Aircraft/Armor Surplus Storage

[kalos72]

So I have been looking through alot of Chico's stuff and some other posts here to find we store 1000's of older vehicles. I knew we did it, just not to that numbers I found. :(

Where the hell do they store 409 AH-1F's or 1500 M551's? :)

[raketenjagdpanzer]

So I have been looking through alot of Chico's stuff and some other posts here to find we store 1000's of older vehicles. I knew we did it, just not to that numbers I found. :(

Where the hell do they store 409 AH-1F's or 1500 M551's? :)

Helos stored outside would have covers over engine inlets and spraylat everywhere else. Fuel and hydraulic fluid would be completely drained as well. Inside they'd still be drained of fuel and fluids but likely not covered in spraylat.

Vehicles would just be parked. There's 2000 M1 tanks stored thusly in California (new builds, too; I guess the Army decided it was cheaper to keep acquiring them than to terminate the contract, despite not having the personnel, TOE or missions for them...)

[kalos72]

Ok so lets assume some of these newer vehicles would be sent overseas as replacements, I doubt they would WANT to sent 8000 M113's to mainline troops in Europe unless they HAD to. So where do you store them?

Any suggestions, real or storyline driven are welcome. :)

[raketenjagdpanzer]

Ok so lets assume some of these newer vehicles would be sent overseas as replacements, I doubt they would WANT to sent 8000 M113's to mainline troops in Europe unless they HAD to. So where do you store them?

Any suggestions, real or storyline driven are welcome. :)

Well...any aircraft would be stored in hardened air shelters. Given that helos can be put on roller-wheels to move them in and out of storage, and an unarmed AH-1 series bird has a really narrow cross section, you could probably pack quite a few inside an HAS. So basically anywhere there was a surviving air shelter is where you could keep them. Otherwise, a warehouse, etc. would do.

Same goes for armored vehicles: a warehouse, etc. would suffice. Anywhere you could string concertina wire and set up defensive points, and be assured of little or no observation by enemy troops would do the trick for a "vehicle depot". I'm not sure what the weight considerations would be but a multi-storey parking garage might do: Bremen, for example, was missed in the nuclear strikes of '97 (and earlier) and may well have some civilian parking garages that would suffice for lighter armored vehicles. Don't know that I'd stick a bunch of Leo-IIIs on the top deck of one of those though...

[rcaf_777]

There are a few places you would store aircraft and AFV's

For Aircraft you have

Kingman Airport, Kingman, Arizona
Phoenix Goodyear Airport, Goodyear, Arizona
Pinal Airpark, Marana, Arizona
309th Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Group, Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, Tucson, Arizona
Southern California Logistics Airport, Victorville, California
Mojave Air & Space Port, California
Roswell International Air Center, Roswell, New Mexico contains the remains of several large passenger and cargo jets, including at least two Boeing 747s and five Boeing 707s.
Abilene Regional Airport in Abilene, Texas is home to many retired Saab 340 aircraft, primarily from American Eagle Airlines.
RAF Aircraft Storage Flight, RAF Shawbury
Alice Springs Airport in Alice Springs, Northern Territory is the first large-scale aircraft boneyard outside the United States.
Canadian Forces Detachment Mountain View - Houses older aircraft for the CAF

parting at the boneyard at KMEBLaurinburg-Maxton Airport in Maxton, North Carolina, home of various former Northwest Airlines aircraft being stripped for parts by Charlotte Aircraft Corporation

For Tanks or AFV you have

Sierra Army Depot, California;
Rock Island Arsenal, Illinois;
Watervliet Arsenal, New York;
Lima Army Tank Plant, Ohio;
Anniston Army Depot, Alabama;
Red River Army Depot, Texas

25 Canadian Forces Supply Depot, Montreal QC - Main War Stock pile for the CAF

[Cdnwolf]

The US army surplus one near Honey Lake is huge!

https://maps.google.com/?ll=40.17309,-120.11338&spn=0.072535,0.169086&t=h&z=13

[kalos72]

Thats amazing! I would think thats close enough to MILGOV HQ to be somewhat controlled...

[Frank Frey]

Another thing to consider is support (fuel, ammo, lubricants). It's one thing to have 100 M1a1 Abrams tanks but quite another to find the necessary fuel and other stuff to even get 10 of them running.
Also the mechanics and other technicians to bring them online and keep them in the field.

[Raellus]

Ok so lets assume some of these newer vehicles would be sent overseas as replacements, I doubt they would WANT to sent 8000 M113's to mainline troops in Europe unless they HAD to. So where do you store them?

Any suggestions, real or storyline driven are welcome. :)

Going by the v1.0 timeline, I imagine that a lot of older gear (M113s, for example) would be shipped to China. Newer stuff would go towards beefing up American reserve units in anticipation of a possible hot war with the Soviets; so increasing domestic storage capacity probably wouldn't be necessary.

[kalos72]

Understood.

My thinking is an idea for another "Lima Incident" style encounter...

I hear rumors of a warehouse in Red River filled with M551 Sheridans and M2HB's. Lets go check it out... :)

But Id like to have a better understanding of how/where things like this were stored pre war so I can develop the back story some. I hate stories that just plop out of nowhere.

[Tegyrius]

Rather than a storage facility, use a shipment of vehicles in transit. The train derailed due to a nuclear strike and, because of its remote location and the general chaos of the TDM, was never recovered. Somewhere out in the Rockies is a ravine full of armor and spare parts...

- C.

[Cdnwolf]

Rather than a storage facility, use a shipment of vehicles in transit. The train derailed due to a nuclear strike and, because of its remote location and the general chaos of the TDM, was never recovered. Somewhere out in the Rockies is a ravine full of armor and spare parts...

- C.

Love it... and as I am trying to develop a story line about the Southern Alps this would fit in great.

[rcaf_777]

The US army surplus one near Honey Lake is huge!

That would be the Sierra Army Depot as stated above

[.45cultist]

Waterlievet is the only barrel manufacturer for alot of heavy guns in the U.S.

[kalos72]

Good information there...thanks.

[raketenjagdpanzer]

Please note, some are near primary sites, and also during a run-up to war many of those vehicles would have already been deployed (for example, the 2000+ Abrams tanks in CA wouldn't be sitting there).

So I'd lower my expectations quite a bit on what would just be "in storage".

[kalos72]

Agreed for the M1's...but they wouldbe be so quick to try and deploy the Sheridans to a main line unit.

Or even consider the idea noted above...a train on the way to port going through a city that just got nuked...and a dozen shiny new M1A1's sitting on a derailed freight line. :)

[Rainbow Six]

An allternative to the derailed train would be a ship sitting docked and slowly rusting away at some abandoned container port with who knows what sitting in its hold.

[kalos72]

Good idea...would EMP kill a container ship like it is supposed to a kill a car?

[dragoon500ly]

Surplus aircraft are not stored in Hardened Aircraft Shelters, for the most part, they are stored in hangers or mothballed in plastic covering with dehumidifer equipment to prevent corrison. This would only be done if the aircraft was still in service with the U.S. or allies.

Obsolete aircraft are stripped of any useful material and then go to the bone yards in prep for smelting down, sooner or later.

For the Army hardware, one of the biggest drawbacks is ammunition. Sadly, propellent does start to breakdown over time, even if properly stored and there comes a point when it is necessary to salvage or even destroy the rounds. This is one of the drawbacks of placing the M-551 back into service, for a very long time, there was only one battalion in active service (with the 82nd Abn), as the Vietnam-era ammo was used or salvaged, there was very little new production of the 152mm ammo, at most only some 500 rounds per year from 1980 onwards. With the decision to withdraw the Sheridan, production was stopped and the production machinery was scrapped in 1992-1993.

Even allowing for increasing tensions, I seriously doubt that the Sheridan would have been retained in service. The vehicles had simply been well-used for over twenty years. This was the reason that the Army pushed for the development of the M-8 AGS system, based on a currently in service chassis and using ammunition that the Army had adequate stocks and was still in production (at least for military assistance and foreign sales).

[kalos72]

Thats logical...agreed.

But still 10 Sheridans rolling down the street even just using its MG's would be more effective than being without the armor.

But remember, my point of view is more domestically then for front line units...so ANY armor is better then what most units back in the states have at this stage. :)

[dragoon500ly]

I agree that even a AFV armed with machine guns trumps civilian vehicles packed with rifle carrying maraders.

I just feel that it is more likely for the M-113s to be pulled from mothballs, and limited production of the V-series of armored cars is more likely.

Pulling the Sheridans back into service is a wonderful idea, but the source for maintenance spares is limited to a very limited selection in government warhouses or stripping mothballed Sheridans for engines and trannies. Its an obsolete system, that used a lot of non-standard parts. Even when the battalion was operational with the 82nd, they had to strip parts to keep the fire control and engines operational. The Army simply did not produce spare parts following the decision to remove the Sheridan from service in the
1980s.

So you are thrown back into a Catch-22 situation. You may have 1,500 Sheridans that have enjoyed minimal protection from the elements and have been stripped for parts for the last decade to support the operational battalion (and the NTC!). You may be very lucky to field more than a dozen machine gun armed vehicles, at least not without extensive modernization and resources would most likely by used on the front line equipment, at least until the Thanksgiving Day Massacre!


Still! It would be fun to see a 152mm Canister round going off!!!!

[Tegyrius]

Resurrecting the thread for another Foxtrot Alpha post:

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/the-ghost-rider-b-52-rises-from-the-grave-to-ride-aga-1686588702

Relevant to discussions of bringing back old aircraft from boneyard stocks:

Even in Type 1000 storage, returning an aircraft to the air is no easy task. It took 70 days of constant work to get the Ghost Rider in a decent enough condition so that it could make its way to Barksdale AFB in Louisiana.

And that's just basic flying condition, not full combat readiness.

- C.

[Olefin]

With the expansion of the Army during the war I am betting that much of the stored equipment would have been used to help equip the 12 Light Infantry Divisions the Army created out of the training units.

That alone probably took care of most if not all the remaining older M113s' in storage. They would need armor too and that is where it makes sense to bring the Sheridan's out of the bone yard - but probably at the rate of getting one or two good ones for every 10-15 in storage after cannibalizing everything that still works.

And with the continuing tensions the Army might have kept them in service a lot longer and thus spares and ammo might have been a lot more plentiful -

And they made 88,000 Shillelagh missiles - so if the Sheridan stayed operational right up to the war start - which given the tensions is a good bet - then there might be a significant amount of them available

And remember a full ammo load for them is only 19 cannon rounds and ten missiles - so if you get, say 150 operational Sheridans out of what you have stored you very well could get enough ammo for at least one full ammo load per vehicle, possibly two

[dragoon500ly]

With the expansion of the Army during the war I am betting that much of the stored equipment would have been used to help equip the 12 Light Infantry Divisions the Army created out of the training units.

That alone probably took care of most if not all the remaining older M113s' in storage. They would need armor too and that is where it makes sense to bring the Sheridan's out of the bone yard - but probably at the rate of getting one or two good ones for every 10-15 in storage after cannibalizing everything that still works.

And with the continuing tensions the Army might have kept them in service a lot longer and thus spares and ammo might have been a lot more plentiful -

And they made 88,000 Shillelagh missiles - so if the Sheridan stayed operational right up to the war start - which given the tensions is a good bet - then there might be a significant amount of them available

And remember a full ammo load for them is only 19 cannon rounds and ten missiles - so if you get, say 150 operational Sheridans out of what you have stored you very well could get enough ammo for at least one full ammo load per vehicle, possibly two


Well, say that you.manage to get 150 operational...from a tanker standpoint, the Sheridan was not a great tank. It's hull could protect against up to 12.7mms AP, but was very vulnerable to RPGs and mines. The rate of fire of the main gun was horrible, the standard 105mms M68 can fire roughly 12 to 15 aimed rounds per minute, the 152mms has a max rate of fire of 2 rounds per minute. The breech design prevented a faster loading cycle. Then we have the Shillelagh missile...it's an IR beam rider design that requires the gunner to maintain lock.on the target...it did have a punch equal to the TOW missile and had an effective range of 2000m...it's minimum range was a horrible 800m giving it a very short engagement envelope. These are the major reasons why it was pulled from service. The running joke when I was still in service was that even the
Marines would not take them!

[ArmySGT.]

With the expansion of the Army during the war I am betting that much of the stored equipment would have been used to help equip the 12 Light Infantry Divisions the Army created out of the training units.

That alone probably took care of most if not all the remaining older M113s' in storage. They would need armor too and that is where it makes sense to bring the Sheridan's out of the bone yard - but probably at the rate of getting one or two good ones for every 10-15 in storage after cannibalizing everything that still works.

11B Light Infantry is foot infantry. They don't have M113s. The Hq unit has 2-3 HMMWVs, 1-2 2 1/2ton trucks, and 1 HMMWV ambulance. A full unit motor movement for light infantry is conducted by a transportation company, or pooling the entire battalions trucks and moving one company at a time to a staging area.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/toe/lid.htm

11M is Mechanized Infantry and organic to Armored Divisions they ride in M113s up to the 90s and transition completely to M2 Bradleys.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/toe/mech.htm

[ArmySGT.]

Well, say that you.manage to get 150 operational...from a tanker standpoint, the Sheridan was not a great tank. It's hull could protect against up to 12.7mms AP, but was very vulnerable to RPGs and mines. The rate of fire of the main gun was horrible, the standard 105mms M68 can fire roughly 12 to 15 aimed rounds per minute, the 152mms has a max rate of fire of 2 rounds per minute. The breech design prevented a faster loading cycle. Then we have the Shillelagh missile...it's an IR beam rider design that requires the gunner to maintain lock.on the target...it did have a punch equal to the TOW missile and had an effective range of 2000m...it's minimum range was a horrible 800m giving it a very short engagement envelope. These are the major reasons why it was pulled from service. The running joke when I was still in service was that even the
Marines would not take them!

Turret rings are universal sizes. Could one accommodate an A-0 Bradley turret? A LAV-25 turret? a PIVAD turret?

[Olefin]

Like I said a Sheridan is better than nothing - and against marauders armed with civilian and military rifles and even 12.7mm MG its an effective vehicle - and I even with a low rate of fire I would hate to be against it if all I had was a armored bank truck with a couple of machine guns on it.

Now if you run into Soviet Division Cuba you have some real issues

And the light divisions I am talking about are the ones formed from the training units in the game not regular or even National Guard formations - I mean the ad-hoc divisions added in haste in 1998

I.e. the 70th, 76th, 78th, 80th, 84th, 85th, 91st, 95th, 98th, 100th, 104th and 108th Infantry Divisions that MilGov and CivGov formed in 1998 after the TDM

If you look at their makeup they only had foot infantry battalions and towed 105's - so any armor of any kind would be very welcome to them

and you can tell they got some armor or inherited it - several of them had tanks or M728's - if they had those you can see them grabbing anything else they could get their hands on too especially after the Mexican invasion

and there was the AGS-Sheridan which was a standard M551 Sheridan hull with the turret of the Stingray light tank. It lost out to the M8 Armored Gun System from FMC/BAE

[jester]

For storage, a lot of names were off the list.

