Out of Mothballs: Obsolescent Weaponry on the T2k Battlefield

[Raellus]

TIL that Romania had 47 SU-100 self-propelled tank destroyers in reserve as of 2016!

Does anyone know if the SU-100 is stat'ed in any T2k book (any version)?

What other older weapon systems would you expect to see brought out of retirement and encountered on the battlefield c.2000?

-

[Vespers War]

All of these are caveated with "last I heard," and may be out of date.

Cuba and North Korea still had T-34 tanks in service, and Vietnam was still using them as training vehicles.

Meanwhile Paraguay has 3 Shermans with diesel engines and the 105mm gun from the AMX-13, along with roughly a dozen Stuarts.

The Kostiantynivka incident suggests some of the Iosif Stalin tanks could be reactivated.

Taiwan has M41 Walker Bulldogs and M48 Pattons (I believe in reserve).

[kato13]

TIL that Romania had 47 SU-100 self-propelled tank destroyers in reserve as of 2016!

Does anyone know if the SU-100 is stat'ed in any T2k book (any version)?

What other older weapon systems would you expect to see brought out of retirement and encountered on the battlefield c.2000?

-
You doubted that Paul has it somewhere. Tisk tisk. ;)

http://www.pmulcahy.com/PDFs/Twilight_2000_WWII.pdf

Page 95

[shrike6]

Paul has it on his main pages as well. http://www.pmulcahy.com/sp_guns/russian_sp_guns.htm scroll to the bottom.

[Raellus]

You doubted that Paul has it somewhere. Tisk tisk. ;)

:p

Not for a second. Of course Paul has it! I just wondered if the SU-100 made it into any of the books. I checked the v1 Soviet Vehicle Guide before I posted and it does not include the SU-100.

-

[Matt Wiser]

Don't forget the Littlefield Armor Collection. In T2K that would be very valuable to MilGov in California, and they would "appropriate" it. Even if it means giving Mr. Littlefield a field commission as a Major or Lt. Colonel.

[Raellus]

Don't forget the Littlefield Armor Collection. In T2K that would be very valuable to MilGov in California, and they would "appropriate" it. Even if it means giving Mr. Littlefield a field commission as a Major or Lt. Colonel.

Thanks for the reminder. We have a couple of threads here somewhere dedicated to discussion of the Littlefield Collection, and other private repositories of working AFVs.

I think the Pancerovka P-27 (a Czechoslovakian version of the RPG-2 with a larger warhead) would have been dusted off for use during the Twilight War.

http://tonnel-ufo-english.tk/weapon/grenade-pancerovka-p-27.php

Of course, it's already stat'ed on Paul's Website. :cool:

-

[CDAT]

...
What other older weapon systems would you expect to see brought out of retirement and encountered on the battlefield c.2000?

-

Just about every US Army base I have ever been to has at least some military museum, how easy to reactivate them I do not know, I do know at Redstone when we were out in the training area one of my guys found a old M60 and was able to get it to start (did not run long or well). Also in 2003 when we were in Iraq M4A3 (76) were found (at least one that I personally laid eyes on) with spare pars and ammo (all from WWII I am guessing, so no idea what shape it was in).

[Ursus Maior]

Yugoslavian successor states and their predecessor militias pulled out M36 tank destroyers out of depots and arsenals. They were used by Croats, Slovenes and Bosnians plus Serbs, though I don't know if references to "Serbia" here mean Serbs in Bosnia or pre-dominantly Serbian units of the Yugoslavian state. Technically, Serbia only came into existence again as a separate state in 2006, when Macedonia left Yugoslavia (the only peaceful split from that state) and only Serbia remained as part of Yugoslavia, renaming the state subsequently.

The T-34 was also used by Bosnians in the Yugoslav Wars and is still in use in African nations, as well as probably in Cuba and North Korea. There were various refurbishing programs to the T-34 line after the war, including new engines, but also introducing night driving equipment, additional fuel, and other modernization. These might still have certain battlefield value late in war and certainly in 2000, when essentially every steel-plated vehicle is king, since by that time we're talking Libyan / Syrian Civil War style warfare and fuel is as much a problem as are actual vehicles.

[.45cultist]

Alabama Arsenal stores everything including vehicles. WW2 and Vietnam reenactors acting as militia are other sources.

[Olefin]

The 1st US Volunteer Mechanized Battalion is in Kenya using a variety of WWII and early Cold War equipment - i.e. Stuart and Sherman and M47 tanks, Ferrets and Greyhound AC

Mexico and Brazil were both operating Stuart tanks (the ones in Brazil were extensively upgraded - the X1A1 and the X1A2) during the timeline and there were still Greyhound Armored Cars operated by several countries if I remember right

Israel still had upgraded Sherman tanks in its inventory and African nations were still operating T-34's

Paraguay had Stuart tanks in service as late as 2014

In 2018, there were multiple countries that maintained T-34s in the inventories of their national armed forces: Cuba, Yemen, the Republic of the Congo, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Namibia, North Korea, Laos, and Vietnam.

[.45cultist]

Also, there's the Cactus Air Force and it's WW2 aircraft.

[Vespers War]

On the East Coast there's the AAF Tank Museum in Danville, VA (on the North Carolina border). The collection there includes:

US armored vehicles:
M1917, M4A3E8 Sherman Bulldozer, M5A1 Stuart, M18 Hellcat, M47 Patton, M48A5 Patton, M103, M41A3 Walker Bulldog, M60, M60A2, M60A3

German PzKpfw IV Ausf H, Soviet T-34/85, Iraqi T-54 and T-72

A half-dozen APCs and their derivatives (M59, M75, M113, M114, M163, M901)

Some of the vehicles (I don't know which, but posts from people who have been there say "most of them") are in running condition and are driven on demonstration days. It wouldn't have been as large in the Twilight War, since the original museum was in Mattituck, NY, and much smaller; it moved to Virginia in 2003 (according to a news article, the move consisted of 2,597 tons of stuff). For someone running a later timeline, though, that could be a treasure trove of materiel.

[Raellus]

To clarify the OP, I was addressing the deployment of relatively large stocks of mothballed weaponry, not so much one-offs like museum collections. The main issue that I see with the latter is a lack of spare parts and expertise re operation, maintenance, and upkeep. If anyone would like to discuss museum exhibits returning to combat, here are a couple of threads that address that topic specifically:

https://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=4600&highlight=littlefield

https://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=4604&highlight=littlefield

-

[Olefin]

in the 90's the US had a lot of older M60 and M48 tanks still in storage as well as close to 500 M47 tanks in Italy in storage - they had spare parts and ammo and were ready to rock

the Soviets/Russians had close to a 1000 T-10A/M tanks in reserve still in 1996 as well as 1400 plus T-34 variants that were being used for driver training and could have been brought back

In both cases there (at least at first) would have been plenty of ammo and spare parts in stock - the question is how long would that last - the Soviets were still making ammo for the T-34 if I remember right until late in the 1980's

As for the M60 - there was a GAO report in the mid-90's about how enough ammo had been produced for the M60A2 that it could have kept the ones that were still in existence supplied with ammo for literally decades

[Raellus]

That's exactly what I'm talking about! Thanks.

in the 90's the US had a lot of older M60 and M48 tanks still in storage as well as close to 500 M47 tanks in Italy in storage - they had spare parts and ammo and were ready to rock

Intriguing. Where did you learn about the M47s in Italy? And to clarify, those are US M47s, not Italian M47s, correct?

-

[Olefin]

the information on the M47's came from the Nato order of battle 1989 mod 8 that is on several websites - its been cited here in several threads

For Italy 1989 (which is basically the V1 situation)

Total tanks in inventory:
200 Leopard 1A1, 720 Leopard 1A2, 300 M60A1, 400+ M47;

2 Armoured Battalion with 34 M47 and one with 16 (they kept the 5-tanks platoons) for a total of 84; other in Carabinieri Mobile Battalions and as many as 300 in storage.

In the US section there is the following note

Tanks: 2374 M1 Abrams, 894 IPM1, 2100+ M1A1 (deliveries ongoing), 5328 M60A3, 2659 M60A1, as many as 1800 M48A5 , 1334 M551 Sheridan, 630 M47s (according to CFE records – appears to reflect fact that Italian vehicles used for decades were leased or temporary transfers that returned to US control when taken out of service)

Thus it appears that the M47 tanks in storage in Italy were leased/transfer tanks per the CFE records

You also have this AP article on US destruction of M-47 tanks required under the CFE

https://apnews.com/article/dc5dc316c8cc3c936e43e1f90595576d

The United States will destroy 640 M-47 tanks - they’re almost a half- century old - but has yet to choose a contractor, said Capt. Debra Pressley of the U.S. European command in Stuttgart.

[pmulcahy11b]

To clarify the OP, I was addressing the deployment of relatively large stocks of mothballed weaponry,

-

Where does the US (or any other country, for that matter) keep their mothballed military vehicles? Is there some equivalent to AMARC?

[shrike6]

Here's something that should be helpful for this thread.
http://the.shadock.free.fr/The_USA_Historical_AFV_Register.pdf



That's exactly what I'm talking about! Thanks.



Intriguing. Where did you learn about the M47s in Italy? And to clarify, those are US M47s, not Italian M47s, correct?

-
Olefin can reveal his source but I'm pretty sure that came to light as part of the CFE treaty. Some DRMO warehouse in Italy still had m47 tanks that were being counted towards the US total or something along those lines if I remember right.

[shrike6]

the information on the M47's came from the Nato order of battle 1989 mod 8 that is on several websites - its been cited here in several threads

For Italy 1989 (which is basically the V1 situation)

Total tanks in inventory:
200 Leopard 1A1, 720 Leopard 1A2, 300 M60A1, 400+ M47;

2 Armoured Battalion with 34 M47 and one with 16 (they kept the 5-tanks platoons) for a total of 84; other in Carabinieri Mobile Battalions and as many as 300 in storage.

In the US section there is the following note

Tanks: 2374 M1 Abrams, 894 IPM1, 2100+ M1A1 (deliveries ongoing), 5328 M60A3, 2659 M60A1, as many as 1800 M48A5 , 1334 M551 Sheridan, 630 M47s (according to CFE records – appears to reflect fact that Italian vehicles used for decades were leased or temporary transfers that returned to US control when taken out of service)

Thus it appears that the M47 tanks in storage in Italy were leased/transfer tanks per the CFE records

You also have this AP article on US destruction of M-47 tanks required under the CFE

https://apnews.com/article/dc5dc316c8cc3c936e43e1f90595576d

The United States will destroy 640 M-47 tanks - they’re almost a half- century old - but has yet to choose a contractor, said Capt. Debra Pressley of the U.S. European command in Stuttgart.

Or beat me before I even post. LOL I knew it had to do with CFE anyways.

[Ursus Maior]

the information on the M47's came from the Nato order of battle 1989 mod 8 that is on several websites - its been cited here in several threads

You also have this AP article on US destruction of M-47 tanks required under the CFE

https://apnews.com/article/dc5dc316c8cc3c936e43e1f90595576d

["]The United States will destroy 640 M-47 tanks - they’re almost a half- century old - but has yet to choose a contractor, said Capt. Debra Pressley of the U.S. European command in Stuttgart.["]
I like the NATO OOB document that's on the internet, but it's not always completely accurate. My main problem is the lack of source documentation, but alas, in its core its 20+ years old, so it's history itself.

As per the IISS publication "The Military Balance (1990)", the US (p. 19) had as "MBT: some 15,440: 1,013 M-48A5, 2,659 M-60/M-60AI, 5,328 M-60A3, 6,440 M-I/M-IAI Abrams."

Italy had (p. 71) "MBT: 1,533: 313 M-47 (in store), 300 M-60A1, 920 Leopard (140 in store)."

For 1989 these numbers were (USA, p. 18) "MBT: sorne 15,992: l, III M-48A5, 3,487 M-60/M-60AI, 5,400 M-60A3, 5,994 M-I/M-IAI Abrams."

And (Italy, p. 68) "MBT: 1,720: 500 M-47 (incl200 in reserve), 300 M-60Al, 920 Leopard."

That contradicts the idea that by 1992 640 M47 would have been to be disposed of that previously were in any form of a ready state. Now, AP certainly was right about the disposal, but I cannot reconstruct how the numbers came to pass. Maybe these included tanks returned from allied nations under some leasing contracts.

It's not clear how many of these could have survived until 1995-1997, when tensions rose again and hostilities broke out respectively.

[shrike6]

Where does the US (or any other country, for that matter) keep their mothballed military vehicles? Is there some equivalent to AMARC?
Its called Sierra Army Depot
https://www.atlasobscura.com/places/sierra-army-depot

[Olefin]

Keep in mind that we are talking all versions here

V1 doesnt have the CFE occur - its the old Cold War that never ends so the CFE never happens

V2.2 has the CFE occur I am pretty sure

as for V4 - I dont remember if the CFE is mentioned in the timeline

Thus the M-47 tank being available as a replacement tank for the US for later in the war really depends on what version you are playing and if the CFE occurred or not

Without it occurring a lot of older equipment is sitting in storage depots

[CDAT]

Keep in mind that we are talking all versions here

V1 doesnt have the CFE occur - its the old Cold War that never ends so the CFE never happens

V2.2 has the CFE occur I am pretty sure

as for V4 - I dont remember if the CFE is mentioned in the timeline

Thus the M-47 tank being available as a replacement tank for the US for later in the war really depends on what version you are playing and if the CFE occurred or not

Without it occurring a lot of older equipment is sitting in storage depots

One thing that may not matter in a game, is crew skill. I was initially trained as a M1 tank crewman, but I was trained when we still had M60's in service. So there was some cross training, and many of the systems were the same. If I was put into a M47 I would for all intents and purposes be untrained. I could probably load the main gun, and maybe run the radio, but not likely I could gun, maybe drive (I did grow up on a farm and can drive stick up to and including tractor trailers) but without someone who knows the ins and outs of the tank, moving from one tank to another is not as simple as all that. There is a reason it takes 16 weeks to train a tank crewman. In full disclosure this is also one of my pet peeves with TW2000.

[Brit]

The Karabiner 98k. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karabiner_98k

I think it is mentioned in 'The Ruins of Warsaw' as the weapon carried by militia sections? Plus, just too many about to not be in use. Weren't captured WWII ones put up for sale a while back by the Soviets / USSR / agents / ? from warehouses in the Soviet Union / Russia - cannot remember if it was pre / post - and people in the USA were buying them?

Ditto: There must be a lot of Lee Enfield SMLEs about all over the world plus copies/ In fact a photo here of a "SMLE owned by Maoist rebels in Nepal, 2005".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee%E2%80%93Enfield#Short_Magazine_Lee%E2%80%93Enf ield_Mk_I

Before the T2K period, but... https://wwiiafterwwii.wordpress.com/2016/10/16/wwii-weapons-in-the-ayatollahs-iran/ But probably not all thrown away / lost / scrapped...

[Raellus]

The Karabiner 98k. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karabiner_98k

I think it is mentioned in 'The Ruins of Warsaw' as the weapon carried by militia sections? Plus, just too many about to not be in use. Weren't captured WWII ones put up for sale a while back by the Soviets / USSR / agents / ? from warehouses in the Soviet Union / Russia - cannot remember if it was pre / post - and people in the USA were buying them?

Good call. And I think we'd see the same thing with the Mosin-Nagant. The Soviets/Russians had huge stockpiles. IIRC, they only started to flood the civilian market here in the States (you could get one at a sporting goods store for $100) after the dissolution of the USSR, when the Russians were doing whatever they could to bring in hard currency from the west. That wouldn't have happened in the v1 or v4 T2kUs.

-

[Brit]

If this is up-to-date they are still in military use.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosin%E2%80%93Nagant#Increased_world-wide_use

Have not read it all so "buyer beware": http://www.smallarmssurvey.org/fileadmin/docs/A-Yearbook/2003/en/Small-Arms-Survey-2003-Chapter-06-EN.pdf

Re: 'The Ruins of Warsaw' they are descibed as 'Mausers'. I added two and two... Page 13 plus (?)

[3catcircus]

Besides antiquated kit in modern times, it's also extremely useful for alternate history WW2, Vietnam, Korea, British Malay, etc. past skirmish games.

More important than the kit - how about the music? One can't deny that wars are culturally defined in part by the music of the times (or that the time produces the music.) Likewise the food. Hawaii wouldn't know spam without war, for example ...

[Matt Wiser]

Just remember: if it can still kill you, it's not obsolete. A well placed 76-mm from an Easy Eight Sherman or an 85-mm from a T-34/85 can still ruin your day.

[Brit]

Just remember: if it can still kill you, it's not obsolete.

Going way back...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Armouries#/media/File:RoyalArmoryLeeds.JPG
Seems the collection at Leeds, UK, opened in 1995 so late for the T2K period but it, or similar, must be elsewhere...

Are there any (large) collections of ACW period weapons 'that work' in US collections / museums? Even if the musket isn't working the bayonet would.
Maybe a re-enactment society could stay together for self-protection?

This could make a different Militia / Local Defence unit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atholl_Highlanders
"Although it has no official military role, this hand-picked body of local men are armed with Lee Metford rifles, and the regiment includes a pipe band".

[Ursus Maior]

Just remember: if it can still kill you, it's not obsolete. A well placed 76-mm from an Easy Eight Sherman or an 85-mm from a T-34/85 can still ruin your day.

That's bit too vague for a proper definition. Can a Sherman still kill "you" personally? Yes of course. But can it fulfill the role of an MBT on a modern battlefield? Certainly not, as it was designed before the MBT role had been defined and is by now an 80 old design. That certainly makes it obsolete as a weapon on a modern battlefield. Otherwise, by your definition, sticks and stones would also still be non-obsolete weapons.

As for a Twilight 2000 setting: Well, if no-one has working tanks for dozens of kilometers than a Sherman in running condition, fueled up and stacked with ammunition is as good as it was in the 1940s. Rifles, handgrenades and automatic weapons haven't changed that much. But beware of someone pulling out a Carl Gustaf. It's from the same decade, but at 400 meters it's going to go right through that Sherman.

[micromachine]

I can see some of the more common antiquated vehicles being reactivated as there are few if any electrical components to be maintained, and most of the mechanical systems can be maintained by an automotive garage or a heavy equipment workshop. Both of these places will have the capabilty to custom fabricate parts, assuming of course they have people with the required skills.
Engines, running gear and POL will be a major headache as well, and the manuals for these vehicles will be long gone, so repacement and repair will be a major case of improvisation.
Ammunition will of course be a large problem, however, a tank with a coaxial machine gun and a pintle mounted machine gun is still something to respect if you have limited antitank equipment. I can see some real "franken weapons" coming into service as the modern spares and hanger queens are used up to make good on battlefield losses. Picture a demilled Sherman tank with a ball mounted M1919, Bofors 40mm gun in lieu of the 75mm gun, an M60 pintlle mount, and a M40 recoiless rifle mounted on the turret bustle as part of the rapid reaction force of a cantonment.

[Tegyrius]

Ammunition will of course be a large problem, however, a tank with a coaxial machine gun and a pintle mounted machine gun is still something to respect if you have limited antitank equipment. I can see some real "franken weapons" coming into service as the modern spares and hanger queens are used up to make good on battlefield losses. Picture a demilled Sherman tank with a ball mounted M1919, Bofors 40mm gun in lieu of the 75mm gun, an M60 pintlle mount, and a M40 recoiless rifle mounted on the turret bustle as part of the rapid reaction force of a cantonment.

Or as the centerpiece of a marauder formation. You don't need APFSDSDU for intimidating the peasants and making an example of the odd resister who tries to off the warlord with a hunting rifle. Put some 40mm into a few church steeples (and the snipers in them) and the rest of the subjects wise up real quick.

Enter the PCs, stage left...

- C.

[Vespers War]

Good call. And I think we'd see the same thing with the Mosin-Nagant. The Soviets/Russians had huge stockpiles. IIRC, they only started to flood the civilian market here in the States (you could get one at a sporting goods store for $100) after the dissolution of the USSR, when the Russians were doing whatever they could to bring in hard currency from the west. That wouldn't have happened in the v1 or v4 T2kUs.

-

There would have been three-line rifles floating around from the era between the World Wars. Approximately 280,000 Remington and Westinghouse Mosins were bought by the US government after the Russian Revolution to keep those companies from going bankrupt, and while 50,000 were left in Russia after the Polar Bear Expedition departed, the remainder were sold as surplus for ~$3.50 each. Some were bought by a reseller and converted to .30-06 (which the rifle didn't handle well), but many if not most were sold by the Director of Civilian Marksmanship in their original chambering.

[Raellus]

There would have been three-line rifles floating around from the era between the World Wars. Approximately 280,000 Remington and Westinghouse Mosins were bought by the US government after the Russian Revolution to keep those companies from going bankrupt, and while 50,000 were left in Russia after the Polar Bear Expedition departed, the remainder were sold as surplus for ~$3.50 each. Some were bought by a reseller and converted to .30-06 (which the rifle didn't handle well), but many if not most were sold by the Director of Civilian Marksmanship in their original chambering.

