Worldwide weapony post-T2K

[95th Rifleman]

The threads on American weapons post-exchange and the discussion on a german alternative to the G11 got me thinking. When you get right down to it, NATO is screwed. Most NATO nations rely on weapons that need modern industry, what would happen post-exchange for the west of the world?

I'll examine Britain first as it's the nation i know most about, I welcome comments and ideas for the other NATO nations and WP nations aswell.

In 2011 the L85 is an effecive, reliable and good weapon that will see service for the forseeable future. The only problem is it took H&K to fix the damn thing back in 2000. This is not going to be happening in the twilight war.

In 1996 the L85 was rather crap, it was one of those lovely designes that worked great in "ideal" conditions but proved to be sub-standard in the field. During the first gulf war the L85 was considered next to useless by many soldiers due to it's jamming issues. It can be assumed that a few of these faults had been ironed out by 1996 in the T2K timeline (as they had been in reality) but it was still an essentilay unreliable weapon. As the H&K upgrade in 2000 can be ruled out due to the events of the twilight war it can be safely assumed that post-nuclear exchange, this weapon would dissapear rather rapidly from service.

What does that leave the British with? Well the only alternative would be to fall back on the old FN-FAL variant known as the SLR L1A1 which was manufactured in Britain and it can be safely assumed that large numbers could be found in storage. But could Britain manufacture this weapon? the SLR was built in Liverpool, Birmingham and the London borough of Enfield. All 3 where targets of nuclear strikes, as was almost all of the UK's industrial capability.

So what the hell could Britain do, post-exchange, to re-arma nd rebuild her armed forces? I'm throwing this one out because, quite frankly, i have no bloody clue otherthan to continue to use stored weapons untill they ran out.

[Raellus]

What does that leave the British with? Well the only alternative would be to fall back on the old FN-FAL variant known as the SLR L1A1 which was manufactured in Britain and it can be safely assumed that large numbers could be found in storage. But could Britain manufacture this weapon? the SLR was built in Liverpool, Birmingham and the London borough of Enfield. All 3 where targets of nuclear strikes, as was almost all of the UK's industrial capability.

So what the hell could Britain do, post-exchange, to re-arma nd rebuild her armed forces? I'm throwing this one out because, quite frankly, i have no bloody clue otherthan to continue to use stored weapons untill they ran out.

I can't remember where we discussed this before, but this point has been brought up a couple of times. Some folks seem to think the L85's teething troubles would have been worked out in the continued Cold War of either T2k timeline, others favor a return to the tried-and-true SLR, thousands of which were held in reserve during the '90s.

I proposed the Brits restarting production of the AR-18. The UK was liscenced to produce them from '67-'79 (IRL) so a foundation for renewed/accelerated production would would already be in place come the mid- '90s WWIII.

By all accounts, the AR-18 is a relatively simple, reliable, and accurate 5.56mm assault rifle. It could be produced in large quantities and issued to those UK troops whose L85s were kaput, or for whom the pre-existing stocks of SLRs were not available.

[95th Rifleman]

I doubt the L85 could be fixed during wartime, it took a rather comprehensive upgrade program by H&K to create the A2 model and that was done ona peacetime budget.

I've never considered the AR-18, did a bit of delving and found details on the SAR-87 (the British variant). It seems the program was shut down in the 80's but I admit the idea of restarting it seems interesting. Apparently the SAR-87 could be converted to 9mm to be used as an SMG so it has the benefit of being able to have a dual purpose.

[Targan]

I agree that the L85 probably couldn't be fixed to the RL A2 standard during the Twilight War but in a number of previous discussions there has been a general consensus that the continuation of the Cold War in the 1990s (in the T2K) universe would have accelerated weapons and other military equipment development by up to five years. Accepting that hypothesis the L85's issues might well have been squared away in time for the Twilight War.

Having said that I very much support the idea of the AR-18 being put into production during the later part of the Twilight War in both the US and the UK. It makes sense. I also think that the UK (and Australia and New Zealand) would quite happily open up their stores of SLRs and issue them to support and late-war formations (this is both a considered opinion and an emotional response on my part as I hold a deep and abiding love for the SLR, its the only military weapon I feel completely confident about maintaining and firing).

[Raellus]

I doubt the L85 could be fixed during wartime, it took a rather comprehensive upgrade program by H&K to create the A2 model and that was done ona peacetime budget.

I agree. The theory put forth by others was that the problems would have been identified (and acknowledged) in the early '90s (in the T2K timeline), and, with the [continued] Cold War motivator of the Red Army in East Germany, a fix would be diligently and speedily applied from that point on until the TDM or thereabouts.

I'm not sure I buy that. As I understand it, the problems weren't really addressed (or faced up to) until Afghanistan c.2001. If that's truly the case, then why would it be identified and a fix implemented in the early '90s in the T2K timeline?

If my facts are crossed and it was Desert Storm in '91 that shined a spotlight on the L85's issues, then that's a different matter. Personally, I prefer a v1.0 timeline where the First Gulf War never happened. That begs the question whether the problems with the L85 would have been i.d.'ed/addressed before '97.

Either way, I like the idea of the UK manufacturing the AR-18 for at least some of its troops.

[simonmark6]

The Stirling Arms Factory is in Dagenham which is just south of London. Given the area's heavy industry I would imagine that it was very heavily damaged by London's nukes even if one wasn't used on the area itself.

Short term it is possibly necessary to examine what missions the UK Land Forces will be expected to perform. In my opinion, UKLF is going to be spending a lot of time reintegrating independent areas into what GDW called "England". I would think that the existing forces would be already armed in a way that could achieve the first step of this: taking territory.

Most of the independent areas of the UK have little more than small arms of various types and maybe a few mortars and AT weapons. The UKLF can muster a decent (for the time) number of tanks and artillery pieces. Most towns, in my opinion, are likely to just surrender rather than face destruction by heavy fire that they can't really oppose.

Some areas will be more difficult, Cornwall for example where the organisation of the enemy forces and the terrain makes armoured warfare less than optimal would be a problem and the UKLF would need to martial their forces carefully in order not to lose too much irreplacable materiel.

This leads to the second part of reintegrating the country:holding territory. This is much more difficult than using overwhelming firepower to take territory and needs boots on the ground. Most of the time however the occupation troops would be facing lightly armed guerrilla style forces and whilst modern firearms would be nice, they aren't totally necessary.

Given this scenario I'd imagine a two (maybe more) tier system with a core of trained veterans being given any modern weapons that could be maintained, SA80s and any stockpiles of SLRs. These troops would be the spear point and rapid reaction firebrigades backed up with the force's remaining tanks and artillery. The second tier would be a more paramilitary style occupying force which could be armed with civilian weapons and anything that could be manufactured in workshops, probably a version of the STEN gun (probably with all the problems that were originally associated with it). For support these light units might have small mortars or the odd workshop made bazooka style weapon.

By marshalling stocks in this way, surviving stocks of military style weapons would maybe last long enough for a manufacturing base to be re-established in a more unified England.

Eventually, once industry becomes more than just a couple of guys in a shed, I think that the AR-18 might be a viable weapon for the UKLF next generation rebuild but I don't see them being made in significant quantities until after the pacification of the country. Whether that includes the newly formed nations of Scotland and Wales is the topic for another thread.

[95th Rifleman]

If we assume the V1.0 timeline then there is really no chance for the L85 upgrade. The first (A1) upgrade program came as a direct result of the 1st Gulf War. If that conflict had not been fought then there would be no reason to upgrade the L85 (it's problems where never really highlighted till they where taken into proper wartime conditions), the same would go for the Challenger MBT.

If we assue the (imho flawed) V2.0 timeline then the L85A1 would of been introduced but it's very unlikely that the A2 upgrade would be carried out in wartime conditions. the A2 program involved sending around two hundred thousand L85s to the factory for what was essentialy an internal rebuild.

The SLR was arguably the best firearm ever issued to the British army, I don't think i've ever heard a bad thing about it. however when you consider the vast amount of 5.56 ammo in the Uk and in NATO militaries it seems doubtful that any post-exchange choice of longterm weapon would be in any other calibre.

However the problem with the SAR-87 (British AR-18) is that the company which produced it went out of business in the 80's. By the year 2000, post-exchange, would all the required plans and such even exist? The Americans have their hands full so it's not very likely they would even consider helping the UK. It can be safely assumed that America (both mil' and civ' governments) would be adopting an "america-first" isolationist policy as they rebuild.

[James Langham]

If we assume the V1.0 timeline then there is really no chance for the L85 upgrade. The first (A1) upgrade program came as a direct result of the 1st Gulf War. If that conflict had not been fought then there would be no reason to upgrade the L85 (it's problems where never really highlighted till they where taken into proper wartime conditions), the same would go for the Challenger MBT.

If we assue the (imho flawed) V2.0 timeline then the L85A1 would of been introduced but it's very unlikely that the A2 upgrade would be carried out in wartime conditions. the A2 program involved sending around two hundred thousand L85s to the factory for what was essentialy an internal rebuild.

The SLR was arguably the best firearm ever issued to the British army, I don't think i've ever heard a bad thing about it. however when you consider the vast amount of 5.56 ammo in the Uk and in NATO militaries it seems doubtful that any post-exchange choice of longterm weapon would be in any other calibre.

However the problem with the SAR-87 (British AR-18) is that the company which produced it went out of business in the 80's. By the year 2000, post-exchange, would all the required plans and such even exist? The Americans have their hands full so it's not very likely they would even consider helping the UK. It can be safely assumed that America (both mil' and civ' governments) would be adopting an "america-first" isolationist policy as they rebuild.

I do like the idea of issuing the AR18 in the UK but think a more likely option is the issue of some of the 10,000 M16s we purchased (even before we bought M16A2s and C7s). My guess is that we would do as the latest commercial models do and adopt the STANAG magazine.

Possibly in service it could be the Rifle L18 with the AR18S becoming the Carbine L19?

I can also see the HSF (Home Service Force) being issued with No4 rifles (Lee Enfield .303s) from storage (they had not long been withdrawn from the cadet forces). These could be issued AKs when enough are captured.

[Rainbow Six]

A few thoughts...

Even in a V1 timeline without the Gulf War, it was known that the A1 version had a number of flaws, so I’m one of those who think that some sort of L85A2 might start to appear in limited numbers from 1995 onwards (note I’m not suggesting it would be the same as the A2 version in current service).

In my T2K World the catalyst for the upgrade is the outbreak of the Sino Soviet War, which prompts the review that IRL happened after the 1991 Gulf War. This review is conducted as a matter of urgency, and starting sometime in 1996 Royal Ordnance begin manufacturing the A2 model, which immediately start going to front line troops (primarily the Infantry Battalions of the Regular Army). Production of the A2 continues up until the 1997 nuclear exchanges, although priority continues to go to combat units in Europe, so the A2 model is rare in the United Kingdom, being only found in the hands of a small number of Regular Army units.

Still in my T2K World, the A1 model is more common in the UK, being used by Territorial Infantry Battalions serving in a home defence role, however it has been widely supplemented by SLR’s and Sterlings, which have been brought out of “storage” and issued on a relatively large scale, particularly to support units (R Signals, Royal Logistics Corps) and RAF and Royal Navy units who have been pressed into service as infantry. I also envisage a number of SLR’s and Sterlings being issued to Civilian police during the third quarter of 1997. I also like the idea of the Bren gun being reissued as a support weapon.

There are various issues with production of the AR18 – as Simonmark6 has mentioned the factory where they were manufactured is in an area that is likely to suffer heavy damage in the nuclear exchange (if not from conventional attack beforehand) but perhaps the bigger issue is that IRL Sterling Armaments went bankrupt in 1988 as 95th Rifleman has pointed out. That said, if you want to introduce increased numbers of AR18’s into the UK I don't think that these problems are unresolvable; one could argue that in a World where the Cold War continues, a buyer might have been found to rescue the company from bankruptcy, so it’s not unreasonable to assume that production could have continued up to the nuclear exchange (at least).

Post exchange, I think the points put forward by Simonmark6 are spot on; given the relatively low numbers of weapons in private ownership, HMG’s forces should be more than capable of outgunning most unlawful groups. With regards to holding reintegrated territory, I agree this would be a far greater challenge than taking the territory in the first place. I think here we could expect to see militia forces being raised, made up of locally recruited volunteers, and quite possibly armed primarily with melee weapons, supplemented by a limited number of firearms (don’t laugh, but for those familiar with the programme the analogy that springs to mind here are the very early episodes of Dad’s Army, when Captain Mainwaring “appropriates” the one firearm the Home Guard platoon has for himself).

[Rainbow Six]

If we assume the V1.0 timeline then there is really no chance for the L85 upgrade. The first (A1) upgrade program came as a direct result of the 1st Gulf War. If that conflict had not been fought then there would be no reason to upgrade the L85 (it's problems where never really highlighted till they where taken into proper wartime conditions), the same would go for the Challenger MBT.

There would definitely still have been a Challenger 2; whilst it didn't enter service until the 1990's, the origins of the programme go back to the second half of the 1980's, so it would have gone ahead regardless of whether the 1991 Gulf War had taken place or not.

[Rainbow Six]

Moving away from the UK specifiically and addressing the Worldwide part of the thread, I think it's been discussed before that the Franco Belgian Union would be in control of the FN facility at Liege, so might be in a position to supply some weapons to its allies (e.g. Quebec).