I would suggest checking out, "Purple Depot." Which are storage depots in the US.

M113s, I see them all the time in the desert on ops. Some units have few, others have ALOT. Most are support vehicles of course, ambulances, com, command etc.

As was said, its better than just being foot mobile.

As for armor, one must consider where it is employed. In open ground yeah, in urban, woodland or mountains as an infantryman I'd feel confident against armor with the right tools of course.

Other areas, beachheads, swamps or even soft sand areas. Again the use of terrain to limit your enemies movement similar minefields.

And of course, taking older vehicles and giving quick simply mods or even deploying them with upgrade kits like the did with the Humvees in Iraq and the Shermans in the hedgerow country to be added in the field.

I have no experience with the Sheridan, but, with its limits could they not be used more as an infantry support weapon rather than a traditional tank role? Providing a mobile heavy gun platform and machinegun support as well as the armor to shield infantrymen and even to drive over infantry positions or even small buildings or portions. Drive up to that pesky RPK firing through the loophole in that concrete building, and blast a beehive round through the window and let the grunts mop up.

[dragoon500ly]

The problem with tanks is that sooner or later they are going to go up against the other guys tanks. In order to beat the other guys, you have to able to shoot first, hit first and kill or disable with that shot. The atgm had a narrow engagement window at best, you might get one or maybe two missiles off before you had to switch to conventional rounds, then your maximum possible rate of fire was two rounds per minute. Shoot and scoot is your mantra.

The drawbacks of the Sheridan restricted it the role of infantry support vehicle, in a single battalion, in a single division. It was kept in that role because it was the only tank that could be air dropped. Even that division depended on regimental antitank companies equipped with TOW for its primary antitank defense.

The only combat test of Sheridan in a traditional tank role was in Vietnam. It was easy to knock out with RPGs. It's armor protection was so bad, that if the crew was not killed immediately, they had to bail out before the ammo fire finished the job.

In Desert Storm, the Sheridan was used as a bunker buster and was never used against Iraqi armor.

When it was first introduced, it was a gee-whiz tech solution and it didn't work. It is to the eternal credit of its crews that they were able to perform their missions in spite of its drawbacks, but there are good and sound reasons why the decision was made to remove it from service. I find it hard to come up with any reason why scarce resources would have been wasted in trying to bring the Sheridan back into operational service.

[ArmySGT.]

Just to challenge convention....... Wouldn't the more modern M1s and M60s be sent overseas and older M48s kept at home? The better to fight them there, than fight them at home. Any M60s or newer still on U.S. soil would be Guard units or Federal units waiting to ship, or training units churning out replacements for losses overseas.


Further, wouldn't the States individually be getting any armor no matter how old operational? While it doesn't make sense for the Army on a large scale to throw effort into a getting a M4A2 Sherman or a M3 Stuart operational a State can fund them as one offs... Swapping the radial for a cummins diesel. Having machine shops make AP or Canister shot for a 75mm or 37mm. Turning over gun shops looking for 1919s. Lots of towns have WW2 relics and plenty of WW2 generation vets that know how to get these things running.

Even in WW2 there was appeals for any hobbyist with the right skills to turn out war materials. Wooden crates for example. Firing pins, etc.

[schnickelfritz]

t is possible and somewhat common for M3/M5 Stuart owners to convert their 2-engine power plants for 350 or 454 Chevy V-8s. This would be advantageous for an owner who has bought one without engines or whose engines are not practical to rebuild.

I am not sure if a M24 Chaffee can benefit from this, but I wouldn't doubt it.

Dave

[Olefin]

Keep in mind the thread with the very real possibility that the tanks and other armored vehicles at the Littlefield collection, many of which had live barrels and operational fire control systems, would have been used in 2000 and 2001 to get the CA MilGov units some armor

and remember that the Mexican's only real tank they had (at least based on real world info) was the Stuart tank

As for the Sheridans taking on other tanks - most likely by the time the Army got around to getting more of them in the fight their wouldnt have been many tanks on the other side left to get in the fight

most likely they would have been used openly against infantry that didnt have ATGM's or RPG's - look at the Texas module for instance - the marauder and Mexican units described had very few of either of those weapons - there a Sheridan could be decisive in a battle -

and there is always this - its cold blooded but it works - i.e. you use the Sheridans to draw fire and find the enemy ATGM's and tanks and then take them out with the only M1A1 or M60 or M48 you have operational

[ArmySGT.]

Keep in mind the thread with the very real possibility that the tanks and other armored vehicles at the Littlefield collection, many of which had live barrels and operational fire control systems, would have been used in 2000 and 2001 to get the CA MilGov units some armor I wonder how much of it would have gone to the collection with the V1 timeline and without a collapse of the Soviet Union. In that rather darker world less of this stuff would have gone to collectors and more kept by nation states for reserves and militia call ups or training. That said some of it would be a more of a logistical burden than help as armor support. I would see them in the defense of critical assets like air fields, rail yards, supply depots, and refineries before I would see burdening a unit with even one. Their too susceptible to modern light anti armor weapons lacking spall liners, fire extinguishers, compartmentalized fuel, and ammunition.
and remember that the Mexican's only real tank they had (at least based on real world info) was the Stuart tank I would have sworn they had some Shermans and Lees too. I don’t know why in this any of the timelines that this Mexican army did not atleast purchase some T55s from Cuba or Nicaragua. Those are light enough to move quickly with a civilian semi and low boy trailer.
As for the Sheridans taking on other tanks - most likely by the time the Army got around to getting more of them in the fight their wouldnt have been many tanks on the other side left to get in the fight Tanks draw fire. Everybody moves under the umbrella of their own fire support.
most likely they would have been used openly against infantry that didnt have ATGM's or RPG's - look at the Texas module for instance - the marauder and Mexican units described had very few of either of those weapons - there a Sheridan could be decisive in a battle - The first operational kill of a tank is world war one and that was with artillery, the preferred engagement method. ATGMs and LAWs are defensive weapons.

and there is always this - its cold blooded but it works - i.e. you use the Sheridans to draw fire and find the enemy ATGM's and tanks and then take them out with the only M1A1 or M60 or M48 you have operational Shouldn’t need to do that. A maneuver commander preps probable locations with artillery fires that only stop (shift to the next target) as the armor platoon arrives on it with infantry support.

Doctrinally, on first sighting the flash and smoke of an ATGM the crew executes a turn toward the launcher or oblique across the front, fires smoke grenades, and starts the smoke generator. The gunner engage the launch are with the coaxial machinegun aided by thermal sights to make life hard for SACLOS systems like Mexican BGM-71 TOW 1 systems. The Battalion FO behind them is shifting BN 81mm mortars onto the enemy ATGM source using the armors tracers to backtrace the launcher. The Brigade FO is calling down the Divarty reserve 105mm to saturate that area too. The infantry support is going to dismount move up, call for a shift fire by the BN and BDE FOs and then mop up that launcher and any support it had. Any commander that was using his troops as live bait would be sacked and probably court martialed for good cause. Soldiery is dangerous but, one expects not to be wasted needlessly. You can get a new tank from the factory is six months or a year but, crewmen are going to need 18 years to hatch.

[Olefin]

the question is whether or not there would any divisional artillery to fire at enemy ATGM teams - by 2000 the Mexican Army has almost no artillery left and if you look at many of the light divisions with as few men as they have left several of them might be down to foot infantry and a few mortars and thats it

As for the Mexican Army - the only Shermans they ever got were basically engineering vehicles - they had Stuarts for tanks but they never invested in anything heavier than APC's and armored cars otherwise as their main opponents were either bandit groups, internal rebel groups that had no armor of any kind and drug lords and criminal groups - in other words they didnt need tanks

Now here the real question is whether or not in 1996 and 1997 would they have tried to get some armor from possibly the Brazilians or maybe the Israelis after it was pretty obvious that things were getting very very bad indeed worldwide and they knew that possibly the US might start looking at their oil resources - if they did then they you could be looking at Sherman tanks from Israel, more Stuarts to complement the force they had from South American countries that were operating them (for instance Paraguay) and also some stuff from Brazil

But not sure if the US would ok Israel shipping them to Mexico - at least not after Israel joined up with CENTCOM as an ally - and the fact that they would have to ship them thru the Med which was a very unhealthy place to be in 1996 and 1997

Now could you see some T-55's from Cuba and Nicaragua - possibly - but since Cuba was trying to stay under the US radar they might not have arrived till after TDM - by then the US wasn't in much of a position to stop trade from Cuba to Mexico (after all they didn't stop the Soviets being shipped from Cuba to Mexico and they were a much bigger threat than a freighter full of T-55's) - and if Nicaragua openly supported the Soviets there might not have been many of those tanks still around after a few US airstrikes

As for Littlefield's collection - keep in mind that a lot of his Soviet stuff he got from places like Egypt and the like - and while he won't have his SCUD he would probably have most of his Western tanks, APC's, armored cars and the like - the ones he obtained before the Twilight War start between the Soviets and Chinese are more than enough to help MilGov a lot - and his other big contribution are his techs and his shop - which is exactly what you need to put stuff like the Sheridans back together and into operation

[jester]

The problem with tanks is that sooner or later they are going to go up against the other guys tanks. In order to beat the other guys, you have to able to shoot first, hit first and kill or disable with that shot. The atgm had a narrow engagement window at best, you might get one or maybe two missiles off before you had to switch to conventional rounds, then your maximum possible rate of fire was two rounds per minute. Shoot and scoot is your mantra.

The drawbacks of the Sheridan restricted it the role of infantry support vehicle, in a single battalion, in a single division. It was kept in that role because it was the only tank that could be air dropped. Even that division depended on regimental antitank companies equipped with TOW for its primary antitank defense.

The only combat test of Sheridan in a traditional tank role was in Vietnam. It was easy to knock out with RPGs. It's armor protection was so bad, that if the crew was not killed immediately, they had to bail out before the ammo fire finished the job.

In Desert Storm, the Sheridan was used as a bunker buster and was never used against Iraqi armor.

When it was first introduced, it was a gee-whiz tech solution and it didn't work. It is to the eternal credit of its crews that they were able to perform their missions in spite of its drawbacks, but there are good and sound reasons why the decision was made to remove it from service. I find it hard to come up with any reason why scarce resources would have been wasted in trying to bring the Sheridan back into operational service.


I can think of one reason.

DESPERATION with little other options.

Then again, remove the gun from the turret and install a Bushmaster or a TOW system or something else that is common and fairly simple.

[ArmySGT.]

I can think of one reason.

DESPERATION with little other options.

Then again, remove the gun from the turret and install a Bushmaster or a TOW system or something else that is common and fairly simple.

http://i613.photobucket.com/albums/tt211/thelastluddite/tanks/3432625860_78298f55b0_b_zps517ced85.jpg
Done

[dragoon500ly]

Just to challenge convention....... Wouldn't the more modern M1s and M60s be sent overseas and older M48s kept at home? The better to fight them there, than fight them at home. Any M60s or newer still on U.S. soil would be Guard units or Federal units waiting to ship, or training units churning out replacements for losses overseas.


Further, wouldn't the States individually be getting any armor no matter how old operational? While it doesn't make sense for the Army on a large scale to throw effort into a getting a M4A2 Sherman or a M3 Stuart operational a State can fund them as one offs... Swapping the radial for a cummins diesel. Having machine shops make AP or Canister shot for a 75mm or 37mm. Turning over gun shops looking for 1919s. Lots of towns have WW2 relics and plenty of WW2 generation vets that know how to get these things running.

Even in WW2 there was appeals for any hobbyist with the right skills to turn out war materials. Wooden crates for example. Firing pins, etc.

In a nut shell...you would have had M1A1 and M1A2 assigned to Germany, REFORGER would pull the same vehicles from the POMCUS sets. The National Guard follow up divisions would have a mix of M48A5/M60A1/M60A3/IPM1.

The equipment sets left by the Regular Army units committed to REFORGER, they were intended to be shipped as battlefield replacements, this, filled out with new construction and battlefield repaired tanks was was what was supposed to keep the Army going.

So, arguments can be made that the NG divisions would be equipped with front-line gear, especially prior to shipment overseas, reasonable. Right up to the Mexican invasion, then it becomes a come as you are war.

[dragoon500ly]

I can think of one reason.

DESPERATION with little other options.

Then again, remove the gun from the turret and install a Bushmaster or a TOW system or something else that is common and fairly simple.

Sigh...I work as auditor for DOD, I get paid the big bucks to travel to these storage facilities just to count the gear AND what condition it is in. Trust me, the M551s in "storage" are in no condition to be locked, cocked and ready to go.

They will require very extensive rebuilds on the scale of what is done at Anniston Army Depot. You will then have to find serviceable missiles and cannon ammo and again, there is not that much out there, that has not been condemned.

As far as slapping 75mms guns, TOWs, etc., Canon has this output going to the LAVs and other front line equipment, just how much can be spared to bring back to life an out-dated hulk left to rot in the desert sun for the last quarter century?

[jester]

I was speaking in gaming terms and desperation and imagination. Look at the vehicle guide, WWII the mods done to armor. Or even Vietnam and the "Gun Trucks."

As I said earlier, I've never even seen a Sheridan. Just going with the concept of using what is available to bring it online in some useful manner. And never was the idea of bringing it back to go toe to toe with modern 1st tier armor.

But, remember some pact nations still have T-55s and T-64/5s as their tier 1 armor. And then, how old is the T-72? Which if I recall correctly, the T-90 is just an updated T-72 since the T-80 didn't work as promised...or am I getting them reversed?

Another issue, how many US armored vehicles have been completely destroyed to the point they are written off and not sent back to be rebuilt? Unless its a catastrophic kill of course. And would this not be the case if the balloon went up? This as I recall was the case in WWII where green crews got in after the holes were patched and the blood washed out.

[Askold]

T-90 was designed in the same factory that builds T-72s. Separate factories made T-72 and T-80 and when Russia (after the collapse of Soviet Union) wanted to replace them with a more modern tank the two factories made competing models and the T-72 factory won. It has several upgrades including ones taken from T-80. (One big factor on the winner might be that T-80 was much more expensive. It was supposed to be the "quality" tank that is less numerous than the cheap T-72 and will only be given to elite units but I guess they either couldn't afford it or just decided that the idea was stupid.)

Slightly related on the topic, I tried to find a comparison between T-72 and T-90 but instead stumbled on this "non-intentional" comedy article:

http://english.pravda.ru/russia/politics/18-09-2012/122196-abrams_t90-0/

[Targan]

Sigh...I work as auditor for DOD, I get paid the big bucks to travel to these storage facilities just to count the gear AND what condition it is in. Trust me, the M551s in "storage" are in no condition to be locked, cocked and ready to go.