Thanks, Vespers. I had no idea that US companies ever manufactured Mosins. I did a bit of following up and found this:

https://www.ammoland.com/2020/04/the-remington-mosin-nagant-an-all-american-pre-soviet-rifle/#axzz6wViyizdh

Nearly a million Mosins made in the USA! Looks like most of them got shipped overseas during the interwar years (Czechoslovakia, White Russia, Mexico, Spain via Finland), so one might encounter American Mosins just about anywhere in the T2kU.

-

[Brit]

Not sure if this is right for here, or if it should be on the 'Frackentank thread', etc, but...

And not even sure if the T-55 counts as "antiquated" in T2K...

"T-55 chassis fitted with S-60 57 mm gun in Iraq".
https://armamentresearch.com/t-55-chassis-fitted-with-s-60-57-mm-gun-in-iraq/

T-55 + AA gun.
https://www.whatifmodellers.com/index.php?topic=33760.0#topic-1
https://www.whatifmodellers.com/index.php?topic=33760.0

Also, I think a similar vehicle has been posted here before (?)
https://thearabweekly.com/hezbollah-unveils-its-military-might-syria

I make models but, although, I look at the vehicles "that are"... I prefer "The T2K War that never was" hence the 'research'.

"And in other news"...

Has anyone one heard of this vehicle before? News to me. I don't believe Paul has 'stated' it... apologies if to Paul if he has:
https://www.butlersprintedmodels.co.uk/20mm/20mm/post-ww2/20mm/post-ww2/other-nations/pereh-20mm.html

And this could ruin your entire day:
https://www.butlersprintedmodels.co.uk/20mm/20mm/post-ww2/20mm/post-ww2/other-nations/sidam-25-aa-20mm.html

[shrike6]

Not sure if this is right for here, or if it should be on the 'Frackentank thread', etc, but...

And not even sure if the T-55 counts as "antiquated" in T2K...

"T-55 chassis fitted with S-60 57 mm gun in Iraq".
https://armamentresearch.com/t-55-chassis-fitted-with-s-60-57-mm-gun-in-iraq/

T-55 + AA gun.
https://www.whatifmodellers.com/index.php?topic=33760.0#topic-1
https://www.whatifmodellers.com/index.php?topic=33760.0

Also, I think a similar vehicle has been posted here before (?)
https://thearabweekly.com/hezbollah-unveils-its-military-might-syria
Don't forget the Finnish T-55 Marksman
https://weaponsystems.net/system/426-T-55+Marksman
http://www.military-today.com/artillery/marksman.htm




Has anyone one heard of this vehicle before? News to me. I don't believe Paul has 'stated' it... apologies if to Paul if he has:
https://www.butlersprintedmodels.co.uk/20mm/20mm/post-ww2/20mm/post-ww2/other-nations/pereh-20mm.html


http://www.military-today.com/missiles/pere.htm

[Ursus Maior]

And not even sure if the T-55 counts as "antiquated" in T2K...

I wouldn't necessarily say so. One might differ on the semantics of obsolete vs. obsolescent, but most of the Warsaw Pact armies outside the USSR hat T-54s, T-55s and their various homebrew modernizations still in active frontline service. Given, not necessarily in the first tier divisions, but still very much in always active divisions. I think, Bulgaria even had T-34s in their Category C divisions.

[Ursus Maior]

Has anyone one heard of this vehicle before? News to me. I don't believe Paul has 'stated' it... apologies if to Paul if he has:
https://www.butlersprintedmodels.co.uk/20mm/20mm/post-ww2/20mm/post-ww2/other-nations/pereh-20mm.html

The Pereh was one of Israel's best kept secrets for about three decades. They started fielding it in the 80s and declassified it in 2015, when it was phased out. That took about until 2017.

The Pereh ("Onager") was based on the Magach 5, i. e. M48 chassis, fitted with 12 Spike NLOS ATGM (range ca. 25 km). The missile itself was not known to the public until 2011. The gun kept a dummy gun to make it look less suspicious, but secondary armament encompassed only two FN MAGs as machine-guns, though additional front armor was used.

The Pereh is probably the best bang for your M48-bucks you could get. The Spike NLOS was recently bought bought by the UK and ordered by the US (in 2020). So it's still very much in the game.

[Vespers War]

The Pereh was one of Israel's best kept secrets for about three decades. They started fielding it in the 80s and declassified it in 2015, when it was phased out. That took about until 2017.

The Pereh ("Onager") was based on the Magach 5, i. e. M48 chassis, fitted with 12 Spike NLOS ATGM (range ca. 25 km). The missile itself was not known to the public until 2011. The gun kept a dummy gun to make it look less suspicious, but secondary armament encompassed only two FN MAGs as machine-guns, though additional front armor was used.

The Pereh is probably the best bang for your M48-bucks you could get. The Spike NLOS was recently bought bought by the UK and ordered by the US (in 2020). So it's still very much in the game.

It's possibly worth noting that the UK received two different versions of Spike NLOS. The UK's Exactor-1 is the Spike NLOS Mk.2, and the Exactor-2 is the Spike NLOS Mk.5. The latter is the newest version, which has different airfoils from the other 4 versions, but other than that I haven't been able to find any descriptions of differences between the various marks.

[pmulcahy11b]

Has anyone one heard of this vehicle before? News to me. I don't believe Paul has 'stated' it... apologies if to Paul if he has:
https://www.butlersprintedmodels.co.uk/20mm/20mm/post-ww2/20mm/post-ww2/other-nations/pereh-20mm.html


I retained my security clearance until 2005 (tell me how that happened -- the Army is slooow sometimes, but if I had been dangerous...). However, though I did know about the Pereh, I would not have statted something I knew was classified.

[bash]

I'm no expert but it seems like the time and resource investment restoring mothballed vehicles would be better spent upgrading non-combat military vehicles or civilian vehicles for combat use.

If you've got a couple one-off oddball vehicles you're not likely to have any part donors or spare parts in general. When they break down or are damaged all the work you've put in will probably be wasted. The question of ammo is also really important.

Without spare treads your museum tank is just an armored gun emplacement. Without main gun ammo it's just an HMG emplacement. A bunch of sand bags could do the same job with fewer resources.

Turning some 6x6s into gun trucks or welding some pintle mounts to the rollbars on some Hiluxes seems like more bang for the buck. Parts are likely easier to find, the endurance is better, and for the same investment of resources you could get several vehicles outfitted.

[3catcircus]

I'm no expert but it seems like the time and resource investment restoring mothballed vehicles would be better spent upgrading non-combat military vehicles or civilian vehicles for combat use.

If you've got a couple one-off oddball vehicles you're not likely to have any part donors or spare parts in general. When they break down or are damaged all the work you've put in will probably be wasted. The question of ammo is also really important.

Without spare treads your museum tank is just an armored gun emplacement. Without main gun ammo it's just an HMG emplacement. A bunch of sand bags could do the same job with fewer resources.

Turning some 6x6s into gun trucks or welding some pintle mounts to the rollbars on some Hiluxes seems like more bang for the buck. Parts are likely easier to find, the endurance is better, and for the same investment of resources you could get several vehicles outfitted.

This... A Hilux with a PK - even spawned the name of the 86-87 conflict between Chad and Libya - The Great Toyota War.

[Olefin]

I'm no expert but it seems like the time and resource investment restoring mothballed vehicles would be better spent upgrading non-combat military vehicles or civilian vehicles for combat use.

If you've got a couple one-off oddball vehicles you're not likely to have any part donors or spare parts in general. When they break down or are damaged all the work you've put in will probably be wasted. The question of ammo is also really important.

Without spare treads your museum tank is just an armored gun emplacement. Without main gun ammo it's just an HMG emplacement. A bunch of sand bags could do the same job with fewer resources.

Turning some 6x6s into gun trucks or welding some pintle mounts to the rollbars on some Hiluxes seems like more bang for the buck. Parts are likely easier to find, the endurance is better, and for the same investment of resources you could get several vehicles outfitted.

You would be amazed at how many spare parts there are still out there for older vehicles to keep them running - the Littlefield Collection for one. And lots of very serious collectors as well besides him.

I grew up in a town with a gentleman who lived nearby who had a Sherman tank with a live barrel and a nice collection of thirty plus live rounds for it (including high explosive and armor piercing and one cannister round)and a whole garage full of spare parts. Definitely someone who was still alive in the timeline who would have put that old tank to very good use. He showed it in parades until well into the 90's.

Also not every outdated vehicle has a turret -there are tons of old Ferrets out there for instance - they run well and once you add the machine gun they are basically one hundred percent back to being a military vehicle - and would take a Ferret any day over an old pick up truck.

[3catcircus]

You would be amazed at how many spare parts there are still out there for older vehicles to keep them running - the Littlefield Collection for one. And lots of very serious collectors as well besides him.

I grew up in a town with a gentleman who lived nearby who had a Sherman tank with a live barrel and a nice collection of thirty plus live rounds for it (including high explosive and armor piercing and one cannister round)and a whole garage full of spare parts. Definitely someone who was still alive in the timeline who would have put that old tank to very good use. He showed it in parades until well into the 90's.

Also not every outdated vehicle has a turret -there are tons of old Ferrets out there for instance - they run well and once you add the machine gun they are basically one hundred percent back to being a military vehicle - and would take a Ferret any day over an old pick up truck.

I dunno. Technicals (i e. Hilux with machine gun) do have their uses. Chad figured out that if they drove them over 100km/hr they could drive right through Libyan minefields without setting them off... That and it's very easy to procure them with aid grants from western nations when sanctions prevent military imports. The only way I see museum pieces being viable is in portions of the former USSR or in western nations. In the ME, Africa, SW Asia, they're too valuable as scrap to become pieces or they are too costly to do anything but abandon (like multiple African nation's airports currently hosting mouldering aircraft husks).

[Trooper]

I'm no expert but it seems like the time and resource investment restoring mothballed vehicles would be better spent upgrading non-combat military vehicles or civilian vehicles for combat use.

If you've got a couple one-off oddball vehicles you're not likely to have any part donors or spare parts in general. When they break down or are damaged all the work you've put in will probably be wasted. The question of ammo is also really important.

Without spare treads your museum tank is just an armored gun emplacement. Without main gun ammo it's just an HMG emplacement. A bunch of sand bags could do the same job with fewer resources.

Turning some 6x6s into gun trucks or welding some pintle mounts to the rollbars on some Hiluxes seems like more bang for the buck. Parts are likely easier to find, the endurance is better, and for the same investment of resources you could get several vehicles outfitted.

Taking tank from museum and trying use it in battle is not good idea. Tanks and other combat vehicles need a lot of spare parts. Usually, museums don’t have lot of spare parts and they have to hunt parts to get museum tank in order and I don’t mean anything resembling combat use. Museum staff and retired tank mechanics usually need several years to get tank in running order. And in that case, they drive tank couple miles per year in shows.

Finnish armed force doesn’t have mothballed equipment or weapons. All equipment and vehicles are in use, storage for war time use or under repair. In 1990 planned war time strength of Finnish Armed forces was something like 580 000 men in full mobilization. Modern weapons and equipment for everybody? Keep on dreaming…

Only 10 Jaeger brigades and two Armor brigades were using modern weapons and vehicles. Rest of the army should have used artillery, small arms and other equipment from 1930as to 1960s. Infantry brigades, local defense units, air force and navy didn’t even get military trucks, they would have to use civilian trucks and farm tractors.

That all come to end after cold war. Finnish army bought huge amount of former East German equipment from Germany. One former officer told me that if all that equipment was loaded to single train that train would have been 40 kilometers long. All those much loved and hated M-39s, Stens and Suomi-SMGs were finally sold or scrapped, because all troops could be armed with Finnish, Soviet, East-German and Chinese Kalashnikovs.

Anyway, in Twilight 2000 world cold war didn’t end and in 2000 AD men meet their fate in cold dark forests using the same weapons that their grandfathers used nearly 60 years earlier.

[Olefin]

I dunno. Technicals (i e. Hilux with machine gun) do have their uses. Chad figured out that if they drove them over 100km/hr they could drive right through Libyan minefields without setting them off... That and it's very easy to procure them with aid grants from western nations when sanctions prevent military imports. The only way I see museum pieces being viable is in portions of the former USSR or in western nations. In the ME, Africa, SW Asia, they're too valuable as scrap to become pieces or they are too costly to do anything but abandon (like multiple African nation's airports currently hosting mouldering aircraft husks).

Keep in mind that in the 90's Africa, Southeast Asia and the Middle East were loaded with still very active "museum pieces" - the list of armies that still operated old WWII and early Cold War tanks and armored cars would be very extensive indeed - the last 20 years have seen many of them retired but in 1995 you have a lot of that equipment still in use. So dont count them out.

Also keep in mind just in Italy there are literally hundreds of old M47 tanks with plenty of spares in storage that were leased from the US Army.

And if you are looking at V1 there would be even more of such tanks and armored vehicles still around and still in running shape - i.e. the era of the US and Soviets sending stuff like that to countries like Kenya, Tanzania, Israel, Syria, etc. would still be very much in action

I also think that even a "Potemkin" tank has a lot of value - i.e. how many marauders are going to see a tank and decide that they want to take it on - not knowing that its basically immobile and may not have a working fire control system. Its one thing if its somewhere that has anti-tank weapons - its another if you are talking a bunch of guys with shotguns and hunting rifles seeing a tank and have nothing but some dynamite or a flaming bottle of gas to try to take it out with. Most would give it a wide berth.

[Raellus]

For discussion of the plausibility and/or utility of using museum pieces in modern warfare, please use the following thread:

https://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=4600

This thread is about obsolescent (not yet obsolete) weapons, which were in national militaries' reserve stockpiles, that would see front-line action at some point in the Twilight War.

-

[Olefin]

The question is what would be a museum piece - that would depend on the country. The Soviets and Russians were still using T-34 tanks for driver training well into the 1990's - whereas in the US the comparable tank, the Sherman, by then was 100% a museum piece.

In Mexico and Paraguay they were still using Stuart tanks into the period of the timeline - here those are museum pieces. There they were active duty tanks.

So it may have to be something you would look at on a country to country basis as to what would be a museum piece. Keep in mind there are active duty T-34's still in several country's armies and that in the 90's you could encounter M-47 tanks in service in Turkey, Iran, Croatia, Pakistan and South Korea and in reserve storage in Italy.

And Austria has a lot of old tank turrets being used for bunkers - so while you wont run into the tank you could very easily run into the still very operational turret and its armament

Perfect example is the Ferret APC - its still in use in a lot of countries - so while some would call it a museum piece others would call it very much obsolescent but still operational.

[Raellus]

The question is what would be a museum piece - that would depend on the country.

Yes, but as you pointed out, if it a vehicle is in a military's reserve stock, for the purposes of this thread, it is not a museum piece (yet).

If a particular vehicle is actually on display at a museum, it is a museum piece.

Feel free to discuss the former here; please discuss the latter in the previously referenced and linked Littlefield Collection thread.

-

[Olefin]

Yes, but as you pointed out, if it a vehicle is in a military's reserve stock, for the purposes of this thread, it is not a museum piece (yet).

If a particular vehicle is actually on display at a museum, it is a museum piece.

Feel free to discuss the former here; please discuss the latter in the previously referenced and linked Littlefield Collection thread.

-

You got it - and as I said that is dependent on the country. So that offers a great way to pull out the rare older vehicle to surprise players. "What the heck I thought all the (fill in the blank with Ferrets, T-34's, M47's) went to the boneyard a lot time ago?"

And the answer is yes they did - but not in Croatia or Greece or Turkey or Africa

By the way that is one reason the East Africa and Korea areas are such a great place to campaign - not only because of the re-enactor unit in Kenya but precisely because so many obsolescent vehicles are still being used that can be used to challenge the players with and not just the same tanks, BMP's, etc.

[mpipes]

Interesting to note that a lot of weapon systems were still in service or buried in some forgotten corner of some warehouse someplace. Examples -
1) Some friends cleaning out a warehouse found a crate of unissued Springfield Model 1884 rifled muskets in 1996.
2) T-34/85s could still be found in Russian training units and Machine Gun Divisions in the Far East in 1990.
3) Approximately 50 M60A2s were still in US POMCUS warehouses in 1990 as well as un-updated M60A1s.
4) MG34 and MG42 machineguns were in East German police and militia armories at reunification.
5) French police still have German G43s rifles in armories.
6) Norway still has MP40s SMGs in its militia armories.
7) German STG44s were captured in Iraq in 2003.
8) Up till about 1994, there were still M1 Carbines maintained in US armories.
9) Many US police agencies still possess M1928 Thompsons in their armories.

In my campaign, I have a fully operational M60A2 that was pulled out of a museum in a CIVGOV unit.

[Raellus]

Interesting to note that a lot of weapon systems were still in service or buried in some forgotten corner of some warehouse someplace. Examples -
1) Some friends cleaning out a warehouse found a crate of unissued Springfield Model 1884 rifled muskets in 1996.
2) T-34/85s could still be found in Russian training units and Machine Gun Divisions in the Far East in 1990.
3) Approximately 50 M60A2s were still in US POMCUS warehouses in 1990 as well as un-updated M60A1s.
4) MG34 and MG42 machineguns were in East German police and militia armories at reunification.
5) French police still have German G43s rifles in armories.
6) Norway still has MP40s SMGs in its militia armories.
7) German STG44s were captured in Iraq in 2003.
8) Up till about 1994, there were still M1 Carbines maintained in US armories.
9) Many US police agencies still possess M1928 Thompsons in their armories.

Thanks, MPipes. Those are exactly the kinds of things I'm hoping to catalogue here.

Re #7, according to Wikipedia...

"The Sturmgewehr remained in use with the East German Nationale Volksarmee with the designation MPi.44 until it was eventually replaced with domestic variants of the AK-47 assault rifle. The Volkspolizei used it until approximately 1962 when it was replaced by the PPSh-41. It was still used by other public security formations thereafter.[24] The ammunition was manufactured there at least until 1961.[24] Other countries to use the StG 44 after World War II included Czechoslovakia (although it was not officially adopted)[24] and Yugoslavia, where units such as the 63rd Paratroop Battalion were equipped with it until the 1980s,[25] when the rifles were ultimately transferred to Territorial Defense reserves or sold to friendly regimes in the Middle East and Africa. France adopted captured StG 44 for colonial Foreign Legion units."

And, apparently, it is still produced today in Germany as a sporting rifle, both in the original caliber and in .22 rimfire.

So, one could expect to find examples of the StG 44 scattered about during the Twilight War.

In addition to previous examples, Romanian Patriotic Guard troops were equipped with MG-34s until at least the 1970s.

I also reckon that one would frequently encounter PPSh-41s and PPS-43 SMGs in East Bloc militia/irregular/deep reserve units come 2000.

-

[Vespers War]

I also reckon that one would frequently encounter PPSh-41s and PPS-43 SMGs in East Bloc militia/irregular/deep reserve units come 2000.

-

Both the PPSh-41 and PPS were used at the start of the current Ukrainian unpleasantness, so they would definitely still be around in any of the existing Twilight War timelines. They might also appear in Africa and East Asia, based on the users and former users listed on Wikipedia.

[Olefin]

Keep in mind this is current data on the T-34 tank as of 2020

Current
Cuba: 642 supplier - undisclosed number in service.
Bosnia-Herzegovina: 5
Republic of the Congo: In reserve.
Guinea: 30 still operational
Guinea-Bissau: 10
Namibia: 4 (in reserve)
North Korea: 650 - undisclosed number in service
Yemen: 30 operational
Vietnam: 45 in service as a trainer

[3catcircus]

Keep in mind this is current data on the T-34 tank as of 2020

Current
Cuba: 642 supplier - undisclosed number in service.
Bosnia-Herzegovina: 5
Republic of the Congo: In reserve.
Guinea: 30 still operational
Guinea-Bissau: 10
Namibia: 4 (in reserve)
North Korea: 650 - undisclosed number in service
Yemen: 30 operational
Vietnam: 45 in service as a trainer

It's much more likely for small arms to be available from bygone eras than artillery, armor, etc. It's just way too costly to maintain a fleet of reserve tanks or ships or airplanes. A rifle is easy - coat in grease, wrap in oilskin, and pack away.

The Boneyard in AZ or the reserve fleet in Philly are examples of wishful thinking, for example - to maintain hardware, you either have to spend the time and effort to maintain it ready-to-go (in which case why bother if you have a front-line set of kit but no guard or reserve troops to use and maintain the old kit) or you have to do so much layup to prepare it for long term storage that it'll take months (or longer) to make it serviceable.

I think that is the key - in order to have antiquated weaponry that isn't a true museum display piece that can actually be used, having reservists or guardsmen type troops to continue using it is necessary.

[Olefin]

It's much more likely for small arms to be available from bygone eras than artillery, armor, etc. It's just way too costly to maintain a fleet of reserve tanks or ships or airplanes. A rifle is easy - coat in grease, wrap in oilskin, and pack away.

The Boneyard in AZ or the reserve fleet in Philly are examples of wishful thinking, for example - to maintain hardware, you either have to spend the time and effort to maintain it ready-to-go (in which case why bother if you have a front-line set of kit but no guard or reserve troops to use and maintain the old kit) or you have to do so much layup to prepare it for long term storage that it'll take months (or longer) to make it serviceable.