[James Langham]

There would definitely still have been a Challenger 2; whilst it didn't enter service until the 1990's, the origins of the programme go back to the second half of the 1980's, so it would have gone ahead regardless of whether the 1991 Gulf War had taken place or not.

There will also be upgraded Cheiftains with the CHARM upgrades.

[James Langham]

Moving away from the UK specifiically and addressing the Worldwide part of the thread, I think it's been discussed before that the Franco Belgian Union would be in control of the FN facility at Liege, so might be in a position to supply some weapons to its allies (e.g. Quebec).

If it hasn't been nuked...

I would suggest a more likely approach is a covert supply of captured weapons.

[James Langham]

A few thoughts...

Even in a V1 timeline without the Gulf War, it was known that the A1 version had a number of flaws, so I’m one of those who think that some sort of L85A2 might start to appear in limited numbers from 1995 onwards (note I’m not suggesting it would be the same as the A2 version in current service).

In my T2K World the catalyst for the upgrade is the outbreak of the Sino Soviet War, which prompts the review that IRL happened after the 1991 Gulf War. This review is conducted as a matter of urgency, and starting sometime in 1996 Royal Ordnance begin manufacturing the A2 model, which immediately start going to front line troops (primarily the Infantry Battalions of the Regular Army). Production of the A2 continues up until the 1997 nuclear exchanges, although priority continues to go to combat units in Europe, so the A2 model is rare in the United Kingdom, being only found in the hands of a small number of Regular Army units.

Still in my T2K World, the A1 model is more common in the UK, being used by Territorial Infantry Battalions serving in a home defence role, however it has been widely supplemented by SLR’s and Sterlings, which have been brought out of “storage� and issued on a relatively large scale, particularly to support units (R Signals, Royal Logistics Corps) and RAF and Royal Navy units who have been pressed into service as infantry. I also envisage a number of SLR’s and Sterlings being issued to Civilian police during the third quarter of 1997. I also like the idea of the Bren gun being reissued as a support weapon.

There are various issues with production of the AR18 – as Simonmark6 has mentioned the factory where they were manufactured is in an area that is likely to suffer heavy damage in the nuclear exchange (if not from conventional attack beforehand) but perhaps the bigger issue is that IRL Sterling Armaments went bankrupt in 1988 as 95th Rifleman has pointed out. That said, if you want to introduce increased numbers of AR18’s into the UK I don't think that these problems are unresolvable; one could argue that in a World where the Cold War continues, a buyer might have been found to rescue the company from bankruptcy, so it’s not unreasonable to assume that production could have continued up to the nuclear exchange (at least).

Post exchange, I think the points put forward by Simonmark6 are spot on; given the relatively low numbers of weapons in private ownership, HMG’s forces should be more than capable of outgunning most unlawful groups. With regards to holding reintegrated territory, I agree this would be a far greater challenge than taking the territory in the first place. I think here we could expect to see militia forces being raised, made up of locally recruited volunteers, and quite possibly armed primarily with melee weapons, supplemented by a limited number of firearms (don’t laugh, but for those familiar with the programme the analogy that springs to mind here are the very early episodes of Dad’s Army, when Captain Mainwaring “appropriates� the one firearm the Home Guard platoon has for himself).

Plenty of L4 Brens around, I have a photo of the Royal Scots Dragoon Guards Battlegroup in the Gulf War with them and they were still in service in 1992/93 at leadt with the cadet forces in the UK.

A cheap and cheerful SMG (based on the Sterling but simplified) adds a lot of authority combined with a relatively easy manufacturing process. Lack of range is less of a problem as the UK is relatively weapon rare as has been noted.

[Rainbow Six]

If it hasn't been nuked...

I would suggest a more likely approach is a covert supply of captured weapons.

True on both points...V2 NATO Vehicle Guide has Liege occupied by 1st Belgian Infantry Division, but that doesn't definitively confirm one way or the other whether it was nuked or not.

Re: your second point, in my T2K World I have the Duke of Cornwall receiving captured German weapons from a French arms dealer.

[95th Rifleman]

There would definitely still have been a Challenger 2; whilst it didn't enter service until the 1990's, the origins of the programme go back to the second half of the 1980's, so it would have gone ahead regardless of whether the 1991 Gulf War had taken place or not.

I was referring to the Challenger 1 upgrade program, just after the gulf war several Challengers recieved various upgrades prior to the Chally 2 coming online. After the Chally 2 entered full production there was no need to upgrade the Chally 1 anymore.

Officialy the Chally 2 entered service in '98 but they began production in '93/'94 so I'm thinking that they would of been rushed into service when war became inevitable,perhaps enough to equip the BOAR?

[95th Rifleman]

Re: your second point, in my T2K World I have the Duke of Cornwall receiving captured German weapons from a French arms dealer.

This just switched on a lightbulb. I's completely forgotten about Fance! They would of been in a superb position to build weapons and supply NATO nations post-exchange, at crippling terms favouring France. Having sat out the Twilight war their manufacturing capabilities would be able to produce such equipment and munitions.

It strikes me that (assuming France doesn't decide to take advantage and expand it's borders) they could come out of the Twilight war as a dominating political and industrial powerhouse post-2k.

Now what would be the likelyhood of France becoming an arms-dealer post-exchange and if they do, what would they build?

[Raellus]

I don't think France would sell weapons and ammo to the NATO nations until well after the war was over. I see relations between France and Germany as being very frosty (especially after French occupation of German territory in the Rhineland). I would imagine that the other NATO countries that stuck with Germany and fought the Soviets would not feel particularly inclined to do business with France. I would imagine that the UK might also feel a little threatened by them.

I just had a thought that perhaps why the Germans wanted the U.S. forces out, but wanted to keep their AFVs and HW, was not so much to guard against the remaining Soviet forces in Poland (they seem to be pulling out and going home or disintigrating into scattered marauder bands in the spring of 2001), but to guard against the rising power of France.

[Rainbow Six]

I was referring to the Challenger 1 upgrade program, just after the gulf war several Challengers recieved various upgrades prior to the Chally 2 coming online. After the Chally 2 entered full production there was no need to upgrade the Chally 1 anymore.

Officialy the Chally 2 entered service in '98 but they began production in '93/'94 so I'm thinking that they would of been rushed into service when war became inevitable,perhaps enough to equip the BOAR?

Sorry mate, picked you up wrongly - I thought you meant there wouldn't be a Chally 2.

In the V1 timeline I could definitely see the Chally 2 coming into service earlier than it did IRL. How much earlier is, I guess, open to debate, and I can't locate any production figures to indicate how many vehicles could be produced per month. For myself, I opted to have five Chally 2 Regiments at the start of the war, with the other MBT Regiments using Chally 1 and Chieftains relegated to the ubiqutous "storage". As the War goes on, Chieftains are pulled from storage and new Chally 2's continue to be manufactured until the nuclear exchanges (Chally 1 production stopped circa 1990 or thereabouts), so chances are by the end of 1997 a typical RAC MBT Regiment could have a mix of Chieftains, Chally 1's and Chally 2's.

Incidentally, wikipedia makes reference to an SPAA platform based on the Challenger platform

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Challenger_Marksman

Whilst it appears to be a "what if" sort of thing, wonder if anyone thinks it's likely that it might have been picked up by the UK or others in a continuing Cold War?

[95th Rifleman]

If WW2 is anything to go by, it can be expected that a whole series of variants based on obsolete tanks to fulfill battlefield roles would appear over the courseof the war.

I would expect to see tank chassis in all nations become modified, especialy after damage. If you can salvage a tank with a fragged turret then it's easier to replace the turret than rebuild/repair.

Two ideas I toyed with ina campaighn was a kangaroo variant of the chieften which elaced the turret with troop carrying space in a similar fashion to the WW2 kangaroos and a variant of the chieften that replaced the gun turret with a missle system for the Milan.

[95th Rifleman]

I don't think France would sell weapons and ammo to the NATO nations until well after the war was over. I see relations between France and Germany as being very frosty (especially after French occupation of German territory in the Rhineland). I would imagine that the other NATO countries that stuck with Germany and fought the Soviets would not feel particularly inclined to do business with France. I would imagine that the UK might also feel a little threatened by them.

I just had a thought that perhaps why the Germans wanted the U.S. forces out, but wanted to keep their AFVs and HW, was not so much to guard against the remaining Soviet forces in Poland (they seem to be pulling out and going home or disintigrating into scattered marauder bands in the spring of 2001), but to guard against the rising power of France.

Tha's an interesting what-if for the end of the twilight war. If France decided to expand and take advantage of post-war europe, there isn't a hell of allot that could stop them.

[Rainbow Six]

I tend to agree with thepoints Raellus has put forward concerning the French supplying NATO. Quite apart from anything else, by the start of 1998 France has invaded the territory of two NATO members (West Germany and the Netherlands), so one could argue that under Article 5 of the NATO treaty, was at war with NATO (although personally I think that the realpolitik of the global situation at the time means that the UK, US, and others would choose to conevniently forget about Article 5).

Either way though, I think Rae's right - relations are going to be frosty at best. Also, those countries are going to be limited as to what they can offer as payment. In referring to French allies earlier, I was really meaning members (and prospective members) of the Franco Belgian Union. If the FN facilities at Liege are intact, then I think the French are in an excellent position to become a major (perhaps even the dominant) arms trader for many years after the War. One possible area of trade outwith the FBU might be with Spain and Portugal.

I still can't find anything to confirm one way or the other what Liege's fate was. Did the map in Going Home go that far west?

[Rainbow Six]

Tha's an interesting what-if for the end of the twilight war. If France decided to expand and take advantage of post-war europe, there isn't a hell of allot that could stop them.

Agreed. For what it's worth, my T2K UK has a fair amount of French meddling going on, all in the interests of keeping the UK destablised (and thus less able to pose any threat to French interests) for as long as possible. As well as the Duke of Cornwall, the French have also covertly supplied arms to Scottish separatists.

[95th Rifleman]

I still can't find anything to confirm one way or the other what Liege's fate was. Did the map in Going Home go that far west?

I'm inclined to assume they got hit. Fabrique Nationale was a huge supplier to western nations ad had to be on the Soviet target list. It would be crazy not to target it.

[Rainbow Six]

I'm inclined to assume they got hit. Fabrique Nationale was a huge supplier to western nations ad had to be on the Soviet target list. It would be crazy not to target it.

Yeah, it would make sense wouldn't it...

Mind you, a couple of minutes digging around the web also came up with Nexter (formerly GIAT)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nexter

Their official website...

http://www.nexter-group.fr/index.php?option=com_content&view=frontpage&Itemid=1&lang=en

Apparently the FAMAS rifle is manufctured in St Etienne...

[Raellus]

I wonder if the Germans got any American tac-nukes when most U.S. forces left north-central Europe during Omega...

With the U.S. XI Corps remaining in N.W. Poland as a bulwark against further Soviet aggression, and a west-leaning Free Polish Congress presumably cooperating with -or, at least not actively working against- Germany would be better placed to address the territorial incursion of the Franco-Belgian Union. I assume that a national German priority would be taking the Rhineland back at some point. With American material support, they could at least start thinking about doing so. IF they inherited a couple of tac-nukes, their position would be a little stronger. Still, it's advantage France, but Germany would be in better shape strategically than they had been before Omega.

[Fusilier]

I wonder if the Germans got any American tac-nukes when most U.S. forces left north-central Europe during Omega...

The Germans would have already had tactical nuclear weapons once hostilities* broke out for their Pershing missiles.

The warheads were kept by the US due to legal reasons in bases in West Germany, but were to be dispersed to the 2 West German Pershing Wings in wartime. The

NATO also kept a percentage of aircraft in reserve designated for nuclear weapons delivery - I am not sure if the Luftwaffe were originally included in this tasking, but if they were, then that is another source of weapons.


* Obviously not the initial hostiles with liberating East Germany, but rather once NATO became involved.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

As far as I have been able to tell, the Sterling Armaments Company was still in existence up to at least 1987 as that's when the final versions of the rifle where produced (hence it's designation of SAR-87). The rifle itself was a joint project between Sterling and Chartered Industries of Singapore (CIS) even though the primary work was done by Sterling as a result of their experience manufacturing the AR-18.

However, even though Sterling went out of business as such, it did not disappear. It was bought out by British Aerospace who also had control of Royal Ordnance. The designs were kept into the early 1990s when I believe BAe allowed CIS to buy the full rights to the rifle. CIS produced some upgraded versions as the Singapore Assault Rifle but dropped the design later and focused on the manufacture of the bullpup SAR-21 rifle.

It should also be pointed out that the apparent reason that BAe closed down the Sterling facilities was due to the UK government's belief in the 'peace dividend' from the end of the Cold War. Had the Cold War continued, it's highly unlikely the UK Govt would have shutdown as many military projects as it did, (many of which were canned simply to save money).
While this does not mean the SAR-87 would have been put back into production, it does suggest that the designs and tooling could have been kept rather than sold in their entirety to Singapore and thus been available for manufacturing the rifle when the Sino-Soviet conflict escalates.

Edit: As a side note, the Singaporeans had made an earlier rifle,the SAR-80. Once they got involved with Sterling, they produced the SR-88 based on the SAR-80 and the SAR-87. Neither of the Singaporean rifles made enough sales to remain in production.

[Targan]

It strikes me that (assuming France doesn't decide to take advantage and expand it's borders) they could come out of the Twilight war as a dominating political and industrial powerhouse post-2k.