I believe you, absolutely, but what about 20 years ago?

[dragoon500ly]

I was speaking in gaming terms and desperation and imagination. Look at the vehicle guide, WWII the mods done to armor. Or even Vietnam and the "Gun Trucks."

As I said earlier, I've never even seen a Sheridan. Just going with the concept of using what is available to bring it online in some useful manner. And never was the idea of bringing it back to go toe to toe with modern 1st tier armor.

But, remember some pact nations still have T-55s and T-64/5s as their tier 1 armor. And then, how old is the T-72? Which if I recall correctly, the T-90 is just an updated T-72 since the T-80 didn't work as promised...or am I getting them reversed?

Another issue, how many US armored vehicles have been completely destroyed to the point they are written off and not sent back to be rebuilt? Unless its a catastrophic kill of course. And would this not be the case if the balloon went up? This as I recall was the case in WWII where green crews got in after the holes were patched and the blood washed out.

In the Vietnam War, the Sheridan earned a rep as a death trap for its crews. It was the first combustible case ammo tank to enter service and there problems with propellant escaping from the round and accumulating on the turret floor with dire results when the hull was penetrated by rpg/mines. Another problem was that the combustible case did not fully ignite in the chamber, when the breech was opened, this flaming debris fell back into the turret, sometimes igniting the round the loader was preparing to load. To overcome this problem, a high air pressure air line was installed to.blow this debris down the tube, this was one of the reasons for the lousy rate of fire. The missile came in for its own loading issues, it could only be loaded one way into the gun, resulting in a notch being cut into the breech...think about trying to "key in" a missile during an engagement!

The fun and joy doesn't end there! The missile was a 1st gen IR beam rider that required the gunner to maintain lock on target throughout the missile flight time. Bad enough, but the missile had a host of problems, especiallyduring sunny days, bright reflections as well as a hordes of reliability issues, bad enough when the missile doesn't fire...it's perverse desire to try go for other targets, like that bright sunny thing in the sky, just ruins a crews day.

Another problem was the electronics of the fire control system...temperamental doesn't begin to describe the issues, both Sheridan and the later M60A2 Starship spent more time in the maintenance shop than on the firing line.

Add the fact that the Sheridan would have spent almost 20 years in storage in the desert by the time of the Mexican invasion...

[dragoon500ly]

I believe you, absolutely, but what about 20 years ago?

These tanks started being put into storage before 1980, the gun-missile launcher and it's assorted problems where the chief reason why. They were being replaced in the armored cavalry regiments with M48/M60A1, and in the divisional cavalry squadrons cavalry squadrons by M150. About the only unit with them was with the 82nd Airborne. Last armor crewman training course for the Sheridan was in 1978, after that, it was armor basic and then OJT at the battalion.

So figure in storage for about 12 or so years, no development work to correct the known issues, and very few personnel familiar with the beast.

I'd find it far more likely that it would have been stripped and melted down.

[dragoon500ly]

My own point of view with regards to scavenging equipment is that some of this gear was worn out when it was retired...and the DOD does not spend funds beyond the bare minimum to store this gear. It's a fun game idea to have the players bring such gear out to help out with the ole marauder band, but trying to keep such equipment requires a decent workshop, mechanics, power, raw material and so on. Tanks require an extensive logistical train, just to keep them running in a piece time army...In a Twilight timeline, I'm surprised that there are so many runners.

[Olefin]

Keep in mind that you only need that impressive logistical train for a lot of tanks - and by 2000 no one has a lot of tanks anymore except the French - also most fronts are pretty static so the tanks that are left arent doing a lot of movement - many of them would be static much of the time just due to a lack of fuel

and the Sheridans were highly prized in Vietnam to be able to support the infantry - and that is what they would be doing here - supporting infantry not taking on enemy tanks

also keep in mind that the majority of the Sheridans that are probably running are ones near the training centers that still used them - who had the techs, the shops, the parts, etc.. to keep Sheridans running - we arent talking about units in Alaska we are talking about California (NTC at Fort Irwin) and Louisiana/Texas (JRTC at Fort Polk)

[Olefin]

and by the way with the run up to the war and the fight that the Chinese needed vehicles I could easily see the Army getting a couple hundred Sheridans ready to send to them - and by the time they had them ready to go with ammo and working the war had started with the Soviets and they had a more pressing need for armor - at first possibly for training and then later after the TDM as better a Sheridan than nothing

[jester]

Um, there is a depot near Irwin that can do tanks....MCLB which has the facilities, it would also mean they have the talent in the community since most people try to live close to work even if its in the middle of the desert.

When I was in I spent 6 months doing vehicle maintenance just short stripping the vehicles down to nothing and rebuilding them and I was a infantryman. Our mechanics however did have that skillset. Add civilians in the community who have similar skills at mechanic and metalwork and the talent can be assembled.

Spares would be a problem, but then salvaging from destroyed vehicles could provide those parts or civilian vehicles that have similar parts, or even modifications to accept such parts.

Another place to aquire armor, The Patton Tank Museum near the Ca/AZ border on the edge of Joshua Tree National Park.

They have several dozen M48 tanks, some restored, some stripped for spares. But, again with modifications, cannibalizing and using civilian parts that would be compatible one could put together a dozen tanks. Weapons systems is another issue though. But, a moveable armored beast with the hull and working tracks and engines is a lot and any weapons systems are just icing on the cake.

[ArmySGT.]

Keep in mind the thread with the very real possibility that the tanks and other armored vehicles at the Littlefield collection, many of which had live barrels and operational fire control systems, would have been used in 2000 and 2001 to get the CA MilGov units some armor

and remember that the Mexican's only real tank they had (at least based on real world info) was the Stuart tank

In all honestly I don't think at the federal level much of the Littlefield collection would matter. Most of the WW2 stuff doesn't have spares. The armor that it has is to light against even 73mm of BMP1s, and RPGS would eat them. Making ammunition would divert critical assets from making munitions for current generation stuff. Do you make 100 75mm Pak40 rounds for a Panzer IV that is probably not going to get off three rounds.

If anything the most recent generation stuff probably as someone will be around that can operate it and maintain it. WW2 and Korea would get fobbed off to state militias to guard the ports, airports, and water dams. If it can't use modern ammunition and diesel the fed governments are going to take a pass, this would just burden a logistics system that is already near collapse.

[ArmySGT.]

Come to think of it....... The Israelis would be in the market for Shermans and Halftracks..... They operate those now in 2015 in support roles. The Shermans as Trailblazer engineering vehicles and the halftracks as supply and commo vehicles with all terrain capability.

[Olefin]

In all honestly I don't think at the federal level much of the Littlefield collection would matter. Most of the WW2 stuff doesn't have spares. The armor that it has is to light against even 73mm of BMP1s, and RPGS would eat them. Making ammunition would divert critical assets from making munitions for current generation stuff. Do you make 100 75mm Pak40 rounds for a Panzer IV that is probably not going to get off three rounds.

If anything the most recent generation stuff probably as someone will be around that can operate it and maintain it. WW2 and Korea would get fobbed off to state militias to guard the ports, airports, and water dams. If it can't use modern ammunition and diesel the fed governments are going to take a pass, this would just burden a logistics system that is already near collapse.

The Panzer doesnt even have a live barrel so I dont expect to see that in action

But the AMX-13, the Conqueror Heavy Tank, the M50 Sherman (which can hold its own quite nicely in a tank fight against most of what the Mexicans have) and the Centurion Mk13 Tank that they have will do the job nicely - I dont expect his Stuarts, Lees and any German WWII tanks to get into the fight as they dont have live barrels but the rest have operational guns

and you would be surprised how much ammo there is around still for many of those vehicles

and they wont need to make a lot of ammo by 2000 - probably one basic load per vehicle is about all they will ever need - keep in mind that the entire Mexican Army in California has 10 AFV's by 2001 - and by that we are talking Stuarts and armored cars - and most units will be luckly to have one RPG with a couple of rounds at best

[rcaf_777]

Now could you see some T-55's from Cuba and Nicaragua - possibly - but since Cuba was trying to stay under the US radar they might not have arrived till after TDM - by then the US wasn't in much of a position to stop trade from Cuba to Mexico (after all they didn't stop the Soviets being shipped from Cuba to Mexico and they were a much bigger threat than a freighter full of T-55's) - and if Nicaragua openly supported the Soviets there might not have been many of those tanks still around after a few US airstrikes

Is there any details on what the Soviet would have in the South-West US in way of Armour?

Cuba had only one ship capable of carrying armour, a Polnocny-class landing ship which could carry about 8 armored personnel carriers, Im guessing BTR-60or 70s.

I dont see the Soviet Division have much left in the way of personel or equipment left in Cuba given that the Soviet are fighting China and NATO.

I also remember reading about the Cubans wanting to get rid of Soviets, I am guessing that could do with some sort of US Airstrikes earlier in the war?

The Mexican Navy could help out too but at the time of TW 2000 the Mexican Navy had only USS Clearwater County (LST-602) Crica 1943 for sea transport

I'm not sure what if any soviet armour could fit in the Cargo Hold?

I am also thinking the cubans might be "You can leave with what ever you can carry"

just some thoughts

[Olefin]

This was an estimate I put in the Soviet Division Cuba thread based on real world data and what I figured the Soviets might get from the Cubans

As to how they got there - it really depends on if they landed the material at a friendly port versus by assault - considering the Mexicans were already in Texas I think its the friendly port situation

From the Soviet Division Cuba thread

"So at the very least you are looking at a 3000-3500 man training brigade and a motorized rifle regiment of 3000 men along with those manning the eavesdropping facility (3000 strong) and the naval personnel that manned the resupply facility for a total of 11,000 men.

That, combined with withdrawn personnel from various embassies in the area and possibly KGB and GRU personnel who were in Cuba would make for enough manpower for sure for a division.

If you look at what is written about them in the Texas module you can see they had a mix of BTR-70's and BMP's, with the BTR-70's being more prevalent which suggests it was a BTR Motorized Rifle Regiment and not a BMP one. Also what is interesting is that unless they were heavily reinforced by the Cubans with tanks, a MRR only has about 41 total tanks - a single tank battalion with an extra tank in the HQ section. Given what they had left it would mean they had only lost 26 tanks taking on the 49th which doesn't sound that realistic given the composition of the 49th. Most likely that means the Cubans reinforced them with tanks from their own units, thus resulting in the mix of tanks they have left - i.e. mostly T-72 or T-80 but also could be types the Cuban Army was equipped with.

So if you base its composition on historical information:

One Motorized Rifle Regiment - 3000 men with one tank battalion and three BTR battalions (which would have some BMP's as well) - the one on duty in Cuba

One Motorized Rifle Regiment - again about 3000 strong, most likely being the training personnel - armed with Cuban material - most likely a mix of BMP-1's and BTR-60's along with a tank battalion of T-62's

One Tank Battalion - another 40 or so tanks, again most likely Cuban T-62's or T-54/55 - 165 men

Recon Battalion and Engineering Battalion - around 350 men each

Artillery Regiment, SAM Regiment, various other support battalions - most likely formed from the signal and support troops in Cuba - about 3600 men or so if they were formed at full strength

One Helicopter Squadron of about 18 helicopters with at least some surviving to 2001, most likely heavy on attack helos, probably reinforced by captured American civilian helicopters (as mentioned in the Texas module the Soviet commander was hoping to use the fuel to get his attack helicopters back into operation) - maybe 200 men

Add it up its about 11,000 men - which matches what Gorbachev said was there in 1991

Plust that gives the Soviets around 120 tanks of various types at the start - which gives them more than enough to engage the 49th with a real possibility of victory when you add in the BTR's and BMP's that are with them"

[rcaf_777]

One Motorized Rifle Regiment - again about 3000 strong, most likely being the training personnel - armed with Cuban material - most likely a mix of BMP-1's and BTR-60's along with a tank battalion of T-62's

One Tank Battalion - another 40 or so tanks, again most likely Cuban T-62's or T-54/55 - 165 men

Add it up its about 11,000 men - which matches what Gorbachev said was there in 1991


Two to think about

1. As stated above, how do you transport BTR and Tanks with only two ships? Mexico has one old LST for cargo and troops and Cuba has the other one that will have to many runs to haul the BTRs, not sure if it can haul any tanks. And its Cuban, not sure they would let them the Soviet use or take away equipment they are going to need. Cuban might worried about rebel or later US invasion. Think about the problems with Op Omega?

2. In 1991 there was 11,000 men in Cuba, after war with China and NATO how many would be left and fit to fight? I mean your not going to keep a fully equipment division with top of line gear, on a small island when you need troops at home are you? How about resupply too? do you think once the shooting starts the US is going to let the soviet resupply of any kind in Cuba?

[Olefin]

Actually I have a feeling they were stranded there and the US had a lot more issues to worry about - plus they probably didnt think things would get so bad that any Soviet troops from Cuba even had a chance to make it to US soil

as for transport - you can load APC's into freighters and other kinds of ships as well - but you are right about the tanks - one possible source could be a Soviet transport that can take tanks being "interned" by the Cubans - or possibly even some neutral ships - once the nukes started flying I could see a Liberian flagged vessel, for instance, decide that any port is better than eating a torpedo in the Gulf or risk docking in any port anywhere near oil facilities in the US or Mexico or Venezuela

Its one of the deus ex machina aspects of the timeline

Stuff like

How did they transport Soviet Division Cuba without the proper ships or fuel with enough tanks to hand 49th Armored its head before it got Stingray tanks and Peacekeeper Armored Cars as replacements for all the tanks they lost against Soviet Division Cuba?

How did the Greek Navy's light ships destroy the escorts of the convoy to Turkey when most of their ships were WWII retreads or missile ships that have about a five minute survival time against a task force with Harpoons?

How did the Soviets somehow have more ships in the Pacific than the USN did to where they could succesfully pull off an assault on the Candaian coast and then try and drive on Seattle?

[ArmySGT.]

I am not buying it that private collections like the Littlefield collection would have 60s, 70s, and 80s vintage equipment in any T2K timeline. To many actions and brushfire wars plus a strong Soviet Union backed by a Warsaw Pact makes that stuff to valuable to sell to collectors when Third world nations are so vulnerable.

Most of the WW2 / Korea era is of dubious capability as it can be killed with 80s and 90s models of rifle grenade, 40mm HEDP, and any LAW or RPG. The soviets were / are making new munitions for WW2 calibers like 57mm, 76mm, and 85mm I don't think anyone in the West bothered and focused solely on inservice calibers.