Oh the rifles and other small arms will be in great profusion - the armor/artillery/armored cars etc. are more to show, as per Raellus question, what kind of obsolescent vehicles will be seen in the T2K timeline.

I.e. what might get pulled out of reserve, etc.. and find itself fighting on the battlefields as modern armor gets short

I recommend an excellent book you might like - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Texas-Israeli_War:_1999 - very relevant to the topic - shows the US having to use old Lee, Sherman and Stuart tanks when the modern armor they had broke down

And I disagree with you on maintaining hardware - many of the older tanks are still in operation precisely because they are so easy to maintain. That guy in my town who owned the Sherman kept it going with a backyard garage and tools he bought from Sears and spare parts that in some cases he improvised from old service manuals he had.

Compared to the marvels of modern tech we operate now they may still be going long after the Twilight War ends due to their simplicity and still be fighting on battlefields when the last M1A1 has finally broken down for the last time.

[3catcircus]

Oh the rifles and other small arms will be in great profusion - the armor/artillery/armored cars etc. are more to show, as per Raellus question, what kind of obsolescent vehicles will be seen in the T2K timeline.

I.e. what might get pulled out of reserve, etc.. and find itself fighting on the battlefields as modern armor gets short

I recommend an excellent book you might like - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Texas-Israeli_War:_1999 - very relevant to the topic - shows the US having to use old Lee, Sherman and Stuart tanks when the modern armor they had broke down

And I disagree with you on maintaining hardware - many of the older tanks are still in operation precisely because they are so easy to maintain. That guy in my town who owned the Sherman kept it going with a backyard garage and tools he bought from Sears and spare parts that in some cases he improvised from old service manuals he had.

Compared to the marvels of modern tech we operate now they may still be going long after the Twilight War ends due to their simplicity and still be fighting on battlefields when the last M1A1 has finally broken down for the last time.

It's not that they may be easier to maintain, technology-wise. It's that they require so much more of it the older they get. It's easy to troubleshoot and replace an LRU on new kit. When you have to half-step down to the circuit card or the mechanical subassembly and then physically repair it, it is infinitely more difficult and time-consuming, even if the equipment is easier to understand and repairs can be done with a screwdriver and wrench but takes 4 hrs instead of 15 minutes - when you have a fleet of vehicles you are maintaining.

[mpipes]

Forgot to mention that the Soviets stored THOUSANDS of captured German weapons at least through the 1990s. A friend was shown one salt mine in the Ukraine in the mid 90s storing WWII captured weapons. He personally saw and inspected crates of Lugers, P38s, G43s, K98s, MP-40s, and MG34s and 42s. All of them were in extremely good condition and fully functional. The Russians also had all the Thompson SMGs received with their lend lease Sherman tanks in storage, and many of those parts kits after the receivers were demilled were imported in the 90s and early 00s.

[Brit]

Articles about the Vietnam War but may interest:
https://wwiiafterwwii.wordpress.com/2015/07/10/wwii-german-weapons-during-the-vietnam-war/
https://www.warhistoryonline.com/instant-articles/wwii-german-weapons-vietnam.html

[Vespers War]

It's not that they may be easier to maintain, technology-wise. It's that they require so much more of it the older they get. It's easy to troubleshoot and replace an LRU on new kit. When you have to half-step down to the circuit card or the mechanical subassembly and then physically repair it, it is infinitely more difficult and time-consuming, even if the equipment is easier to understand and repairs can be done with a screwdriver and wrench but takes 4 hrs instead of 15 minutes - when you have a fleet of vehicles you are maintaining.

In a number of the militaries of less wealthy countries, a soldier's time is cheaper than new vehicles and there aren't sufficient threats to justify spending large sums of money on the latest shiny toys. There are M8 Greyhounds still serving in multiple Latin American forces, while the last M4 Sherman tanks were retired in 2018 and Paraguay might still have some M3 Stuarts in service (Uruguay retired theirs in 1999). As far as I know, M3 half-tracks are still in service in Mexico. About 15 years newer but still "obsolete," there are hundreds of M60 tanks still in service, to the point that Raytheon and Leonardo have both introduced SLEP packages within the last 5 years, while Taiwan implemented an Elbit SLEP in 2019. There's plenty of old stuff either still trucking along in active service with second (or third, or fourth) users or in reserve to be recalled if there's a big enough war to need fast expansion of a military.

[unipus]

A point I haven't seen brought up in this thread (although maybe I missed it) is that you'd be far, far more likely to see many of these obsolescent vehicles than cutting-edge ones, just as a matter of logistics. Where were all the T-80Us and M1A1s? On the front line. That means that most of them got blow'd up in the first weeks of the war. The repair yards get blow'd up too, the spares get used up or blow'd up. Pretty soon there's not many functioning cool guy tanks around.

All of the above, in super fast motion, for aircraft.

Meanwhile, months or even years later, huge numbers of T-55s and M60s and M48s and T-34s are showing up to keep the show going. I doubt there are a whole lot of replacement T-80s coming, especially once the nukes drop.

Someone said a tank that's out of main gun rounds isn't better than a sandbag emplacement. Functionally true, maybe. In terms of morale on your average infantryman, it's pretty hard to beat the effect of knowing a TANK is guarding the approach to a town. (and I've personally seen this effect even in-game. It's great. One immobile T-55 is plenty enough to send the players scattering to rethink their whole plan -- as well it should!)

[Vespers War]

And modernization can simplify the logistics somewhat if a user plans accordingly - when Egypt updated their T-55s to Ramses II standards, they put in an engine with ~80% commonality with the M60A3's engine. They also used the same M68 cannon that they had used for updating the M60A3, the road wheels were the same as the M48, and British tracks replaced the Soviet style, so spare parts could be used across multiple vehicles. These would have been post-Twilight War vehicles (the prototype was in the late 1980s but series production wasn't until 2004), but the principle remains the same regardless of era - replace aging assemblies with newer ones you're already using, and the maintenance problems become more manageable.

[Ursus Maior]

Yes, these are very good points. Taiwan put M18 Hellcat turrets onto it surplus M42 Duster hulls, creating its Type 64 light tank. In my opinion, the difference between a Frankentank and a cross-model using upgrade is proper technical documentation and a series of builds larger than a hand full of field conversions plus avoiding obvious design bungles (e. g. cannot be operated safely).

[Raellus]

A lot of good points have been raised so far. Another factor to consider is how much, or how little, certain weapon systems are used in field training. Some armies can afford to do a relatively large amount of training, so their equipment sees a lot of use- this produces wear and tear that, in the short-term, requires routine maintenance, and in the long term requires replacement of parts and other more involved work. A lot of armies in the developing world (and some of the poorer Warsaw Pact nations during the Cold War) can't afford to conduct a lot of realistic field training, so their tanks and whatnot spend all but a couple of days a year in depot, not accumulating wear and tear*. So, it might be the case that at the beginning of the Twilight War, a T-34 that's been sitting in a depot for 360 days a year for decades (assuming it receives a modicum of TLC during that time) might be in better working condition than a 10-year old M1 that's been in and out of the shop half-a-dozen times because it's in the field on maneuvers or on the range (or whatever) at least 180 days a year.

*Disparities in training and their impact on operational readiness and battlefield performance is a topic for another thread.

-

[Raellus]

Stumbled across this video today.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s59IFr_5DJ4

No real surprises, IMHO.

-

[swaghauler]

The USS COD has arrived in Erie's dry dock facility to undergo maintenance.

https://youtu.be/yj5Zv5LASQc

[Ursus Maior]

Is that the submarine that was caught in a river flood some time ago?

[Olefin]

The USS COD has arrived in Erie's dry dock facility to undergo maintenance.

https://youtu.be/yj5Zv5LASQc

From what I remember the Cod is the only one that still has an intact pressure hull - the Pampanito is the only other one where it could possibly be brought back into use - they did make some cuts but the way they did it they could repair it and get water tight integrity again but her ability to dive much beyond a 100 feet was compromised - whereas Cod didnt have any changes

[Raellus]

Found a photo of Romanian Patriotic Guard troops using what appears to be a PM1910 water-cooled Maxim machinegun in the 1970s or '80s. These venerable weapons were used by most Warsaw Pact armies at one time or another and likely would have remained in reserve in significant numbers throughout the Cold War. Its replacement, the SG-43 Goryunov, would be even more common.

Also, this rare bird turned up in Libya in 2016.

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/this-rare-cold-war-hungarian-submachine-gun-reappeared-in-2016-b96de9150913

-

[cpip]

There's an interesting Twitter feed, Calibre Obscura (https://twitter.com/CalibreObscura), who posts various photos taken of weapons in the Middle East and Africa. Some of it is modern, but the feed turns up some interesting odds and ends, like a desert camo painted Mosin-Nagant (https://twitter.com/CalibreObscura/status/1403288609147572227?s=20) or a very prettily-kept PPsH-41 (https://twitter.com/CalibreObscura/status/1392789788982382596?s=20).

Between the strange old weapons, and the fascinating one-off modifications that show up there, it's a good view, to me, of what the Twilight equipment would look like: extensive customizations and pressing anything random into service that still works.

[Vespers War]

Found a photo of Romanian Patriotic Guard troops using what appears to be a PM1910 water-cooled Maxim machinegun in the 1970s or '80s. These venerable weapons were used by most Warsaw Pact armies at one time or another and likely would have remained in reserve in significant numbers throughout the Cold War. Its replacement, the SG-43 Goryunov, would be even more common. -

The Ministry of Defense of Ukraine listed 35,000 PM M1910 Maxims in inventory in 2011, which should give a sense of the scale of possible Cold War reserves of the weapon.

There would also be RP-46 machine guns hanging around, since some of those were encountered in Iraq during the most recent conflict there. That's the heavy-barreled, belt-fed version of the DP-27 that can still use the original's pan magazines. It's a bit heavier empty, but the much lighter ammo storage makes it more mobile overall. Taliban forces had the older pan-fed DPM.

Edit to add: honestly, one very solid reason for Russian antiques to hang around is that the Three-Line Cartridge, Model of 1891 is still in use today, so supplying old weapons with 7.62x54mmR ammo is easy. It's a lot harder to source things like .30-40 Krag or 6.5mm Shoenauer or 8mm Lebel if you keep other countries' antiques around.

[Raellus]

The Ministry of Defense of Ukraine listed 35,000 PM M1910 Maxims in inventory in 2011, which should give a sense of the scale of possible Cold War reserves of the weapon.

Come to think of it, I remember seeing a photo of a Ukrainian soldier, kitted out in multi-cam fatigues and modern body armor, manning a PM M1910 Maxim in a bunker, within the last year or two. Thanks for jogging my memory.

-

[Brit]

This (or similar)?
https://twitter.com/ralee85/status/1223317491365163008

[Raellus]

This (or similar)?

That's the one! Thanks. It's nice to know it wasn't just my imagination playing games with my memory.

-

[Olefin]

FYI example of how old guns might get into a T2K game

Bermuda Regiment in 1996 still had large stocks of Sterling submachine guns and Lee Enfield No. 4, Mk 1 rifles as well as two 25 pounder guns and several SBML 2-inch mortars dating from WW2. They even had some old Greener military shotguns.

Have a feeling a lot of current and ex-British possessions have much the same story as to old weapons still stored away

[Matt Wiser]

People may want to check this site out:

https://wwiiafterwwii.wordpress.com/


It highlights use of WW II-era equipment (aircraft, tanks, small arms, artillery, etc.) well after the end of the war. One example: Su-100s still being used in the Yemen War. Another: The huge arsenal found after the Grenada Invasion, and some of that was WW-II vintage. RDF Sourcebook users: Iran was still using Shermans and M-36 Tank Destroyers in the Iran-Iraq War (Some were found in Iraq after OIF), and still uses the M1 105-mm howitzer and the 155-mm M1 as well. Not to mention that StG-44s were found by U.S. and British Forces in Iraq (and some of the Syrian rebels also use 'em).

[Olefin]

People may want to check this site out:

https://wwiiafterwwii.wordpress.com/


It highlights use of WW II-era equipment (aircraft, tanks, small arms, artillery, etc.) well after the end of the war. One example: Su-100s still being used in the Yemen War. Another: The huge arsenal found after the Grenada Invasion, and some of that was WW-II vintage. RDF Sourcebook users: Iran was still using Shermans and M-36 Tank Destroyers in the Iran-Iraq War (Some were found in Iraq after OIF), and still uses the M1 105-mm howitzer and the 155-mm M1 as well. Not to mention that StG-44s were found by U.S. and British Forces in Iraq (and some of the Syrian rebels also use 'em).

Great site Matt - and I would add that for those using the East Africa Kenya Sourcebook you would find a lot of older weapons in Africa - not just what the 1st US Volunteer Mech Infantry Battalion brought with them. Africa is basically awash in older British, Soviet, Chinese, American and French equipment. Uganda would still be operating old Sherman tanks and there were T-34's in multiple African countries

[micromachine]

Love the ww2afterww2 site. Great info and the weapons from ww2 still are soldiering on in the modern era. The ROCN update program on the Gearing class is particulary interesting to me.

[rcaf_777]

Carrier Pigeons

[raketenjagdpanzer]

I have over the last year or so gotten very addicted to auto recovery/restoration channels on Youtube. Vice Grip Garage, Thunderhead 289, Dylan McCool, and Junkyard Digs...and so many others. I'm not much of a gearhead but watching their channels now when they do a "drive it out of its grave" video, the basics that they go through, I can predict what the issue is that's stopping a given vehicle from starting and usually get it right, based on prior recoveries they've done.

The one that got me really hooked was Thunderhead, Dylan (for at least 1 episode, I think) and Junkyard recovered and got a Ford F150 truck that had been parked since 1989 or thereabouts, just sitting, not moving, on an abandoned farm. The truck itself was from the early 1970s. With about 8 hours of work, with a tool kit, some automatic transmission fluid, and a scavenged radiator, improvised radiator hose, and scavenged starter coil, they got it to drive out of its grave. It's utterly flat tires held air; they drove it a couple of miles (one up, one back) before calling it a victory. But it ran, idled, etc.

The point of all of this is that aside from the Abrams, AFVs generally use similar versions of the same engine you'll find in most heavy trucks/equipment. If a couple of guys can in the space of a day with limited tools get a vehicle moving, I would wager that a team of motivated mechanics with proper equipment could get long parked and "abandoned" AFVs working and running, no problem. Would they be factory perfect? Hell no! But, take the M113 for instance; the US has tens of thousands of them still in inventory. Their engine is the same as used in many buses and other "commercial" applications. I think the idea of "Hey can we get those M47s running again is really damn cool. It's why in my "Florida JMC" idea, the Joint Military Command has a single M60 pulled from a display in front of a VFW up in north Central Florida. Now, sure, the main gun breach is cut, but still, it's mobile armored firepower against enemies who don't have any.

Just wanted to share that.

[Brit]

Carrier Pigeons

Of course!

https://www.iwm.org.uk/history/top-tips-for-managing-your-carrier-pigeons

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKhdJd1Nu74

[kato13]

Of course!

https://www.iwm.org.uk/history/top-tips-for-managing-your-carrier-pigeons

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKhdJd1Nu74

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Electronics_Type_Designation_System

I remember reading in the Harpoon rules that "Pigeon" had the "B" designation for Type of equipment which was later deprecated to allow use for communication security. However the coast guard used an experimental system where pigeons were trained to see orange in the water (life vests) and peck in the direction they saw it. I was always hoping they would get a letter back.

[kato13]

Drone and UAV discussion moved here
https://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=6176

[Olefin]

Drone and UAV discussion moved here
https://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=6176

thank you Kato!

[Olefin]

Another older vehicle you would find is if you go adventuring in the Dominican Republic - they operated the Landsverk L-60 tank until 2012. They actually had seen combat during the US intervention in the 60's including one of the few tank on tank battles ever in the Western Hemisphere when one got stupid and tried to take on an M48 Patton tank.

[Olefin]

FYI an interesting sidelight - Morpac Industries, Inc. in Burnaby, BC builds equipment that uses old Sherman tank chassis, suspensions, road wheels and tracks.

They have a huge source of tracks in stock, including ones that would fit Sherman tanks, as well as rubber road wheels for military-type carriers with long wearing steel rims. They also manufacture tracks as well.

Have to look at the Vancouver nuke strike but if they are out of the blast effects you could see them being a very desirable resource for the Canadian, US and Soviet forces in the area. Could be a good adventure idea for people using the Pacific Northwest module

[Brit]

I have seen Punt Guns in museums in The UK and seemingly in T2K: R/- (in The UK). However 'just' a pipe and...

"In the United Kingdom, a 1995 survey showed fewer than 50 active punt guns still in use. The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 limits punt guns in England and Wales, and in Scotland, to a bore diameter of 1.75 inches (44 mm) (1 1/8-pounder). Since Queen Victoria's Diamond Jubilee in 1897 there has been a punt gun salute every Coronation and Jubilee over Cowbit Wash in Cowbit, Lincolnshire, England. During the Diamond Jubilee of Elizabeth II, 21 punt gun rounds were fired separately, followed by the guns all being fired simultaneously".

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punt_gun

It is 'remembered' from an old White Dwarf magazine Call of Cuthulu scenario but they said that Boyes anti-tank rifles could be bought / owned on a shotgun licence as they are smooth bore and thus 'OK' under English & Welsh Law. (The mag would date back to the 80's?). Buyer Beware!

[Vespers War]

I have seen Punt Guns in museums in The UK and seemingly in T2K: R/- (in The UK). However 'just' a pipe and...

"In the United Kingdom, a 1995 survey showed fewer than 50 active punt guns still in use. The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 limits punt guns in England and Wales, and in Scotland, to a bore diameter of 1.75 inches (44 mm) (1 1/8-pounder). Since Queen Victoria's Diamond Jubilee in 1897 there has been a punt gun salute every Coronation and Jubilee over Cowbit Wash in Cowbit, Lincolnshire, England. During the Diamond Jubilee of Elizabeth II, 21 punt gun rounds were fired separately, followed by the guns all being fired simultaneously".

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punt_gun

It is 'remembered' from an old White Dwarf magazine Call of Cuthulu scenario but they said that Boyes anti-tank rifles could be bought / owned on a shotgun licence as they are smooth bore and thus 'OK' under English & Welsh Law. (The mag would date back to the 80's?). Buyer Beware!

Over in the Best That Never Was thread, I did up a French punt gun (https://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?p=87750) a couple of months ago. Unlike most, it is feasible to shoulder-fire as it's "only" six and a half kilos.

[Brit]

Not really 'out of mothballs' but... maybe similar vessels about?

"The Paraguayan Navy's Humaitá-class river gunboats may well be regarded as ancient by most modern standards, but their longevity pales into insignificance when compared to that Navy's Capitán Cabral (ex-Triunfo, ex-Adolfo Riquelme), which was first launched in 1907!".
http://wargamingmiscellany.blogspot.com/2018/04/an-even-older-paraguayan-river-gunboat.html
http://wargamingmiscellany.blogspot.com/2018/04/paraguayan-river-gunboats.html

[.45cultist]

I have seen Punt Guns in museums in The UK and seemingly in T2K: R/- (in The UK). However 'just' a pipe and...

"In the United Kingdom, a 1995 survey showed fewer than 50 active punt guns still in use. The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 limits punt guns in England and Wales, and in Scotland, to a bore diameter of 1.75 inches (44 mm) (1 1/8-pounder). Since Queen Victoria's Diamond Jubilee in 1897 there has been a punt gun salute every Coronation and Jubilee over Cowbit Wash in Cowbit, Lincolnshire, England. During the Diamond Jubilee of Elizabeth II, 21 punt gun rounds were fired separately, followed by the guns all being fired simultaneously".

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punt_gun

It is 'remembered' from an old White Dwarf magazine Call of Cuthulu scenario but they said that Boyes anti-tank rifles could be bought / owned on a shotgun licence as they are smooth bore and thus 'OK' under English & Welsh Law. (The mag would date back to the 80's?). Buyer Beware!

I got to see an 8 gauge punt gun at the SKB shotgun factory in Japan, it was on display in the lobby. 8 gauge shells are still made to clear kilns in metal working. So a nasty surprise can be had for those willing to scavenge.

[ChalkLine]

When introducing an older vehicle into the game I usually try and work outs context first. If it's a one off some group got going then anything goes, but if it's not then there has to be some considerations.

First off, some vehicles need essentially gutting and installing stuff from existing vehicles. This is made easier if the vehicle comes from a class of vehicles that are still in service such as the common-as-mud M113 chassis. Otherwise you're looking at installing new engines, transmissions and suspensions. Really, don't do this for tracked vehicles but you can get away with it for some wheeled vehicles.

If the vehicle is really old you can simply throw the turret (if there is one) away and drop in a new turret. Note this has to be a lighter turret. Most turrets have their dimensions available on the internet and such things as the BMP-1 turret or the Textron 1 metre turret will fit into a lot of things.