It strikes you? Well yeah, that's exactly what happens in canon. I take it you've never read the Traveller: 2300 timeline?

[atiff]

It strikes you? Well yeah, that's exactly what happens in canon. I take it you've never read the Traveller: 2300 timeline?

Where can a good timeline for this be found on the Net? I've looked before without much success...

[Targan]

I dunno about on the net but I've got heaps of stuff on my hard drive. I'll upload a bare-bones Traveller 2300 timeline as an attachment to this post but I don't think I'm allowed to upload the full T:2300 backstory, it probably exceeds 'fair use' under copyright.

Edit: Scratch that, every time I try to upload the file as a Word doc or as a .rar archive the upload fails. The size of the file doesn't exceed the limit and both file types are on the allowable list so the site must be having some kind of issue.

Anyone who wants Traveller 2300 backhistory info is welcome to PM me their email address and we'll work something out.

[95th Rifleman]

It strikes you? Well yeah, that's exactly what happens in canon. I take it you've never read the Traveller: 2300 timeline?

Nope, never played traveller or read the timeline for it. just T2K and the later 2013 version.

[pmulcahy11b]

I dunno about on the net but I've got heaps of stuff on my hard drive. I'll upload a bare-bones Traveller 2300 timeline as an attachment to this post but I don't think I'm allowed to upload the full T:2300 backstory, it probably exceeds 'fair use' under copyright.

Edit: Scratch that, every time I try to upload the file as a Word doc or as a .rar archive the upload fails. The size of the file doesn't exceed the limit and both file types are on the allowable list so the site must be having some kind of issue.

Anyone who wants Traveller 2300 backhistory info is welcome to PM me their email address and we'll work something out.

Email it to me. I can put it on my site for download, and even turn it into a PDF if people would prefer.

[Legbreaker]

I'd just like to stress that the books state neutral countries were hit in with nukes to deny their facilities and resources to the enemy. This tells me that while not wiped off the face of the planet as the belligerent countries effectively were, France, Switzerland, and all the other neutrals aren't going to be in much shape to supply their own needs, let alone export anything beyond despair and refugees.

They certainly weren't hit anywhere near as hard as those actually involved in the fighting, but to me that just means they'll have a leg up - perhaps a 10 year head start in reconstruction.

It's worth noting however that after WWII, the loosing countries came back fairly strong (after a couple of decades of reconstruction) while the winning countries economies went into decline. Simplified, this was because their outdated factories were flattened and when rebuilt, updated to the latest technology, while those who retained their old factories found that in the 70's and 80's they were up for some very significant upgrading costs. I believe this was one of the causes behind the unemployment problems of the time.

Of course in T2K, those countries which were flattened, aren't going to get the assistance the countries of the 40's and 50's did and therefore reconstruction and recovery is going to be orders of magnitude more difficult and slow.

[Tegyrius]

Where can a good timeline for this be found on the Net? I've looked before without much success...

http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product_info.php?products_id=390&it=1

http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product_info.php?products_id=413&it=1

- C.

[Mohoender]

Unless you review the game entirely, Liege has not been nuked. Simply because there are no real targets there and simply because, if you nuke Liege (and other minor cities), you can't go with the idea that the Franco-Belgian Union escape most of the nuking.

About France, supplying NATO: why not? I effectively doubt that it sells weapons to countries such as Germany and Netherlands but a deal with UK is possible. Altough, I advocate that tensions between UK and France should be high, it is not the only viable option. As much as I think Liege has survived, I, however, think that Brussel was destroyed as NATO HQ makes it a major target. Then, what would be NATO in the game?

Talking of France weapon production capability, it is basically intact and, may be, even superior to what it was before the war. The major weapon production area of the country has escaped the nukes (french arm factories are largely located in small cities while the sites located in the largest cities are mostly administrative). You'll find all of the actual ones here (more existed 20 years ago but that gives a fair idea):
http://www.industrymakers.com/ambrosale/recherche_new/recherche_resultat.asp?TypeRecherche=RechercheActi vit%E9&Chapitre=32847

Therefore, France will still be producing weapons for itself as I can tell you that the number of units available to France is much more important that what you find in the game. The French army should be 3 or 4 time what is indicated in the NATO sourcebook. The Foreign Legion alone should have grown from 8000-10000 to more than 30000. A special policy might even involve the refugees at France's borders: "Apply to the legion, we temporarily feed your relatives. Join it, we allow them into the country. Serve your time, and they'll be granted citizenship". The French army as given in the game is the peacetime army (450.000-550.000 at the time), it should have grown to wartime numbers (1-1.5 millions).

Then, France will have taken over the weapon production capability of Belgium (largelly located in the Meuse valley, in the Ardennes and south of Brussel) with a nuclear research center depending of Liege university (Sart-Tilman), aircraft production capability (spareparts and more for the F16/Hercules), tank and vehicle production (Patton, M113/AIFV, Scorpion light tank and apc family, Land rover...), Heavy weapons and gun by Cockrill-Sambre (90mm gun, mortars), Light weapons (FN). Exports to the UK, Ireland, Portugal/Spain, the Middle East, Latin America and allied countries in Africa is perfectly plausible.

Concerning Germany, I have a tendency to have Switzerland being the main provider with Germany supplying what it can in raw materials.

Sweden could be the main weapon provider to the Scandinavian area

Soviet Union and US still produce a small number of weaponry/equipment as do Israel which as always been a master at recycling military equipments.

[Mohoender]

I'd just like to stress that the books state neutral countries were hit in with nukes to deny their facilities and resources to the enemy. This tells me that while not wiped off the face of the planet as the belligerent countries effectively were, France, Switzerland, and all the other neutrals aren't going to be in much shape to supply their own needs, let alone export anything beyond despair and refugees.


I always thought that this concerned essentially oil facilities. In the case of France you simply can't except by devastating the country. In the case of Switzerland, the country would have immediately switched to its wartime politics and much facilities would have survived being moved. For my part, i don't even think that one nuke hit Switzerland. Why would you do that? The country has no oil, no raw materials and you already disrupt so much the raw material production of its neighbors that the ammount of supply the Swiss can send is far from being capable of tipping the balance. Most oif what it produces will be used domestically and what it would send to (for exemple Germany) will be ammo and spareparts.

[Mohoender]

I did not include ships and engineer equipments

Tanks
- AMX 56 Leclerc (slowly entering service in the early 1990’s it is expensive and only fully replaced the AMX-30 in the most prestigious units such as the 2nd and 5th DB).
- AMX-30 Brenus (the main French tank)
- AMX-30B2 (progressively being improved to Brenus standards)
- AMX-13/90 (phased out in 1989, several could be returned to service, spare parts would not be a problem)
- Leopard 1 (spare parts can be produced along some for M60 Patton)

Recon vehicle
- Vextra-105 (may be entering service in the very late 1990’s)
- AMX-10RC
- VBC-90 (a fair number in the gendarmerie)
- ERC-90
- AML-90
- VBL (several thousands)
- EBR (a few might be put back into service, nevertheless unlikely)
- Scorpion 90 light tanks

IFV-APC
- AMX-10P
- AMX-13 VCI (a good question)
- VAB (the main French work horse)
- VBRG (several hundreds in the Gendarmerie)
- Vextra IFV (may be entering service in the very late 1990’s, , I find it more likely than the VBCI)
- AIFV (also spare parts for M113)
- Spartan APC
- Local vehicles such as the BDX
- PVP (not developped until the early 2000's but it could be developped nonetheless as it is based on vehicles existing in T2K).

Soft-skinned vehicles
- Land Rover
- Peugeot P4
- Auverland
- Hotchkiss Jeep
- Renault (TRM-2000/4000/10000)
- Volvo N10
- Berliet GB 8KT/Renault GBC180 and GBH280
- Acmat VLRA (possibly a number of armoured version)
- Simca-Marmon
- Several more types as the list is quite large even including possibly a fair number of WW2 GMC trucks

Artillery
- Pluton/Hadès
- MLRS
- AuF1
- Mk F3
- M109 (spare parts can be produced)
- Caesar system
- TR-F1
- Older 105-155mm howitzers
- Kanonenjagdpanzer (small number with Belgium)
- Crotale air defense system
- Roland air defense system
- Hawk air defense system
- Mistral air defense system
- AMX-13/30 AD with twin 30mm
- 20mm air defense gun (tarrasque and Rheinmetall both home produced)

Support Weapons
- Mortars (120, 81 and 60mm)
- MILAN
- HOT
- ERYX
- APILAS
- LRAC-89
- Grenade launchers and rifle grenades

Light weapons
- Browning HP
- Beretta M9
- French pistols (forgot which one)
- MAT-49 (likely to be back in production as it is easy to build)
- Beretta M12
- MAS-49/56 (rare and not in front line)
- FAMAS
- FN FAL
- FN FNC
- FR F1/F2
- Hecate
- FN Minimi
- FN MAG
- M2HB

Aircrafts
- Dassault Rafale
- Dassault Mirage 2000
- F16 Fighting Falcon (spare parts can be produced)
- Dassault Mirage F1
- Dassault Mirage 3/5
- Crusader F8
- Dassault Mirage IV
- Sepecat Jaguar
- Dassault Super Etendard
- Breguet Atlantic
- Breguet Alizé
- E-3 Sentry
- Dassault Alpha Jet
- Fouga Magister
- Several basic training aircrafts
- Airbus A400M (In very late 1990’s if any)
- C-130 Hercules
- C-160 Transall
- Noratlas
- Airbus
- Caravelle
- Nord 262
- KC-135
- Several types of light transport aircraft including Embraer, Falcon, Broussard, Paris…

Helicopters
- Tigre
- Gazelle
- Alouette
- Puma/Super Puma and evolutions
- Agusta 109
- Lynx
- Dauphin

[Legbreaker]

I always thought that this concerned essentially oil facilities.
The following is from the 2.2 BYB.
major industrial and oil centers in neutral nations are targeted, to prevent their possible use by the other side.
The exact same words are in V1.0.
So, oil isn't the only target possibility, and in fact is likely to only represent a minority of targets hit in the neutral countries given the wealth of industry which could be deemed as potentially helpful to an enemy - weapons, ammunition, vehicles, spare parts, electronics, the list just goes on and on.

Now I know next to nothing about the distribution of industry across France, but I'm fairly certain it's not all located in one convenient to hit with a nuke location and therefore I can see relatively widespread destruction. Not perhaps on the scale seen in belligerent countries, but destruction all the same.

As for Switzerland, perhaps they did dodge a nuke, mainly I'd think because they have a loooooong history of neutrality unlike France. Switzerland surely has some nukeable targets, but given their history of sitting on the fence, I'd assume they were not hit. What's the point after all? It's not like the Swizz have ever helped (or harmed for that matter) anybody any time in the last few centuries!

[Mohoender]

Now I know next to nothing about the distribution of industry across France, but I'm fairly certain it's not all located in one convenient to hit with a nuke location and therefore I can see relatively widespread destruction. Not perhaps on the scale seen in belligerent countries, but destruction all the same.


And, then, we are back to the old issue: is France party to the war or not. Unlike US, France has little in term of large industrial centers except if you count the large civilian centers to the north, Strasbourg, Toulouse and the Rhone Valley. Then, to really destroy it, you must use quite a lot of nukes as Industries are much more scattered.

Large French cities are administrative and trade centers, rarely industrial centers (a nuke on Paris will not destroy one single industry). Paris is ten times smaller than NYC (3 times smaller than Detroit) but the area containing the industries around Paris is ten times larger than the same NYC.

Ground weapon industries are scattered in the small and average cities of the Massif Central valleys. If you take Roanne where most current tanks are being produced, the city itself is 35.000h with an urban area of 100.000. Basically, it is Burlington (Vermont).

If you use the needed amount of nukes, France get into the war or to his knees (fine with me but if it's so, it can't manage to retain any sort of government, the Union Corse is an urban legend, it can't move to the Rhine and secure the borders, It never invaded Belgium, Germany or Netherlands).

The game has been quite good when locating most destruction to the Atlantic coast. If you hit a number of location to the Atlantic coast you deny to France the capability to trade with the outside. First, you destroy half of its oil production. Second, you destroy its main harbor facilities (Bordeaux, Nantes, Le Havre, Dunkerque and Saint Nazaire) with the exception of Marseille. If I'm not mistaken, Marseille is still working and that could be because an eventual nuke hit the "Etang de Berre" instead of the city (one more quarter of the oil production capability). If inland cities are hit, these should be Lille, Strasbourg and Toulouse. You can add Lyon but it is simply not fun.

If you take the case of Belgium, the problem is quite the same and targets should be Antwerp and Brussel. Ostende Might be on the list as well but I tend to spare it because it, then, allows France to support Quebec. Liege could indeed be a target but most arm indsutries and the FN might survive a hit on the city. It will depend on where the nuke hits. If it hits to the north, the FN is destroyed. If it hits to the center, little factories if any are destoyed. If it hits to the south, the Sart-Tilman is demaged. Liege itself is at the bottom of the Meuse Valley and surrended by a large plateau. If you hit the city, the plateau might not suffer much.

[Nowhere Man 1966]

The threads on American weapons post-exchange and the discussion on a german alternative to the G11 got me thinking. When you get right down to it, NATO is screwed. Most NATO nations rely on weapons that need modern industry, what would happen post-exchange for the west of the world?

I'll examine Britain first as it's the nation i know most about, I welcome comments and ideas for the other NATO nations and WP nations aswell.