[Olefin]

He was collecting stuff back when the Cold War was still hot - and he got a lot of his Soviet stuff from places like Egypt and Israel that either didnt need it anymore or who had captured it in fighting

Look at his tank's that still have live barrels

Conqueror - long out of service with the British even during our Cold War

AMX-13 - being phased out by the French

Super Sherman - he got that in trade for some stuff that an Israeli museum wanted

the Centurion Mk13 - again out of service when he got it

all you need is a guy with a lot of money and a lot of interest and a lot of passion and connections - Littlefield had them all

as for ammo - again lots of money can do wonderous things to find hard to get items - if he had the money to buy the tanks then getting a small quantity of shells is probably well within his means - maybe one complete ammo load per vehicle worth - but I wouldnt bet against it

and frankly if you can believe a lot of the other things in the T2K timeline then Littlefield having a Conqueror and Mk13 Centurion is a pretty small pill to swallow

and he had a shop and technicians who could and did take tanks and equipment that were basically wrecks and restore them to operation on a regular basis - pretty handy guy to have around

[ArmySGT.]

as for ammo - again lots of money can do wonderous things to find hard to get items - if he had the money to buy the tanks then getting a small quantity of shells is probably well within his means - maybe one complete ammo load per vehicle worth - but I wouldnt bet against it

I would. The BATF considers each round of ammunition a "Destriuctive Device" that must be applied for separately. So whatever the cost, and additional $200 per shell, and additional costs for storing them in a BATF approved secure facility.

HE and other things don't store forever even in ideal conditions.

[ArmySGT.]

He was collecting stuff back when the Cold War was still hot - and he got a lot of his Soviet stuff from places like Egypt and Israel that either didnt need it anymore or who had captured it in fighting

Look at his tank's that still have live barrels

Conqueror - long out of service with the British even during our Cold War

AMX-13 - being phased out by the French

Super Sherman - he got that in trade for some stuff that an Israeli museum wanted

the Centurion Mk13 - again out of service when he got it

all you need is a guy with a lot of money and a lot of interest and a lot of passion and connections - Littlefield had them all

Egypt would still have been a Soviet allied nation at that time.

These would be out of service with the armies in 1st world countries of Europe and North America , but they are not for Africa, Asia, countries like Iran. Countries that field them because they inherited them from the last government and can't afford better and need spare parts anyway.

Not buying it. There are smaller players in the proxy wars of the cold war that would be extremely happy to get these.

The only one of those you mention I would accept would be the M50 because no one, but Israel or a collector would have wanted it at that time in history.

[swaghauler]

I would. The BATF considers each round of ammunition a "Destriuctive Device" that must be applied for separately. So whatever the cost, and additional $200 per shell, and additional costs for storing them in a BATF approved secure facility.

HE and other things don't store forever even in ideal conditions.

Not to mention that while solid shot is fine; you have to get a testing/development exemption from the BAFT for possession of explosive or armor piercing rounds. Otherwise it would be illegal to possess, transport, buy, or use said rounds.

[swaghauler]

This thread does bring up an interesting thought. What if the locals decided to "upgun" an APC or "rearm" an old tank with a gun they could actually make powder charges and ammo for? Be pretty funny seeing an old WW2 tank with a Civil War era black powder muzzle loading cannon mounted in it. These "Destructive Devices" are both common and popular (which means they could turn up anywhere) and come in both "old school" Civil War era models and new manufacture versions. The locals could make both the shot and powder it uses with relative ease. It may be only a one shot weapon, but it could dominate a force with only small arms. Any thoughts?

[Targan]

This thread does bring up an interesting thought. What if the locals decided to "upgun" an APC or "rearm" an old tank with a gun they could actually make powder charges and ammo for? Be pretty funny seeing an old WW2 tank with a Civil War era black powder muzzle loading cannon mounted in it. These "Destructive Devices" are both common and popular (which means they could turn up anywhere) and come in both "old school" Civil War era models and new manufacture versions. The locals could make both the shot and powder it uses with relative ease. It may be only a one shot weapon, but it could dominate a force with only small arms. Any thoughts?

As you can imagine with a group that's been around this long, some ideas and discussions circle back around from time to time. I'll see if I can dig through the archives and find some of the discussions we had on the exact same subject a few years back.

[Targan]

Here are some old threads that talk about reloading ammo and have some references to the use of black powder:

Improvised ammunition

Ammo reloading

Pictures of homemade guns

Improvised weapons and equipment

Post-exchange gunpowder production

Black powder

And here's a few threads that talk about modifying military vehicles:

Modified vehicles in T2K

Gun trucks

Using captured vehicles

M551A2 Sheridan

Questions about home guard/militia units

And this thread has elements of both:

Surplus armor in T2K

[jester]

Division De Cuba:

Had me wondering about Gitmo. What would of become of the Navy Facility there? Does the timeline show it abandoned? Or would they have reinforced like their did during the Cuban Missile Crisis? Or, did the personel die in a blaze of glory and the radio went silent?

That could be a source of some US weapons for the Division.

Another issue, since Cuba liked to export and share with the world the joys of socialism with the like of good ol Che. Do you all think there could be a battalion of volunteers that would go with the Russians to fight those evil imperialist Yankees? Or, as Cuba tends to do, a light "Boatlift" in an effort to get rid of undesirables? Sending them as "support" for the Russians.

[Olefin]

At 200 a round for the license Littlefield could afford to have quite the arsenal - remember we are talking about a multi multi millionaire here - this isnt some guy with an old M113 in his garage - this is a guy who had more tanks and armored vehicles than most countries have

Oh and by the way - Sadat threw the Soviets out of Egypt long before the timeline ever deviated from ours - Egypt is a US allied nation in this timeline - they were buying US equipment and by 1989 were considered a US ally - so getting ex-Soviet stuff from Israel and Egypt would have been easy to do

one thing that also could be done would be to use any vehicles as pure gun platforms - i.e. turn them into the equivalent of a WWII tank destroyer or self propelled gun without a turret - mount a small cannon or AA gun or heck a helicopter gunship rocket pod on it and send it into combat

[ArmySGT.]

At 200 a round for the license Littlefield could afford to have quite the arsenal - remember we are talking about a multi multi millionaire here - this isnt some guy with an old M113 in his garage - this is a guy who had more tanks and armored vehicles than most countries have

Oh and by the way - Sadat threw the Soviets out of Egypt long before the timeline ever deviated from ours - Egypt is a US allied nation in this timeline - they were buying US equipment and by 1989 were considered a US ally - so getting ex-Soviet stuff from Israel and Egypt would have been easy to do

one thing that also could be done would be to use any vehicles as pure gun platforms - i.e. turn them into the equivalent of a WWII tank destroyer or self propelled gun without a turret - mount a small cannon or AA gun or heck a helicopter gunship rocket pod on it and send it into combat

Since Mr. Littlefield did not buy munitions, machinery to manufacture munitions, or even chemicals to produce even propellants, is proof enough to me that he never intended to in the first place. Let alone the federal laws that would have to be overcome.

I don't like hand wave things just to hand wave them. People I have played with want plausible excuses for things not their intelligence insulted. Billionaires that buy fantastic weapons and never have bureaucratic government problems is a movie called Iron Man.

It is reasonable and plausible in the T2K timelines that a hobbyist like Littlefield would have Korean war and earlier vehicles and equipment. Given the radical changes in the timeline that differ from our own; I find it implausible that operational 60s and later equipment would have gone to a collector.

[swaghauler]

As you can imagine with a group that's been around this long, some ideas and discussions circle back around from time to time. I'll see if I can dig through the archives and find some of the discussions we had on the exact same subject a few years back.

Thanks for the links to the old threads. I really enjoyed them.

[Olefin]

Since Mr. Littlefield did not buy munitions, machinery to manufacture munitions, or even chemicals to produce even propellants, is proof enough to me that he never intended to in the first place. Let alone the federal laws that would have to be overcome.

I don't like hand wave things just to hand wave them. People I have played with want plausible excuses for things not their intelligence insulted. Billionaires that buy fantastic weapons and never have bureaucratic government problems is a movie called Iron Man.

It is reasonable and plausible in the T2K timelines that a hobbyist like Littlefield would have Korean war and earlier vehicles and equipment. Given the radical changes in the timeline that differ from our own; I find it implausible that operational 60s and later equipment would have gone to a collector.

sorry but an old M60A2 Starship and a Conqueror tank are hardly fantastic weapons - and you can own live shells in this country for a license fee that is very affordable - and for the right price you can get anything in this country -

and if you use the V2 timeline then he could have gotten everything he had basically - even the original timeline is totally plausible for 90% of his collection - and the T2013 timeline means he got it all

and either way the man had exactly what you need to maintain and rebuild tanks and armored vehicles including a very loyal and dedicated staff

but again either way its how you approach the game versus how I approach it - and everyone's campaign is different in how non-canon is handled

[Silent Hunter UK]

Oh and by the way - Sadat threw the Soviets out of Egypt long before the timeline ever deviated from ours - Egypt is a US allied nation in this timeline - they were buying US equipment and by 1989 were considered a US ally - so getting ex-Soviet stuff from Israel and Egypt would have been easy to do


Indeed, a number of the MiGs used in CONSTANT PEG are believed to be ex-Egyptian ones.

[ArmySGT.]

sorry but an old M60A2 Starship and a Conqueror tank are hardly fantastic weapons - and you can own live shells in this country for a license fee that is very affordable - and for the right price you can get anything in this country - That M60A2 would have been recycled into an M60A1 or sold to Israel that would have done the same. Jordan would have liked to have the Conqueror, South Africa, even Israel again. Israel would have converted the conqueror to one of the turretless counter IED engineer vehicles that sweep between one kibbutz and the next.

Old and obsolete to the 1st world powers like NATO is still adequate to those not so advanced. In any of these timelines without a collapse of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact to economic difficulties means a continuance and escalation of brushfire wars in Asia, Africa, and the Middle East.
and if you use the V2 timeline then he could have gotten everything he had basically - even the original timeline is totally plausible for 90% of his collection - and the T2013 timeline means he got it all So your saying all these smaller 3rd world nations like those in south America still using M24s, M41s, and M48s would not have been snapping any of these things up for spares if nothing else.
I don’t think so.
and either way the man had exactly what you need to maintain and rebuild tanks and armored vehicles including a very loyal and dedicated staff Maintaining museum quality sure….. I think he could have a reasonable collection of WW2 and Korean era equipment. The items from the 60s forward would be in the hands of 3rd world countries in local conflicts fueled by money from either NATO or the Warsaw Pact…… Afghanistan, Angola, Eritrea, Sinai, Cyprus, Vietnam, Laos, Chad, Libya, Pakistan, India, as examples.
but again either way its how you approach the game versus how I approach it - and everyone's campaign is different in how non-canon is handled I don’t like to insult my players with far fetched per case scenarios. If bad guy needs to be stronger to counter a powerful PC team or to give the PC a target worthy of their efforts, then a reasonable and plausible means for a tank or APC to be there can be better devised than because billionaires like tanks.

Millionaires and billionaires didn’t get that way spending money. Sure Mr. Littlefields collection was worth a lot, and gained in value as other vehicles were scrapped. What doesn’t give it value is live ammunition at $200 per shell above the base cost, plus the outrageous monthly insurance.
Then ammunition doesn’t sit infinitely, propellants and explosives naturally decay. Is he going to shoot 10% to 50% per year from every vehicle to rotate stock? Not a chance. The wear and tear on the vehicles alone would be unacceptable.

Ordnance isn’t built or maintained by mechanics no matter how clever they are. Fuses, even of the impact type, have little to nothing at all incommon with anything on the tank, but another fuse.
Any Twilight timeline is a violent place and I doubt anything would sit around as surplus to be collected by hobbyists.

[Olefin]

ArmySgt - the timeline isnt that much more violent than our current timeline up until the start of the Soviet Chinese war - there would still be surplus equipment to be had by those who had enough money

and there is always surplus equipment to be had for the serious collector who has enough money and he was both

keep in mind that many third world nations don't operate much in the way of tanks - like Mexico for instance

and many of the vehicles he had he rebuilt from the ground up - these werent pristine vehicles that drove up ready to fire - these were lovingly rebuilt by him over the years - if you are a Third World nation you are going to want to buy fully operational tanks and armored vehicles - not ones that need a year in a rebuild shop to bring them back up to spec while you search spare parts collections and use old drawings to make parts one at a time

he didnt buy this tanks right off the lot - that Panzer IV that he had looked literally like a piece of crap when he got it - and it took years to fix it -

Frankly if you dont like the Collection then dont use it in your campaign -heck unless you are playing in CA or AZ it would never even come into play

And while you keep talking about how crappy it would be to have a WWII or Korean era tank in a fight, the Croats, Serbs and Bosnians used a bunch of old WWII tanks in the fight in Yugoslavia in the mid 90's - and they worked quite well

[ArmySGT.]

ArmySgt - the timeline isnt that much more violent than our current timeline up until the start of the Soviet Chinese war - there would still be surplus equipment to be had by those who had enough money

and there is always surplus equipment to be had for the serious collector who has enough money and he was both

keep in mind that many third world nations don't operate much in the way of tanks - like Mexico for instance

and many of the vehicles he had he rebuilt from the ground up - these werent pristine vehicles that drove up ready to fire - these were lovingly rebuilt by him over the years - if you are a Third World nation you are going to want to buy fully operational tanks and armored vehicles - not ones that need a year in a rebuild shop to bring them back up to spec while you search spare parts collections and use old drawings to make parts one at a time

he didnt buy this tanks right off the lot - that Panzer IV that he had looked literally like a piece of crap when he got it - and it took years to fix it -

Frankly if you dont like the Collection then dont use it in your campaign -heck unless you are playing in CA or AZ it would never even come into play

And while you keep talking about how crappy it would be to have a WWII or Korean era tank in a fight, the Croats, Serbs and Bosnians used a bunch of old WWII tanks in the fight in Yugoslavia in the mid 90's - and they worked quite well

Still seen nothing here to convince me otherwise. When V1 doesn't support your argument, you say V2. When V2 doesn't you say V3.

When the ammunition comes up you say he is a millionaire, just buying munitions because he can.

You haven't convinced me, because you keep moving the goal posts.

This is relevant to anywhere in the U.S., because a great many collections exist both private and public. That is really my interest in this thread. There has to be a plausible excuse for using the resources to get them going and operational. Just because it is a tank, doesn't mean anyone is going to be stupid enough to go into battle in it. If M203 and BG-15s can kill them from 150 to 300 meters out, these relics won't even be safe with a infantry unit to screen them. Then they are in rendered useless in an attack, only to be marginally effective in a defense. Let alone that with high explosives most would be hampered severely with the poor penetration capabilities of hardened steel shot for the main armament.

Pz IIs and M3 would get killed just by a marauder with an M203.

It is barbarically negligent to kill soldiers by sending them into battle in some of these things.

[raketenjagdpanzer]

You know you say "Oh he'd only have WWII stuff and no guns..."