Next, weapon commonality. It doesn't need just compatible ammunition, you need enough spares. Really you want a standard NATO/WarPact (depending on who fields it weapon). Either you have to have enough to cannibalise or it has to be dead simple so division can fabricate new parts (such as for rocket tubes). A classic gun for NATO vehicles on the large scale is the L7 105mm gun because there's buckets of them around.
Generally thinks like a coax and pintle mounts will be swapped for the correct weapons unless you're making an all-OPFOR equipment force, something usually only done in emergencies. Likewise radios. Adaptors for things like periscopes can be made given time and inclination.

[Olefin]

Thats one reason a Ferret would be a common older vehicle that could be pressed back into service - the UK made a ton of them, they exported them all over the place and there are a ton of spares - and even ones that were bought by civilians can be put right back into service - just mount a machine gun and you are back in business

[Raellus]

We've probably all seen or included crossbowmen or bowmen in T2k, but is this also true of slingers? I can't remember if it's ever come up here before. I reckon very few PC's, if any, have used slings in combat, but it strikes me as being a weapon one might encounter in the hands of NPCs (civie militia or poorly equipped marauders come to mind).

I've read that in classical warfare, slingers using led shot could kill an armored man at 100 yards with a head shot. They've found skulls with depressed fractures and some with sling shot imbedded or inside the cranium.

One sees slingers at work during uprisings in the Palestinian territories. I don't know how effective they are.

Simple to make and with readily available ammo, I don't see why slings wouldn't make a comeback in the T2kU. The biggest obstacle, IMHO, is training, as a sling is not something one can just point and shoot. Dating back to at least the dawn of civilization, slings would be one of the most anachronistic weapons, probably the most anachronistic projectile weapon, on the 2000 battlefield.

-

[swaghauler]

We've probably all seen or included crossbowmen or bowmen in T2k, but is this also true of slingers? I can't remember if it's ever come up here before. I reckon very few PC's, if any, have used slings in combat, but it strikes me as being a weapon one might encounter in the hands of NPCs (civie militia or poorly equipped marauders come to mind).

I've read that in classical warfare, slingers using led shot could kill an armored man at 100 yards with a head shot. They've found skulls with depressed fractures and some with sling shot imbedded or inside the cranium.

One sees slingers at work during uprisings in the Palestinian territories. I don't know how effective they are.

Simple to make and with readily available ammo, I don't see why slings wouldn't make a comeback in the T2kU. The biggest obstacle, IMHO, is training, as a sling is not something one can just point and shoot. Dating back to at least the dawn of civilization, slings would be one of the most anachronistic weapons, probably the most anachronistic projectile weapon, on the 2000 battlefield.

-

I did discuss slings and other primitive weapons in .45Cultist's thread ANTIQUE & PRIMITIVE WEAPONS. Vesper's War/The Dark also contributed significantly there.

I'll be popping in more frequently soon guys. Dad's estate is winding down, Gram's estate is settled and my cousin Johnny's memorial is now done and everything concluded. They say bad things come in threes, so let's hope I can catch a break for a while!

[Raellus]

I did discuss slings and other primitive weapons in .45Cultist's thread ANTIQUE & PRIMITIVE WEAPONS. Vesper's War/The Dark also contributed significantly there.

I'll be popping in more frequently soon guys. Dad's estate is winding down, Gram's estate is settled and my cousin Johnny's memorial is now done and everything concluded. They say bad things come in threes, so let's hope I can catch a break for a while!

Thanks for the redirect, Swag, and please accept my condolences for your personal losses.

-

[ChalkLine]

I don't know if anyone has posted this but the Cadillac Gage (now Textron) V-150 and V-200 are perfect for refurbishing into the Twilight War.

Firstly, they have a rugged simplicity that follows the maxim of "the less complexity = the higher reliability".

But more importantly the vehicles were specifically designed to use as many components of the M113 armoured personnel carrier and M939 series 5-ton 6×6 trucks as possible, greatly easing the problems with resupply, deployment and maintenance.

Both vehicles have benefitted from advances over the years and the bane of the early V-100, twisted axles, is a long gone memory. They can have a variety of turrets meaning you can field multiple different mission vehicles on the same chassis, another big boon. A special point is that the best turret for T2K, the Textron One Metre Turret which features either a M209 or an M2HB and a Mk 19, was specifically created with this vehicle in mind. And even when carrying the 90mm low pressure gun they can still carry eight troops.

Of course, you pay for this in thin armour. It's only rated against 7.62mm AP. However the M1117 featured up-armour packages and anyone should be able to do this with applique and/or slat armour. The base armour is too thin for ERA though.

However you may not want to. The base V-150 is only 9,800kg, giving the players a relatively lightweight vehicle handy for getting over bad infrastructure. In my experience players only use their vehicles as fire support and not assault vehicles anyway, so send those grunts in to clear out the heavy weapons.

As an aside it'd make a great rail/road vehicle for railway campaigns.

[.45cultist]

I don't know if anyone has posted this but the Cadillac Gage (now Textron) V-150 and V-200 are perfect for refurbishing into the Twilight War.

Firstly, they have a rugged simplicity that follows the maxim of "the less complexity = the higher reliability".

But more importantly the vehicles were specifically designed to use as many components of the M113 armoured personnel carrier and M939 series 5-ton 6×6 trucks as possible, greatly easing the problems with resupply, deployment and maintenance.

Both vehicles have benefitted from advances over the years and the bane of the early V-100, twisted axles, is a long gone memory. They can have a variety of turrets meaning you can field multiple different mission vehicles on the same chassis, another big boon. A special point is that the best turret for T2K, the Textron One Metre Turret which features either a M209 or an M2HB and a Mk 19, was specifically created with this vehicle in mind. And even when carrying the 90mm low pressure gun they can still carry eight troops.

Of course, you pay for this in thin armour. It's only rated against 7.62mm AP. However the M1117 featured up-armour packages and anyone should be able to do this with applique and/or slat armour. The base armour is too thin for ERA though.

However you may not want to. The base V-150 is only 9,800kg, giving the players a relatively lightweight vehicle handy for getting over bad infrastructure. In my experience players only use their vehicles as fire support and not assault vehicles anyway, so send those grunts in to clear out the heavy weapons.

As an aside it'd make a great rail/road vehicle for railway campaigns.
Twenty years ago, the military vehicle collector mag had both a V150 and an M1114 for sale in the classifieds.

[chico20854]

Here's an odd one out of mothballs: In 1972 Libya purchased 8 C-130s. By the time manufacturing was complete the Quadaffi regime's hostility to the US had led to an arms embargo, so the brand new aircraft (with spares aboard), painted desert tan, were placed in storage at the plant in Marietta Georgia. The State Department paid the storage fees and they remain there to this day; IRL when the arms embargo was lifted in 2009 the aircraft were more fit for the scrap heap than a refit. The Libyans, when they got the estimated cost, were no longer interested in the aircraft, and with the revolution in 2011 there was no resolution. (some details at http://www.marietta.com/libyas-c-130-hercules-aircraft)

In a v1 timeline I could see the aircraft, at the outbreak of war, being refurbished and sent into action, despite their terrible condition post-2000. (Supposedly the spares aboard, including complete engines, were pristine in 2007). Possible recipients would include the US, any of its allies that operated the C-130, and China and Iran.

[Matt Wiser]

Here's an odd one out of mothballs: In 1972 Libya purchased 8 C-130s. By the time manufacturing was complete the Quadaffi regime's hostility to the US had led to an arms embargo, so the brand new aircraft (with spares aboard), painted desert tan, were placed in storage at the plant in Marietta Georgia. The State Department paid the storage fees and they remain there to this day; IRL when the arms embargo was lifted in 2009 the aircraft were more fit for the scrap heap than a refit. The Libyans, when they got the estimated cost, were no longer interested in the aircraft, and with the revolution in 2011 there was no resolution. (some details at http://www.marietta.com/libyas-c-130-hercules-aircraft)

In a v1 timeline I could see the aircraft, at the outbreak of war, being refurbished and sent into action, despite their terrible condition post-2000. (Supposedly the spares aboard, including complete engines, were pristine in 2007). Possible recipients would include the US, any of its allies that operated the C-130, and China and Iran.

The order was for 16, and the full $100 million paid. Eight had been delivered when the above-mentioned embargo was imposed. Those eight in Georgia, if in any shape in 1996-7, would be refurbished and the USAF likely getting first crack at them to replace attrition. FYI they were H models.

[Ursus Maior]

Sounds reasonable, especially if Colonel Gaddafi would choose to side with the Neo Soviets of the Twilight War, which wouldn't be unlikely to happen. At that point the US government might just decide to disown Libya as part of general warfare.

[.45cultist]

Remembering the salad days, in the 1990's, TT33's, SKS's and Mosins were cheap and plentiful, with the exception of the SKS that took AK mags. Even now, in the KC metro, .30-06 is hard to find, but 7.62X54R is common!

[Olefin]

Sounds reasonable, especially if Colonel Gaddafi would choose to side with the Neo Soviets of the Twilight War, which wouldn't be unlikely to happen. At that point the US government might just decide to disown Libya as part of general warfare.

They got nailed big time in the V1 and V2.2 timelines - the V1 Med Cruise doesnt go into a lot of detail but Libya definitely sounds like it got a pretty good nuking at the hands of someone

and in V2.2 in the East Africa canon I detailed Libya's participation in the war - including their attacking Egypt and taking out the Aswan Dam after the Soviets nuked several refineries in Egypt and then launching an invasion - and the US paying them back with multiple nuke hits including ones that stopped their invasion forces in their tracks

i.e.

December 9, 1997

Taking advantage of the chaos gripping Egypt, Libya launches an attack by Tu-22 bombers against the Aswan Dam, causing the dam to collapse and send a wall of water down the Nile, drowning hundreds of thousands of Egyptians and displacing even more. The attack destroys most of what electrical power was still being generated in Egypt after the nuclear attacks. Libyan tank formations cross into Egypt and head east against pitiful resistance.

Dec 10, 1997

Multiple nuclear strikes hit pro-Soviet Algeria and Libya hard, destroying refineries, oil fields and ports, cutting off almost all oil production and in the process causing nearly seven million casualties. The cities of Tripoli, Skikda (Philippeville), Algiers, Arzew, Ra's Lanuf, Zawiya, Benghazi and Oran have all been targeted in the attacks. The attacks on Algeria incense the French government and many of its people who still think of that country as being part of France. Libyan armored formations that had crossed the Egyptian border are devastated by three tactical nuclear warheads, knocking out over 80 percent of the tanks and APC’s and sending the survivors fleeing back towards Libya.

[tanksoldier]

When I was at OTAG in Sacramento, the 2nd Street Armory had barrels of M1903s and M1911s sitting in cosmoline, along with ammunition and various other things. They were originally given to teh state by the US Army during WWII when every state's National Guard had been mobilized and incorporated into the Regular Army. They were intended to arm the various state militias and defense forces that formed to replace the missing Guard units.

In about 1998 they decided to dispose of most of it, with the vast majority being demilled and recycled. That decision would not have been made in most of the T2K timelines, and I'd expect that in the post war era many rear echelon formations to be armed with M1903s.

Also, Sierra Army Depot has been mentioned. In the mid-1990s many strange things could be found in dark corners of many Army equipment depots and warehouses.

The Soviets never threw anything away, and had several WWII-era division sets of equipment stored, maintained and ready to go... tanks, artillery, small arms, ammo, trucks, uniforms, everything... as well as later divisional sets... 1950s, 1960s, etc.

Keep in mind the Soviet reserve systems wasn't like ours. They didn't do the "one weekend a month/ two weeks per year" like we do. Most Soviet youth were conscripted, spent 2 years training, then went home and never saw the military again. Their NCOs were largely conscripts from the same year group who showed leadership potential or other factors... bt they were really no more experienced than their peers... much like our "noncommissioned officer candidate school" of the Vietnam era.

The Soviet reserve plan was that conscripts from a particular period were kept together and on mobilization they would fall in on a divisional set of equipment appropriate for when they were conscripted. As they and their equipment got older, they were bumped down the readiness lists until they were completely too old for service... I think when the youngest conscripts in the group reached 60 or something they were completely removed from mobilization charts... but until then they were kept organized on paper as a "division" based on geographical loction and assigned a particular divisional set of equipment, which most never saw.

However when the division was finally "retired" the equipment was retained. The plan at that point was, in the evet of extended war, new units would be conscripted train and fall in on the old equipment. So, in theory, new 16 year old conscripts could have been trained and deployed with T34s and other WWII era equipment.

It's not that they may be easier to maintain, technology-wise. It's that they require so much more of it the older they get. It's easy to troubleshoot and replace an LRU on new kit. When you have to half-step down to the circuit card or the mechanical subassembly and then physically repair it, it is infinitely more difficult and time-consuming, even if the equipment is easier to understand and repairs can be done with a screwdriver and wrench but takes 4 hrs instead of 15 minutes - when you have a fleet of vehicles you are maintaining.

True to an extent, but also not.

It is possible to machine, forge or cast anything a T34 need to function in combat in post-war T2K. Nobody is making black boxes for M1A1s or T80s in T2K's 2001.

Repairing modern equipment is easier IF you have the parts, but impossible without them. In the modern US Army, going back to at least 1990, nobody at the line level "fixes" M1 engines. If there is a problem, except for a few specific replacement parts, you replace the engine entirely and ship the broken one to a depot for fixing. Tank battalion mait platoons carry those few parts that can be replaced, and entire engines. That's it. When there are no more engines, there is almost nothing that a battalion, brigade or even divisional maint shop can do to fix the M1's engine... and nobody is forging turbine blades anywhere but the factory.

ICE engines are different, but fire control computers and such are not. You replace black boxes, or it stays broken. Even engines with computer controls are iffy to fix in a shade tree environment.

T34s, M46 and M47... even M48 and M48A1 can mostly be fixed with a basic machine shop and a hot enough fire. By 2002ish the old WWII equipment would likely rule the battlefield of T2K, and M1s and T80s would be reduced to immobile gun emplacements operating in emergency manual mode.

[Olefin]

When I was at OTAG in Sacramento, the 2nd Street Armory had barrels of M1903s and M1911s sitting in cosmoline, along with ammunition and various other things. They were originally given to teh state by the US Army during WWII when every state's National Guard had been mobilized and incorporated into the Regular Army. They were intended to arm the various state militias and defense forces that formed to replace the missing Guard units.

In about 1998 they decided to dispose of most of it, with the vast majority being demilled and recycled. That decision would not have been made in most of the T2K timelines, and I'd expect that in the post war era many rear echelon formations to be armed with M1903s.

Also, Sierra Army Depot has been mentioned. In the mid-1990s many strange things could be found in dark corners of many Army equipment depots and warehouses.

The Soviets never threw anything away, and had several WWII-era division sets of equipment stored, maintained and ready to go... tanks, artillery, small arms, ammo, trucks, uniforms, everything... as well as later divisional sets... 1950s, 1960s, etc.

Keep in mind the Soviet reserve systems wasn't like ours. They didn't do the "one weekend a month/ two weeks per year" like we do. Most Soviet youth were conscripted, spent 2 years training, then went home and never saw the military again. Their NCOs were largely conscripts from the same year group who showed leadership potential or other factors... bt they were really no more experienced than their peers... much like our "noncommissioned officer candidate school" of the Vietnam era.

The Soviet reserve plan was that conscripts from a particular period were kept together and on mobilization they would fall in on a divisional set of equipment appropriate for when they were conscripted. As they and their equipment got older, they were bumped down the readiness lists until they were completely too old for service... I think when the youngest conscripts in the group reached 60 or something they were completely removed from mobilization charts... but until then they were kept organized on paper as a "division" based on geographical loction and assigned a particular divisional set of equipment, which most never saw.

However when the division was finally "retired" the equipment was retained. The plan at that point was, in the evet of extended war, new units would be conscripted train and fall in on the old equipment. So, in theory, new 16 year old conscripts could have been trained and deployed with T34s and other WWII era equipment.



True to an extent, but also not.

It is possible to machine, forge or cast anything a T34 need to function in combat in post-war T2K. Nobody is making black boxes for M1A1s or T80s in T2K's 2001.

Repairing modern equipment is easier IF you have the parts, but impossible without them. In the modern US Army, going back to at least 1990, nobody at the line level "fixes" M1 engines. If there is a problem, except for a few specific replacement parts, you replace the engine entirely and ship the broken one to a depot for fixing. Tank battalion mait platoons carry those few parts that can be replaced, and entire engines. That's it. When there are no more engines, there is almost nothing that a battalion, brigade or even divisional maint shop can do to fix the M1's engine... and nobody is forging turbine blades anywhere but the factory.

ICE engines are different, but fire control computers and such are not. You replace black boxes, or it stays broken. Even engines with computer controls are iffy to fix in a shade tree environment.

T34s, M46 and M47... even M48 and M48A1 can mostly be fixed with a basic machine shop and a hot enough fire. By 2002ish the old WWII equipment would likely rule the battlefield of T2K, and M1s and T80s would be reduced to immobile gun emplacements operating in emergency manual mode.

Also keep in mind that there are museums and collectors who have a ton of parts, manuals, etc. for older equipment and could help keep it going - including Jacques Littlefield in California who literally rebuilt tanks and armored vehicles that were wrecks then they arrived into operational status - and he had live barrels on many of his vehicles. He literally restored a Panther that had been sitting underwater since WWII - given that he could easily keep an old Sherman going from a collector or Arnold's tank for that matter.

[Raellus]

Also keep in mind that there are museums and collectors who have a ton of parts, manuals, etc. for older equipment and could help keep it going - including Jacques Littlefield in California who literally rebuilt tanks and armored vehicles that were wrecks then they arrived into operational status - and he had live barrels on many of his vehicles. He literally restored a Panther that had been sitting underwater since WWII - given that he could easily keep an old Sherman going from a collector or Arnold's tank for that matter.

It's one thing to keep a single Panther or a couple of Shermans running in peacetime; it's quite another to keep larger stocks of older AFVs in fighting shape under post-apocalyptic combat conditions.

Reposted from #14 upthread:

To clarify the OP, I was addressing the deployment of relatively large stocks of mothballed weaponry, not so much one-offs like museum collections. The main issue that I see with the latter is a lack of spare parts and expertise re operation, maintenance, and upkeep. If anyone would like to discuss museum exhibits returning to combat, here are a couple of threads that address that topic specifically:

https://forum.juhlin.com/showthread....ht=littlefield

https://forum.juhlin.com/showthread....ht=littlefield

-

[Olefin]

It's one thing to keep a single Panther or a couple of Shermans running in peacetime; it's quite another to keep larger stocks of older AFVs in fighting shape under post-apocalyptic combat conditions.

Reposted from #14 upthread:

To clarify the OP, I was addressing the deployment of relatively large stocks of mothballed weaponry, not so much one-offs like museum collections. The main issue that I see with the latter is a lack of spare parts and expertise re operation, maintenance, and upkeep. If anyone would like to discuss museum exhibits returning to combat, here are a couple of threads that address that topic specifically:

https://forum.juhlin.com/showthread....ht=littlefield

https://forum.juhlin.com/showthread....ht=littlefield

-

Actually I will just add that if anyone could get multiple vehicles up and running and support a decent force of armor - and keep in mind by July 2000 that basically means 3-5 vehicles for a whole division - it would be Littlefield - damn did he have a lot of equipment and spare parts - and his collection of armor was bigger than a lot of countries have

[Olefin]

Was reading about Cuban tanks and found out that Cuba still had 40 IS-2M tanks in useable storage at the time of the Twilight War. Definitely an interesting tank to run into.

[Raellus]

Was reading about Cuban tanks and found out that Cuba still had 40 IS-2M tanks in useable storage at the time of the Twilight War. Definitely an interesting tank to run into.

Good find. An unexpected encounter for a CONUS campaign, for sure!

Of course, I can't find it right now, but I recall reading that the USSR kept a sizeable stock of IS-3 tanks for use in the static border defense role. I imagine these would be dusted off and sent to the front lines once Soviet tank factories were put out of commission.

According to Wikipedia, "In 2014, an IS-3 was captured by the Armed Forces of Ukraine near the city of Donetsk from pro-Russian rebels. Footage of the tank being reactivated by the rebels circulated online, showing the tank being successfully started and driven off its plinth at a memorial in the city of Kostiantynivka, Donetsk Oblast."

-

[Ursus Maior]

Was reading about Cuban tanks and found out that Cuba still had 40 IS-2M tanks in useable storage at the time of the Twilight War. Definitely an interesting tank to run into.

Are you sure those were still usable? IISS' The Military Balance 1997 (p. 215) lists them as static defence [notice the European spelling] artillery together with T-34s and SU-100s. Though there were also T-34s fielded as MBTs as per the report (together with T-54, T-55 and T-62), no IS-2 are mentioned under the MBT section. That doesn't mean they couldn't have been restored to working conditions, though. It just means, they weren't in a working condition.

As per IISS' The Military Balance of 1989 (p. 190), these IS-2 hadn't been in working condition for quite some time: In this issue, "some 15 JS-2" had already been used as static defence artillery by that time. It might be worth noting that in the 1989-1990 timeframe, no T-34s were listed under the "MBT" section and some 150 T-54/-55 were listed as in store or static coast defence, whereas the 1997 issue clearly puts the T-34 under the MBT category and no T-54/-55 are listed as "in store or static coast defence".