In 2011 the L85 is an effecive, reliable and good weapon that will see service for the forseeable future. The only problem is it took H&K to fix the damn thing back in 2000. This is not going to be happening in the twilight war.

In 1996 the L85 was rather crap, it was one of those lovely designes that worked great in "ideal" conditions but proved to be sub-standard in the field. During the first gulf war the L85 was considered next to useless by many soldiers due to it's jamming issues. It can be assumed that a few of these faults had been ironed out by 1996 in the T2K timeline (as they had been in reality) but it was still an essentilay unreliable weapon. As the H&K upgrade in 2000 can be ruled out due to the events of the twilight war it can be safely assumed that post-nuclear exchange, this weapon would dissapear rather rapidly from service.

What does that leave the British with? Well the only alternative would be to fall back on the old FN-FAL variant known as the SLR L1A1 which was manufactured in Britain and it can be safely assumed that large numbers could be found in storage. But could Britain manufacture this weapon? the SLR was built in Liverpool, Birmingham and the London borough of Enfield. All 3 where targets of nuclear strikes, as was almost all of the UK's industrial capability.

So what the hell could Britain do, post-exchange, to re-arma nd rebuild her armed forces? I'm throwing this one out because, quite frankly, i have no bloody clue otherthan to continue to use stored weapons untill they ran out.

I can see them possibly going back to the old Lee-Enfield although you'd have to convert them to 7.62mm NATO or make more British .303

Chuck

[95th Rifleman]

The Russians are many things, stupid is not one of them. An attack on France is almost guaranteed to bring them into the war on NATO's side.

Sure some neutral countries would of been hit but i don't think the soviets would of done much against France, not after they made such a show of staying out of the war.

France has a significant military, both conventional and nuclear with a strong naval capability. As long as they stayed neutral I don't honestly see the soviets gunning for them. Why risk bringing them into the war when they are happy to sit out and watch?

[95th Rifleman]

I can see them possibly going back to the old Lee-Enfield although you'd have to convert them to 7.62mm NATO or make more British .303

Chuck

In second line and civil defense units, definitey.

[Nowhere Man 1966]

The Russians are many things, stupid is not one of them. An attack on France is almost guaranteed to bring them into the war on NATO's side.

Sure some neutral countries would of been hit but i don't think the soviets would of done much against France, not after they made such a show of staying out of the war.

France has a significant military, both conventional and nuclear with a strong naval capability. As long as they stayed neutral I don't honestly see the soviets gunning for them. Why risk bringing them into the war when they are happy to sit out and watch?

Good points, I think the Soviets would have enough problems with all the American (and UK/Red Chinese) nukes they had to take a hit with. I think if they can avoid the French beating them up as well, they would leave France alone. I think over time, maybe the USSR would seek France as a trading partner, if the Soviets could get things going relatively well, France could receive raw materials from the USSR in exchange for finished products.

Chuck

[Mohoender]

I can see them possibly going back to the old Lee-Enfield although you'd have to convert them to 7.62mm NATO or make more British .303

Chuck

The conversion has been carried out in the mid-1950's:)

[Rainbow Six]

The Russians are many things, stupid is not one of them. An attack on France is almost guaranteed to bring them into the war on NATO's side.

Sure some neutral countries would of been hit but i don't think the soviets would of done much against France, not after they made such a show of staying out of the war.

France has a significant military, both conventional and nuclear with a strong naval capability. As long as they stayed neutral I don't honestly see the soviets gunning for them. Why risk bringing them into the war when they are happy to sit out and watch?

Agreed. Whilst nuking Venezuela or Mexico (for example) would incur little real consquences to either side, an important point to consider is that France is unique amongst neutral nations in that it has the ability to retaliate in kind for any nuclear strikes against it.

Personally, I rather like the option put forward on the etranger site

During this period French ports and oil facilities were struck. France asked, and was given permission, to transit German airspace. The hope was that France would enter the war on the side of NATO. CoFAS responded with the ‘pre-strategic’ ASMP strikes against selected Soviet targets. For every strike against France, one Soviet target was hit. The point had been made France would stay out of the war if left alone.

Full article is on the following link

http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~dheb/2300/Historical/PGAA1.htm

[Fusilier]

"major industrial and oil centers in neutral nations are targeted, to prevent their possible use by the other side."

Which can arguably mean potentially sparing the medium and minor industrial and oil centers in neutral nations.

[Legbreaker]

It doesn't have to be the Soviets nuking France - there's plenty of other countries that may do it, out of spite for not upholding their treaty obligations if nothing else.
Or it could have been the Soviets. All they'd need to do is put the blame on somebody else and with the French invasion of Germany (to the Rhine) they'd have a perfect excuse to point the finger at either Germany, the US or even Britain.
It could be argued that Nato commanders/politicians honestly believed the French had climbed into bed with the Italians (another former Nato partner) and were opening an additional front behind Nato lines.

Anyway, the point is it's possible France was indeed nuked.

[Mohoender]

Anyway, the point is it's possible France was indeed nuked.

Obviously but the point is up to each gamemaster.

If you want to go by the game's point of view the answer is lightly!

If you change that point of view and add a new approach the answer is of course.

As a result, France would be mix of isolated and devasted lands with small local areas under control. As the nuke were falling on France, destroying much little than in the rest of Europe but eliminating Transport, national political leadership, communication and power production (The destruction of Paris and Lyon being the major blow), the country entered a period of progressive dissolution. Regions were the first to secede, declaring sovereignty over their lands one after another. The departements didn't play a real role but simply dissolved. Cities turned onto the countryside. Then, county's (cantons) turned against each other generating as many petty war as possible. Finally, Valleys turned onto valleys and villages turned on each other. Members of the gendarmerie and local forces brought support to those they new best and peasants digged out the weapons their fathers and grand fathers had burried.

The South of France has become even more violent when the Corsicans tried to take over. They were quickly opposed by the local mafias and the entire area from Marseille to Nice is now a war zone were gangs are conducting a bitter fight. Men are killed or executed on a daily bases (often with wife and kids). Then, people living further away from the coastline distrust those that call gangsters and anyone coming from the coast is shot on sight.

The low and high mountain turned onto themselves and are considered out of control. In fact, nothing is so far from the truth and they are probably the most stable areas as long as you are not a stranger (bear in mind that, in France, stranger often relate to people you cannot reach by foot walk). Mountaineer have established societies of their own which, if isolated, are among the most stable. Funny enough, the most remote areas of France have become the most advanced as they still had the capability to function onto themselves.

Some area of civilized stability remain nonetheless in regions such as Britany or the Camargue. Then, the cities that housed a garrison (when not destroyed) or retained some kind of fortification often managed to gain control over the closed countryside. As an exemple, Epernay, with support from the 34th engineer regiment, managed to take control over part of the Marne Valley. In addition, St Tropez and St Malo are again cities of privateers and pirates as their militias had been rebuilt.

Nuke France, and here is a way it could have evolved.

[95th Rifleman]

An idea I've been toying with is a timeline that assumes the soviets left france alone. The year is late 2000 and the players are part of an ad-hoc unit that has either been pulled back into germany or found their own way there.

The twilight war is effectively over. America has a civil war to deal with, the european nations that got stuck in are hurt and focussing on their own affairs. In the aftermath of the twilight war the WP effectively fell apart with russia nursing her injuries, perhaps dealing with an internal revolt (playing around with some ideas on that).

France decides to expand, either they get a nationalist leader who pulls a napolean/hitler (this is te idea i'm most inclined to go with) or the democraic government decides it's time to take advantage.

The PCs, tired and war weary, find themselves facing this new French invasion of germany.

Working on the details and planning to run it as eithera stand alone scenario or a medium length campaigh for my gaming group.

[Mohoender]

Nice Ideas but I have one comment and two questions, hoping it can help

In the aftermath of the twilight war the WP effectively fell apart with russia nursing her injuries, perhaps dealing with an internal revolt (playing around with some ideas on that).

Here is the comment. Russia would be dealing with several revolts I think. Nationalism is not only the fact of the Chechens and as soon as Moscow cease to pay for peace, several might rise up. The Mongols might also be an interesting addition to this.

France decides to expand, either they get a nationalist leader who pulls a napolean/hitler (this is te idea i'm most inclined to go with) or the democraic government decides it's time to take advantage.


First questions why should the leader of France be Napoleonic (Hitler is out of the question)? It can be, however, a revival of the monarchy or extremist Republicans such as Robespierre (or even beter Marat). It can also be a type of communism. It is widely outlooked but communism is a reference to the Paris commune and the red flag was first raised in France (before 1789 it meant that you couldn't count on any mercy, by 1790 it was raised by the French National Guard and it was raised again in 1871 durng the Paris Commune).

Another question: Why would France expend toward Germany where it will have to enter a bitter fight (everything there has to be rebuilt, no industrial advantage, mining exploitation are all destroyed and already well exhausted)? IMO, the natural expension zone for France is Africa where it would be able to take over the ongoing genocide with nobody to complain about it. Raw materials might not be readily available but there is little extended destruction and raw materials are far from exhaustion.

Not a politically correct idea, I agree but couldn't it make sence?

[95th Rifleman]

First questions why should the leader of France be Napoleonic (Hitler is out of the question)? It can be, however, a revival of the monarchy or extremist Republicans such as Robespierre (or even beter Marat). It can also be a type of communism. It is widely outlooked but communism is a reference to the Paris commune and the red flag was first raised in France (before 1789 it meant that you couldn't count on any mercy, by 1790 it was raised by the French National Guard and it was raised again in 1871 durng the Paris Commune).

Another question: Why would France expend toward Germany where it will have to enter a bitter fight (everything there has to be rebuilt, no industrial advantage, mining exploitation are all destroyed and already well exhausted)? IMO, the natural expension zone for France is Africa where it would be able to take over the ongoing genocide with nobody to complain about it. Raw materials might not be readily available but there is little extended destruction and raw materials are far from exhaustion.

Not a politically correct idea, I agree but couldn't it make sence?

When I describe a possible French leader pulling a napolean/hitler I meant in the political sense. Post-2k there would be allot of social and political turmoil in all nations, including France. The world has just weathered WW3 and survived (sort of). One of the ldest tools in the political armoury is to focus the people on an outside threat.

Economicly Fance is relatively screwed at first, there are no countries in a position to import or export untill industries and economies can be rebuilt. Sure France could manufacture goods and charge steep prices for them, but who can actualy pay? We are talking mostly in terms of IOUs for the first five to ten years of rebuilding. Where are the cargo ships and transport planes to deliver these goods?

Now I'm making some big assumptions in order for this scenario to work I admit. I'm assuming that a nationalistic, charismatic individual arises in France and uses fiery, nationalistic rehtoric to become popular and powerful. This also assumes a weak and ineffective administatration at the time. Going along similar lines to Germany in the 30's, this charismatic leader preaches unity through fear, he creates in the national subconsious a fear of France's neighbours. He tells the people that envious eyes in broken, war-mongering nations look at France, they hate France for not joining in their bloodbath and they see Fance as their next target.

The fact that Germany is no military threat doesn't even mean anything to the majority of French civilians, tis leader reminds them of the two previous world wars, started by German aggression. He spins the Twilight war as another Germanic power-grab, citing it was Germany's lust for domination that once more plunged the world into war. Sure it is anoutright lie, but the facts can be bent to fuel it, after all Germany DID start the war by advancing into east germany did it not?

With the fear of their neighbours to spur them, the French rally around this new leader and rebuild the French economy, forging links with the nations not affected by the war too much, rebuilding cargo ships and the like. The fear-tactics he has used to get into power rule the French leader (as it has done for every politician who uses such politics) and incidents along the border which he has used for political gain force hm to take an aggressive stance and before you know it, French troops are crossing the rhine.

Sure it's unlikely, but it is a possibility.

[Raellus]

I bet that France after the TDM has a lot of trouble with its minority populations. Worst case scenario would like a lot like the situation we see in the film Children of Men. Couple that scenario with nationalist insurgencies in Holland and Belgium, and a Germany eager to reclaim its lost territory (and rearmed with American AFVs and heavy weapons ceded to them aftere Omega), and France is going to have plenty of issues to deal with in late 2000 and beyond.

This extreme turmoil could lead to the election of a French ultra-nationalist leader.

[Legbreaker]

Of course we all know that TDM is a term that can only apply to the USA. Much of the rest of the world had already received their ration (and would continue to do so for some time).

[Raellus]

Of course we all know that TDM is a term that can only apply to the USA. Much of the rest of the world had already received their ration (and would continue to do so for some time).

I use "TDM" as shorthand for the escalation/height of the nuclear exhanges. Please don't take offense.

[TrailerParkJawa]

When I was thinking of source material for the northern California region I had wondered how the various MilGov cantoments would rearm. I don't believe there are any small arms factories in this region. Even if there was its not easy to get materials for high quality arms.

So something I thought of would be that the powers that be in the California would start producing new weapons entirely instead of trying to build weapons from the world that was.

What would they build? Well I thought it would have to be something simple like the M3 submachine gun. It would might look different but have similar performance. Something that can be built from stamped parts and by labor that isn't highly skilled. I even thought of a name "M3 Grizzly".

[Legbreaker]

I'm fairly sure you'd see a lot of simple weapons reappearing such as the M3 and the Sten gun. I think the Sten was even built in backyard workshops in WWII, with a few examples actually made from basic plans and scrap metal behind the lines in France.