Consider this: even taking that into consideration, his "garage" is a treasure trove of a machine shop. It'd be a fine prize for any faction to take, be it civgov, milgov, New America, MexiCubanSoviet invaders, whatever. He's got tooling, lifts, lathes, etc. up there to keep an armored brigade repaired and running.

Now regarding the collection itself? Fine, He's only got up to Korean War era stuff, and no ammo. Taking it as fact (because it is a fact) that he's got the machine shop to do so, what's stopping him from pulling turrets off of tanks and hey, presto, armored prime movers? Attaching dozer blades and other things, and now you've got armored engineering vehicles, vital to combat engineer work and reconstruction? How about turning those old tanks into personnel carriers? Mortar carriers? A Sherman could shrug off MG42 rounds, why not RPK slugs? Same for his various half-tracks.

So you consider his 30-40 vehicles that he "would have" during T2k's timeline, we'll be really conservative and say 20 can be made operational, and hey presto that's 20 personnel carriers or prime movers, now suddenly you can put a brigade strength infantry unit on tracks versus walking everywhere, or riding in relatively thin-skinned vehicles.

[Olefin]

Sgt - first off I am not moving the goalposts

Timelines

V1 - he still gets almost every tank and vehicle he had that was made pre-1970 that was in his collection and even some of the Soviet Stuff - Egypt still becomes a NATO ally and gets rid of its Soviet stuff, Israel still captures a bunch in the various wars they had

V2 - he gets the same plus even some Soviet stuff he could have obtained from the former East Germans and the Yugoslav remnants

2013 - he gets his whole collection including the Scud missile

no one is moving the goalposts - the posts move because of the events in the timeline change

as for munitions - hmm lets see MilGov decides to make use of his collection - well there is where the munitions come from as one possibility - another is that a machine shop (which per canon are capable of turning out mortar shells and the like) make a small amount of solid shot shells for the vehicles

or he obtains munitions the old fashioned way - he buys them pre-war - maybe only enough to give one basic ammo load or less for the vehicles with live barrels - and he had lots of storage room to keep them in

and for our info most of the tanks and artillery pieces didnt have live barrels - so the Stuarts and PzkII and Pzk IV you seem to obsess about and the Lee and the British WWII tanks arent going anywhere as tanks - but they sure could be modified to be turned into gun platforms for other weapons for the US Army or turned into tracked gun vehicles instead of wheeled ones -

and anyone who uses a M203 against the tanks that he did have with live barrels is going to end up dead

you might want to actually research his collection like I did and find out what worked and what didnt - and what only needed a .50 to be fully operational like most of his APC's

and per canon - by 2000 anything with a gun on it and tracks was being used as tank in the US by the various groups fighting

thats pretty clear that if it had a turret, a gun and could move they used it

plus keep in mind that the main marauder threat is a bunch of guys armed with shotguns, civilian rifles and if they were really lucky some M-16's they might have looted out of a National Guard armory - none of which have a hope in heck of hurting anyone in a tank

and again - per canon - from the Texas module - even the Mexican Army by 2000 was mostly foot infantry with rifles - you would be lucky if a whole unit had one or two anti-tank weapons of any sort with them -

this isnt charging Soviet Division Cuba with a bunch of original production Shermans and Stuarts

this is taking on marauders and Mexican infantry who the only thing they can do against a tank is hope they get close enough to use a Molotov on it or maybe manage to blow a tread off with dynamite

and frankly any commander who had working tanks and APC's and artillery pieces sitting right there and didnt use them when he had no tanks of any sort and no armored vehicles in his unit is not one whose men will stay with him long

[kato13]

Given the penchant the game designers had putting odd equipment in odd places, I think the Littlefield collection fits nicely. They have British and German units stay in Canada. They have an Alaskan Invasion by the Soviets. They have a US division get "lost" by 800 kilometers.

When I played I tried to give the 49th some color by adding 24 DUKW transports which were "requisitioned" when one of their brigades was near the Wisconsin Dells (where they are used for recreational touring (https://www.dellsducks.com/ducks.html)).

Personally I would give Littlefield a little more eccentric personality (and more money and power). Maybe add a little John DuPont and Howard Hughes. Make the collection an obsession that leads to grey and black market deals.

Once you enter that world you find corrupt quartermasters, Insurgents who capture a single vehicle (and have no support for it), a dictator's cousin looking for a little cash, plus anything that would be above board.

You have to make Littlefield crazy to have the collection armed before TDM, but if you throw in a little of DuPont's or Hughes paranoia it might work. Personally I would not have the collection armed until "Wojo" type plants spring up.

[raketenjagdpanzer]

I should also point out the matter of vehicles that 40mm rounds can take out - the M1 (of any stripe) is still vulnerable in almost all arcs to RPG-7 fire. When they were taken out with them in OIF the Army (and Marines) didn't pull them off the line and mothball them.

[Olefin]

I agree with you Kato - and Raketenjagdpanzer has a big point too - just that shop of his, which he would have had no matter what the timeline, would have been invaluable

just imagine - its 2000 and you have a fully manned (his techs weree as dedicated as he was after all) and operational tank repair depot that can take a tank that is basically a pile of junk and make it operational again

and there sits MilGov units with all kinds of tanks and armored vehicles with issues that need to be fixed - its a marriage made in heaven

and I could easily see him obtaining stuff once the war started with various bribes if not beforhand - especially if he saw how the world was getting pre-TDM and figured it might be a damn good idea to have some munitions to arm his collection

[ArmySGT.]

Again, we are back to where we are not going to agree.

A U.S. government that provides HE munitions to a millionaire eccentric with a militaria fetish.

A machine shop that can be replicated anywhere there is a shop that services heavy construction equipment. The only thing that sets it a part is some of the skill sets of the technicians and the manuals available. Saying that though, heavy equipment mechanics typically made their start in military service.

Diversion of resources to make munitions for an obsolete caliber with in a multi-front global conflict.

No, diesel to put these into action, let along move them by rail, or tractor trailer to near the marshaling area.

All the timelines with a strong Communist Bloc and worldwide brushfire wars of proxy between NATO and the Soviet Union.

A M203 High Explosive Dual Purpose (HEDP) has the potential to penetrate 2 inches (50mm) into Rolled Homogenous Steel (RHA) at zero degrees deflection. One per fire team. Now look over the armor thickness on these relics and see how long they will last against the lightest of anti-armor weapons.

Killing tanks with handweapons like molotovs, burning sulphur, satchel charges, dropping a building on them isn't that difficult once you drive the supporting infantry off. Chechnya taught the Russian Army that lesson with the loss of T-80s to underscore the point.

I am utterly unconvinced.

How ever my interest is post apocalyptic genre, not WW3. So I only care about solid, plausible explanations without a confluence of preposterous circumstance.

[ArmySGT.]

I should also point out the matter of vehicles that 40mm rounds can take out - the M1 (of any stripe) is still vulnerable in almost all arcs to RPG-7 fire. When they were taken out with them in OIF the Army (and Marines) didn't pull them off the line and mothball them.

Notably because the insurgent tank hunting practice was to attempt to overwhelm the tank with volley fire expending 20-30 RPGs some with recently supplied ChiCom and Russian tandem warheads. Those tanks weren't lost or out of action long. I will concede that they were put out of action temporarily and tank crews killed or maimed permanently. Insurgent RPG gunners got lucky hitting hatches from on top. Tanks immobilized because multiple RPGS were used to destroy the drive sprocket (bogie?). Some were lost to simply packing the road with several artillery shells filled set to command detonate. Those RPGS did shut some M1s down but, only just by hits to the gunners sights, commanders visor blocks, etc. It takes 20 to a 100 men and near or completely suicidal dedication.

That also brought out the T.U.S.K. program.

If you can find an instance where an RPG-7 standard round penetrated the hull through the armor and not a more vulnerable point like a vision block or weapon sight I would genuinely like to read it.

[Olefin]

The shop had the ability to weld armor plate - I used to work for a company that produced military vehicles - i.e. the M88, the M109, the Bradley, etc..

you need special equipment and training to be able to weld heavy duty armor that miltary vehicles use - and I worked for a company that builds heavy construction equipment - plus that shop had equipment that could easily handle a tank turret or tank body -

and we used to qualify our welders to work on armor - the qualifications you need for working on construction equipment is not what you need to properly weld a heavy armored vehicle together

as to a lack of diesel - well thats why the military converted their vehicles to run on methanol and ethanol - so most likely they would do it here

as for lack of tank transports - have a feeling that the US military still has them and they could use them to move those tanks to where they are needed - and they run on methanol and ethanol too

yes those tanks are vulnerable to those rounds - and so are Bradley's, M113's, Bufords, LAV-25's, etc.. - and I highly doubt that MilGov has parked all those vehicles just in case someone has an M203 HEDP round on them

yes it has the potential to penetrate that steel at 150 meters range - whats the effective range of a .50 caliber machine gun on those grenadiers? and thats if they even have those rounds by 2000 in any quantity at all let alone actual RPG's

and I would rather have a tank to fight in that was designed as a tank than converted bank armored cars - which per canon are being used as armored vehicles by MilGov, CivGov and New Amerca

if they are issuing Peacekeepers to the 49th to make up for lost tanks then I bet they would rather have actual tanks instead no matter what their vintage than a Peacekeeper

Heck they are using M728 Combat Engineer Vehicle's as tanks then they really dont care much what they have for tanks

[ArmySGT.]

The shop had the ability to weld armor plate - I used to work for a company that produced military vehicles - i.e. the M88, the M109, the Bradley, etc..
you need special equipment and training to be able to weld heavy duty armor that miltary vehicles use - and I worked for a company that builds heavy construction equipment - plus that shop had equipment that could easily handle a tank turret or tank body -
and we used to qualify our welders to work on armor - the qualifications you need for working on construction equipment is not what you need to properly weld a heavy armored vehicle together The formula isn’t a mystery or super secret knowledge. Let’t not pretend it is.
as to a lack of diesel - well thats why the military converted their vehicles to run on methanol and ethanol - so most likely they would do it here That is one of the failures of the T2K setting. Now they probably get the idea from the M35 2 ½ which has a multi-fuel engine. That doesn’t mean it can run on pure ethanol or methanol. The fuel mix for a M35 still must be greater than 50% diesel, kerosene, crank case oil to lubricate the pistons. Pure ethanol would seize the pistons very fast. The only other vehicle that would run would be the turbine in an M1 Abrams until the alcohol destroyed any gaskets and lines.

The brewing fuel bit only works for gasoline motors for a short time, again alcohol attacks those gaskets and lines not formulated against its corrosive effects.

It is a major handwave for the entirety of the story or there would be few or no military vehicles at all without oil production and refining to get diesel on the market.
as for lack of tank transports - have a feeling that the US military still has them and they could use them to move those tanks to where they are needed - and they run on methanol and ethanol too For one, they do not run on methanol and ethanol except it the T2K universe. Trains are out since railyards are a strategic target on their own and typically in a large urban area another target of strategic nuclear weapons. Civilian lowboys could move around APCs and light armor, it is going to take a HET to move an M1 with any efficiency. I would say some are around, these are a support vehicle and some are going to make it through the tactical nukes destroying rear area marshalling yards and forward support battalions. These burn a lot of fuel though. These are also valuable as transport for any and everything else. Escorted HETs on MSR Tampa between Scania and BIAP with tons of anything and everything like sack concrete, concertina wire, plus pallets of sandbags. They wouldn’t go on ethanol or methanol though.
yes those tanks are vulnerable to those rounds - and so are Bradley's, M113's, Bufords, LAV-25's, etc.. - and I highly doubt that MilGov has parked all those vehicles just in case someone has an M203 HEDP round on them All the modern vehicles you name have things like spall liners, fire suppression systems, and ammo compartmentalization in their favor.
yes it has the potential to penetrate that steel at 150 meters range - whats the effective range of a .50 caliber machine gun on those grenadiers? and thats if they even have those rounds by 2000 in any quantity at all let alone actual RPG's This is the wrong thread to go into infantry anti armor tactics but, having a .50 isn’t going to do them much good. A tank without infantry protecting it is a dead tank.
and I would rather have a tank to fight in that was designed as a tank than converted bank armored cars - which per canon are being used as armored vehicles by MilGov, CivGov and New America If they are using bank armored cars then those guys are pants on head retarded to start with. The best possible use is as scouts or convoy escorts. These do not have the armor to be anything more than the lightest battle taxi that would carry infantry forward and drop them off 500 to a 1000 meters from the objective.
Another writers fiction that has somehow gained traction.
if they are issuing Peacekeepers to the 49th to make up for lost tanks then I bet they would rather have actual tanks instead no matter what their vintage than a Peacekeeper If the 49th is using Peacekeepers this explains how they lost their tanks to begin with. It is all for the story though, so that is the way it has to be, realistic or not.

[Olefin]

actually they used the Peacekeepers as replacements for the armor they lost fighting Soviet Division Cuba

and bank cars being used as APC's are in both "A River Runs Thru It" by MilGov and in the Florida module being used by New America and quite effectively so against guerrillas who have no anti-armor weapons

and we are talking about T2K here - so in the canon they have converted vehicles to run on methanol and ethanol and have done so since 1998 when gasoline and diesel got short

basically outside of Oklahoma, Ohio, Kenya, and Iran there arent many military vehicles they have that arent running on alcohol and have been doing so for quite a while

so you may not like it but thats the world those of us who play the game have gotten used to

and the lack of anti-armor weapons by 2000 is why any remaining tanks are as effective as they are - look at the Soviet Vehicle Guide and it specifically states how effective one APC is because the guerrillas its fighting have almost no anti-armor weapons

look at the Soviet attack on Brownsville in the Texas module - they lose a grand total of one vehicle to anti-armor weapons in close in fighting - not exactly a ringing endorsement of the availability of anti-armor weapons

[ArmySGT.]

actually they used the Peacekeepers as replacements for the armor they lost fighting Soviet Division Cuba They why isn’t important, it is the how. If they are using them as tanks in frontal attacks against a dedicated defense meant to hold ground those are going to be dead to the first DsHK 38/42. Having any AT rocket or missile is irrelevant against a bank car which is armor up to 30.06 or 7.62N AP ammo. A 120 motor will take one out with just a near miss and shrapnel.