So, either Cuba actually reactivated an unknown number of T-34s and up to 150 T-54/-55 from static duty following the collapse of the Soviet Union or IISS figures turned out to be inaccurate after the end of Cuba's patron state. Either way, the IS-2s probably weren't active for quite some time, once the Twilight War started. A intermittent reactivation during the 1990s can also be excluded, I checked the 1994-1995 (combined) issue of IISS' The Military Balance and found the same 15 IS-2 being on static duty as before and after.

I'd say, heavy tanks were pretty much dead during the 1990s, except for the occasional museum pieces, including some IS-3. The only exception being IS-2 and IS-3 that were used by South Ossetian forces and Georgian forces respectively during the low-intesity conflicts of the decade. Of course, who knows really what equipment mobilization only divisions of the Soviet Army would have fielded and how long it would have taken the Soviets to bring that type of equipment back into action. This is pretty much fantasy novel artistic license reigning here as almost nothing is known about Soviet deep mobilization plans including spare parts in depots or the tools to produce them. It could be these divisions would have been available with a somewhat unified TOE after a year or so or one would see Studebakers, BTR-40s and T-34s in homeopathic dosages next to Mosin Nagants, PPSh-41 and VAZ-2101 Zhigulis for transport.

[Olefin]

Are you sure those were still usable? IISS' The Military Balance 1997 (p. 215) lists them as static defence [notice the European spelling] artillery together with T-34s and SU-100s. Though there were also T-34s fielded as MBTs as per the report (together with T-54, T-55 and T-62), no IS-2 are mentioned under the MBT section. That doesn't mean they couldn't have been restored to working conditions, though. It just means, they weren't in a working condition.

As per IISS' The Military Balance of 1989 (p. 190), these IS-2 hadn't been in working condition for quite some time: In this issue, "some 15 JS-2" had already been used as static defence artillery by that time. It might be worth noting that in the 1989-1990 timeframe, no T-34s were listed under the "MBT" section and some 150 T-54/-55 were listed as in store or static coast defence, whereas the 1997 issue clearly puts the T-34 under the MBT category and no T-54/-55 are listed as "in store or static coast defence".

So, either Cuba actually reactivated an unknown number of T-34s and up to 150 T-54/-55 from static duty following the collapse of the Soviet Union or IISS figures turned out to be inaccurate after the end of Cuba's patron state. Either way, the IS-2s probably weren't active for quite some time, once the Twilight War started. A intermittent reactivation during the 1990s can also be excluded, I checked the 1994-1995 (combined) issue of IISS' The Military Balance and found the same 15 IS-2 being on static duty as before and after.

I'd say, heavy tanks were pretty much dead during the 1990s, except for the occasional museum pieces, including some IS-3. The only exception being IS-2 and IS-3 that were used by South Ossetian forces and Georgian forces respectively during the low-intesity conflicts of the decade. Of course, who knows really what equipment mobilization only divisions of the Soviet Army would have fielded and how long it would have taken the Soviets to bring that type of equipment back into action. This is pretty much fantasy novel artistic license reigning here as almost nothing is known about Soviet deep mobilization plans including spare parts in depots or the tools to produce them. It could be these divisions would have been available with a somewhat unified TOE after a year or so or one would see Studebakers, BTR-40s and T-34s in homeopathic dosages next to Mosin Nagants, PPSh-41 and VAZ-2101 Zhigulis for transport.

The Soviets were using them as bunkers and for coastal defense but also still had ones that were mobile as well into the late 80’s and early 90’s. It may be a question more of V1 versus V2.2. The V1 world where the Cold War never ended is one where the Soviets and Cubans never went thru the draw downs that would have occurred in V2.2. In a V1 scenario I could easily see the Cubans still having the T34 and IS-2M’s ready to go as needed instead of being used for static defense by the time of the war.

By the way I always like Cuba as a place Mexico could have gotten armor for their army from - i.e. Cuba needs oil, Mexico needs armor (keep in mind they were still operating Stuart tanks in the 90's) - T34-85's and IS-2M's would be a pretty good buy for them (considering that a lot of Central American and South American countries at the time were operating old WWII and early Cold War armor) in exchange for oil for Cuba

[lordroel]

Was reading about Cuban tanks and found out that Cuba still had 40 IS-2M tanks in useable storage at the time of the Twilight War. Definitely an interesting tank to run into.

Well if it can shoot it can kill.

[Ursus Maior]

The Soviets were using them as bunkers and for coastal defense but also still had ones that were mobile as well into the late 80’s and early 90’s. It may be a question more of V1 versus V2.2. The V1 world where the Cold War never ended is one where the Soviets and Cubans never went thru the draw downs that would have occurred in V2.2. In a V1 scenario I could easily see the Cubans still having the T34 and IS-2M’s ready to go as needed instead of being used for static defense by the time of the war.
Well, as I have written above, the Cubans hadn't kept the IS-2Ms in a running condition by 1989 already, and likely earlier. The Soviets did neither, at least not in Cuba - where there was only one brigade stationed at the end of the Cold War - or in European Russia. Running IS-2 only reappeared in break-off areas of break-off states after the collapse of the USSR. These beasts were really rare and old by the 1980s. Also, they hadn't been produced in numbers comparable to the T-34/85 medium tanks and were too slow for Soviet doctrine after the 1960s.

Could a post Twilight War Cuba, Mexico or Soviet remnant state field a couple of them? Yes, sure, why not. But it's not going to be a sizeable and likely only a company in total, divided into platoons or even single tanks over a wider area. But hey, it's a mobile 122 mm gun, so it will likely make an impression by 2000.

[ChalkLine]

Something to remember with Soviet legacy vehicles is that the sights, periscopes and so on tended to be smaller in the armour penetration than earlier versions. This means you can generally cannibalise a periscope off a T-72 and jam it into a T-10 with a simple adaptor plate.

What I'm getting at is that GMs shouldn't assume that the old vehicles have old radios, periscopes and attendant night vision systems, gunnery sights, subsidiary weapons, smoke launchers and all that junk. That all might be pretty modern because it makes more sense to drop that into a hull you're getting ready to refurbish than try and sources parts for old stuff.

Also the older stuff tended to be fairly thick in the armour department, thick enough to take substantial ERA packages.

As to engines, keeping an old clapped-out clunker from the 1950s makes little sense if you have spares from more modern vehicles in store. Not only are they more powerful but they are also lighter. Swapping an engine isn't as difficult as many people might think.

When I put these vehicles into play I like to make whole new vehicles out of them rather than use some old nostalgia vehicle. Not only is it a fun exercise and really they only turn up rarely but also it keeps the players guessing. Especially when the T-43/85 has a radar sight :)

[Raellus]

Being as Sweden is a featured setting of v4, you might want to check out the Terrängbil m/42D SKP (aka the KP-bil).

Technically, this AFV wasn't mothballed yet in the 1990s (IRL), but this ugly beast was originally fielded in 1943 (!), so I think it qualifies. It's essentially an armored truck based-APC. Later versions fielded in the 1990s had MG mounts, armored tops, smoke grenade launchers, and firing ports for passengers.

https://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/sweden/Terrangbil_m-42D_SKP.php

-

[Olefin]

Being as Sweden is a featured setting of v4, you might want to check out the Terrängbil m/42D SKP (aka the KP-bil).

Technically, this AFV wasn't mothballed yet in the 1990s (IRL), but this ugly beast was originally fielded in 1943 (!), so I think it qualifies. It's essentially an armored truck based-APC. Later versions fielded in the 1990s had MG mounts, armored tops, smoke grenade launchers, and firing ports for passengers.

https://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/sweden/Terrangbil_m-42D_SKP.php

-

Ok this officially qualifies as a very cool find

[Ursus Maior]

On that note, the Dominican Republic had Landsverk L-60 "light" tanks in service until 2002. The model was contemporary to other light tanks of early World War Two, like the German Panzerkampfwagen II, Panzerkampfwagen 35(t), US M2, Polish 7TP or Soviet T-26.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landsverk_L-60

[pmulcahy11b]

On that note, the Dominican Republic had Landsverk L-60 "light" tanks in service until 2002. The model was contemporary to other light tanks of early World War Two, like the German Panzerkampfwagen II, Panzerkampfwagen 35(t), US M2, Polish 7TP or Soviet T-26.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landsverk_L-60

I was watching a documentary on the Military Channel yesterday; the US Marines knocked out two of these with Super Bazookas during the Dominican Intervention in 1965.

[Olefin]

I was watching a documentary on the Military Channel; the US Marines knocked out two of these with Super Bazookas during the Dominican Intervention in 1965.

and one of them tried to take on a USMC tank - which didnt work out for them at all - also the only tank kills the Ontos had I think happened in the Dominican

"The most-thinly documented incident is a reported exchange of fire between a massively outgunned L-60 and a Marine Patton tank. The eight-ton L-60, armed with a 37-millimeter gun, could hardly have dented the armor of the 50-ton Patton. The same cannot be said for the Patton’s 90-millimeter cannon, which “disintegrated” the smaller vehicle.

Another L-60 was knocked out by a Marine M-50 Ontos anti-tank vehicle. These unique vehicles bristled with six heavy 106-millimeter recoilless rifles —each had to be individually reloaded after taking a shot.

The Ontos was definitely a “shoot-and-scoot” vehicle — it was so thinly armored that an L-60 might actually have damaged one. An Ontos is also credited with blowing the turret off a rebel AMX-13.

This was the first combat employment for both the Ontos and M-48 — they went on to see extensive use in Vietnam — and the only time the Ontos was used in the role it was designed for, fighting enemy tanks" - https://warisboring.com/in-1965-u-s-and-dominican-tanks-fought-brief-violent-skirmishes/

[Ursus Maior]

I was watching a documentary on the Military Channel yesterday; the US Marines knocked out two of these with Super Bazookas during the Dominican Intervention in 1965.

Indeed they did. What fascinates me most, is that the Dominicans actually bought tanks - that didn't usually happen in the Caribbean very often - and then chose to kept them almost 40 years after the intervention.

Pre-war tank models were worlds apart from what was fielded at the end of WW2. The Dominicans also fielded about a company of Pansarbil m/39 "Lynx" armored cars and French AMX-13 light tanks each, the latter of which were rather state of the art by 1965.

On a side note, I think there were actually three L60 destroyed by US Marines and members of the 82nd Airborne Division. One by a M40 recoilless rifle, one by a M50 Ontos and one by a M48 Patton.

[Ursus Maior]

Oh, basically what Olefin said. I think, we're reading the same source. :)

[rcaf_777]

"To join the Atholl Highlanders, an invitation must be made from the Duke, who specially selects people with ties to the estate or the local area."

https://blair-castle.co.uk/scottish-highland-castle/atholl-highlanders-parade-gathering/

The 10th Duke of Atholl died on 27th February 1996. His funeral was held in the ballroom of Blair Castle. After the service, six Highlanders acted as pallbearers, others provided the carriage party and lined the route to the Castle graveyard at Old Blair.

It was feared that the regiment would be disbanded following the 10th Duke’s death in 1996, until his successor, JOHN MURRAY, 11TH DUKE OF ATHOLL, wrote to the estate trustees accepting an invitation to continue his traditional role.

[Raellus]

The design process on the T-10 began in 1944. It was officially retired from service in 1996.

https://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/coldwar/ussr/T-10.php

They were allocated to independent tank battalions.

According to Wikipedia, "It is estimated that some 6,000 Soviet heavy tanks were built after the end of World War II, of which 1,439 were T-10s."

Presumably, most of the others were JS-3's, mentioned up-thread.

-

[chico20854]

The design process on the T-10 began in 1944. It was officially retired from service in 1996.

https://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/coldwar/ussr/T-10.php

They were allocated to independent tank battalions.

According to Wikipedia, "It is estimated that some 6,000 Soviet heavy tanks were built after the end of World War II, of which 1,439 were T-10s."

Presumably, most of the others were JS-3's, mentioned up-thread.

-
In the 1980s T-10s were assigned to mobilization only tank divisions in the Southwest TVD. Presumably in the 90s they would either have remained there or been shuffled off to even lower priority M-O divisions, such as those in Western Siberia. (For example, the 80th TD, which fielded a mix of JS-3's and T-34/85s https://www.ww2.dk/new/army/td/80td.htm) Other T-10s (and other JS-3s that hadn't been exported, including to Syria and Egypt) were emplaced in fortified areas, including the Kuriles, the Chinese border and in the Caucasus.

Bear's Den mentions one outside the nuked remains of the Transcarpathian Military District HQ, it's barrel melted to the ground.

Overall, a T-10 is not much to worry about if you have a Leopard II or even M-60, but certainly enough to ruin your day if you're running around the woods with nothing heavier than a LAW!

[pmulcahy11b]

The design process on the T-10 began in 1944. It was officially retired from service in 1996.

From the side, it looks sort of like a lengthened T-62, except for that suspension.

[Raellus]

If it's coming back in 2022, it'd be back in T2k.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/44034/pre-world-war-ii-dp-27-machine-guns-could-go-to-needy-ukrainian-reserve-units

-

[chico20854]

If it's coming back in 2022, it'd be back in 2000.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/44034/pre-world-war-ii-dp-27-machine-guns-could-go-to-needy-ukrainian-reserve-units

-
I guess they're regretting this (https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_99728.htm?selectedLocale=en) then!

I'm wondering what happened to this cache (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/apr/24/protesters-ukraine-weapons-cache-mine). In a T2k situation that's enough small arms to equip every mobilization-only division in the Soviet Army a couple times over. And you have to wonder if there were similar stockpiles scattered around other places in the USSR. Given the flood of Mosins, Mausers and other Second World War small arms into the US civilian gun market over the past 25-30 years it seems that there probably were.

[Vespers War]

I guess they're regretting this (https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_99728.htm?selectedLocale=en) then!

I'm wondering what happened to this cache (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/apr/24/protesters-ukraine-weapons-cache-mine). In a T2k situation that's enough small arms to equip every mobilization-only division in the Soviet Army a couple times over. And you have to wonder if there were similar stockpiles scattered around other places in the USSR. Given the flood of Mosins, Mausers and other Second World War small arms into the US civilian gun market over the past 25-30 years it seems that there probably were.

With regards to rearming the Soviet Army, I would think that depended on the proportion of 1990s-era Kalashnikovs to 1910s-era sabres and tachankas. The Maxims could still be useful since the same ammunition is still in use (as long as appropriate belts were available), but even if horses come back into fashion, I don't think men armed with just swords are going to be very effective.

[Tegyrius]

I guess they're regretting this (https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_99728.htm?selectedLocale=en) then!

I have several thousand rounds of Ukrainian 5.45mm that was considered surplus around that time. I wonder if they'd like those Spam cans back...

- C.

[Raellus]

Anti-tank guns aren't necessarily "antique" weapons, but by the mid-to-late 1990s, most modern militaries had moved on from them and were employing ATGMs, exclusively, to do the job.

It's 2022 and Ukraine needs all of the AT capability it can muster. They're dusting off another oldie-but-goody,

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/44191/ukraine-rolls-out-soviet-era-radar-equipped-anti-tank-guns

I've done some research on AT guns for T2k (I think they'd be back in widespread by year 2 of the Twilight War), but somehow I missed that this one has a radar to see through smoke and dust on the battlefield.

-

[Ursus Maior]

Yepp, the "R" is for radar, and it shoots AT-10 Stabber, too, I think. That might be the follow on MT-12K, though. Anyway, the big issue remains that AT guns are vulnerable to artillery and the Russians will bring a lot of that.

By the way, Russia has now stationed 100 of its batallion tactical groups along the Ukrainian border, a figurehead separatist in Donbass just called for 30.000 Russian troops to help his forces out "against Ukrainian aggressions" and some of the Russian troops are sleeping in tents. On Thursday a maneuver with Belarus is going to start.

We'll know what's coming by Sunday, I think.

[swaghauler]

Anti-tank guns aren't necessarily "antique" weapons, but by the mid-to-late 1990s, most modern militaries had moved on from them and were employing ATGMs, exclusively, to do the job.

It's 2022 and Ukraine needs all of the AT capability it can muster. They're dusting off another oldie-but-goody,

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/44191/ukraine-rolls-out-soviet-era-radar-equipped-anti-tank-guns

I've done some research on AT guns for T2k (I think they'd be back in widespread by year 2 of the Twilight War), but somehow I missed that this one has a radar to see through smoke and dust on the battlefield.

-

Do not forget the 2A45 SPRUT(Kraken or Octopus) B towed 125mm AT gun. This is erroneously called the Rapira III in the Twilight rules (Rapira is the name of the cannon which is fitted to a number of tanks and field guns). The Sprut B is a FULLY POWERED MOUNT with a 360-degree rotation (like the 122mm Howitzers can do) that can move limited distances on its own at speeds of up to 15km per hour. It is fitted with a laser designator and ballistic computer allowing it to fire all of the 125mm Missiles and cannon rounds. The later versions augment the passive Night vision sight with thermal imagers. Its powered traverse and elevation allow adjustments of up to 20 degrees per second, compared to hydraulically-assisted manual traversing systems that might hit 5 degrees a second and could NEVER track a fast-moving AFV.
The Russian airborne units even have a "tank destroyer" that mounts this 125mm cannon in an enclosed turret on a BDM (?) air-droppable tracked chassis.

I think I did a write-up of all the AT and Field guns in a threat you started specifically about Field Guns. The Russians do LOVE their "dual-purpose" artillery.

[Raellus]

I think I did a write-up of all the AT and Field guns in a threat you started specifically about Field Guns. The Russians do LOVE their "dual-purpose" artillery.

I'll have to try to find that. I don't remember it, but I'd like to see it.

On a sad note, it looks like Taiwan is finally retiring its Walker Bulldog light tanks.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/44406/taiwan-prepares-to-give-up-its-m41a3-walker-bulldog-tanks-after-more-than-six-decades

-

[swaghauler]

I'll have to try to find that. I don't remember it, but I'd like to see it.

On a sad note, it looks like Taiwan is finally retiring its Walker Bulldog light tanks.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/44406/taiwan-prepares-to-give-up-its-m41a3-walker-bulldog-tanks-after-more-than-six-decades

-

It was actually Kalos72 who started the thread and it is titled "Mortars and Artillery."

[Raellus]

Meant to post about this last night, but forgot. I was reminded this morning by footage on the news of a Russian separatist firing in the Donetsk region.

Anti-tank rifles, like the the PTRS-41, would make a comeback in the Twilight War. Today, they're often employed as long-range sniper rifles, but more often as anti-materiel weapons.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PTRS-41

Obviously, anti-tank rifles are fairly useless against modern AFVs, but they can still do significant damage to soft-skin and light armored vehicles. For example...

In the T2k PbP I play in, two different OPFOR have used anti-tank rifles against the PC's BTR-80 in the last two major firefights, managing to poke a few holes in it, damage the engine, and wound a couple of people.

-

[ChalkLine]

There's a PTRS-41 reticule for the PSO-1 sight (the same as used on the SVD among others)
The PTRS needs a rail fitted and evidently it's a custom side-rail due to the width of the receiver.

[swaghauler]

There's a PTRS-41 reticule for the PSO-1 sight (the same as used on the SVD among others)
The PTRS needs a rail fitted and evidently it's a custom side-rail due to the width of the receiver.

If you get a chance, check out 9-Hole Reviews the YouTube channel. I have the video from him posted in Leg's Video thread that's just below this one. He shoots an AK74 with an RPG-7 optical sight attached to its rail.

[Raellus]

Does anyone know roughly how long explosives in things like land mines remains viable? Is there an expiration date, or does the stuff last forever? Similarly, is there a best-used-by date, after which the explosives become less... explosive (or more unstable, perhaps)?

I reckon it's a good long while, given how carefully unexploded ordinance from WWII is dealt with when an antique air-dropped bomb is discovered during construction or whatever.

-

[Targan]

Meant to post about this last night, but forgot. I was reminded this morning by footage on the news of a Russian separatist firing in the Donetsk region.

Anti-tank rifles, like the the PTRS-41, would make a comeback in the Twilight War. Today, they're often employed as long-range sniper rifles, but more often as anti-materiel weapons.

The PCs in my last campaign captured a Gepard M3 and loved it.

[swaghauler]

Does anyone know roughly how long explosives in things like land mines remains viable? Is there an expiration date, or does the stuff last forever? Similarly, is there a best-used-by date, after which the explosives become less... explosive (or more unstable, perhaps)?

I reckon it's a good long while, given how carefully unexploded ordinance from WWII is dealt with when an antique air-dropped bomb is discovered during construction or whatever.

-

It depends on the explosive. We were shooting ordinance from WWII in our howitzers and it went bang every time. I have shot 100-year-old rifle ammo with NO ISSUES.

On the other hand... I have witnessed 20-year-old commercial dynamite "sweating" (leaking nitro from its casing) in Africa. It was so sketchy, that we just put a brick of C4 on it and sent it on its way. I also know that they blow up 20-year-old detonators (the pressure kind you screw into landmines) in the Army. But I have seen 50-year-old Composition B bricks used to demolish a bunker.

