbazooka. agree about the combo. Greater flexibility at potentially small unit level, depending on the amount of leftists produced.

March 29, 2014 at 7:57 PM Flag Quote & Reply

Marcus1870
Member
Posts: 17

Just one thought, panzerfaust 250: effective range 250m, pen in excess of 200m- more than enough to defeat anything on the battlefield. A reusable pistol grip tube.  Might not need the super bazooka if the the Germans cranked out those an s ok me of the lower panzerfausts,  150's and below.

March 30, 2014 at 9:47 AM Flag Quote & Reply

Keith Lange
Member
Posts: 325

Marcus1870 at March 30, 2014 at 9:47 AM

Just one thought, panzerfaust 250: effective range 250m, pen in excess of 200m- more than enough to defeat anything on the battlefield. A reusable pistol grip tube.  Might not need the super bazooka if the the Germans cranked out those an s ok me of the lower panzerfausts,  150's and below.

But the 250's development wasn't finished, and none were produced. Furthermore, I would think that the German Republic would be too busy trying to produce the weapons that they were already familar with to do so. While the US was at the least working on the SB back in 44, and they would be able to finish developing it and other weapons.

March 30, 2014 at 12:38 PM Flag Quote & Reply

gee_colin@yahoo.co.uk
Site Owner
Posts: 910

I tend to agree about the republic's development issues, and have no intention of visiting the 250 in any way. The existing Pzfsts are up to the job [thus far]. My point on issue and TOE is that a group of soldiers coudl receive a handful of Pzfsts when they are available, and they were easy to use, although not as easy as is often suggested. Bazookas would be part of a TOE, within Hvy Weps units or issued out on a scale to formations, which would be a different thing.

--

March 31, 2014 at 4:57 AM Flag Quote & Reply

You must login to post.

go back to the top