[Mohoender]

Sure it's unlikely, but it is a possibility.

In fact it makes perfect sense. I only disagree with your economic point of view. You still think economic in terms of profit and that is a conception outdated under T2K. Most exchange will be made either in gold or through barter and France retains a need for raw materials.

Transport might be a problem of course but you can expect France to do two things. First, it will engaged in a ship contruction program similiar to that of the Liberty Ships in WW2 (although at a much reduced rate). Then, it will seize and repair whatever ships it can find. Several will already be in Belgium/French harbors. A little more might be seized in the Netherlands and African ports.

As a result, I would expect the French to be able to establish some secure sealanes within two years. These will not extend worldwide but should possibly be enough to maintain communication with the less damaged areas. At the time France still had a fair number of escort ships and much more could be built in little time (Estienne d'Orves-class for exemple).

[Legbreaker]

I'd imagine the French would only really need small escort vessels to protect their shipping post 2000. Patrol boats (armed with a couple of torpedos and a 20mm gun), corvettes and the like should be more than enough to beat off any pirates that may be lurking about in most places. The bigger prewar ships (frigates, cruisers, etc) should be sufficient for the longer range operations given the almost total lack of serious opposition anywhere on the planet.
Can't see total domination of the sea lanes happening though - it's more likely the French would work on the old convoy principle of half a dozen plus freighters escorted by two or three naval vessels (which may even include a submarine).

[Mohoender]

In fact, Corvettes should do the entire escort job (what we call Aviso) as all of our models have been conceived with long range operation in mind (due to our overseas territories). They would be supplemented by our Escorteurs (a type of ship no longer in French naval service).

Here is an more than excellent websites on French ships (sorry in French, I don't know how the english version works). If you need any help I'll be glad to help

http://www.netmarine.net/index.htm

I add a few link to relevant ships. Several were in storage but could be put back to sea at the time. Most were taken out of service in the early 1990's but that would certainly not be the case.

http://www.netmarine.net/bat/fregates/floreal/index.htm
http://www.netmarine.net/bat/avisos/destiennedorves/index.htm
http://www.netmarine.net/bat/ee/duperre/index.htm
http://www.netmarine.net/bat/ae/cdtriviere/index.htm

Here is the link to decommissioned ships

http://www.netmarine.net/bat/listes/desindfr.htm

[Webstral]

France has a significant military, both conventional and nuclear with a strong naval capability. As long as they stayed neutral I don't honestly see the soviets gunning for them. Why risk bringing them into the war when they are happy to sit out and watch?

The Soviets play for the long term. If France escapes significant nuking, then France will become a dominant power on the Continent. While a dominant France is better than a dominant Germany, dominant France isn't much better. Everything Mo has been writing is perfect justification for knocking France down to size. It's just not in the best interests of the Soviets to leave France functional. Once the Anglo-Americans and the Soviets have had their surgical strategic exchange, de Gaulle's equation about tearing off an arm loses its logic. By the end of 1997, there aren't any targets left in the USSR that are the equivalent of Paris, Brest, etc. The Soviets have more to lose by leaving France relatively intact than they do by knocking France into the mud with everyone else.

None of the arguments being made here about France's arms industry, potential to support NATO, potential to be a post-War major power, etc. will have escaped the Soviets. Every argument made for France's capabilities is an argument in favor of destroying Paris, Brest, major air bases, and throwing in some EMP to knock out the French nuclear power plants. Without oil and without electricity, France's arms industry is going to look a lot like everybody's else's.

The francophiles among us should look on the situation as evidence of standing. France is an important Western power. Therefore, France gets pounded along with everybody else because the Soviets won't tolerate any Western power standing head-and-shoulders above the rest in the aftermath just for the sake of respecting neutrality. The French nuclear arsenal might ensure that the Soviets don't hit France as hard as they hit Canada; but the French aren't going to go overboard in retaliatory strikes, either, since the Soviet nuclear capability vastly overmatches France's nuclear capability.


Webstral

[Mohoender]

I entirely agree with Webstral and the only reason I don't go that way is because I don't feel like modifying the game in this direction.

However, Webstral, you still overlooked one thing. At the time, the french communist party is still strong and it takes order directly from Moscow. In a T2K setting, the French government had just switched to a coalition composed by communist and socialist.

In the 1980's relations between France and USSR had been strained by the relations France maintained with NATO. France walking away from NATO could very well warm up the relations with Moscow. Then, what you say about the soviets equally apply to NATO/US (and don't tell me that US doesn't play long term :D). Therefore, the nuking of France might equally be the doing of US. US government attitude with Iraq tends to convince me of that. My take anyway.

[Legbreaker]

Web, you summed it up beautifully!

In a T2K setting, the French government had just switched to a coalition composed by communist and socialist.

...until the next election....
Nothing lasts forever, particularly in politics. In time, the Communists and Socialists will loose power and France will become a threat. Although there are some friendly faces on staff at the time, the Soviets are unlikely to think twice about dropping some hurt on the French, just to keep things even.

And with the Com/Soc alliance in power, I can't see the USA, UK or Germany holding back either, especially Germany when the French annex Belgium, parts of Holland and step over the Rhine. The Germans may not have much left in the arsenal by then though.

It's a scenario ripe for nukes with all sides blaming the other for their use and nobody spending more than a few minutes discussing why they shouldn't do it.

[Mohoender]

I'm not discussing anyones point as I think that all could perfectly fit. However, here is what I think could have happen with France.

In 1981, François Mitterand became president and established a coalition with the French Communist Party (at the time the communist party had 44 seats in the parliament). In 1988, the left had won its second election but the communists had lost influence, gaining only 25 seats.

However, with the revival and reinforcement of communsit rule in the Soviet Union itself, the French communist party was revived again. Receiving a fair amount of funding from Moscow it could overcome the financial difficulties it faced in the late 1980's while the politburo was taken over by a new generation. As a result, by 1993, the French communist party had regained part of its previous popularity and was increasingly regarded as a valid option by the French working class. When the legislative election came, while the left was defeated, the communist had gain a lot of influence getting 70 seats while the socialists had won only 57.

During the presidential election of 1995, the PCF widely supported the socialist candidate, Lionel Jospin who won by a small margin over Jacques Chirac. Then, in the legislative election called by Jospin following his election as president, the left gained a majority of the seats again (the socialists having 207 seats, the ecologists 18 and the communists 96). As a result, the PCF represented a force to count with and it was given no less than 5 ministers (including finance and foreign relations) and 8 secretary of states to the PCF.

That same year, as the war had started between China and USSR, the PCF had expressed full support to the PCUS while the French government offcially declared neutrality in the ongoing war.

By the end of 1995, a majority of the French intelligentsia (writer, phylosphers, movie directors, actors...) had also express support to the Soviets who are described as the main opposition to the "Peril Jaune" (Yellow Threat), a notion that had long been vivid in France. Then, the PCF and PCI issued what is now known as the "Call for Resistance". Immediately following this, communists from all over the world gathered into Moscow where they are organized into 4 International Brigades (50% of the volunteers are French and 20% Italian). The French government tried to oppose this but most volunteers fly to Moscow from Italy and Switzerland. By mid-1996, US is widely critisized among some French circles for its increasingly pro-chinese position.

When the war started between NATO and the Warsaw Pact, the French President renouncing his prerogative, turned to the parliament who voted by 70% against the war (many French deputies of the right and far right joining with the left, stating that this war was, again, an expression of German Imperialism). Again, France declares neutrality, asks its NATO partners to return to their starting point and, finally, withdraws from NATO.

This marks the starting point of a long lasting discussion among NATO. While the other countries who had left the alliance are not seen as serious threat France poses a serious problem and it is widely described as a traitorous country. The problem increases when several NATO-align commercial ships seeking refuge in French harbors are impounded while their crews are taken into custody (In fact, after two months of negociation, ships and crews are allowed to leave but they are empty). London insists about the need of a strike on French military ports but this is opposed by Washington (especially as the French are collaborating in the Middle East). Nevertheless, new tensions arise as time goes by and more ships are impounded (This time, only crews are returned).

Therefore, when the nukes start to fall, Germany, Netherland and UK are convinced that the French might help the Soviets. They also argue that, whatever France position, France is a threat onto itself. Finally, they point out that NATO can't take the risk of having France following the path of Italy. At last, they convinced US and NATO to hit a number of targets located essentially on France Atlantic Coast. Nevertheless, these strikes are short live as France answers quickly, destroying a number of targets clearly vital to NATO.

This is just some rough ideas based on a few historical facts. When Italy left its alliance with Germany in WW1, it declared war to the Central Powers. When France capitulated in 1940, UK turned on it at Mers-el-Kebir, Dakar but also Madagascar. When US troops landed in North Africa French troops opened fire (unlike what had been expected by Free France). Resistance was short lived but often bitter. French troops also resisted the British in Syria. By 1940, several french ships (including the aircraft carrier Bearn) were interned in Matinique upon the insitance of US (a neutral nation at the time).

I'm not saying that the Soviet targetting of France is a wrong idea, I'm just saying that it is no better than the NATO option (That's war and France turned on its allies). In fact, France is more a threat to NATO than to WP (as seen in the game scenario itself).

[B.T.]

Very nice ...

Mo, is this international brigade (pro-communist volunteers that head for Moscow and join the soviet forces) your idea or is this brigade mentioned somewhere in canon?

I think this is a very cool idea and if such a unit exists in T2k, I'd like to let my gamers have an encounter with these. A really brilliant idea, IMHO.

[Mohoender]

No clue, I had just been rereeding some writings by Hemingway and I went through a book about the Spanish Civil War of 1936-1939.

By the way, among French volunteers, you'll find a fair proportion of men from Spanish descent.

[Webstral]

However, Webstral, you still overlooked one thing. At the time, the french communist party is still strong and it takes order directly from Moscow. In a T2K setting, the French government had just switched to a coalition composed by communist and socialist.

As Leg points out, the results of the latest election are a temporary phenomenon. Asking the Soviets to base their geopolitical decisions with repercussions extending over a generation or more on the outcome of the latest election in a Western country is asking them to go to Vegas with the rent money.

In the 1980's relations between France and USSR had been strained by the relations France maintained with NATO. France walking away from NATO could very well warm up the relations with Moscow. Then, what you say about the soviets equally apply to NATO/US (and don't tell me that US doesn't play long term :D). Therefore, the nuking of France might equally be the doing of US. US government attitude with Iraq tends to convince me of that. My take anyway.

I agree that if the Soviets don't hit France, the US will. One could even imagine a situation in which the Soviets nuke Mexico and blame it on the US, while the US nukes France and blames the USSR. In any event, France is too powerful to allow a temporary neutrality to keep her on the sidelines while global civilization hangs in the balance.


Webstral

[Mohoender]

As Leg points out, the results of the latest election are a temporary phenomenon. Asking the Soviets to base their geopolitical decisions with repercussions extending over a generation or more on the outcome of the latest election in a Western country is asking them to go to Vegas with the rent money.


What they did in no less than 8 occasions on the outcome of WW2 and with great success : Albania, Austria, Bulgaria, Czecoslovakia, Finland, Hungary, Poland,and Roumania. Sometimes, the red army was a great help, at other times it didn't have to intervene. Without the marshall plan they would have been successfull on the eight bet instead of the six they got.

I agree that the situation isn't the same but leg's point about election is not convincing for France. With the war, elections in France might be suspended (as it was in 1940) or their rules might be deeply modified (as in 1958). Moreover, the parties were ruling for 7 years and with T2K they had just come to power (not my choice, blame the authors).

US has a constitution based on that of 1776, you had the Federalist and the Anti-federalist and one civil war. In the meantime, we have had the declaration of 1789, 5 constitutions and no less than 16 different regimes (Louis XVI absolute monarchy, Louis XVI Constitutional monarchy, First Republic, Convention, Terror, Directoire, Consulat, First Empire, Restoration, July Monarchy, Second Republic, Second Empire, Third Republic, Regime de Vichy, Fourth Republic, Fifth Republic). Out of these eleven were dictatorial/authocratic (even they don't last as much as the democratic ones), 3 were bloody. In addition, we have faced five revolutions and one major uprising (1968). The army turned on the government during the Algiers events and I'm not even talking of the Paris commune in 1871. In 1979, Georges Marchais (Then head of the PCF) publicly declared support to the soviet intervention in Afghanistan. When he did that,the man was not in Paris but in Moscow (They could have gone for the bet, it would have depended on the political situation in France).

Still, I agree with you and Leg, I'm just saying that there is another option and as the game doesn't cover this, you have some freedom while filling in the blanks.

Four political options for France:
- A right dominated government with a strong nationalist component: France declares neutrality and USSR thinks of it as a target.
- A right dominated government (as in 1995) and France joins with NATO.
- A left dominated government with a weak PCF: USSR might turn on it and France might declare neutrality but it ultimately joins NATO (quite rapidly).
- A left dominated government with a stronger/revived PCF: France declares neutrality and is a threat to NATO. US/NATO bombs it.

While neutral. If France is hit by NATO, it might respond lightly. If it is hit by the Soviets, all our missiles would have been flying after the first hit.

[Brother in Arms]

Hey everyone I am an extreme late comer to this thread and as I know continually abesent from this forum....Frankie Fisticuffs and I moved to Tennesee so I have been extremely busy....