The issue with explosives, especially COMMERCIAL EXPLOSIVES, isn't that they won't go "boom," the issue is that they MAY GO BOOM from just being handled!

[Raellus]

Most of our discussion here has focused on land weapon systems. It looks like the Russians are going to dust off some old bi-planes for use in Ukraine.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/44532/russia-appears-to-be-preparing-its-ancient-an-2-biplanes-for-war-in-ukraine

To be fair, the North Koreans have never stopped using the AN-2. It's ability to fly low and slow, and it's low-metal use construction make it a somewhat stealthy platform, good for delivering SOF teams behind enemy lines.

-

[Raellus]

Someone posted a link to this 11-minute video on the FB fan page.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YYMgYpavdB4

In this video:

Mosin-Nagant
Maxim
DP27
MG42
MP40
PPSh41
PPS-43

There's also an interesting bit about how vehicle-mounted PKT machineguns, which don't have an external trigger mechanism, are being retrofitted with improvised ones by Kiev auto-mechanics for use as infantry GPMGs.

And a couple of newer (non-classic T2k) systems are included as well.

-

[Vespers War]

Most of our discussion here has focused on land weapon systems. It looks like the Russians are going to dust off some old bi-planes for use in Ukraine.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/44532/russia-appears-to-be-preparing-its-ancient-an-2-biplanes-for-war-in-ukraine

To be fair, the North Koreans have never stopped using the AN-2. It's ability to fly low and slow, and it's low-metal use construction make it a somewhat stealthy platform, good for delivering SOF teams behind enemy lines.

-

In a bit of irony, the Antonov Design Bureau that the An-2 was developed by was based in Kyiv.

[Raellus]

Ironic, indeed.

First introduced in 1950, the AZP S-60 57mm anti-aircraft gun is currently seeing combat in Ukraine, most often against ground targets. It would definitely see a return to duty in the Twilight War.

I can easily imagine a scenario were an AZP S-60 57mm anti-aircraft gun shoots down an AN-2 Colt.

[Raellus]

Is this old-timey canon functional, or just for show? If it's the former, that has to set some sort of out-of-mothballs record.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/is-this-an-antique-cannon-guarding-a-russian-checkpoint-in-ukraine

-

[swaghauler]

Is this old-timey canon functional, or just for show? If it's the former, that has to set some sort of out-of-mothballs record.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/is-this-an-antique-cannon-guarding-a-russian-checkpoint-in-ukraine

-

Every day Ukraine resembles a Twilight2000 campaign more and more. Europe didn't "demill" their stuff like the US did. That cannon could be operational but I'm betting the Ukrainians put it there (as a scavenged weapon system) and not the Russians.

[pmulcahy11b]

Is this old-timey canon functional, or just for show? If it's the former, that has to set some sort of out-of-mothballs record.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/is-this-an-antique-cannon-guarding-a-russian-checkpoint-in-ukraine

-

It looks like a toy. For that matter, the soldier looks like a toy. Note the uniform gray color in the two, and notice the lumpishness. Someone took a joke picture.

[Raellus]

It looks like a toy. For that matter, the soldier looks like a toy. Note the uniform gray color in the two, and notice the lumpishness. Someone took a joke picture.

Could be. I have seen any follow-up either way.

https://www.thedrive.com/news/39228/the-us-armys-largest-4x4-ever-the-gigantic-1000-hp-larc-lx-amphibious-vehicle

I wonder if these massive LARC-LX amphibs might have been dusted off and used in Europe- perhaps to cross the Vistula- during T2k.

Paul, I poked around on your site for this one and didn't find it, but I wasn't sure which category to look in.

-

[pmulcahy11b]

B]LARC-LX[/B] amphibs might have been dusted off and used in Europe- perhaps to cross the Vistula- during T2k.

-

I didn't do it; it's not on my site. I had to look it up in Bing to find out what it was; ah well, add it to the list. (That's how the Bombers got in there; they were on my list.)

[Raellus]

The OT-810 was basically a lightly modified, Czech-made Sd.Kfz. 251 half-track APC with a Tatra diesel engine. According to Wikipedia, about 1,500 OT-810s were manufactured between 1958-1962, and the last examples weren't removed from Czech army depots until 1995. I imagine they would have seen action during the Twilight War.

-

[Vespers War]

Could be. I have seen any follow-up either way.

https://www.thedrive.com/news/39228/the-us-armys-largest-4x4-ever-the-gigantic-1000-hp-larc-lx-amphibious-vehicle

I wonder if these massive LARC-LX amphibs might have been dusted off and used in Europe- perhaps to cross the Vistula- during T2k.

Paul, I poked around on your site for this one and didn't find it, but I wasn't sure which category to look in.

-

Dusted off? Four of them were still in service in 2001. They hadn't seen combat service since the '70's, but they were still in commission with the 309th Transportation Company, 11th Transportation Battalion (based out of Fort Story, Virginia Beach, Virginia). There are at least four survivors in museums, one in Florida, one in Virginia, one in Tennessee, and one in the Netherlands.

[chico20854]

The OT-810 was basically a lightly modified, Czech-made Sd.Kfz. 251 half-track APC with a Tatra diesel engine. According to Wikipedia, about 1,500 OT-810s were manufactured between 1958-1962, and the last examples weren't removed from Czech army depots until 1995. I imagine they would have seen action during the Twilight War.

-
photo (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1JULVqxHTL_i4yWb86DOROYGL18Pnbb3f/view?usp=sharing)
Recalled reservists of the 24th Motor Rifle Division by their OT-810 APC before invading Austria, Summer 1997.
(from my Czechoslovak Vehicle Guide (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1iWKi-cwRMLRUd3TEFnUWpsekE/view?usp=sharing&resourcekey=0-N6R9vmtrr-clfwNF9KakqQ))

[Raellus]

That's where I'd seen it before! I should have realized. Thanks, Chico.

[swaghauler]

Check out ADAM SOMETHING'S YouTube channel for photos of this...

The Russians are sending a train loaded with T-62 MBTs to Ukraine! I wonder how much ammo they have stockpiled? There's a certain irony in the fact that Russia is now using a tank on the battlefield that was introduced to the world BEFORE I WAS BORN!

[Vespers War]

photo (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1JULVqxHTL_i4yWb86DOROYGL18Pnbb3f/view?usp=sharing)
Recalled reservists of the 24th Motor Rifle Division by their OT-810 APC before invading Austria, Summer 1997.
(from my Czechoslovak Vehicle Guide (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1iWKi-cwRMLRUd3TEFnUWpsekE/view?usp=sharing&resourcekey=0-N6R9vmtrr-clfwNF9KakqQ))

If there's ever an update/revision of the CVG, I noticed two things.

First, on page 26, the caption refers to the Ondova T-72M1 as an Ondava.

Second, another vehicle that could be added is the OT-810D, which was the OT-810 with an 82mm vz. 59 (M-59A) recoilless rifle (which Paul has here (http://pmulcahy.com/rocket_launchers/czech_rocket_launchers.htm)). 280 of them were converted from the APCs in the 1960s. At least 4 are known to survive today in Czech Republic.

Sort of a third thing but not really, the OT-810C was also notable for having an enclosed passenger cabin, so infantry were a little less vulnerable than in the Sd.Kfz 251.

[Vespers War]

Check out ADAM SOMETHING'S YouTube channel for photos of this...

The Russians are sending a train loaded with T-62 MBTs to Ukraine! I wonder how much ammo they have stockpiled? There's a certain irony in the fact that Russia is now using a tank on the battlefield that was introduced to the world BEFORE I WAS BORN!

I had looked into the ammo when I saw the news, and Nexter in France was manufacturing 115mm APFSDS-T ammunition at least up to 2018, and presumably they weren't the only manufacturer. It's still moderately well-represented among former client states of the Soviets, with Syria and Egypt both having quite a few, and North Korea's Ch'onma-ho being derived from the T-62 (although the newest Ch'onma-ho V uses a knock-off of the 125mm gun instead of the 115mm).

[Raellus]

Here's an article about the T-60 deployment Swag told us about a few days ago.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/russia-deploys-50-year-old-t-62-tanks-to-ukraine-front

"Quantity has a quality all its own." -Josef Stalin

We shall see...

I think it's interesting how Soviet/Russian army tactics changed since WW2. Leaving aside artillery for a moment, in WW2, most attacks started with infantry. Early in the war, these infantry often attacked in human waves. Later, infiltration tactics were utilized to good effect. Once a breakthrough was achieved, tank formations would rush into the breach to begin the deep penetration, exploitation phase. It could be costly, in terms of infantry casualties, but it worked.

After WW2, during the Cold War, all Soviet infantry became Motor Rifles, and rode into battle in BTRs and/or BMPs. The days of pure infantry attacks seem to have passed. It wasn't broke, so why did the Soviet high command decide to fix it? Did they suddenly start caring about friendly casualties?

Since the end of the Cold War (Part 1), first in Grozny, then in the attack on Kiev, the Russians have sent armored forces into MOUT without dismounted infantry support, both times with disastrous results for the attackers.

I haven't read much about Russian tactics in the Donbass in recent weeks, but apparently, most attacks start with serious artillery prep.

-

[.45cultist]

Here's an article about the T-60 deployment Swag told us about a few days ago.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/russia-deploys-50-year-old-t-62-tanks-to-ukraine-front

"Quantity has a quality all its own." -Josef Stalin

We shall see...

I think it's interesting how Soviet/Russian army tactics changed since WW2. Leaving aside artillery for a moment, in WW2, most attacks started with infantry. Early in the war, these infantry often attacked in human waves. Later, infiltration tactics were utilized to good effect. Once a breakthrough was achieved, tank formations would rush into the breach to begin the deep penetration, exploitation phase. It could be costly, in terms of infantry casualties, but it worked.

After WW2, during the Cold War, all Soviet infantry became Motor Rifles, and rode into battle in BTRs and/or BMPs. The days of pure infantry attacks seem to have passed. It wasn't broke, so why did the Soviet high command decide to fix it? Did they suddenly start caring about friendly casualties?

Since the end of the Cold War (Part 1), first in Grozny, then in the attack on Kiev, the Russians have sent armored forces into MOUT without dismounted infantry support, both times with disastrous results for the attackers.

I haven't read much about Russian tactics in the Donbass in recent weeks, but apparently, most attacks start with serious artillery prep.

-

Those infantry tactics meant only 1 in 20 of the men who were 18 YO in 1940 were still alive in 1945. I don't think Russia could do it unless they were being invaded.

[Tegyrius]

Shut this thread down. The Ukrainian Cossack cosplayers won:

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/ukraine-fighters-with-soviet-vehicles-and-wwi-guns-channel-16th-century-ancestors

- C.

[pmulcahy11b]

Shut this thread down. The Ukrainian Cossack cosplayers won:

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/ukraine-fighters-with-soviet-vehicles-and-wwi-guns-channel-16th-century-ancestors

- C.

Now that's an example of pulling everything off the shelves you can!

[swaghauler]

Shut this thread down. The Ukrainian Cossack cosplayers won:

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/ukraine-fighters-with-soviet-vehicles-and-wwi-guns-channel-16th-century-ancestors

- C.

I liked the Maxim with the Holo Sight on it. The Ukrainians are truly our (American) "gun cousins." Normally, only a US "redneck" would take the time to fabricate a sight mount for a gun built more than 100 years ago.

At the rate that Russia is losing its armor and jets, I wonder how long it will be before Russian arms dealers are trying to buy Macedonia's MIG 19s?

[Raellus]

Those infantry tactics meant only 1 in 20 of the men who were 18 YO in 1940 were still alive in 1945. I don't think Russia could do it unless they were being invaded.

Good point, but I wasn't suggestion a return to the desperate human wave attacks of 1941-'42. I'm just surprised that the Russians haven't really tried to replicate the very successful (and less costly) tactic of preceding attempted breakthroughs with infantry infiltration attacks, instead of trying to batter their way through with armor (which clearly isn't working very well thanks to St. Javelin and her friends).

-

[.45cultist]

Good point, but I wasn't suggestion a return to the desperate human wave attacks of 1941-'42. I'm just surprised that the Russians haven't really tried to replicate the very successful (and less costly) tactic of preceding attempted breakthroughs with infantry infiltration attacks, instead of trying to batter their way through with armor (which clearly isn't working very well thanks to St. Javelin and her friends).

-

Given current Russian performance though, getting pasted by the West makes TDM more likely in any WW3 scenario.

[Bestbrian]

I have a suspicion those T-62s are being shipped up to be used as static defensive emplacements. The Russians have supposedly been fortifying their gains in the south ahead of a Ukrainian counterattack.

[Vespers War]

I have a suspicion those T-62s are being shipped up to be used as static defensive emplacements. The Russians have supposedly been fortifying their gains in the south ahead of a Ukrainian counterattack.

My thinking was that they were going to swap the T-62s for the DPR and LPR's T-72 and T-80 tanks (and possibly the T-64s, although AFAIK Russia doesn't have any T-64 units these days). That way, they could get some resupply (or at least parts donor tanks) for their own units under the guise of standardizing the insurrectionists' equipment. I may be too generous in my assumptions about their thinking about logistics, though.

[Vespers War]

Now that's an example of pulling everything off the shelves you can!

Ukraine had 35,000 PM1910/41 in storage about a decade ago. There are a lot of shelves to pull them from, and for a vehicular or fortification mount where the gun doesn't have to be particularly mobile, it's still a perfectly valid piece of equipment.

[Raellus]

A WW2-era tank gun (T34/85) fielded as a towed anti-tank gun, with secondary (or primary, depending on the bigger picture) indirect artillery capabilities. If it's seeing combat use in today's Ukraine, IRL, it would definitely feature in the Twilight War.

https://www.army.mil/article/222483/ria_self_guided_tour_m1945_d44_85mm_antitank_gun

-

[Raellus]

This cool Twitter feed (Ukraine Weapons Tracker) includes a pic of a WWII-era DP-27 LMG fitted with an optic and suppressor.

https://twitter.com/UAWeapons?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembe d%7Ctwterm%5E1532282866293518336%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon %5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.militaryimages.net%2Fthr eads%2Fukrainian-forces-2022.10408%2Fpage-10

-

[ToughOmbres]

In the Twilight War I can see the large numbers of 1895 seven shot Nagant revolvers being brought of deep storage and issued to mobilization only divisions or dispersed to Pact Allies mobilization only divisions. What say you?

[pmulcahy11b]

In the Twilight War I can see the large numbers of 1895 seven shot Nagant revolvers being brought of deep storage and issued to mobilization only divisions or dispersed to Pact Allies mobilization only divisions. What say you?

Some Russian Generals carry the Nagant even now. So it would probably be issued out at some point in the Twilight War.

[Raellus]

Back from 1952, the Ferret Scout Car, formerly known by the less ferocious sobriquet, the Field Mouse, is making an appearance in Ukraine.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/antique-ferret-armored-car-shows-up-in-ukraine

-

[ToughOmbres]

From the recent 25 years ago updates...anyone care to speculate how many Albanian reservists will be fortunate enough to have SKS/SKS clones and how many will be issued Carcano rifles courtesy of Italy from World War II?

[chico20854]

According to this site (https://wwiiafterwwii.wordpress.com/2021/08/07/albania-the-last-mosin-nagants-made/), there's all kinds of old stuff in use there, especially among the militias!

[Vespers War]

From the recent 25 years ago updates...anyone care to speculate how many Albanian reservists will be fortunate enough to have SKS/SKS clones and how many will be issued Carcano rifles courtesy of Italy from World War II?

Relatively few SKS - Albania produced only 15-20K of them. In the early 2000s, the most common weapons seized from illegal stockpiles that had been looted from armories were the AK-47, TT pistol, M56 submachine gun, and only as a fairly distant fourth the SKS. Especially because of the emphasis on partisan/guerilla warfare, I expect a lot of reservists would be issued SMGs to provide a base of fire, with one or two SKS in a squad as sharpshooters/designated marksmen.

[.45cultist]

Also, the NATO stockpile update by the Clinton Administration never happened in V1-2.2 canon. This means that the US has M1911A1's, M3A1's, M14's and M48A5's warehoused and not given to Turkey.

[ToughOmbres]

For V1 or 2 canon could we also assume there would be an expedited return of M1 Garand, M 1 Carbines and 1911's from Military Assistance Programs to Allies or would you as referee assume the small arms would be of limited use and left in place rather than devote resources to bring them back home?

[bash]

For V1 or 2 canon could we also assume there would be an expedited return of M1 Garand, M 1 Carbines and 1911's from Military Assistance Programs to Allies or would you as referee assume the small arms would be of limited use and left in place rather than devote resources to bring them back home?

I don't think the government would bother trying to bring back such weapons. Before TDM there wouldn't be much of a need and after TDM there wouldn't be much capability.

Even if they came back to the US, ammunition production after TDM would be common NATO rounds to support the war, not oddball (relatively speaking) rounds for M1 Garands and Carbines.

[pmulcahy11b]

I don't think the government would bother trying to bring back such weapons. Before TDM there wouldn't be much of a need and after TDM there wouldn't be much capability.

Even if they came back to the US, ammunition production after TDM would be common NATO rounds to support the war, not oddball (relatively speaking) rounds for M1 Garands and Carbines.

As far as .30-06, I think that there would be more around than you think, but in the civilian supply chain. .30-06 is a common hunting round in the US and to a lesser extent in the rest of the world, and commercial manufacturing has been going strong since the 1910s.

M1 descendants are also fairly common hunting weapons, so there may be less spare parts issues with issue of M1 Garands from government stocks or impounded civilian stocks. (I don't think this would happen until post-TDM, however.)

[.45cultist]

As far as .30-06, I think that there would be more around than you think, but in the civilian supply chain. .30-06 is a common hunting round in the US and to a lesser extent in the rest of the world, and commercial manufacturing has been going strong since the 1910s.

M1 descendants are also fairly common hunting weapons, so there may be less spare parts issues with issue of M1 Garands from government stocks or impounded civilian stocks. (I don't think this would happen until post-TDM, however.)

Lake City loads 100,000 AP rounds or so every few years for body armor testing. the armor levels are based on the .30-06 AP penetration.

[bash]

As far as .30-06, I think that there would be more around than you think, but in the civilian supply chain. .30-06 is a common hunting round in the US and to a lesser extent in the rest of the world, and commercial manufacturing has been going strong since the 1910s.

M1 descendants are also fairly common hunting weapons, so there may be less spare parts issues with issue of M1 Garands from government stocks or impounded civilian stocks. (I don't think this would happen until post-TDM, however.)

Like I said, before TDM there wouldn't be a need for M1s (Garand or Carbine) and after TDM there might be a need but little means to actually get them to the US. Post-TDM no one is going to spend valuable fuel to transport a bunch of rifles back to the US.

In terms of ammo production, the US would likely enforce the Defense Production Act as soon as US forces start fighting. So from 1996 onwards small arms companies are going to be spitting out NATO standard stuff (guns, ammo, maintenance kits, etc). Production of ammo etc for the civilian market will drop to a trickle.

The US getting a few tens of thousands of M1s will be a logistical challenge rather than a helpful addition. Every cleaning kit, stripper clip, and .30-06 round is one less produced that could be used for the US/NATO service weapons.

So I don't see the utility of the US trying to field M1s. I do however think those MAP recipient countries would be fielding them. Even if their front line forces had newer weapons they'd equip militias/conscripts/rear echelons with their old M1s. The sorts of places that got MAP weapons aren't seeing the same level of fighting as Europe or the Far East.

[micromachine]

Logistically, bringing the M1 Garand back would be tough. I suggest that it would be done for some of the reasons below:

a) Frees up the last stores of more modern weapons (Coast Guard, Naval Land detachments, Training battalions, etc.) for front line use.

b) Commercially available ammunition (Government purchase or confiscation).

c) One shot, one kill.

d) Lots of variants and parts available.

e) Semi automatic firepower for units that may lack it (State Militias and the like).

f) Cross compatibility with the M1895, M1903, M1917 rifle, M1917 mmg, M1918 bar, M1919mmg and the plethora of hunting rifles in this caliber.

g) Kalashnikov-esque ruggedness that has already been bought and paid for by Uncle Sam.

If given the choice, I would take an M1 Garand coming out of mothballs rather than some baffed out M16EZ, re-issued battlefield pickup, or some other abomination in a scarce sized caliber, particularly if based in CONUS. the only real drawbacks are the en-block clip availability, lack of skilled armorers and smiths, and the chance of getting the wrong ammo at the wrong time.

[swaghauler]

Logistically, bringing the M1 Garand back would be tough. I suggest that it would be done for some of the reasons below:

a) Frees up the last stores of more modern weapons (Coast Guard, Naval Land detachments, Training battalions, etc.) for front line use.

b) Commercially available ammunition (Government purchase or confiscation).

c) One shot, one kill.

d) Lots of variants and parts available.

e) Semi automatic firepower for units that may lack it (State Militias and the like).

f) Cross compatibility with the M1895, M1903, M1917 rifle, M1917 mmg, M1918 bar, M1919mmg and the plethora of hunting rifles in this caliber.

g) Kalashnikov-esque ruggedness that has already been bought and paid for by Uncle Sam.