That is taking exceptional liberties with calling a bank car meant to protect cash from robbers a military armored vehicle.
If they are and that is canonically correct, who is in charge of this 49th ? The post office? Because something is seriously wrong in the implementation of combined arms theory over there.
and bank cars being used as APC's are in both "A River Runs Thru It" by MilGov and in the Florida module being used by New America and quite effectively so against guerrillas who have no anti-armor weapons How loosely are we defining “Use as an APC” because again to use these even moderately successfully they are battle taxis or convoy escorts. Either taxing troops with 500 to 1000 meters to avoid engagements and leaving the infantry to themselves; option two is as a convoy escort that hopes to survive the initial ambush and belch out troops to counter attack. Any other way and all I can forsee is a loss of the vehicle quickly.
and we are talking about T2K here - so in the canon they have converted vehicles to run on methanol and ethanol and have done so since 1998 when gasoline and diesel got short Which is still ridiculous and not a ringing endorsement for the setting either. They can’t manufacture parts or support armies in the field, yet all sides can engineer a engine replacement, manufacture this, ship these globally, and refurbish every vehicle in the fleet combat or combat support with a new gasoline / ethanol motor. See the shortfalls in that.
basically outside of Oklahoma, Ohio, Kenya, and Iran there arent many military vehicles they have that arent running on alcohol and have been doing so for quite a while It is elemental handwavium for the sake of having military vehicles for the players and the opposing forces. Let’s just call that what it is.
so you may not like it but thats the world those of us who play the game have gotten used to Yup, I bought my first copy of T2k in 1986, doesn’t mean the story holds water any better than a colander then or now. Would be better to dispense with the ethanol foolishness and state that the coal oil conversion process doesn’t have the same outputs as the pre-war petrochemical. So it takes months to get enough for a large offensive. Easy peasy, still works with the slow advance and long periods of settling in.
and the lack of anti-armor weapons by 2000 is why any remaining tanks are as effective as they are - look at the Soviet Vehicle Guide and it specifically states how effective one APC is because the guerrillas its fighting have almost no anti-armor weapons Which is again ridiculous given the simplicity of rudimentary shape charges with a government capable of doing so. Panzerfausts and Bazookas can comeback into fashion if everyone is into WW2 relics and bank cars.

look at the Soviet attack on Brownsville in the Texas module - they lose a grand total of one vehicle to anti-armor weapons in close in fighting - not exactly a ringing endorsement of the availability of anti-armor weapons Which is a plot point necessary for the author versus a ringing endorsement of combined arms theory. It was necessary for the story, so that is the way it went.

[Olefin]

Urban Guerrilla

New American forces use a mix of armored bank cars as armored personnel carriers and assault vehicles - with a machine gun turret on the top that is used to support their troops in close in assaults. They used a variety of armored cars including small, medium and large ones.

And they used them to bring troops right up into the fighting where they deployed right into the fighting - so not armored taxis for sure

US Vehicle Guide

Peacekeeper entry

Peacekeeper armored car of 2 78th Armored Cavalry Regiment;
Germany, spring 1998.

Another vehicle from the 278th ACR contemporaneous with
that shown in Plate E1, the Peacekeeper was also most commonly
used by USAF security police for airfield security. This
particular peacekeeper has apparently been recently repainted
which accounts for it having acquired a camouflage pattern and for the less weathered look of the vehicle compared to "Lady
Jane". Note the searchlight mounted on the machine gun gun
shield.This was a common feature on airfield security vehicles
and has been retained by this crew.

In addition to airfield defense, a number of Peacekeepers were
also acquired by the Department of Energy in the early 1980's
for nuclear reactor security. A number of Peacekeepers of both
USAF and DOE origin were used in 1999 to replace vehicle
losses in the 49th Armored Division in Oklahoma.

So the Army was using them to equip Armored Cav Regiments in Germany and to replace lost armored vehicles in the 49th per the canon.

Soviet Army Vehicle Guide

BRDM-3

the 30mm autocannon was very effective against partisans and irregular forces who had little in the way of anti-tank weapons as the war went on

again showing that antitank weapons are at a premium by 2000

Red Star Lone Star

The Mexican armed forces are armed with a mix of rifles - no machine guns, no anti-tank weapons. The only guys with RPG's are the guys in Brownsville and the Soviets and the only grenade launchers in the whole module are in the hands of the Texian Legion who got them from a MilGov unit that didn't have any armor

[ArmySGT.]

Urban Guerrilla

New American forces use a mix of armored bank cars as armored personnel carriers and assault vehicles - with a machine gun turret on the top that is used to support their troops in close in assaults. They used a variety of armored cars including small, medium and large ones.

And they used them to bring troops right up into the fighting where they deployed right into the fighting - so not armored taxis for sure

US Vehicle Guide

Peacekeeper entry

Peacekeeper armored car of 2 78th Armored Cavalry Regiment;
Germany, spring 1998.

Another vehicle from the 278th ACR contemporaneous with
that shown in Plate E1, the Peacekeeper was also most commonly
used by USAF security police for airfield security. This
particular peacekeeper has apparently been recently repainted
which accounts for it having acquired a camouflage pattern and for the less weathered look of the vehicle compared to "Lady
Jane". Note the searchlight mounted on the machine gun gun
shield.This was a common feature on airfield security vehicles
and has been retained by this crew.

In addition to airfield defense, a number of Peacekeepers were
also acquired by the Department of Energy in the early 1980's
for nuclear reactor security. A number of Peacekeepers of both
USAF and DOE origin were used in 1999 to replace vehicle
losses in the 49th Armored Division in Oklahoma.

So the Army was using them to equip Armored Cav Regiments in Germany and to replace lost armored vehicles in the 49th per the canon.

Soviet Army Vehicle Guide

BRDM-3

the 30mm autocannon was very effective against partisans and irregular forces who had little in the way of anti-tank weapons as the war went on

again showing that antitank weapons are at a premium by 2000

Red Star Lone Star

The Mexican armed forces are armed with a mix of rifles - no machine guns, no anti-tank weapons. The only guys with RPG's are the guys in Brownsville and the Soviets and the only grenade launchers in the whole module are in the hands of the Texian Legion who got them from a MilGov unit that didn't have any armor

Ok, but what is your point with this departure from the thread?

None of these examples, though they exist in game canon, are indicative of real world combined arms theory.

Lets go with number one. Bank cars.

Run flat tires, large windshield of bullet resistant glass laminate, non-turreted, high center of gravity, low power to weight ratio, driver and passenger positions in the front, separate cargo/passenger area to the rear (no door or passage to the drivers compartment), firing ports allowing barrel protrusion (drivers compartment one forward, one left, one right) (cargo one rear, one left, one right), firer cannot use the weapon sights.

Sound about right? The armor protection is rated up to 30.06 / 7.62N on only the best, and most often used for high value cargoes. Typical application drops down to close range and pistol caliber cartridges. The difference between the ATM service truck and casino or bank transfer truck. Hundreds of the first, a dozen of the second.

Use it as an APC, lose it quickly.

Thugs with bank car decide to raid merchant with food and some petrochemicals like motor oil and some kerosene.

Vehicle approaches at a high rate of speed. Merchant guards move to defense recognizing the vehicle for what it is.

Merchant guards engage with M16s, M14s, and Ak-47s. In moments the driver windshield is pocked and shattered forming large circles of fractured glass that impair vision from multiple impacts. The radiator takes multiple punishing impacts from bullet fragments deflecting off the louvers. The front wheels immediately deflate from multiple rifle caliber impacts and sink onto shredding rubber and the aluminum run flat internal wheel. The driver unable to see, with unresponsive steering loses control and the vehicle comes to a rest on its side. The merchant guard using their positions under cover use aimed shots at any sign of movement from inside the vehicle. A detachment of guards moves to the vehicle from the now exposed underside that hasn't any vision blocks, ports, or windows. Using improvised means sets the bank car on fire and retreats.

Thugs are dead and the bank car is destroyed. This is with AT weapons, counter vehicles obstacles, or mines.

Bank cars as APCs is an author taking tremendous liberties with the real capabilities of men and equipment.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

While I have no desire to block a debate that's providing interesting information, I am constantly looking at it from the viewpoint that GDW intended the game to be about a group of WW3 veterans surviving and maybe rebuilding in the aftermath of a global war, with the PCs adventuring in a manner similar to how PCs adventure in AD&D.

It wasn't specifically about any group fielding large numbers of vehicles to continue prosecuting the war and although it can be argued that certain NPC groups will try to get all the vehicles they can, half the fun of the game would be missions for the PCs to get the necessary spares and POL to get a handful of vehicles operating. These missions would be significant not just to the NPCs or PCs but also to the Players simply because those needed resources are now so scarce that their PCs would be taking a significant role in the game story - which is kinda the point of RPGs :p

As I say, the debate is throwing out a lot of interesting and useful information but for me ultimately, it is a purely intellectual exercise because I personally don't see T2k as a game of raising masses of armoured vehicles to keep WW3 going. I've always thought of the combat vehicles as rare and kept for "special occasions".
Protecting your enclave is obviously important but the resources dedicated to keeping those armoured vehicles in combat could be better used to keep the population alive and growing food.

[jester]

Peacekeeper Armored cars;

One was forsale at DRMO recently for about 5k.

My boss and partner both worked with them. At any given time 1/3 of the vehicles would be down. Durring movements, another 1/3 of the vehicles would break down.

I doubt any Peacekeepers would survive to be used as replacements.

Further, no vision, poor braking, poor power to weight ratio, poor steering, all of which are the recipe for disaster in short order. And much worse in "field" conditions.

Further, they had primitive crew conditions. Heat exhaustion of those inside was a given. In cold conditions they worse more clothes which made it almost impossible to move inside the vehicle or get out with any speed.

As for using civilian armored cars, gotta agree. A death trap if used on anything beyond a modern maintained road. Off road, or as a combat platform a death trap. I could see them as a gun platform if a turret is mounted and they are left to keep roads clear, run on sturdy flat areas like a runway or cleared roads.

[dragoon500ly]

Straight out of the improvised munitions handbook, an effective antitank weapon can be made from two sticks of C4, a fuse, and a Coke-Cola bottle, simply mold the explosive around the upper part of the bottle, insert fuse assembly and place on the vehicle, good enough to penetrate up to 3 inches of armor.

Basic rules for antitank is to get the crew to button up, thus reducing their visibility, then get in close and use your antitank weapons against the rear of the vehicle.

Ideally, you want to damage the suspension, either by breaking the track or damaging the running gear, once the vehicle is immobilized, you can then then hamper their vision, disable weapons or blow the hatches off. You can also access the engine compartment and plant charges against the fuel cells.

There used to be a class taught at the Armor Officers Course, where it was demonstrated just how easy it was to get up close and personal with a tank. You could disable the running gear with as simple a method as jamming a log into the road wheels (i still cringe at the arse-chewing I got for that stunt). Blankets or spray paint is great for disabling periscopes/vision blocks, blocking the barrels with cleaning rods, rocks,etc. even something as crude as using a sledge hammer to damage the muzzle of a machine gun, or stuff a termite or WP grenade into the muzzle of the cannon. At that point, with the crew helpless, they can surrender or wait for the hatches to be breached.

[dragoon500ly]

Wheeled vehicles are even easier to disable, especially if you can get them off road. Even all-wheeled drive has issues with vertical obstacles, anything that gets one or more wheels into the air...or blocking them with something too heavy to for them to push will immobilize them enough for a close assault.

So what can the crew do to protect themselves? By placing Claymores in improvised mounting on the hull, the crew buys themselves especially time. Running with one or more wingman allows another vehicle to "scratch your back" when those irritating infantry types try to ruin your day. And, of course, staying out of terrain ideal for close assaults, until after friendly infantry has cleared it.

[ArmySGT.]

Sorry, skipped over your post replying to others so here goes.
You know you say "Oh he'd only have WWII stuff and no guns..." I do. For two reasons, first because when the Soviet Union collapsed in our real world timeline of 09 November 1989 the little wars happening all over the world especially in Africa, South America, and South East Asia drastically reduced in size and intensity. Those wars were fueled by money and weapons from mostly NATO (primarily the U.S., I admit that) and the USSR mostly to preserve or limit the other factions influence in the area.
With a strong USSR and Warsaw Pact still in existence those wars never stop or lower their intensity. The Pact allies like Cuba, North Korea, Angola, Venezuela don’t really decline or stop their military misadventures regionally or globally. For this reason I assert there really isn’t much in the way of military surplus vehicles or artillery because some place, at some time, somebody is using this stuff trying to kill someone else. What would not be acceptable first line equipment in Europe for the coming WW3 in mostly effective somewhere that either side isn’t using that sophisticated equipment or fighting Kursk level pitched battles.
I keep iterating that the surplus will be WW2 and Korea as though they are easy to operate and could be effective in some situations these are now vulnerable to the least effective of anti armor weapons like the 40mm grenade. That makes spending money and diverting resources to these as fighting vehicles decidedly less worthwhile.
Consider this: even taking that into consideration, his "garage" is a treasure trove of a machine shop. It'd be a fine prize for any faction to take, be it civgov, milgov, New America, MexiCubanSoviet invaders, whatever. He's got tooling, lifts, lathes, etc. up there to keep an armored brigade repaired and running. It isn’t unique. Anywhere that has a machine shop for repair of heavy construction equipment has the multi ton hoists, lathes, mills, and the large toolsets to work on these things. Literally, every county, multiple in every state everywhere there is a Department of Transportation. Additionally, any dealership that sells heavy construction equipment such as Caterpillar, Case, or John Deere has a repair bay with all the same stuff. The only thing unique about Mr. Littlefield’s shop is some of the unique expertise and the manuals available. I can think of four or five places in Pueblo down there that would all escape the nuclear exchange and would only need electricity.
Now regarding the collection itself? Fine, He's only got up to Korean War era stuff, and no ammo. Taking it as fact (because it is a fact) that he's got the machine shop to do so, what's stopping him from pulling turrets off of tanks and hey, presto, armored prime movers? Prime movers are used to tow artillery in poor terrain where there is a risk of counter battery fire or bombing by tactical aircraft. Depends on if there is artillery to be towed to start with, then if saddling a unit with a cantankerous beast of a machine that has no spare parts is worth the effort.
Attaching dozer blades and other things, and now you've got armored engineering vehicles, vital to combat engineer work and reconstruction? How about turning those old tanks into personnel carriers? Mortar carriers? A Sherman could shrug off MG42 rounds, why not RPK slugs? Same for his various half-tracks. There is a big difference between combat engineering and reconstruction. Combat engineering vehicles are either put up obstacles to slow, channel or stop an enemy advance or trying to tear down the other guy’s defenses. This is all done while being fired upon as both sides are in contact. Only the most heavily armored are expected to survive this like a M728. Even then, a mass effort is in place just for that one combat engineering vehicle. Infantry are screening to counter enemy infantry, the smoke unit is pumping out hectares of smoke, artillery is firing at known enemy concentration and enemy held road junctions, tacair and air superiority is overhead. The enemy is going to pour artillery onto that combat engineering vehicle just to prevent a breakthrough.
As to conversions, mortar carriers, sure those only need to be armored enough to survive counter battery fire up to 152mm or 155mm detonating at 50 meters. Those don’t get close enough to the infantry battle line to be threatened by AT weapons. As to personnel carriers, only in the sense as the battle taxi like an M113; protecting the infantry from small arms and shrapnel and bring them within 500 to 1000 meters of the objective while attempting to support the infantry dismounted movement with long range heavy machinegun fire. Expect to lose them though. When the enemy is in range so are you. Some of these would be vulnerable to 14.5 KPV and certainly 23mm ZPUs in a ground role, those weapons outranging the M2HB.
So you consider his 30-40 vehicles that he "would have" during T2k's timeline, we'll be really conservative and say 20 can be made operational, and hey presto that's 20 personnel carriers or prime movers, now suddenly you can put a brigade strength infantry unit on tracks versus walking everywhere, or riding in relatively thin-skinned vehicles. No, you don’t have anywhere near a Brigade strength and only close to the strength of ONE mechanized infantry company all the while diverting resources that could have better supplied a Brigade strength unit with fuel, ammunition, and support weapons.