Here is my Take on Britian and the its service rifle....Simple put the L1A1 would be thrust back into service immediatly. First lets consider the lifespan of an FAL type rifle. It is almost infinite, it is one of the most rebuildable rifles I have ever worked on. First you can shoot if for over 15,000 before the barrel is shot out. Secondly you can continually replace locking shoulders for a very long time so headspace errosion is almost a non issue and thirdly its not very difficult to rebarrel given you are qaulified to do so. The milled reciever alone would last easily 400,000 rounds before its worn out. So I don't see the L85A1 ever gaining much traction. Particularly with its many many short comings the Twilight war would command a rifle like the L1A1 not the L85A1. I think it would have failed early on and the L1A1 would continue in service for the duration of the twilight war. Especially considering new weapon prouduction would be non-exsistant.

Also Lets look at the caliber issue, if you have the L85A1 you have 5.56
as well at 7.62 for GPMG two calibers on the battle field is a logistical problem after the end of the world. Myself I would be more inclined to the more powerfull round because the 7.62 round is a much better round for a rifleman Its a better round for small unit fighting were taking less shots but more effective ones would be appropriate. You might not have machineguns at your disposal but if you have a few guys with L1A1's shooting at the same things (like the selous scouts often did) they can chew things up just as bad. 5.56 just doesn't have the penetration capabily that 7.62 does. Also Radway Green made many millions of 7.62 in the 80's. I am still shooting 1980's headstamped stuff today and it shoots great!!!!

I think supply being what it is soldiers would field whatever rifle they had been issued until no more were issued then the L1A1 would be the only alternative and be back in service...also since they are so durable I doubt they would be replaced by the AR-18 no real not do try to make a new rifle if your old standby is still working perfectly. The other option would be captured eastern bloc weapons if no L1A1's could be had...because the L85 would fail and com bloc stuff is good for the end of the world and would be laying around...Just my two cents as a gunsmith.

[Legbreaker]

I believe you've summed the situation up quite well there Brother, and not just for the UK but for most nationalities.
As we know, most countries do not immediately dispose of the replaced weapon, but place them in storage in case they need to rapidly expand their military for some reason or other - exactly the case in T2K.
Sure there's bound to be a percentage of those weapons which have reached the end of their useful life, but it's a relatively small percentage and can be generally discounted as a contributing factor on large scale weapon choice.
Also, as stated, weapons can be repaired and parts replaced. Given a decent metal shop, most working parts of a rifle can be fabricated as needed (it's no production line, but if you only need half a dozen new breech blocks or a couple of gas pistons for example...).

[95th Rifleman]

Hey everyone I am an extreme late comer to this thread and as I know continually abesent from this forum....Frankie Fisticuffs and I moved to Tennesee so I have been extremely busy....

Here is my Take on Britian and the its service rifle....Simple put the L1A1 would be thrust back into service immediatly. First lets consider the lifespan of an FAL type rifle. It is almost infinite, it is one of the most rebuildable rifles I have ever worked on. First you can shoot if for over 15,000 before the barrel is shot out. Secondly you can continually replace locking shoulders for a very long time so headspace errosion is almost a non issue and thirdly its not very difficult to rebarrel given you are qaulified to do so. The milled reciever alone would last easily 400,000 rounds before its worn out. So I don't see the L85A1 ever gaining much traction. Particularly with its many many short comings the Twilight war would command a rifle like the L1A1 not the L85A1. I think it would have failed early on and the L1A1 would continue in service for the duration of the twilight war. Especially considering new weapon prouduction would be non-exsistant.

Also Lets look at the caliber issue, if you have the L85A1 you have 5.56
as well at 7.62 for GPMG two calibers on the battle field is a logistical problem after the end of the world. Myself I would be more inclined to the more powerfull round because the 7.62 round is a much better round for a rifleman Its a better round for small unit fighting were taking less shots but more effective ones would be appropriate. You might not have machineguns at your disposal but if you have a few guys with L1A1's shooting at the same things (like the selous scouts often did) they can chew things up just as bad. 5.56 just doesn't have the penetration capabily that 7.62 does. Also Radway Green made many millions of 7.62 in the 80's. I am still shooting 1980's headstamped stuff today and it shoots great!!!!

I think supply being what it is soldiers would field whatever rifle they had been issued until no more were issued then the L1A1 would be the only alternative and be back in service...also since they are so durable I doubt they would be replaced by the AR-18 no real not do try to make a new rifle if your old standby is still working perfectly. The other option would be captured eastern bloc weapons if no L1A1's could be had...because the L85 would fail and com bloc stuff is good for the end of the world and would be laying around...Just my two cents as a gunsmith.

I'm reminded of why the British army didn't adopt automatic weapons till the 80's anyway. The British military has always been in the midset that the British soldier should be a well trained marksman. In the opening months of WW1 the germans thought the British had entire companies of machine guns because an Infantry battalion could fire so many accurate rounds from their bolt action lee enfield at a scary rate of fire.

Given a chance the powers that be would love to drop the 5.56, as many in the establishment where not happy with it and felt the round was forced on them by NATO.

[Mohoender]

In the opening months of WW1 the germans thought the British had entire companies of machine guns because an Infantry battalion could fire so many accurate rounds from their bolt action lee enfield at a scary rate of fire.


So true that at the beginning of WW1, during a surprised engagement at Mons (Belgium). The sustained rate of fire maintained by British soldiers (15 rounds per minutes) led the German to believe that they were, in fact, facing dozens of machineguns.

[Arrissen]

In GDW's Traveler 2300 timeline France IS the major superpower on the planet, like it or not. 300 years post-T2K, after "The Death of Earth", up out of the ashes a warlord shall rise and her name is France. Why would this be the case if they were nuked as hard as everyone else? It's not like they're more industrious or anything than anyone else. They just simply weren't damaged as much as the other NATO countries. Working out why is the hard part, no doubt.

As for the L1A1, why is there any doubt that the Brits wouldn't have to break out their war stocks of SLR's? It is the only battle rifle that they have afterall and they are facing the biggest battle they have ever fought. And that's saying something for one of the most warlike nations on Earth. I mean with their history and all. The L85A1, at the time of the Twilight war really was a sad mistake. Sure it's a bullpup, compact and handy but British senior NCOs desparately trying to keep their men alive by this point would be screaming - begging, borrowing or stealing what they needed to stay in the fight and that would be the trusty rifle they knew they could always rely on. Someone once said that the most dangerous weapon in the world is a determined individual. And these blokes would be extremely determined, bred true over hundreds of years to persevere and get the job done, come hell or high water, for King and country!

[Legbreaker]

In the opening months of WW1 the germans thought the British had entire companies of machine guns because an Infantry battalion could fire so many accurate rounds from their bolt action lee enfield at a scary rate of fire.

It wasn't just the British and not just WWI either.
In 1940 at the age of about 18, my grandfather (who passed away 18 months ago) was able to fire a full 10 rounds from an SMLE in 3 seconds....into a penny....at 50 yards....from the hip....
And that was during his basic training for the RAAF - he was tapped by the training staff to conduct rifle training while he completed basic. I saw him repeat the feat in the early 90's with my own eyes.

He went on over the next few decades (before his eyesight failed him) to win almost every contest he entered, usually with Possibles (perfect score) and almost always at 1,100 yards plus.

Seems unbelievable I know, but the trophies don't lie.

[Mohoender]

Leg you're Australian. At the time, it counted as British (In the way training was conducted I mean). Replace British by Commonwealth (or subject of the British Crown) and you'll have it right.;)

[Legbreaker]

British!? BRITISH!!!!????:mad:
Australian, through and through! Especially in WWII and even WWI to a significant extent!

[Arrissen]

He he he, yeah we are not British that's for sure. Same training more or less but certainly not British. Wild colonials more like it. My grandfather was in WWII also. He was in the 2/11th Infantry and fought in all the big battles in Africa and then got sent up to fight in New Guinea as well. He was away for the whole war. Tough as nails he was and would have smacked ya in the chops if ya called him British! :D

[Targan]

In 1940 at the age of about 18, my grandfather (who passed away 18 months ago) was able to fire a full 10 rounds from an SMLE in 3 seconds....into a penny....at 50 yards....from the hip....
And that was during his basic training for the RAAF - he was tapped by the training staff to conduct rifle training while he completed basic. I saw him repeat the feat in the early 90's with my own eyes.

That's awesome. What a guy.

[Targan]

British!? BRITISH!!!!????:mad:
Australian, through and through! Especially in WWII and even WWI to a significant extent!

He he he, yeah we are not British that's for sure. Same training more or less but certainly not British. Wild colonials more like it. My grandfather was in WWII also. He was in the 2/11th Infantry and fought in all the big battles in Africa and then got sent up to fight in New Guinea as well. He was away for the whole war. Tough as nails he was and would have smacked ya in the chops if ya called him British! :D

Yeah, agreed. My paternal grandad was a 30 year old motorcycle policeman when he joined up in WWII. He enlisted as a private soldier but by the time he entered battle he'd been commissioned and promoted to captain. He commanded a Bren carrier company in the North Africa campaigns (he hated Bren carriers, said he would have preferred jeeps with pintle mounted MGs). His war ended when he had half his moustache and big chunk of top lip shot away. The way he told it he saw himself as a New Zealander first, an ANZAC second and maybe fighting for the British Empire third. By the 1940s Aussies and Kiwis had very strong national identities.

[Panther Al]

I've always wondered:

If your average Kiwi is worth 2, maybe 3 west islanders, and your average west islander is worth two brits, why did the Brits insist on being in charge back in the day? ;)

[Legbreaker]

If your average Kiwi is worth 2, maybe 3 west islanders, and your average west islander is worth two brits, why did the Brits insist on being in charge back in the day? ;)

...and if your average Brit is worth 5 Americans..... ;)

I'd have to say the Anzacs should be in charge of the world! :p

[TiggerCCW UK]

...and if your average Brit is worth 5 Americans..... ;)

I'd have to say the Anzacs should be in charge of the world! :p

Don't forget the Irish! :) :)

[Panther Al]

How can we not forget the Irish, they did save civilisation after all!

[Legbreaker]

How can we not forget the Irish, they did save civilisation after all!

...from sobriety!!! :p

[Mohoender]

LOL they didn't even read what I put in parenthesis. LOL :D:p:D:p:D:p I meant in term of level of training LOL:p:p

[95th Rifleman]

I've always wondered:

If your average Kiwi is worth 2, maybe 3 west islanders, and your average west islander is worth two brits, why did the Brits insist on being in charge back in the day? ;)

Because you need someone to point your average Kiwi and Aussie in the direction of the enemy, otherwise they are liable to spend all day fighting amongst themselves.

[Legbreaker]

We only fight amongst ourselves until we see the real enemy....
Keeps us sharp.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

We only fight amongst ourselves until we see the real enemy....
Keeps us sharp.

Or see a pub -- we like drinking as much as the Irish :p

Maybe more...

[atiff]

If your average Kiwi is worth 2, maybe 3 west islanders....

In defense of all concerned, I must say that the 'average' Kiwi in WWII should only be rated so highly because of the enhancement to the average made by the men in the Maori battalion.

Scary thought for the day - men of the Maori battalion vs. Ghurkas.

[TiggerCCW UK]

Or see a pub -- we like drinking as much as the Irish :p

Maybe more...

As a non drinking Irish bar manager I find that hard to argue with. Whiskey - Gods way of stopping the Irish from taking over the world :D:D

Although obviously only if the whiskey is spelt the correct way.....

[Rainbow Six]

Although obviously only if the whiskey is spelt the correct way.....

Which is obviously without the e...:D

[TiggerCCW UK]

Suppress urge to slag the furniture polish that the Scots think is whiskey.... ;)

In fairness as single malts go, its hard to beat an Islay malt, or Glenfarclas 105 if you prefer a lighter flavour, but for an every day drinking whiskey, I was always a Jameson or Bush man.

[dragoon500ly]

LOL

Nothing beats Jack Daniels old number 7!

[Panther Al]

Except just about anything made in Scotland, or better yet, Ireland.

;)


*says the guy with Black Bush and Clynelish in his cupboard*

[WallShadow]

To bring the thread back onto topic and meld the current subject of discussion, I think that honest-to-God backwoods homemade "shine" will outstrip :D any competitors as a beverage, a paint-stripper, or a lethal weapon!

[James Langham]

As far as I have been able to tell, the Sterling Armaments Company was still in existence up to at least 1987 as that's when the final versions of the rifle where produced (hence it's designation of SAR-87). The rifle itself was a joint project between Sterling and Chartered Industries of Singapore (CIS) even though the primary work was done by Sterling as a result of their experience manufacturing the AR-18.

However, even though Sterling went out of business as such, it did not disappear. It was bought out by British Aerospace who also had control of Royal Ordnance. The designs were kept into the early 1990s when I believe BAe allowed CIS to buy the full rights to the rifle. CIS produced some upgraded versions as the Singapore Assault Rifle but dropped the design later and focused on the manufacture of the bullpup SAR-21 rifle.

It should also be pointed out that the apparent reason that BAe closed down the Sterling facilities was due to the UK government's belief in the 'peace dividend' from the end of the Cold War. Had the Cold War continued, it's highly unlikely the UK Govt would have shutdown as many military projects as it did, (many of which were canned simply to save money).
While this does not mean the SAR-87 would have been put back into production, it does suggest that the designs and tooling could have been kept rather than sold in their entirety to Singapore and thus been available for manufacturing the rifle when the Sino-Soviet conflict escalates.