If given the choice, I would take an M1 Garand coming out of mothballs rather than some baffed out M16EZ, re-issued battlefield pickup, or some other abomination in a scarce sized caliber, particularly if based in CONUS. the only real drawbacks are the en-block clip availability, lack of skilled armorers and smiths, and the chance of getting the wrong ammo at the wrong time.

The issue would be NUMBERS. In the 90s, there were around 100K M1s in the US inventory, mostly as parade rifles or for the Civilian Marksmanship Program. Canada had roughly an equal number in the RCMP arsenal. There were more than 2 MILLION M16A1s in the US arsenal. So the US would most likely just issue M16A1s to those agencies that needed them.

[swaghauler]

Also, the NATO stockpile update by the Clinton Administration never happened in V1-2.2 canon. This means that the US has M1911A1's, M3A1's, M14's and M48A5's warehoused and not given to Turkey.

He really did destroy a lot of guns in 1994-1995. I remember them melting down something like 250K M14 rifles and 500k M1911s. That broke my heart because they used to be sold as surplus.

[.45cultist]

He really did destroy a lot of guns in 1994-1995. I remember them melting down something like 250K M14 rifles and 500k M1911s. That broke my heart because they used to be sold as surplus.

Also all the SEAL Stoners, the old M1911's and Thompsons in the FBI inventory. DOJ/ATF facilities might yield militia gear.

[micromachine]

The issue would be NUMBERS. In the 90s, there were around 100K M1s in the US inventory, mostly as parade rifles or for the Civilian Marksmanship Program. Canada had roughly an equal number in the RCMP arsenal. There were more than 2 MILLION M16A1s in the US arsenal. So the US would most likely just issue M16A1s to those agencies that needed them.

I don't have an issue with the M16A1 count of over two million in the US Arsenal. Canada used limited numbers of the M1 rifle, and I severely doubt that the RCMP maintained an arsenal of 100K. Canada only procured a brigade set, which I suspect was for the WW2 vintage special service force. These disappeared from service in the 1950s, and being .30-06, would be an anomaly in the caliber suite (The M1919 were rebored to 7.62mm nato). Would there come confusion with the Lee-Enfield or perhaps the C1 (L1 SLR)?
My point is simply that all cards are on the table and the frontline troops would need the most modern weapons available, so the rear areas and home areas would see these rifles pressed into service even on a small scale.

[swaghauler]

I don't have an issue with the M16A1 count of over two million in the US Arsenal. Canada used limited numbers of the M1 rifle, and I severely doubt that the RCMP maintained an arsenal of 100K. Canada only procured a brigade set, which I suspect was for the WW2 vintage special service force. These disappeared from service in the 1950s, and being .30-06, would be an anomaly in the caliber suite (The M1919 were rebored to 7.62mm nato). Would there come confusion with the Lee-Enfield or perhaps the C1 (L1 SLR)?
My point is simply that all cards are on the table and the frontline troops would need the most modern weapons available, so the rear areas and home areas would see these rifles pressed into service even on a small scale.

It was in fact the RCMP who were selling those M1s in the 1990s. I have the one I bought hanging on the wall as I type this. They also had CASES of both .30-06 ammo and .303 ammo. The .303 sold for as little as $25 US per case and the .3006 was $30 per case. Those were war-surplus wooden ammo crates too. They were also selling Enfields as I bought one of those too. My local gunshop bought 100 of each as well as 100 M1 Carbines. I do NOT know why the RCMP was selling those weapons but they were READILY AVAILABLE up until Clinton started his gun control measure just before the '94 ban in the US. They were also selling S&W Model 10 .38 heavy barrels and Browning Hi Powers, but I wasn't able to snag one of those. I do not know why the RCMP had those weapons, but they all appeared to be war surplus by their condition and the TWO CASES of ammo I bought were produced in the early 50s. One was US production and the other case was made by RADWAY. That Radway was some light-shooting .303.

[micromachine]

Hey Swag,

We are not confusing Royal Canadian Mounted Police with the Citizen Marksmanship Program? I can find information on about 8-10k of the Garand that were sent to Canada, along with more limited numbers of M1-M2 carbines as well.
With the S & W Model 10 and the Inglis Hi-Power, I think you are correct that the weapons originated in Canada.
Would be nice to compare notes on this.

[.45cultist]

Also German police agencies, corrections and forestry agencies have M1 carbines.

[swaghauler]

Hey Swag,

We are not confusing Royal Canadian Mounted Police with the Citizen Marksmanship Program? I can find information on about 8-10k of the Garand that were sent to Canada, along with more limited numbers of M1-M2 carbines as well.
With the S & W Model 10 and the Inglis Hi-Power, I think you are correct that the weapons originated in Canada.
Would be nice to compare notes on this.

Nope. The guns came from the RCMP. Maybe that was due to Canada exporting them to the US (ie they had to be distributed by the RCMP)? I only know my M1 is a Springfield made during the Korean war era (by serial number). My Enfield was WWII vintage.

I see that the RCMP are STILL selling M1 Garands today (there is an article on them).

[micromachine]

Would you be able to post a link?

[Bestbrian]

One of the most interesting aspects of the current war in Ukraine is that it gives a window into what Western aid to China in 1995 would've looked like (on a vastly larger scale, and with the "Chinese Tank Breaker" scenario already having played out in the analogue of St. Javelin), and the larger issue of supplying weapons and gear that the Chinese would've already had familiarity with. Does the West just throw open the armories and dump Garands/Enfields and stockpiles of WWII gear? Or do they scour the Third World for Soviet gear that can be sent to China in exchange for upgraded western tech (I can see Egypt being a substantial source of this supply). In any event, a lot of cool gear would've been fed into China long before the war spread west, let alone the TDM.

[Raellus]

One of the most interesting aspects of the current war in Ukraine is that it gives a window into what Western aid to China in 1995 would've looked like (on a vastly larger scale, and with the "Chinese Tank Breaker" scenario already having played out in the analogue of St. Javelin), and the larger issue of supplying weapons and gear that the Chinese would've already had familiarity with. Does the West just throw open the armories and dump Garands/Enfields and stockpiles of WWII gear? Or do they scour the Third World for Soviet gear that can be sent to China in exchange for upgraded western tech (I can see Egypt being a substantial source of this supply). In any event, a lot of cool gear would've been fed into China long before the war spread west, let alone the TDM.

That's a really good point. I think what we're seeing with aid to Ukraine since February strongly suggests that the US and its allies are going to be sending pretty much everything they can spare, or get their hands on from willing third parties. Like with Ukraine, this would result in an eclectic mix of the ultra-modern (eg "Tank Breaker" ATGMS), obsolescent stuff pulled from storage mothballs (eg Redeye MANPADs), and nearly everything in between. I'm following a "Ukraine Weapons Tracker" on Twitter that does a good job illustrating the point.

https://twitter.com/UAWeapons?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembe d%7Ctwterm%5E1532282866293518336%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon %5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.militaryimages.net%2Fthr eads%2Fukrainian-forces-2022.10408%2Fpage-10

All kinds of stuff, some of it rather antiquated (eg. Swedish recoilless rifles) is showing up there. Yesterday, the account posted a pic of 155mm artillery shells made in Pakistan.

At the same time, I think the Chinese might reject some "donations", like, for example, M1 Garand rifles, as being not-worth-the-trouble to field. Ukraine has essentially rejected some proffered military aid- fairly recent reports are indicating that the Ukrainians shot down US offers of A-10 Warthogs as they continue to press for more modern multi-role Western fighters instead.

Besides Egypt, in a v1 T2k timeline, I can see Pakistan being a third party supplier to the Chinese. The US has some sway there, and a lot of Pakistani weaponry from that era originated in China.

-

[swaghauler]

Would you be able to post a link?

It was on Gun Broker in an article. You might search there but I'm not sure about where I saw it. The US CMP is also selling M1s. They have about 10k to auction off.

[Raellus]

Apparently, Russia's unable to keep up with ammunition expenditures and is literally having to dust off and issue 40+ year-old ammunition.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/burning-through-ammo-russia-using-40-year-old-rounds-us-official-says-2022-12-12/

This belies the notion, popular in games like Fallout, that ammo has a long shelf-life.

I reckon that the issuance of old ammo would happen in the later stages of the Twilight War as well. Between antiquated ammo, and post-exchange new manufactures (with access to high quality materials limited), I'd wager that ammo failures would be a common occurrence in the T2kU.

AFAIK, there's no explicit mechanic for this in any version of T2k rules. Most players are probably grateful for this. I wonder if any GMs have house-ruled late war bad ammo (either too old, or too new) in their campaigns. I've only run 2.2. When a PC rolled a 1 on a ranged small arms attacks, I rolled a two-sider (digitally). On a 1, there was a stoppage and the PC had to spend a turn clearing it. For explosive rounds (grenades, mortar bombs, artillery shells) a rolled 1 was an automatic dud. I'm too lazy to look up the rules right now, so I'm not sure if this idea was mine or something straight from the rulebook.

Anyway, figured that 40 year old ammo qualifies as "out of mothballs".

-

[.45cultist]

Apparently, Russia's unable to keep up with ammunition expenditures and is literally having to dust off and issue 40+ year-old ammunition.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/burning-through-ammo-russia-using-40-year-old-rounds-us-official-says-2022-12-12/

This belies the notion, popular in games like Fallout, that ammo has a long shelf-life.

I reckon that the issuance of old ammo would happen in the later stages of the Twilight War as well. Between antiquated ammo, and post-exchange new manufactures (with access to high quality materials limited), I'd wager that ammo failures would be a common occurrence in the T2kU.

AFAIK, there's no explicit mechanic for this in any version of T2k rules. Most players are probably grateful for this. I wonder if any GMs have house-ruled late war bad ammo (either too old, or too new) in their campaigns. I've only run 2.2. When a PC rolled a 1 on a ranged small arms attacks, I rolled a two-sider (digitally). On a 1, there was a stoppage and the PC had to spend a turn clearing it. For explosive rounds (grenades, mortar bombs, artillery shells) a rolled 1 was an automatic dud. I'm too lazy to look up the rules right now, so I'm not sure if this idea was mine or something straight from the rulebook.

Anyway, figured that 40 year old ammo qualifies as "out of mothballs".

-
Depends on the quality and storage.

[Brit]

May interest...

I think ths site, in general, has been posted here before:
https://wwiiafterwwii.wordpress.com/2022/08/10/the-98k-in-iraq/
The 98k is issued to militia / local defence squads in one of the canon / official T2k adventure books.

I was genuinely surprised how far WW11 German weapons had got:
https://wwiiafterwwii.wordpress.com/2015/07/10/wwii-german-weapons-during-the-vietnam-war/
So, something to do with all those plastic model 75mm Pak 40s I have...

Some of the 98ks the Soviets captured at the end of WW11...
https://wwiiafterwwii.files.wordpress.com/2018/01/stackedsoviet1945.jpg

[Brit]

Logistically, bringing the M1 Garand back would be tough. I suggest that it would be done for some of the reasons below:

Photo here I believe of a Garand being used in 2018.
https://wwiiafterwwii.wordpress.com/2019/01/17/the-m1-garand-in-vietnam/

[Brit]

Photo here I believe of a Garand being used in 2018.
https://wwiiafterwwii.wordpress.com/2019/01/17/the-m1-garand-in-vietnam/

I think this links to the photo directly:
https://wwiiafterwwii.files.wordpress.com/2019/01/dec2018.jpg

[Ewan]

May interest...

I think ths site, in general, has been posted here before:
https://wwiiafterwwii.wordpress.com/2022/08/10/the-98k-in-iraq/
The 98k is issued to militia / local defence squads in one of the canon / official T2k adventure books.

I was genuinely surprised how far WW11 German weapons had got:
https://wwiiafterwwii.wordpress.com/2015/07/10/wwii-german-weapons-during-the-vietnam-war/
So, something to do with all those plastic model 75mm Pak 40s I have...

Some of the 98ks the Soviets captured at the end of WW11...
https://wwiiafterwwii.files.wordpress.com/2018/01/stackedsoviet1945.jpg
These are very interesting posts and something miniature figures tend to forget for characters armed with unusual/obsolete weapons.
In a Twilight 2000 world I could easily see militia units being equipped with WW2 or 1950s weapons and I often wonder how many Lee Enfields Britain still had in the 80s and 90s.

[Brit]

Not sure. It appears they are legal to own in The UK if you have a firearms certificate.

I am sure there be some in various Army Cadet and Air Training Corps buildings in the 80's and 90's. They definitely were in the late 70's or there was access to them. The rifle(s) was kept locked in one place and the bolts somewhere else IIRC. I think they did not have a magazine fitted. I do not know if they could if need. The .22 rifles which looked similar did not. Again IIRC I fired a Martini Henry carbine (?) as well that was .22.

But it was about 45 years ago! I remember missing the target with the .303. I tensed up too much. I was much better with the .22. Never 'a marksmen' but I hit the target.

In 'the real world' the Canadian Rangers (who I think feature in a T2K article) were using Lee Enfield's until 2016 according to this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee%E2%80%93Enfield#Users

[Brit]

Off thread... and it is 254 pages (and I have not read it! i.e. 'Buyer Beware') ... so a large file, but:

http://www.nzha.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/The-Lee-Enfield-Rifle-Major-E-G-B-Reynolds-19601.pdf

I think this in the 'may interest?' category...

[Brit]

"North Vietnamese PaK-40 guns on parade in Hanoi during the late 1950s or early 1960s, these guns were not used at anti-tank role but they were used as coastal gun and Artillery".

https://preview.redd.it/7s710x2wz5171.jpg?auto=webp&8c06cbe0

"A 75mm pak 40 of a North Vietnamese militia forces".

https://i.redd.it/xmmb8kp9k3551.jpg

I think on a more practical note in one of his PDFs James Langham has Soviet / Russian / etc forces using this in T2K, with some captured and aquired ones been used by whomever can:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/76_mm_divisional_gun_M1942_(ZiS-3):

And that link has it in use from '2015 to the present' here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yemeni_Civil_War_(2014%E2%80%93present)

Strangely one Wikipedia site has the civil war starting one year before other has the weapons' use beginning...

[Brit]

Sorry, the top link does not work: i an NOT a Computer Genius.

I think Googling - North Vietnamese PaK-40 guns on parade in Hanoi during the late 1950s or early 1960s, these guns were not used at anti-tank role but they were used as coastal gun and Artillery - does...

[Spartan-117]

2023 War in Ukraine going very well for Mother Ruzzia...

https://defence-blog.com/russia-to-deploy-vintage-btr-50-tracked-carriers-to-ukraine/?amp

[Raellus]

The BTR-50 is definitely a blast from the past. The Poles and Czechs built their own version known as the OT-62 TOPAS. This is definitely an AFV that one could encounter in a Europe-based campaign, especially one set in Poland.

-

[Ursus Maior]

Russia going through all available MT-LBs. Who would have had that on his bingo card in 2021 or even 2022?

[Bestbrian]

Russia going through all available MT-LBs. Who would have had that on his bingo card in 2021 or even 2022?

Think that's nuts, how about BTR50s? :) https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a43129749/russia-using-ancient-soviet-armored-vehicles/

[Vespers War]

Think that's nuts, how about BTR50s? :) https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a43129749/russia-using-ancient-soviet-armored-vehicles/

BTR-60 have also been seen, although it's not clear to me whether they're NBC Protection Troop command vehicles (their last use in the regular Russian army) or being pulled from storage and deployed.

[Ursus Maior]

Think that's nuts, how about BTR50s? :) https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a43129749/russia-using-ancient-soviet-armored-vehicles/

That report was where my post originated from. :D

[Raellus]

The MPL-50 (small infantry spade 50) was adopted by the Russian military in the late 19th century (it was patented and issued to the Danish army in 1870). It's still being used as a combat weapon today.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/n7ej4w/russian-soldiers-are-attacking-ukrainians-with-shovels-uk-intelligence-says

Since at least 1987, the Soviet/Russian Spetsnaz have supposedly trained to use it as a throwing weapon, as well as for more conventional hand-to-hand combat.

For anyone wishing to use the MPL-50 as a weapon in T2k, one could use the stat block for a hatchet.

-

[Ckosacranoid]

In my 4th ed game so far the party has found a Russia group with mossians and a different group with garandes.

[Raellus]

To continue the theme of edged weapons (see the MPL-50P in post 210), here are two antique weapons that could make an appearance on the battlefield c. 2000.

The 1927 pattern Shashka (a hiltless cavalry sabre of Caucasian/Cossack origin).

The 1940 general pattern sword.

I wonder if there are stockpiles of the 1927 pattern Shashka somewhere in the former USSR. I could see the Soviets restarting production in the T2kU, to issue to their new and converted horse cavalry formations (reasoning: it'll save ammo). The latter was issued to officers only, so would probably be considerably more rare.

-

[Raellus]

Dummies have been used to draw enemy fire since the Middle Ages, at the latest. Anti-sniper decoys, a prominent feature of WWI, are making a combat in the trenches of Ukraine.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/wwi-style-sniper-decoy-makes-comeback-in-trenches-of-ukraine

-

[Raellus]

This Vice piece has links to a Twitter video showing a UAF soldier firing a Maxim modified with a stock, modern optics, and suppressor.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/wxjqx4/ukraine-is-successfully-using-a-140-year-old-machine-gun-against-russia

-

[Ursus Maior]

Trench warfare with larger assaults occurring weekly. Water-cooled machine-guns are having a blast - so to speak - in these conditions. It's really, what they were made for. With larger assaults seemingly happening only weekly, barrels should last months, if not longer.

Meanwhile, the Russians are moving T-54 and T-55 to the front. Right on time, I expected them in spring, when I saw their losses of T-72s mounting last year in April.

[Raellus]

Meanwhile, the Russians are moving T-54 and T-55 to the front. Right on time, I expected them in spring, when I saw their losses of T-72s mounting last year in April.

It looks that way. This article suggested the alternative possibility that the T-54/55s might be on their way to Syria, or to backfill more modern types being sent to the front. Either way, this is not a good sign for the Russians.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/signs-point-to-russia-sending-ancient-t-54-series-of-tanks-to-ukraine

-

[kato13]

It looks that way. This article suggested the alternative possibility that the T-54/55s might be on their way to Syria, or to backfill more modern types being sent to the front. Either way, this is not a good sign for the Russians.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/signs-point-to-russia-sending-ancient-t-54-series-of-tanks-to-ukraine

-

I have seen it suggested that they will be used for SP indirect fire as Russian artillery tubes are getting worn out. Iran also produces HE shells for them so that might assist vis-a-vis the ammo shortages we have been hearing about.

[Vespers War]

I have seen it suggested that they will be used for SP indirect fire as Russian artillery tubes are getting worn out. Iran also produces HE shells for them so that might assist vis-a-vis the ammo shortages we have been hearing about.

I don't think they'll be able to fill that role for long. Barrel lives when they were made were <500 rounds (the T-62 had a 450 round barrel life, for example) and they'll have had some of that life used up before they were mothballed. A few days of shooting 100+ rounds and their rifling will be worn out and the barrel warping from heat cycling.

[pmulcahy11b]

I have seen it suggested that they will be used for SP indirect fire as Russian artillery tubes are getting worn out. Iran also produces HE shells for them so that might assist vis-a-vis the ammo shortages we have been hearing about.

I've seen rumors that they are intended for infantry support.

[Bestbrian]

I don't think they'll be able to fill that role for long. Barrel lives when they were made were <500 rounds (the T-62 had a 450 round barrel life, for example) and they'll have had some of that life used up before they were mothballed. A few days of shooting 100+ rounds and their rifling will be worn out and the barrel warping from heat cycling.

Never mind what condition the ammunition is in. On paper, the Russkis think they have a gazillion rounds of legacy 100mm gun ammo, so getting those tubes up to the front isn't really a bad idea, but...who believes any of this stuff was properly stored, maintained, or not secretly sold off? If it's stupid and it works then it's not that stupid, but the fact that they're in the position of being one year into this thing and already digging into the Class C/Mobilization Only division supply pool is really piss poor. However this thing ends, the after action reports of this war are going to be brutal.

What's next? T-34s by Christmas?

[Raellus]

This article outlines the pros and cons of using T-54/55s as SP artillery. Fortunately, there are a few more cons.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2023/03/24/russias-ancient-t-55-tanks-could-double-as-artillery-but-not-very-good-artillery/?sh=7dd32c39472e

-

[bash]

This article outlines the pros and cons of using T-54/55s as SP artillery. Fortunately, there are a few more cons.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2023/03/24/russias-ancient-t-55-tanks-could-double-as-artillery-but-not-very-good-artillery/?sh=7dd32c39472e

-

The 18° elevation isn't so much a problem if they park them on inclined ramps. A 52° ramp would give them up to the 70° elevation needed to match a Howitzer. It leaves a lot of problems but could maximize their range.

The bigger problem (in my estimation) is just getting those tanks and their ammo to the front. We've seen nothing but terrible logistics from the Russians since they started the war and zero improvement since then. Keeping a bunch of old T-55s running to actually use as SPGs will further strain their terrible logistics.