Mr. Littlefield’s collection can best serve in a supporting role with guard or militia units guarding seaports, airports, water purification plants etc. where they would not be in direct battle with troops or modern munitions and the activity wouldn’t be causing breakdowns daily.

[raketenjagdpanzer]

Army Sgt., if we started poking holes in t2k's realism issues by the end of the day we'd have an aperture grille, not a solid peace.

Olefin's suggesting, and I'm suggesting "This could be a neat thing". Nobody's going to drive to your house and scribble in "...AND THE JACQUES LITTLEFIELD COLLECTION!" in your copy of Howling Wilderness.

I used to be like you, I'd get worked up when someone said lifting demi-human level limits from AD&D was a good idea. But here's the thing: to all discussions about RPGs, attach "...at my table." whether you're arguing for or against. And then I quit because writing 40000 words over a course of weeks in a forum about xyz issue is a waste of time and effort. You're not going to change. I'm not going to change.

There's plenty of logical reasons to include Littlefield's collection in a consideration of arms and armor in the US, post Exchange. There's plenty of reasons not to. At the end of the day do it or don't do it. The whole goddamn game is rife with plot and believability holes.

[ArmySGT.]

Army Sgt., if we started poking holes in t2k's realism issues by the end of the day we'd have an aperture grille, not a solid peace.

Olefin's suggesting, and I'm suggesting "This could be a neat thing". Nobody's going to drive to your house and scribble in "...AND THE JACQUES LITTLEFIELD COLLECTION!" in your copy of Howling Wilderness.

I used to be like you, I'd get worked up when someone said lifting demi-human level limits from AD&D was a good idea. But here's the thing: to all discussions about RPGs, attach "...at my table." whether you're arguing for or against. And then I quit because writing 40000 words over a course of weeks in a forum about xyz issue is a waste of time and effort. You're not going to change. I'm not going to change.

There's plenty of logical reasons to include Littlefield's collection in a consideration of arms and armor in the US, post Exchange. There's plenty of reasons not to. At the end of the day do it or don't do it. The whole goddamn game is rife with plot and believability holes.

I am just going to stick to the topic. I am not upset that someone doesn't agree with me.

I don't care if you want Panzers or Shermans in your T2k game because you think these are sexy. What I like about T2k and other post apocalyptic games is the realism..... I tired of AD&D and magic solving everything long, long ago.

So if you have one, then I demand a plausible and logical reason. To just say "Because" is an insult to the adults sitting at the table.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

I have no problem with AD&D and the magic but I am like ArmySGT when it comes to games set in historical, modern or near future settings, I want plausible believability.
For fantasy, horror and sci-fi games I'm happy to suspend my disbelief but for modern settings, I and the people I've been gaming with have become more demanding and we want real-world, logical answers.

So I'm kinda walking in the middle here, I agree that the Littlefield collection represents a wonderful resource to anyone who controls it but I find it a stretch to believe that anyone is going to try and field the majority of Littlefield's vehicles with all their different spare parts needs as an integrated combat unit.

It's one thing for an M113 unit to throw a pair of refurbished M114 vehicles into their TOE or even a pair of SdKfz 251 halftracks but in my opinion it's too demanding on logistics to expect them to field say 10-15 M113s, a couple of M114s, a couple of SdKfz 251s, an M4 Sherman, a Matilda MkII, an M18 Hellcat and an SU-100.

[Raellus]

Hey fellas,

Things are getting a little bit testy here so, instead of trying to win each other over to our own points of view, no matter how enlightened they may be, it might be wiser and more productive to just agree to disagree.

This note is not directed at any particular user. At this point, I don't see the need to shut this thread down or PM official cease and desist requests. Let's all do our parts not to let it get to that point.

Thanks.

[ArmySGT.]

So I'm kinda walking in the middle here, I agree that the Littlefield collection represents a wonderful resource to anyone who controls it but I find it a stretch to believe that anyone is going to try and field the majority of Littlefield's vehicles with all their different spare parts needs as an integrated combat unit. I think these items do have their place if refurbished. Rear area security missions like the seaport, airfields, and resources like a nuclear power plant, desalinization plant. Those things. Then these WW2 relics earn their keep freeing up newer more capable platforms for the fight on the southern border. In those missions they are unlikely to be used hard enough to tear through parts or come up against modern AT weapons and soldiers with the training to use them.

A resource like the machine shop at the Littlefield collection would be better used repairing battle damaged wrecks and training every mechanic and technician that can be found in doing the same. A the while Mr. Littlefield himself travels the southwest region assembling new machineshops to do the same thing as a consultant.

[Targan]

Hey fellas,

Things are getting a little bit testy here so, instead of trying to win each other over to our own points of view, no matter how enlightened they may be, it might be wiser and more productive to just agree to disagree.

This note is not directed at any particular user. At this point, I don't see the need to shut this thread down or PM official cease and desist requests. Let's all do our parts not to let it get to that point.

Thanks.

Yeah, I had this same argument a couple of years back and no good came of it. Actually I believe it marked the start of a decline in my participation level on this forum that hasn't really recovered. I've watched this most recent cycle and decided against joining in because I know from bitter experience that it'd be the equivalent of banging my head against the wall.

[Olefin]

Actually I dont think any of the Panzers or Lees or Stuarts or the WWII British tanks he has would ever be used - they dont have live barrels - that also applies to all the German WWII artillery he had as well

The only real WWII or Korea tanks he has that have live barrels are a couple of Shermans that the Israelis extensively modified (so much so that they successfully were being used as tanks well into the 1980's) and one M47 tank

the APC's and half tracks are a different issue - all you need to arm them is a 50 caliber machine gun and they are ready to rock - including that M113 he has (and got to love that M113 fire support vehicle as well)

looked thru what he had that actually worked and was ready to go and what could be made ready to go that had live barrels or didnt need a main gun working to be effective (for instance the Ferret armored car that only has a 50 cal machine gun for its armament)



six assorted armored cars,
five tanks (a Conqueror Heavy tank, a Centurion Mk13 tank, two ex-Israeli Sherman tanks and a Patton M47 tank)
M113A1 FSV
six assorted armored personnel carriers
a FV433 Abbot M105 SPG, a Sexton SPG armed with a 105mm howitzer and an M37 105mm Howitzer Motor Carriage
three assorted recovery vehicles
Saracen Command Post vehicle
Israeli BTR 40


Like I said the Lees, Stuarts, Cromwells, Panzers and other stuff are great to look at but with no main guns that work they are better off being left there - or having the tank bodies removed and turn them into mobile gun platforms - otherwise they are just very large machine gun platforms

so I agree that the majority of his collection will never be used - keep in mind we are talking about a large amount of vehicles that he had - that fact that 25 vehicles can be used sounds like a lot

but keep in mind we are talking about 15-20% or so of his overall collection

and his shop and those techs are the real prize

And as I said use it or not if you want in your campaign - but its hardly magic or a stretch to have that many of his vehicles be drafted into MilGov - especially not one using CEV's as tanks in CA

either way more than nuff said on this subject

[StainlessSteelCynic]

*** Thread Necromancy ***


This seemed like the best place to mention this...
Just been reading about preserved military vehicles in the former Soviet Union. A large number of WW2 era vehicles were turned into monuments in the 1940s & 50s, typically consisting of a tank or assault gun mounted on some large plinth.
What was interesting from a T2k perspective was that the method of turning these vehicles into monuments was actually rather simplistic.

The plinth would be constructed, then an earthen ramp was made behind the plinth and the vehicle (in the vast majority of cases a T-34-85) was driven up the ramp and parked on the plinth. The batteries were disconnected and all hatches were spot welded closed but aside from the removal of ammunition, nothing else of significance was done to the vehicles.
The Soviet and then the Russian government also kept a stock of 20 working T-34-85 and 20 working Su-100 vehicles for use in Moscow parades however over time the number of operational vehicles has dropped down so that by 2018, they only had approximately 3 working T-34-85's (one leading the parade and the others as spares) and a similarly low number of Su-100's.

But in the last 20 or so years, a number of T-34-85's have been making appearances in local parades across Russia and Ukraine. These particular T-34's have been recovered from the plinths they were mounted on and restored to running order. In one particular case, the recovery team did little more than change the batteries & flush the fuel lines and the old tank started up on the first try.

Now I'm not saying that Eastern European armies, militias, bandit groups, town defence units etc. etc. are going to have hundreds of recovered and restored T-34's at their disposal, it's unlikely to even be dozens of vehicles. However the way the Soviet Union made those tanks into monuments does make restoring them a hell of a lot easier than what happens in the West. Although the vast majority of such WW2 monuments featured the T-34-85, the Soviets did "preserve" other vehicles in the same manner. Again, it's not going to let some unit equip dozens of old tanks but it does make the notion of equipping a unit with one or two older Soviet amoured vehicles easier to achieve.

All in all, with that information it's easier to justify why some group or other has a pair of T-34's on strength (or one or two other Soviet armoured vehicles) or even, if the PCs find out such info, why the PC group might end up with some of those vehicles.

[Olefin]

Its amazing how much WWII equipment the Soviets kept around - its one reason their WWII films were more accurate as to equipment versus ours (think the tanks that were used in Patton as to what I am talking about) - when Enemy at the Gates was made they used a lot of old WWII equipment for the movie that they got from Russian sources that was still in perfect working order

[ChalkLine]

There is a window where a failing industrial state would see these stored vehicles as more than just scrap value.

In World War 2 Australia was in a parlous state before the US joined the war and every rusty gun available was being dragged into government workshops to see if it could be made serviceable in any way. It was so bad there was a proposal to bring in civilian trucks, convert them to armoured cars for the length of the emergency and then deactivate and return the trucks to the civilians after the war. In my mind at least all the big powers reach this state during the Twilight War.

Working ex-military vehicles, especially armoured vehicles, can be given a modern weapon and placed in an Ad Hoc Emergency Defence Force unit for the duration. M551s could be given a low pressure 105mm gun, as could a Sherman (it actually has better armour).

Are these weapons going to Europe? No. They will be used when the final decline is imminent and the administrations are trying to (alas unsuccessfully) stave off collapse. They might never operate more than 50km from their refurbishment site.

An M3 Half Track might be 50+ years old but given an new M2, slat armour and desperate troops it's still a force to be reckoned with.

[Olefin]

Keep in mind that Mexico was still operating WWII equipment in their army in our real timeline - meaning that the invasion of the US would have had Stuart tanks and other fun pieces of hardware as part of their forces. And while Shermans and other older tanks would be easy meat for modern AT weapons the fact is that by 2000 you arent going to be seeing too many of them left - even among regular military units that are still intact.

[lordroel]

Keep in mind that Mexico was still operating WWII equipment in their army in our real timeline - meaning that the invasion of the US would have had Stuart tanks and other fun pieces of hardware as part of their forces. And while Shermans and other older tanks would be easy meat for modern AT weapons the fact is that by 2000 you arent going to be seeing too many of them left - even among regular military units that are still intact.
But would you agree Olefin, a Sherman is much easy to maintain and the build spare parts for than a modern tank like a Abrams.

[Olefin]

Definitely Roel - for one it was to be easy to maintain in the field - that was one reason the Germans had such a big problem during WWII - great tanks but maintenance was a real problem

[StainlessSteelCynic]

lordroel & Olefin - the article I was reading (details below) implies that the likely reason so many of these T-34's could be recovered and used in parades was because they are relatively simple to maintain compared to modern armoured vehicles and thus had lower amounts of vital equipment and less technologically demanding equipment in regards to manufacture & maintenance requirements.


Issue 211 of Classic Military Vehicles, December 2018,
pg 74-80, title: Old Soldiers On Parade.

[Legbreaker]

Can't assume every old Soviet AFV will be in close to fighting order though, even if the engine still runs. Plenty of vehicles kept by Russian museums in supposed "near complete" order have had vital systems removed such as breach blocks, sights, telescopes, periscopes, intercom (for those that had them to begin with), even ammo and equipment racks, not to mention crew seating. From the outside they look the part, but in reality they're not much more than an empty shell with an engine.
Basically anything you might be able to use in a newer vehicles (particularly things like radios) is often stripped out and reused, and anything else that could be pried loose before the hatches welded up scavenged by the workers and sold off for scrap. After all, who's going to know they took it all if nobody can climb in to check?

[lordroel]

Definitely Roel - for one it was to be easy to maintain in the field - that was one reason the Germans had such a big problem during WWII - great tanks but maintenance was a real problem

So would having tanks that from WW II era be much easy to maintain than tanks who where build around the period of World War III and thus more sought after.

[Legbreaker]

So would having tanks that from WW II era be much easy to maintain than tanks who where build around the period of World War III and thus more sought after.

I wouldn't think so. There's a reason they're not used any more, and it's got nothing to do with ease of maintenance....

[madmikechoi]

Just to challenge convention....... Wouldn't the more modern M1s and M60s be sent overseas and older M48s kept at home? The better to fight them there, than fight them at home. Any M60s or newer still on U.S. soil would be Guard units or Federal units waiting to ship, or training units churning out replacements for losses overseas.


If we go by Timeline 1.0- the US never stopped producing tanks so tanks like the IP M1s (894) get converted to A1 standards and baseline (2300 and some change) would go to Guard heavy divisions. Plus there are a lot of equipment that's going directly to POMCUS or prepositioned on ships (Diego Garcia; Guam/Saipan/Tinian) or similar USMC programs (Norway or Korea).
So going by the Endless Cold War, the goal for Big Army was always to make sure 7th Army got the latest and greatest first but even then the 2d Infantry Division's heavy brigades would still get 120mm gun tanks and BFVs before '95/96 let alone the November Nukeout


IMNSHO those old M48A5s would get flogged off to the ROK Army as spares- especially during wartime losses; Thailand, Taiwan, and/or Turkey. The M60 series- the ones that aren't earmarked for the Israelis- I can see being used to reequip the USAR "training" divisions but the doctrine and TO&E would probably closer to the old H series although I think were would be a serious shortfall on anti-tank missiles and naturally little to no organic aviation so would have to rely on corps aviation brigades .