Edit: As a side note, the Singaporeans had made an earlier rifle,the SAR-80. Once they got involved with Sterling, they produced the SR-88 based on the SAR-80 and the SAR-87. Neither of the Singaporean rifles made enough sales to remain in production.

I had a quick play round with the idea and came up with this:

SA80A2 and Stirling Armaments

The Gulf War of 1991 showed the deficiencies of the SA80 in sandy and dusty conditions. The SAS sergeant turned author Andy McNab commented that “in the SA80 the British Army bought a Rolls-Royce, albeit a prototype Rolls Royce.� The name itself also highlights the fact that SA80 stood for Small Arm for the 1980s, even though problems with the weapon resulted in the issue only late in the decade. The initial SA80 (known as the L85) was quickly superseded by the L85A1 which added a guard rail around the magazine release catch to stop the accidental release of the magazine (a problem increased by the use of the excellent sling which allowed the weapon to be slung across the chest).

In late 1992 after the results of the study instituted at the end of the war were published, it was decided to create an upgrade programme for the weapon. The preferred choice Heckler and Koch were unavailable as they were now ramping up production of the G11 and G41 for the German Army. In a job creation scheme, the British Government bought up the now defunct Stirling Armaments company and gave them the contract (this caused much resentment through the arms industry that the programme had not been open to competitive tender – Royal Ordnance in particular were very upset and took the case to court – this had not been resolved by the outbreak of war when Royal Ordnance were given a contract to produce further L85A2s).

Stirling made a number of changes to the basic design, these included a new stronger firing pin, heavier recoil springs, a heavier magazine with redesigned lips (although still STANAG compatible), a better gas plug (that eliminated the chance of getting it seriously stuck in the weapon if it was removed at the wrong angle), a new cocking handle with a unique comma shape and a strengthened safety catch bar. The same upgrades were also made to the L86A1 (LSW) creating the L86A2. The cadet forces rifle, the L98A1 was also rebuilt with the same changes, converting it from a manually cocked weapon to a semi-automatic only weapon, the L98A2. The L98A2 was (other than the lack of a change lever) an L85A2 in all but name. Conversions of all from A1 to A2 standard had only just started as war broke out although gradually the A1 type was supplemented and sowly overtaken by new production A2s.

In December 1996 with fighting in Europe reaching epic proportions, more rifles were needed, the L1A1 SLR and L2A3 Stirling were pulled from storage as were the 10,000 M16s bought in the early 1960s (the British Army had actually adopted the M16 before the US Army!). This still did not meet demand. It was originally suggested that Stirling Armaments would produce L85A2s and L86A2s. This would however have taken time to set up the tools as only the upgraded items were ready to be produced. As an interim measure the director of Stirling suggested that the production lines for the L2A3 and upgraded AR18 (the SAR87) that had been manufactured commercially until the company went bankrupt were reopened. The Ministry of Defence agreed immediately. The SAR87 was renamed the L18 rifle and put into full scale production. A modified AR18S was also put into low volume production with the same changes as the Carbine L19. These were basically AR18Ss that had been modified to take the STANAG magazine. It was also possible to swap the barrel, bolt and magazine and add a magazine housing adapter, to produce a 9mm submachine gun version of either (this was slightly modified from the original kit to take L2A3 magazines. These were known as the L18A1 and L19A1 respectively when fitted with the L172 conversion kit. Few of these were taken into service and most that were, were issued to Ministry of Defence Police. Numbers are however impossible to determine as the weapons could be converted into each other. Records of how many kits were bought were lost when the factory was destroyed. Many of the issued rifles went to home defence units (in some cases replacing the .303 No4 rifles that some had been issued during the rifle shortages) although there are instances of units being fully equipped with L18s (generally these were issued the L4A4 Bren as an LMG instead of L86s).

[Mohoender]

To bring the thread back onto topic and meld the current subject of discussion, I think that honest-to-God backwoods homemade "shine" will outstrip :D any competitors as a beverage, a paint-stripper, or a lethal weapon!

At last, someone with real taste.:D

[95th Rifleman]

I had a quick play round with the idea and came up with this:

SA80A2 and Stirling Armaments

The Gulf War of 1991 showed the deficiencies of the SA80 in sandy and dusty conditions. The SAS sergeant turned author Andy McNab commented that “in the SA80 the British Army bought a Rolls-Royce, albeit a prototype Rolls Royce.� The name itself also highlights the fact that SA80 stood for Small Arm for the 1980s, even though problems with the weapon resulted in the issue only late in the decade. The initial SA80 (known as the L85) was quickly superseded by the L85A1 which added a guard rail around the magazine release catch to stop the accidental release of the magazine (a problem increased by the use of the excellent sling which allowed the weapon to be slung across the chest).

In late 1992 after the results of the study instituted at the end of the war were published, it was decided to create an upgrade programme for the weapon. The preferred choice Heckler and Koch were unavailable as they were now ramping up production of the G11 and G41 for the German Army. In a job creation scheme, the British Government bought up the now defunct Stirling Armaments company and gave them the contract (this caused much resentment through the arms industry that the programme had not been open to competitive tender – Royal Ordnance in particular were very upset and took the case to court – this had not been resolved by the outbreak of war when Royal Ordnance were given a contract to produce further L85A2s).

Stirling made a number of changes to the basic design, these included a new stronger firing pin, heavier recoil springs, a heavier magazine with redesigned lips (although still STANAG compatible), a better gas plug (that eliminated the chance of getting it seriously stuck in the weapon if it was removed at the wrong angle), a new cocking handle with a unique comma shape and a strengthened safety catch bar. The same upgrades were also made to the L86A1 (LSW) creating the L86A2. The cadet forces rifle, the L98A1 was also rebuilt with the same changes, converting it from a manually cocked weapon to a semi-automatic only weapon, the L98A2. The L98A2 was (other than the lack of a change lever) an L85A2 in all but name. Conversions of all from A1 to A2 standard had only just started as war broke out although gradually the A1 type was supplemented and sowly overtaken by new production A2s.

In December 1996 with fighting in Europe reaching epic proportions, more rifles were needed, the L1A1 SLR and L2A3 Stirling were pulled from storage as were the 10,000 M16s bought in the early 1960s (the British Army had actually adopted the M16 before the US Army!). This still did not meet demand. It was originally suggested that Stirling Armaments would produce L85A2s and L86A2s. This would however have taken time to set up the tools as only the upgraded items were ready to be produced. As an interim measure the director of Stirling suggested that the production lines for the L2A3 and upgraded AR18 (the SAR87) that had been manufactured commercially until the company went bankrupt were reopened. The Ministry of Defence agreed immediately. The SAR87 was renamed the L18 rifle and put into full scale production. A modified AR18S was also put into low volume production with the same changes as the Carbine L19. These were basically AR18Ss that had been modified to take the STANAG magazine. It was also possible to swap the barrel, bolt and magazine and add a magazine housing adapter, to produce a 9mm submachine gun version of either (this was slightly modified from the original kit to take L2A3 magazines. These were known as the L18A1 and L19A1 respectively when fitted with the L172 conversion kit. Few of these were taken into service and most that were, were issued to Ministry of Defence Police. Numbers are however impossible to determine as the weapons could be converted into each other. Records of how many kits were bought were lost when the factory was destroyed. Many of the issued rifles went to home defence units (in some cases replacing the .303 No4 rifles that some had been issued during the rifle shortages) although there are instances of units being fully equipped with L18s (generally these were issued the L4A4 Bren as an LMG instead of L86s).

Now that is a work of genius mate.

[James Langham]

Now that is a work of genius mate.

Thanks not 100% happy with it - for one thing I can't find a pic of a British soldier with an Ar18 to put with it.

Can anyone help or suggest and improvements?

[Targan]

In defense of all concerned, I must say that the 'average' Kiwi in WWII should only be rated so highly because of the enhancement to the average made by the men in the Maori battalion.

Scary thought for the day - men of the Maori battalion vs. Ghurkas.

Just one of the many fundamental and important differences in the ways that the indigenous peoples of New Zealand and Australia were treated. Australian Aborigines came perilously close to being wiped from the face of the earth during the 1800s and the shattered survivors were literally wards of the state (legally speaking) even as adults until the 1960s when they were finally recognised with citizenship and voting rights. An appalling dark stain on Australia's collective soul. The situation in New Zealand was completely different. The Maori, as individual tribes and in large-scale united resistance, fought three major and dozens of minor wars with the British Empire during the 1800s and in the end were only defeated because they were outnumbered 20 to one and the Redcoats took to burning their villages and slaughtering their non-combatants.

The beginning of the end of the Maori Wars came with the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi under which the Maori were recognised as equal subjects of the British Empire and had all the requisite rights under the law. Then New Zealand became the first modern democracy to grant all adult citizens, male and female, the vote when it became an independent nation.

From even before independence Maori men were welcomed into the British Army and associated colonial forces. It's a very similar situation to the Nepalis - they excel at warfare, proved exceedingly difficult and costly to fully vanquish, they volunteer to wage war for you so you arm them, transport them to the vicinity of the enemy, point them in the right direction and give them heaps of room.

The 19th century Maori probably thought it was an excellent deal, being provided with firearms and ammunition to go kill people AND get paid to engage in their favourite hobby!

[StainlessSteelCynic]

The problem being that as far as anyone at the time could see, the Maori, the Zulu, the Afghanis, the Nepalese etc. etc. etc. all appeared to have an organized and relatively sophisticated culture whereas the Australian aborigines were still living a hunter/gather lifestyle that was essentially proto-neolithic.

As far as could be seen, they had no larger organization above the clan group and certainly paid little interest to other aboriginal groups except for potential wives or as competitors for resources. They produced nothing extra to the basics of daily subsistence.
The aborigines were incredibly primitive compared to every other group the British had come in contact with and this lead to the state of affairs known as Terra Nullius (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terra_nullius) for Australia.

The fact that the aborigines had had no significant change in their culture or lifestyle for over 40,000 years meant they were ill-equipped to understand the concepts of warfare that the Maoris, the Zulu, the Nepalese and so on, so readily accepted. If the aborigines had been able to organize fighting units in a similar line with what the Maoris had, they probably would have been given similar status to the Maori. As it was, with the disdain Europeans had for the less cultured peoples of the world, the aborigines were seen as the most primitive of them all.

[Mohoender]

And we dare pretend to be civilized...:(

[Arrissen]

White Kiwis actually tend to be big solid farm boys decended from wild Celts like Scottish Highlanders. Besides, Anzac's are Anzac's. No need to go splitting hairs. They're all green in the army anyway and work happily side by side.

[Olefin]

Before this thread turned into a discussion on whiskey and if Aussies are Brits this was a very interesting discussion.

While it did get bogged down a lot in France there are other places that weapons could be obtained in the world post Twilight War that also merit discussion.

In the V1 timeline Japan is virtually untouched as are the Swedes. While the Japanese dont fare as well in V2 the Swedes stilll come out pretty good.

Both countries have indigenous weapon production factories that could be excellent sources of weapons post war. I could see the Swedes selling especially to the Germans, Danes, Norwegians and the Dutch and eventually the new Baltic nations and the Poles, whereas the Japanese could find customers in South Korea and China.

Another source for weapons could be Taiwan which was almost not even mentioned in the timeline. Again while most of their weapons were mods of existing vehicles you could see them being used to keep older systems going and providing a source of things like light tanks and APC's based on older American designs.

Finally another major source of weapons could be South Africa, which by virtue of the embargo on them by most of the world because of apartheid, developed their own tanks, APC's, planes, etc..

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Before this thread turned into a discussion on whiskey and if Aussies are Brits this was a very interesting discussion.
Cruel, but a fair comment on the derailment :D

[Targan]

Brazil. Obviously they've ramped things up IRL since the time T2K is set in, but I'm sure WWIII would have given them the impetus they needed to become a major arms supplier during and after the Twilight War.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Defence_companies_of_Brazil

[pmulcahy11b]

My vote would be with small arms shops set up in garages and free cities, and places like the arms in Pakistan are made. They can build you a crude copy of almost any small arms you care to mention, and the ammunition for it. It may not be 100% reliable, but a lot of places you find may be able to at least repair your weapons -- and may have stored things like rocket launchers or missiles, just for a contingency like necessity, or haggling in a big deal.

[Olefin]

My vote would be with small arms shops set up in garages and free cities, and places like the arms in Pakistan are made. They can build you a crude copy of almost any small arms you care to mention, and the ammunition for it. It may not be 100% reliable, but a lot of places you find may be able to at least repair your weapons -- and may have stored things like rocket launchers or missiles, just for a contingency like necessity, or haggling in a big deal.

A perfect place like that would also be Yemen - I remember reading about how many small shops there are exactly like that there that can turn out just about any kind of small arms - including perfect copies of older British and American rifles - let alone fix a broken fire arm.

[Olefin]

Brazil. Obviously they're ramped things up IRL since the time T2K is set in, but I'm sure WWIII would have given them the impetus they needed to become a major arms supplier during and after the Twilight War.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Defence_companies_of_Brazil

I agree with you there Targan on their ability to provide weaponry - its actually even canon that they have already sold vehicles in the RDF area either pre-war or during the war as several Brazilian vehicles are mentioned there - meaning that exported vehicles are already there and part of the action by mid-2000

[raketenjagdpanzer]

Brazil has quite an "overstock" of M3/M5 Stuart light tanks, I could see them shipping some overseas (at least in a v1 timeline) and the US RDF building a brigade out of them - the Brazilian variants are called X1 and X1A2 (the -a1 variant wasn't built). They mount a 90mm DEFA gun, have upgraded sights and other modern conveniences.