If they were to use ramps/dugouts to properly angle the guns they won't be able to shoot and scoot like real SPGs and will get a salvo off before counterbattery liquifies them. Even those salvos might not hit anything if the ammo they pull from storage has been taken care of as well as the rest of their depot munitions and vehicles.

It'll end up being a lot of logistical effort for low rewards unless the Russian army gets real competent real fast.

[.45cultist]

When the T55's rolled off the line, they were parked running for 5-6 hours. Then the oil was drained and a couple of kilos of metal shavings removed!

[Raellus]

When the T55's rolled off the line, they were parked running for 5-6 hours. Then the oil was drained and a couple of kilos of metal shavings removed!

Yikes! What's Russian for "quality control"?

I'm not sure how to do screen caps but from OSINT Uri on Twitter,

"The AFU has been using modified WWII-era PTAB (2.5 kg) anti-tank bombs dropped from UAV's against Russian armor and personnel. They were used as a cluster munition against German armor and troops dropped from cassettes most often mounted on IL-2's. The version shown has both a shaped charge at the nose and anti-personnel fragmentation casing for dual use."

The tweet includes photos. Drones wouldn't really feature in T2k v1-4, but those PTAB bomblets would still be around. I wonder if they could be used (with a few mods) as AT grenades?

-

[Raellus]

More from Twitter:

"the ���� Ukraine Weapons Tracker
@UAWeapons
·
4h
#Ukraine: The Ukrainian army started to use ancient KS-19 100mm anti-aircraft guns. Though initially designed to be used against air targets, now they will be used against ground targets- in indirect and possibly direct mode.

The first KS-19 guns entered service in 1947.

"We can see Soviet UOF-412 rounds with OF-412 projectiles, which weigh 15.6KG and pack ~1.5KG of TNT. They have a maximum range when fired from the KS-19 of 19,950 meters.

These particular rounds are rather old too- they were manufactured back in 1962."

-

[Vespers War]

As Ukraine redirects old anti-aircraft guns to the field artillery, they've also started mounting PM1910 machine guns on pickup trucks as anti-aircraft weapons. The one I saw had three of them on a pedestal mount in the middle of the truck bed, which appeared to have enough space for the gunner to completely rotate the mount. As ancient as those guns are, it does make sense as an anti-drone SPAAG - the chief disadvantage of the PM1910 is it's heavy. Its chief advantages are being able to sustain fire and being nearly indestructible. As a vehicle-mounted light SPAAG it negates its disadvantage and fills a needed role in attacking drones with cheap ammunition. And, as mentioned either earlier in this thread or in another thread, Ukraine had 35,000 of them in storage. Even if only a few percent are fully operational, that's hundreds if not thousands of guns that can re-enter service.

[Raellus]

So, in addition to employing them as ersatz self-propelled artillery, and fixed field fortifications, it appears that the Russians are now using T-54s as vehicle-borne IEDs in Ukraine.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/ancient-russian-t-54-55-tank-turned-into-rolling-bomb-explodes-in-massive-shockwave

In the video clip included with the article, one can see the T-54 being immobilized by a mine or RPG. A follow-up RPG hit produces a massive explosion producing multiple, clearly visible shockwaves.

-

[micromachine]

This seems like a waste of a fair fire support platform, unless it has the main gun damaged. There are plenty of soft skin and light armoured vehicles in the Ukrainian arsenal that would suffer greatly from the D10T.
It would be far more effective if employed in groups, smoke laid to cover the advance, or there was a feint attack on the left/right or there was suppressive fire applied to the enemy position.
Seems like Russia is using ISIL's playbook and poorly at that.

[Vespers War]

This seems like a waste of a fair fire support platform, unless it has the main gun damaged. There are plenty of soft skin and light armoured vehicles in the Ukrainian arsenal that would suffer greatly from the D10T.
It would be far more effective if employed in groups, smoke laid to cover the advance, or there was a feint attack on the left/right or there was suppressive fire applied to the enemy position.
Seems like Russia is using ISIL's playbook and poorly at that.

To play devil's advocate, they might not want to use the T-54/55 very much because it requires a fourth crewman that normally isn't part of Russian tank crews and trained crews are better used on the newer tanks. Semi-trained crews can probably handle them adequately in the artillery role that the T-54/55 and T-62 are allegedly being used in, but not in the armored assault role.

IIRC, the D-10T also had a barrel life of just a few hundred rounds, so this one may have already been worn out by use as ad hoc artillery.

[Ursus Maior]

To play devil's advocate, they might not want to use the T-54/55 very much because it requires a fourth crewman that normally isn't part of Russian tank crews and trained crews are better used on the newer tanks. Semi-trained crews can probably handle them adequately in the artillery role that the T-54/55 and T-62 are allegedly being used in, but not in the armored assault role.

The Russian armored corps has already been shattered and almost all instances of using tanks since mid-2022 has been in the form of an assault gun or armored field gun.

The problem of the fourth crew man is something I already predicted when the Russians began using T-62s about a year ago. It will put additional strain on the Russian recruiting and training systems. Although it's just the loader, the lowliest and least training demanding position in the tank, the training system of the Russian Armed Forces is already overburdened.

However, other options are lacking, T-72 production is simply not high enough to keep up with losses. And training crews on newly built or repaired T-72s takes much longer time than training conscripts on T-62s and T-55s. So, Russia will retain a very small number of T-72 crews, but the majority of drafted conscripts will end up in these iron-age coffins.

[Heffe]

Some Mosins found in a reserve trench in Zaporizhia recently. Unclear if they're reserve issue, or sporting rifles taken as trophies from locals.

[Raellus]

Some Mosins found in a reserve trench in Zaporizhia recently. Unclear if they're reserve issue, or sporting rifles taken as trophies from locals.

The long barrels on those Mosins suggest that those things are ancient indeed.

The photo below, left shows Norwegian territorial reservists firing an MG34 (rechambered in 7.62x51mm) in 1987. It wasn't officially removed from service until 1993 IRL, so it would probably still be in use in the T2kU. In the photo below, right, a Norwegian soldier armed with an MP40 SMG stands guard over a bridge during an exercise in 1983.

https://smallarmsreview.com/mg34-and-mg42-in-norway-post-ww2/

The Romanian Revolutionary Guards also used the M34, but in the original 8mm Mauser.

[Raellus]

From The_War_Zone (7/14/23):

"The war in Ukraine continues to be a military memorabilia lover's dream come true. Mobilized troops have been supplied by the Russian Defense Ministry with a host of weapons that would make most collectors smile, like these PPS submachine guns, PPSh-41s, SKS Karabins and other guns that debuted during WWII."

Video of the bemused "unboxing" below:

https://twitter.com/NOELreports/status/1679427187097624578?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5 Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1679427187097624578%7Ctwgr% 5E21aa0f890d32b30969a1fdfb29bae006427654f5%7Ctwcon %5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedrive.com%2Fthe-war-zone%2Fukraine-situation-report-russian-general-fired-after-lambasting-shoigu

-

[Raellus]

The title says it all:

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a44723874/ukraine-antique-soviet-artillery-apcs/

As stocks of ATGMs started running low, D44 85mm divisional guns would appear on European battlefields of the Twilight War. Developed during WW2, the D44 was produced between 1944-1953. Clearly, given its use in 2023 Ukraine, 85mm ammo for it is still available from reserve stockpiles.

And, of course, the Ukrainians have mounted some D44s on MTLB armored tractors. According to the Popular Mechanics article, the BTR50 was actually designed with the capability of mounting a D44 field gun in mind.

-

[Vespers War]

The title says it all:

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a44723874/ukraine-antique-soviet-artillery-apcs/

As stocks of ATGMs started running low, D44 85mm divisional guns would appear on European battlefields of the Twilight War. Developed during WW2, the D44 was produced between 1944-1953. Clearly, given its use in 2023 Ukraine, 85mm ammo for it is still available from reserve stockpiles.

And, of course, the Ukrainians have mounted some D44s on MTLB armored tractors. According to the Popular Mechanics article, the BTR50 was actually designed with the capability of mounting a D44 field gun in mind.

-

They would have appeared well before the stocks of ATGMs started running low. When reunification happened in our timeline, the National People's Army (East Germany) had around 400 D-44/SD-44 as part of their artillery park. Those were somewhat modern for them, given that they also had M-1931 and M-1937 122mm guns and M-1938 howitzers (there was some newer kit as well, like the "M-1974" self-propelled howitzer [2S1 Gvozdika], but there was a lot of old stuff).

Edit: as far as ammunition still being available, Pakistan has a couple hundred of the Chinese clone in service, Armenia and Azerbaijan both have smaller numbers in service, and Bulgaria had over a hundred in storage a few years ago.

[Vespers War]

I read an interesting anecdote tonight that illustrates how oddball weapons could show up somewhere in the Twilight War.

Back in the 1950s, Austria received 26,385 M1 carbines from the United States and bought more from France as the French removed them from service. They were apparently extremely popular, with Austria acquiring almost $1.5 million of ammunition. They remained in frontline service until 1959 when the FN FAL replaced them and the M1 Garand, and were used by the reserves and the customs and tax police in the 1960s. It was thought they had all left service in 1970.

In 1993, workers discovered a stockpile of guns that had been stored in Vienna's government quarter as last-ditch weapons in case of an invasion. There were 1,900 M1 carbines still in factory grease that had been stored for almost 40 years and forgotten about. These kind of forgotten Cold War caches could turn up pretty much anywhere with just about any type of weapon that was being discarded by the major powers after WW2, particularly in countries that were maintaining large reserves relative to their active military and were hardware-rich in a way that storing guns for use by reserves made sense.

[Vespers War]

A vehicle that got mentioned earlier but (AFAIK) hasn't been statted is Brazil's X1 Pioneiro. It's a massively upgraded Stuart tank. Brazil had received over 400 Stuart tanks after World War II, and by the 1960s they were pretty obsolete. Brazil decided to upgrade the Stuarts rather than try to buy something entirely new.

The tanks chosen for the upgrade package were torn down so completely that the armor was cut off the vehicles and replaced. They were lengthened slightly and an enlarged engine compartment took advantage of that extra space. The suspension from an M4 artillery tractor was copied to give the new tank more modern running gear. The turret ring was enlarged and the tanks received a French low-pressure 90mm gun as their main armament, with a pair of M1919 machine-guns (one in the forward hull, one coaxial), and a pintle-mounted M2HB. New radios were also included. The new tank weighed 17 tonnes, and was extremely fragile but capable of resisting light autocannon fire. A total production run of 52 tanks were upgraded with delivery of 17 in 1977 and 35 in 1978.

Mass: 17 tonnes
4 crew (driver, co-driver, gunner, commander/loader)
HF 14 - HS 5 - HR 5
TF 6 - TS 6 - TR 4
260 HP Scania D223L V6 diesel
Tr Mov 154/92
Com Mov 25/15
Fuel capacity unknown, probably more than the Stuart's original 340 liters
520 km road range
90mm CN90F3 (http://pmulcahy.com/misc_pages/lgcal_guns.htm) (no APFSDS) (18 rounds in turret, 10 in hull)
2x M1919 machine gun (1 forward, 1 coaxial, 1250 rounds each)
M2HB machine gun (commander's pintle mount, 750 rounds)



The X1A1 was supposed to be a more lengthened X1 to give additional room for ammunition. That stretch ended up ruining the tank's maneuverability because it was too long for its width. Instead, a new-build light tank was made to similar specifications, the X1A2 Carcara. 24 of the X1A2 were built before Brazil decided to shift focus to upgrades on its M41 Walker Bulldogs.

Changes:
21 tonnes
3 crew (eliminate co-driver)
Change 90mm ammunition to 24 rounds in turret, 44 in hull (still no APFSDS)
Eliminate forward M1919
Engine horsepower increased to 280
Tr Mov 157/94
Com Mov 26/16
Increase fuel to 600 liters
Increase road range to 600 km



Variant: the XM3D1 was an X1 that replaced the turret with a Maxson quad .50 AA mount. Remove the 90mm gun, the coaxial M1919, and the M2HB and replace them with 4 M2HB in a turreted mount. Only one of these was built in real life, but they'd make a useful supplement to an X1 or X1A2 formation and likely be very popular with PC groups. Allegedly it was also fitted with the TCM-20 (http://pmulcahy.com/autocannons/israeli_autocannons.html) variant of the Maxson, but I haven't seen photographic confirmation of this.

The X1 tank family started being phased out in 1988 and appear to have left service completely in 1994, making them a good candidate for oddball vehicles appearing in the Twilight War.

[pmulcahy11b]

I statted those out:

http://www.pmulcahy.com/tracked_lcv/brazilian_tlcv.htm
I didn't know it was called the Pioneiro, but I have it.

There are some engineer vehicle variants here:
http://www.pmulcahy.com/tracked_engineer_vehicles/brazilian_tev.htm

A mortar carrier version here:
http://www.pmulcahy.com/mortar_carriers/brazilian_mortar_carriers.htm

Just sayin...

[Vespers War]

I statted those out:

http://www.pmulcahy.com/tracked_lcv/brazilian_tlcv.htm
I didn't know it was called the Pioneiro, but I have it.

There are some engineer vehicle variants here:
http://www.pmulcahy.com/tracked_engineer_vehicles/brazilian_tev.htm

A mortar carrier version here:
http://www.pmulcahy.com/mortar_carriers/brazilian_mortar_carriers.htm

Just sayin...

I had missed that because I was looking under tanks instead of light combat vehicles.

A couple notes on the X1A2:

1. It's not a rebuilt Stuart, it's an entirely new vehicle based on the Stuart (likely because Brazil already had some tooling that could be used from the Stuart upgrades).
2. The removed crew member was the assistant driver/machinegunner, not the loader. It did not have an autoloader, and the commander was the loader.
3. The gun's actually an EC-90 (the same as on the EE-9 Cascavel), which is a license-built Cockerill, but was unable to fire APFSDS because of the muzzle brake.
4. The unit price was approximately $400,000 in 1980. That (relatively) high price was why Paraguay bought the EE-9 instead, because it cost $243,600 in the late 1980s.

For the X1, despite being the "not produced in numbers" variant, it's actually the most common, since there were 52 X1, either 1 or 2 X1A1, and 24 X1A2.

Edit: and the first two versions should have a pair of .30 cal MGs instead of the single MAG, since there was one coaxial and one in the hull front for the assistant driver to use.

[pmulcahy11b]

I had missed that because I was looking under tanks instead of light combat vehicles.

A couple notes on the X1A2:

1. It's not a rebuilt Stuart, it's an entirely new vehicle based on the Stuart (likely because Brazil already had some tooling that could be used from the Stuart upgrades).
2. The removed crew member was the assistant driver/machinegunner, not the loader. It did not have an autoloader, and the commander was the loader.
3. The gun's actually an EC-90 (the same as on the EE-9 Cascavel), which is a license-built Cockerill, but was unable to fire APFSDS because of the muzzle brake.
4. The unit price was approximately $400,000 in 1980. That (relatively) high price was why Paraguay bought the EE-9 instead, because it cost $243,600 in the late 1980s.

For the X1, despite being the "not produced in numbers" variant, it's actually the most common, since there were 52 X1, either 1 or 2 X1A1, and 24 X1A2.

Edit: and the first two versions should have a pair of .30 cal MGs instead of the single MAG, since there was one coaxial and one in the hull front for the assistant driver to use.

Thanks for getting me looking at that page again. I'm working on an update now. I don't completely agree with you on some points, but I have some new and updated information to work with. I haven't looked at my page on the X1 in years -- it's nice to take another look.

[pmulcahy11b]

OK, I've done some more research and rewritten the X1 entry. It's here:
http://www.pmulcahy.com/tracked_lcv/brazilian_tlcv.htm

It has corrections, new info and a new X1 subtype.

[Raellus]

Although not weapons, per se, horses still apparently have a military application, as far as the Russian army is concerned.

https://defence-blog.com/russia-sends-troops-into-battle-on-the-backs-of-horses/#:~:text=The%20Russian%20army%20still%20sends,Russ ia's%20autonomous%20republic%20of%20Bashkiria.

-

[Ursus Maior]

3. The gun's actually an EC-90 (the same as on the EE-9 Cascavel), which is a license-built Cockerill, but was unable to fire APFSDS because of the muzzle brake.
Snap-shot comment on this: The EC-90 gun, like the French 90 mm D-921, is a low-pressure gun. So APFSDS is not an option anyway. The gun doesn't have the V(0) to make this a viable projectile option. HEAT remains the only anti-tank or anti-armor option.

[pmulcahy11b]

Snap-shot comment on this: The EC-90 gun, like the French 90 mm D-921, is a low-pressure gun. So APFSDS is not an option anyway. The gun doesn't have the V(0) to make this a viable projectile option. HEAT remains the only anti-tank or anti-armor option.

There is picture on a page I cruised into (I'll find it and edit -- but its nearly dinner for the guys right now) where there are some Brazilian officers holding an APFSDS round for an EC-90 gun. But the text of the article does describe EC-90 APFSDS as being no more effective than HEAT upon striking the target.

https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/coldwar/brazil/bernardini-ccl-x1a2-carcara.php

[Vespers War]

APFSDS for the EC-90 was being looked at in case the vehicles went up against opponents who had been provided with ERA. Even without APFSDS being any more effective than HEAT against steel, early ERA was only effective against HEAT and not against kinetic penetrators, so a vehicle with Kontakt-1 might be immune to an EC-90 HEAT shell but get penetrated by a (on paper) weaker APFSDS shell. Brazil eventually gave up on its development, probably because of the odds of that happening went way down after the breakup of the USSR.

[Ursus Maior]

There is picture on a page I cruised into (I'll find it and edit -- but its nearly dinner for the guys right now) where there are some Brazilian officers holding an APFSDS round for an EC-90 gun. But the text of the article does describe EC-90 APFSDS as being no more effective than HEAT upon striking the target.

https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/coldwar/brazil/bernardini-ccl-x1a2-carcara.php

Here is the text that explains the ammo question for the EC-90 in the article you linked. The encyclopedia generally does good work, in my personal opinion.

ontrary to common statements, the X1A2 was thus not able to fire APFSDS rounds in the configuration it used at the time. Not only were they not available at the time when the X1A2 was in service, the development of the APFSDS round was never completed by Engesa. It also did not have a muzzle brake that would support the APFSDS round. Since neither requirements were met, the X1A2 never used APFSDS in its loadout. In addition, by the time the APFSDS round could have been ready, interest had already completely shifted to the M41C and the main battle tank projects like the Osorio and Tamoyo.

The X1A2 had access to HEAT, High Explosive Squash Head (HESH), and High Explosive (HE) rounds. The HEAT round was meant for anti-armor purposes and was the X1’s anti-tank round. The HESH round was mainly meant for bunkers, walls and light vehicles, and not as ‘anti-armor’ ammunition. The HE round was used as a general purpose support round. The X1A2 also had access to a white phosphorus smoke round and a HEAT practice round.

[Ursus Maior]

APFSDS for the EC-90 was being looked at in case the vehicles went up against opponents who had been provided with ERA. Even without APFSDS being any more effective than HEAT against steel, early ERA was only effective against HEAT and not against kinetic penetrators, so a vehicle with Kontakt-1 might be immune to an EC-90 HEAT shell but get penetrated by a (on paper) weaker APFSDS shell. Brazil eventually gave up on its development, probably because of the odds of that happening went way down after the breakup of the USSR.

As quoted above, there was development going on, but the tank lacked the necessary configuration (muzzle break) in addition to the pure development necessary. The USSR breaking up, did not have much influence on Brazil in that regard. However, by the time the project could have concluded, Brazil was looking into buying the M41C as a replacement and procure a true MBT from an indigenous design, either Osorio or Tamoyo.

[Raellus]

A column of Russian ZIS-151 trucks, manufactured between 1948-158, has been filmed by a Ukrainian drone whilst moving towards the front line.

https://truck-encyclopedia.com/coldwar/ussr/ZIL-151.php

I wonder when we're going to start seeing Lend-Lease Studebakers.

-

[Raellus]

...entered production in 1943.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2023/10/26/the-kremlin-sent-an-80-year-old-howitzer-to-ukraine-no-that-doesnt-mean-russias-artillery-corps-is-collapsing/?sh=4ab6522a7c50

-

[Ursus Maior]

A column of Russian ZIS-151 trucks, manufactured between 1948-158, has been filmed by a Ukrainian drone whilst moving towards the front line.

https://truck-encyclopedia.com/coldwar/ussr/ZIL-151.php

I wonder when we're going to start seeing Lend-Lease Studebakers.

-

The ZiS-151 (the factory it was only renamed ZiL after Stalin's death) was also the basis for the baseline BTR-152 as well as the ZIL-485 BAV-A, a Soviet knock-off of the DUKW. The 151 was built between 1948-1958, when it was replaced by the ZiL-157, which was also used as basis for the improved BTR-152V.

The Chinese copied it as the Jiefang CA-30 though and kept on building it until 1986. Both, the original ZiS-151 and the CA-30 are still in active service, though the former only in North Korea and the latter only in Bangladesh. During the Twilight War, these would see massive service on both sides of the Soviet-Chinese theater of war and probably all across Asia and Europe.

Additionally, the Soviets could restart the production line, should they want to. Not a lot is needed.