Those same training division would pretty much have to stop loss every solider and marine that ever served in ground combat arms for at least the past two to three fiscal years... provided these same dudes' original battalions didn't get first dibs. Personally I'm somewhat skeptical if those USAR divisions would ever get activated since we're talking about a complete call up of the entire Guard not just roundout brigades plus CAPSTONE so we're already talking about a lot of facilities being overtasked such shipping, ports, and training posts such as Little Sandbox, Yakima, Fort Puke, etc

Mad Mike

[Legbreaker]

Personally I'm somewhat skeptical if those USAR divisions would ever get activated since we're talking about a complete call up of the entire Guard not just roundout brigades plus CAPSTONE so we're already talking about a lot of facilities being overtasked such shipping, ports, and training posts such as Little Sandbox, Yakima, Fort Puke, etc

Only have to look at WWII to see how that would work. Training facilities can, and have been, rapidly and massively expanded in a time of crisis. Can't think of any event more critical that WWIII...

[madmikechoi]

Only have to look at WWII to see how that would work. Training facilities can, and have been, rapidly and massively expanded in a time of crisis. Can't think of any event more critical that WWIII...

But a lot of those posts were closed... the US had years to raise and train an army to fight overseas. The Twilight War would see the entire US military engaged almost from the beginning w/ a war in Korea, numerous fronts in Europe from Norway to the Balkans, and another war in Iran plus the navy running around trying to secure lines of communication throughout the Atlantic, Pacific and Indian Oceans.

If anything would make initial sense was once NG units get mobilized from Day 1 with a deployment overseas no greater than 180 days from mob orders, USAR training divisions would try to set up refresher and force on force for combat arms a la NTC and JRTC at places like Shelby or Indiantown Gap (last time I checked there's something 4-6 reserve component mobilization centers/reserve training sites) and/or use defense contractors. Beats trying to see if they can setup a lottery for every swinging dick that filled out a selective service card; then sending them for ASVABs and medical; and finally getting a bunch of these fools on buses to OSUT or basic training posts. Mobilization support and sustainment of NG and USAR combat arms (if we go by Ver 1 Twilight these units never went away but never really got much bigger either b/c CAPSTONE of service support and selective combat support units offered Big Army more bang for the buck)

OTOH concurrently w/ this proposedmassive mobilization it would give places like Sierra Army Depot and Anniston an excuse to run 24-7 shifts w/ overtime to get everything from trucks and typewriters to tanks and trailers in running order. Go figure :D


Mad Mike

[madmikechoi]

Only have to look at WWII to see how that would work. Training facilities can, and have been, rapidly and massively expanded in a time of crisis. Can't think of any event more critical that WWIII...

But a lot of those posts were closed... the US had years to raise and train an army to fight overseas. The Twilight War would see the entire US military engaged almost from the beginning w/ a war in Korea, numerous fronts in Europe from Norway to the Balkans, and another war in Iran plus the navy running around trying to secure lines of communication throughout the Atlantic, Pacific and Indian Oceans.

If anything would make initial sense was once NG units get mobilized from Day 1 with a deployment overseas no greater than 180 days from mob orders, USAR training divisions would try to set up refresher and force on force for combat arms a la NTC and JRTC at places like Shelby or Indiantown Gap (last time I checked there's something 4-6 reserve component mobilization centers/reserve training sites) and/or use defense contractors. Beats trying to see if they can setup a lottery for every swinging dick that filled out a selective service card; then sending them for ASVABs and medical; and finally getting a bunch of these fools on buses to OSUT or basic training posts. Mobilization support and sustainment of NG and USAR combat arms (if we go by Ver 1 Twilight these units never went away but never really got much bigger either b/c CAPSTONE of service support and selective combat support units offered Big Army more bang for the buck)

OTOH concurrently w/ this proposedmassive mobilization it would give places like Sierra Army Depot and Anniston an excuse to run 24-7 shifts w/ overtime to get everything from trucks and typewriters to tanks and trailers in running order. Go figure :D


Mad Mike

[Legbreaker]

But a lot of those posts were closed... the US had years to raise and train an army to fight overseas.

Really?
So what was the state of the US military in early December 1941?
Seems to me it was pretty terrible and there was a HUGE expansion during 1941 and onwards. Yes, they started before Pearl Harbour, but compared to what it became, it was initially only a small increase in numbers and quite leisurely.

With T2K, the world had a reasonable amount of notice too. China and the USSR had been going at it for quite some time (about a year or so depending on which edition you're using), and tensions along the German border had been steadily ramping up for about as long. We can be fairly sure though that conscription was not implemented at this early stage, but likewise it's almost a certainty plans existed for a rapid call up and expansion (unlike WWI and WWII, the US had a clear opponent in the USSR to counter).

We also know that due to the lack of transport many units were not deployed to Europe and the Middle East until 1997, even 98 in some cases (look through the various books with unit histories for confirmation of this).

Given this canon information, it's quite clear the US had plenty of time to call up all reservists and conscript even more troops, as well as construct the necessary training facilities (which may well have been little more than tent cities).

[ChalkLine]

This would have been accompanied by a shifting to a war economy as it is an existential threat to the state. War Loans would be made to the state so that industrial output could be supercharged. At that point no one would have any idea how it would go, and if it did go well what reverses might suddenly occur (as is what did happen in the canonical history) so high output programs, planned years ahead and with the infrastructure already put in the pipeline, would surge.

I think the standard T2K armies are far too small

[Olefin]

Thats one thing that the game had wrong was the USAR units - some of them had cavalry and armored equipment attached to them - for instance the 100th Training Division had M1 tanks and M3 Bradleys - but if you look at the US Army Vehicle Guide they say all they had was light infantry troops and 105mm guns - which is inaccurate. There were at least one battalion of tanks and two cavalry squadrons attached to that division. It was the only training division with the mission of conducting training on the M-1 Abrams tank and the M-3 Bradley Cavalry vehicle. Thus it probably would have been the most effective of the training units.

As for old tanks in the US - keep in mind that a lot of the current state of demilitarization of old tanks in the US, where they made damn sure they couldnt be able to fire, was after that nut stole that tank in 1995. Since then it has been a lot harder to be able to keep a tank in proper firing condition in the US in private hands. When I was a teenager we had a guy who owned a Sherman tank in my area that was 100% complete and operational - he even had a few shells for it - and not blanks either.

[Legbreaker]

There's a good chance the training units would have their more modern equipment stripped off and sent to the front lines as replacements.
Training units don't usually need the "latest and greatest", at least not for practising tactics, etc. Just a handful of modern tanks, or even mockups/simulators would suffice in a pinch to get vehicle crews familiarised with what they'll end up fighting in - not the best situation, but certainly better than sending inadequate vehicles to the front lines (which we know did actually happen - various books, colour plates and notes).

Real world, peacetime unit organisations don't last. External factors will always have an impact.

[dragoon500ly]

One little thing about the training divisions, they are not equipped with battalions of equipment, they use NG equipment to train on, for the most part, and if activated, they would assume the training equipment left with the service schools.

I'm the first to admit, I have a lot of issues with the canon order of battle, but they were fairly correct in one aspect, the training divisions would have gone into action as either weak infantry/light infantry divisions, with nothing heavier than mothballed artillery, early generation AT weapons, and whatever small arms that could be scrounged to supplement issued weapons.

[Legbreaker]

I'm the first to admit, I have a lot of issues with the canon order of battle....

A lot of that can be adequately explained away by the pressures and vagaries of near 5 years of intense and wide spread combat. Sure, some units were earmarked for certain theatres, but due to the situation on the ground elsewhere at a particular time, entire brigades would have had to be detached from their intended parent units and attached elsewhere.

As for the rest, it's quite likely any strange decisions could be put down to politics, lack of transportation, limited resources, or a host of other things.

[Olefin]

One little thing about the training divisions, they are not equipped with battalions of equipment, they use NG equipment to train on, for the most part, and if activated, they would assume the training equipment left with the service schools.

I'm the first to admit, I have a lot of issues with the canon order of battle, but they were fairly correct in one aspect, the training divisions would have gone into action as either weak infantry/light infantry divisions, with nothing heavier than mothballed artillery, early generation AT weapons, and whatever small arms that could be scrounged to supplement issued weapons.

Actually the 100th had two brigades that were designated as training units specifically for armor and cavalry troops and was specifically assigned M1 tanks and Bradley APC's - enough to form at least two full battalions from what I have found and possibly three. I could see most of the others lacking armor but they are the one group that would have had at least a decent amount at the start - which could explain why they still have tanks in 2000. If there is one of the training divisions that needs to be updated to show it having tanks and APC's at the start I would say its the 100th. Now I could see the 100th getting its M1's and Bradley's replaced with M60A4's and M113's as the newer equipment was needed to be sent to Europe and Korea and the Middle East.

Also keep in mind that the USAR training units had first rate NCO's and officers as well. And they would have definitely had regular army small arms, mortars and machine guns to go around - they are training units after all and its hard to train men in how to be soldiers without weapons.

The question what was their training function and did they train them for combat operations? One thing to look at with the training units is what their assignments actually were - i.e. the ones that were training for combat would have definitely had a better record in the field than units that were training support units.

For instance the 85th was a logistics training unit - not a combat training unit like the 100th. And its record in the Twilight War reflects that - i.e. it almost got wiped out by the Texian Legion. Whereas the 100th did pretty good and by 2000 is actually the unit that is guarding one of the most important areas that MilGov has left.

[Legbreaker]

Now I could see the 100th getting its M1's and Bradley's replaced with M60A4's and M113's as the newer equipment was needed to be sent to Europe and Korea and the Middle East.

It's conceivable they didn't even have vehicles that new given the hodge podge of vehicles such as the Stingray, Peacekeepers and Commandos which were requisitioned and pressed into combat service. M48's and other 1950's vehicles could well have made up the bulk of their armoured strength in the beginning, along with the 4 M60A3s, 1 M1 and 1 M1A1 listed in the vehicle books. The older equipment may have been lost in combat, broken down, or even been reallocated to neighbouring units leaving just the 6 tanks listed (which were likely all that was left of the modern training vehicles, or too worn out to send overseas - trainees tend to be rather hard on equipment).

[Olefin]

Given the fact that they drove into Texas and are the strategic reserve now for MilGov I am betting that they had pretty good armor but not a lot of it when the division was formed up for combat - probably a battalion of mixed tanks which explains what they have left - could easily see them starting with a mix of a company of M1 tanks (both M1 and M1A1 models that were training tanks with higher miles and thus ones that might have been left behind) as well as replacement M60A4's to bring them back up to strength along with the cav vehicles they would have had as well.

And actually they would have been in a good position to keep going what they had - one of their training functions was in maintenance of the tanks.

Again this doesnt apply to all the training units - but for the 100th an addition of a couple of cav battalions (armed with older equipment) and an armored battalion (with a mixed bag of tanks) would definitely be appropriate given their assignment.

And one thing that is actually surprising is that you dont see the M48 or older versions of the M60 showing up in many of the stateside units - there were stockpiles of them still and they are the perfect tanks to have never been issued to units heading out to take on top of the line Soviet equipment and thus ones you would see in things like the rebuilt 40th Mechanized.

[Louied]

Slightly OT.........while researching the CAPSTONE program CMH sent me a document entitled "Army Command and Control Study 82". Apparently each ARCOM had a post-mobilization mission to command certain installations. What I found interesting is that five ARCOMs would have formed new combat divisions...."ARCOM will be prepared after M+4 months to form base for new combat division".......these were:

96th ARCOM @ Ft, Carson, CO
90th ARCOM @ Ft. Chaffee, AR
77th ARCOM @ Ft. Drum, NY
79th ARCOM @ Ft. Indiantown Gap, PA
63rd ARCOM @ Ft. Irwin, CA

[Vespers War]

*** Thread Necromancy ***


This seemed like the best place to mention this...
Just been reading about preserved military vehicles in the former Soviet Union. A large number of WW2 era vehicles were turned into monuments in the 1940s & 50s, typically consisting of a tank or assault gun mounted on some large plinth.
What was interesting from a T2k perspective was that the method of turning these vehicles into monuments was actually rather simplistic.

The plinth would be constructed, then an earthen ramp was made behind the plinth and the vehicle (in the vast majority of cases a T-34-85) was driven up the ramp and parked on the plinth. The batteries were disconnected and all hatches were spot welded closed but aside from the removal of ammunition, nothing else of significance was done to the vehicles.
The Soviet and then the Russian government also kept a stock of 20 working T-34-85 and 20 working Su-100 vehicles for use in Moscow parades however over time the number of operational vehicles has dropped down so that by 2018, they only had approximately 3 working T-34-85's (one leading the parade and the others as spares) and a similarly low number of Su-100's.

But in the last 20 or so years, a number of T-34-85's have been making appearances in local parades across Russia and Ukraine. These particular T-34's have been recovered from the plinths they were mounted on and restored to running order. In one particular case, the recovery team did little more than change the batteries & flush the fuel lines and the old tank started up on the first try.

Now I'm not saying that Eastern European armies, militias, bandit groups, town defence units etc. etc. are going to have hundreds of recovered and restored T-34's at their disposal, it's unlikely to even be dozens of vehicles. However the way the Soviet Union made those tanks into monuments does make restoring them a hell of a lot easier than what happens in the West. Although the vast majority of such WW2 monuments featured the T-34-85, the Soviets did "preserve" other vehicles in the same manner. Again, it's not going to let some unit equip dozens of old tanks but it does make the notion of equipping a unit with one or two older Soviet amoured vehicles easier to achieve.

All in all, with that information it's easier to justify why some group or other has a pair of T-34's on strength (or one or two other Soviet armoured vehicles) or even, if the PCs find out such info, why the PC group might end up with some of those vehicles.

A good source for relics is Surviving Panzers (http://the.shadock.free.fr/Surviving_Panzers.html), which tries to keep track of the surviving armored vehicles from both World Wars. There look to be a lot of plinth-mounted IS-3 and IS-3M heavy tanks.

[Legbreaker]

A good source for relics is Surviving Panzers (http://the.shadock.free.fr/Surviving_Panzers.html), which tries to keep track of the surviving armored vehicles from both World Wars. There look to be a lot of plinth-mounted IS-3 and IS-3M heavy tanks.

Found a similar site a couple of months ago detailing steam engines and their approximate state of (dis)repair.

[Vespers War]

I had forgotten about this, but the IS-3M in Konstantinovka (on page 31 of Surviving Panzers' IS-3 document) was started up by pro-Russian forces in Ukraine in 2014, so not only is it plausible, it's been done. :D

[Raellus]

An interesting piece with some information on how long it takes a resident of the Bone Yard to be returned to operational status.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/28015/a-b-52h-nicknamed-wise-guy-becomes-the-second-to-ever-come-back-from-the-bone-yard

I'm sure the process could/would be sped up during wartime, but I wonder by how much, realistically, especially because manufacturers would also be trying to expand their production lines for new aircraft.