X1, X1A1 Carcara and X1A2 Light Tank

Bernardini S/A Industria e Comercio (Bernardini Industrial and Commerce Company) of Sao Paulo, Brazil, which operated from 1912 to 1992, was originally a safe manufacturer. During its later years it branched out into vehicle production, with products including the M41B and M41C Light Tanks upgrades from the American M41, and the X1, X1A1 and X1A2 Light Tank rebuilds of the American M3, the MB-3 Tamoyo tank and the Xingu BT25 and BT50 wheeled vehicles.

At least 20 American M3 Stuart Light Tanks (out of a promised 65) were received in 1942 and used to replace armor then available in Brazil. A further 200 were acquired between 1944 and 1945, both in the M3 and M3A1 versions. By the 1970's it was becoming increasingly difficult to find spare parts for these tanks, so a decision was made to modernize part of the M3A1 series. The decision to modernize vehicles so old was a political one: by 1977 Brazil had denounced the US-Brazilian military agreements, so no more obsolete (and cheap) vehicles were available from North American sources.

In the early 1970s Bernardini rebuilt two American M3A1 Stuart light tanks for the Brazilian Army. Technical control of the project was under the direction of the Brazilian Army Research and Development Centre. The modifications included replacing the armor above the tracks by new sloped armor provided by the Biselli company, replacement of the original American gasoline engine with a six-cylinder Saab-Scania diesel developing 280 bhp, new volute suspension designed by the Novatracao company, new turret with a French DEFA D-921A 90 F1 90mm gun as fitted to the Panhard AML (4×4) and other light AFVs, and a fire-control system designed by the D F Vasconcelos Company. The vehicles weighed 15,000 kg, had a road range of 450 km and could ford to a depth of 1 meter without preparation.

Following prototype trials, the Brazilian Army ordered 100 M3A1 light tanks to be rebuilt to the new standard. The first 80 vehicles were modernized between 1975 and 1978. These were delivered to Cavalry Regiments under the designation X1, with final deliveries made in 1978. The new car, known as CC MB1 (Combat Car, Brazilian Model nr. 1) or X1A, remained in service until the 1990's.

The X1 was followed by the Carcara, or X1A1. This is essentially a stretched X1 with an additional volute spring suspension group, and three bogies (instead of two) on each side. The engine and turret were the same as fitted to the earlier X1 tank. Trials with the X1A1 were completed in 1977-78 but the Brazilian Army did not place an order for the vehicle and it didn't reach production.

Further development resulted in the CC MB2 X1A2 which was based on a new chassis rather than a rebuild of an M3A1 chassis. The X1A2 was offered for export. Based on the X1A1, this version retained very little of the original Stuart as even its hull was redesigned. The vehicle weighed 19 tons, had a crew of 3, was armed with a 90-mm gun and was powered by a Saab-Scania 300 hp diesel engine. A total of 30 vehicles - completely new ones, not modernized Stuarts - were produced in 1979-1983.

All had been withdrawn from Brazilian service by the end of the 1990s.


http://i.imgur.com/PCXQszz.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/LylDgbB.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/eyf1xxz.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/N0XAGn6.png

http://i.imgur.com/OgAOIsd.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/eGIFcvP.jpg

...

It mounts the same main gun as the Panhard AML-90, operated by Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Lebanon, and essentially all of North Africa, so ammunition for the DEFA D921 90mm shouldn't be an issue. The gun fires HE and HEAT rounds.

I could see the US buying maybe a dozen or two if the Brazilians offered them for the RDF or hell even European forces (possibly CivGov if the Brazilians would deal, for use in Romania).

Anyway that's my $.02.

[raketenjagdpanzer]

Also, while AvGas is at a serious premium, for light/liason work in the air I could see most western militaries pressing "traffic choppers" and civilian light a/c into service for the role; the OH58D is merely a militarized Bell Jetranger, and the AH-3/MH-3 is but a Hughes 500MD similarly outfitted.

As we've discussed with the possibility of the Littlefield Collection winding up as THE armored division west of the Rockies, likewise I'm sure large portions of the CAF would be too tempting for the government to pass up on. Like pressing Shermans into front line service, any aircraft is better than no aircraft, so the notion of having a P47 plus a couple of P51s - and a huge number of prop-driven bombers - is a great advantage.

Plus, the CAF also operates five jet aircraft (a MiG-17, two MiG-15s, a MiG-21, a Lockheed T-33 and I was amazed to discover they operate an F4 Phantom).

Now, as to ships, consider the huge number of museum ships out there. Of course getting, say for example, the USS Alabama up and running again would be a massive, massive undertaking not even considering that she needs oil in them thar engines in more ways than just fuel...that might be a post-post-Twilight War undertaking...

On the more practical side, regarding small arms? Yeah, the US in Post T2k is going to be swimming in everything from .22 revolvers up to .50 machine guns (and DsHK's) pretty much forever, so no issue there. Wasn't there something in Howling Wilderness about millions of "Civilian M16s" distributed to local law enforcement and Civil Defense in kit form as a show of "support" for the reconstruction project? Something to the effect of if you see guys in uniforms all holding M16s its a sign that there's some kind of authority or organized effort at reconstruction or something like that.

[Olefin]

Actually those Brazilian Stuart variants could have been used by the Mexican Army as well. In real life in the 90's the only tanks they had were M3 Stuart tanks and 3 Sherman tank retrievers.

That upgunned Stuart would fit perfectly in the Mexican Army and could be what made up their tank formations during the invasion. Would have allowed them to take on the light armor that the Guard and the light divisions would have had for sure.

[raketenjagdpanzer]

Actually those Brazilian Stuart variants could have been used by the Mexican Army as well. In real life in the 90's the only tanks they had were M3 Stuart tanks and 3 Sherman tank retrievers.

That upgunned Stuart would fit perfectly in the Mexican Army and could be what made up their tank formations during the invasion. Would have allowed them to take on the light armor that the Guard and the light divisions would have had for sure.

Truth...although I guess it depends on who Brazil was aligned with at the time. They've always seemed to have been close to the US in military terms, more-or-less although fortunes of war and so forth...

I wonder what the specs on the new hull armor and rangefinding gear are.

Also, IRL, Brazil sold off a crapload of Stuarts (not the rebuilds) a few years ago. I remember reading somewhere that collectors were scrambling to get them as A - there were tons of them and B - they were being sold off for a pittance.

[Olefin]

Between the Littlefield and other private collections and the amouint that were still in various South American countries I could see the Stuart still being a factor in Twilight War and post Twilight War battlefields for quite some time

"As we've discussed with the possibility of the Littlefield Collection winding up as THE armored division west of the Rockies, likewise I'm sure large portions of the CAF would be too tempting for the government to pass up on. Like pressing Shermans into front line service, any aircraft is better than no aircraft, so the notion of having a P47 plus a couple of P51s - and a huge number of prop-driven bombers - is a great advantage."

I would think that its more than a possibility - its the only real source of tanks and armored vehicles and more importantly trained techs and repair facilities in that area. And I agree with you on the value of old WWII fighters to MilGov and CivGov - yes they need aviation gas - but not as much as jets do. Plus keep in mind things like the Ozarks scenario. A single P-51 could shoot those airships and ultralights to pieces. And during that timeframe there were literally hundreds of WWII fighters, trainers, etc. still around in flyable shape in the US and Canada.

[kato13]

Here is a link to a similar discussion we had last year.
Modernizing an M3 (M5A1) Stuart in the T2k setting. (http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=4085)

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Not just Brazil either, at various points in their history a few South American nations have built their vehicles and weapons locally (and not just local assembly of a foreign design but full manufacture of both licenced and indigenous designs).
Most of us here are probably aware that nations like Chile, Colombia and Mexico have produced smallarms and ammo for some time and also that Argentina and Brazil have produced vehicles but Argentina also built a number of it's own warships and I think it's been already mentioned earlier in the thread that they also built warplanes.

Perhaps more interesting, they also built an indigenous tank during WW2 and they still have access to local technical expertise to manufacture armour plate. *
Argentina also built a post-war SPG by converting Crusader tank hulls to carry guns taken from Krupp and Bofors 75mm field guns. The same platform was also converted to provide MLRS and AAG systems. **

With the potential for resources provided by Antarctica and no UN body to prevent its exploitation, it's possibly worth the effort for some Latin American nations to charge up their defence industries simply to secure resources from the Antarctic region for themselves. This would then put them in a pretty good position to supply armaments to other countries.


* For anyone interested in Argentina's first local tank design, the "Nahuel" D.L. 43 (Nahuel has been taken to mean "tiger" in one of the Mapuche languages but it is probably more correctly translated as "puma" - there aren't many tigers in that part of the world!), the following page is about the most comprehensive write-up in English on the net: -
http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/Argentina/Nahuel_DL43.php

This Russian page has a small amount of additional info
http://www.aviarmor.net/tww2/tanks/argentina/nahuel_dl43.htm
Google Translate version
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aviarmor.net%2Ftww2%2Ftanks%2Fa rgentina%2Fnahuel_dl43.htm

There is also a YouTube video (well, a slideshow really) with a number of images but the listed data is very wrong in some cases.

** This page has a number of photos of both the Nahuel Medium Tank and the Crusader SPG but a small amount of data although it is info not covered on other sites. The site is also specifically about Argentina's military so appears to be far more accurate than some other sources on the net.
The Nahuel is the second tank entry on the page with the Crusader SPG immediately following it. Sorry for lack of specific location but the page layout is appallingly bad - done in blog style rather than individual pages!
http://www.militariarg.com/tanks-support-combat-self-propelled-artillery-mech-infantry-armored-cavalry-and-other-recce-engineering-and-recovery-vehicles.html

[Tegyrius]

I would think that its more than a possibility - its the only real source of tanks and armored vehicles and more importantly trained techs and repair facilities in that area. And I agree with you on the value of old WWII fighters to MilGov and CivGov - yes they need aviation gas - but not as much as jets do. Plus keep in mind things like the Ozarks scenario. A single P-51 could shoot those airships and ultralights to pieces. And during that timeframe there were literally hundreds of WWII fighters, trainers, etc. still around in flyable shape in the US and Canada.

I'll just leave this here for you, boys...

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/this-p-51-mustang-restoration-includes-operational-50c-1647964258

- C.

[Wolf sword]

I'll just leave this here for you, boys...

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/this-p-51-mustang-restoration-includes-operational-50c-1647964258

- C.

And another FYI, Ron Fagan bought a Mitchel Bomber not that long ago.
The WW2 reenacting group had been to his airshow that they put on.

[.45cultist]

Before this thread turned into a discussion on whiskey and if Aussies are Brits this was a very interesting discussion.

While it did get bogged down a lot in France there are other places that weapons could be obtained in the world post Twilight War that also merit discussion.

In the V1 timeline Japan is virtually untouched as are the Swedes. While the Japanese dont fare as well in V2 the Swedes stilll come out pretty good.

Both countries have indigenous weapon production factories that could be excellent sources of weapons post war. I could see the Swedes selling especially to the Germans, Danes, Norwegians and the Dutch and eventually the new Baltic nations and the Poles, whereas the Japanese could find customers in South Korea and China.

Another source for weapons could be Taiwan which was almost not even mentioned in the timeline. Again while most of their weapons were mods of existing vehicles you could see them being used to keep older systems going and providing a source of things like light tanks and APC's based on older American designs.

Finally another major source of weapons could be South Africa, which by virtue of the embargo on them by most of the world because of apartheid, developed their own tanks, APC's, planes, etc..

Most military stuff in Japan is from Howa Heavy Industries, I'd say in V2 that they get a mix of U.S., Singapore and Philipine small arms. The U.S. stuff as aid, High tech parts trade for the rest.

[unkated]

Spain and Portugal:

Portugal produced a local version of the G3 starting in the mid-1980s, as well as MG-3. And of course 7.62N ammo to go with it.

Spain (I never quite understood the supposed reasons for Spain to fall apart completely in any canon, though I can see falling back to regional levels. Regional govt + factories + ports hmmm) produced not only small arms, but IFVs, including supporting artillery.

Spain produced an indigenous AR design (CETME model C) in 7.62N starting in 1974, replaced by an improved action in 5.56N starting in 1987. And the MAG3 MG. As well as local production of mortars and artillery, and both IFV/APCs and soft-skinned military vehicles.

So, Some amount of weapons and NATO-flavored ammo may be available in the UK nearer than Japan or Brazil.

Brazil it self is an interesting case, as even if you strike its oil industry targets with small nukes...

It's a large enough place that a few strikes will not destroy all of it.
In this period, it was taking strides away from oil dependence, including creating industrial ethanol production.
It had a fairly large industrial output, including softskin and IFV, APCs and tanks.
It had agricultural output enough to cover its population.


Argentina is also in a decent position - except as far as I know, they had not yet made an ethanol industry...

More on that in another topic.

Uncle Ted

[Rockwolf66]

I've been looking up images from Dara Pakistan. While I cannot find the Set of Images of the Gunsmiths their copying an Armsel Protects I have fount some Saiga-12 knockoffs and Aks in 7.92X57mm.

http://www.sadefensejournal.com/wp/?p=1989

and then there is Improguns.

http://homemadeguns.wordpress.com/

It gives one Ideas.