The formula isn’t a mystery or super secret knowledge. Let’t not pretend it is.
That is one of the failures of the T2K setting. Now they probably get the idea from the M35 2 ½ which has a multi-fuel engine. That doesn’t mean it can run on pure ethanol or methanol. The fuel mix for a M35 still must be greater than 50% diesel, kerosene, crank case oil to lubricate the pistons. Pure ethanol would seize the pistons very fast. The only other vehicle that would run would be the turbine in an M1 Abrams until the alcohol destroyed any gaskets and lines.

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

It is a major handwave for the entirety of the story or there would be few or no military vehicles at all without oil production and refining to get diesel on the market.
For one, they do not run on methanol and ethanol except it the T2K universe. Trains are out since railyards are a strategic target on their own and typically in a large urban area another target of strategic nuclear weapons. Civilian lowboys could move around APCs and light armor, it is going to take a HET to move an M1 with any efficiency. I would say some are around, these are a support vehicle and some are going to make it through the tactical nukes destroying rear area marshalling yards and forward support battalions. These burn a lot of fuel though. These are also valuable as transport for any and everything else. Escorted HETs on MSR Tampa between Scania and BIAP with tons of anything and everything like sack concrete, concertina wire, plus pallets of sandbags. They wouldn’t go on ethanol or methanol though.
All the modern vehicles you name have things like spall liners, fire suppression systems, and ammo compartmentalization in their favor.
This is the wrong thread to go into infantry anti armor tactics but, having a .50 isn’t going to do them much good. A tank without infantry protecting it is a dead tank.
If they are using bank armored cars then those guys are pants on head retarded to start with. The best possible use is as scouts or convoy escorts. These do not have the armor to be anything more than the lightest battle taxi that would carry infantry forward and drop them off 500 to a 1000 meters from the objective.
Another writers fiction that has somehow gained traction.
If the 49th is using Peacekeepers this explains how they lost their tanks to begin with. It is all for the story though, so that is the way it has to be, realistic or not.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

That is taking exceptional liberties with calling a bank car meant to protect cash from robbers a military armored vehicle.
If they are and that is canonically correct, who is in charge of this 49th ? The post office? Because something is seriously wrong in the implementation of combined arms theory over there.
How loosely are we defining “Use as an APC” because again to use these even moderately successfully they are battle taxis or convoy escorts. Either taxing troops with 500 to 1000 meters to avoid engagements and leaving the infantry to themselves; option two is as a convoy escort that hopes to survive the initial ambush and belch out troops to counter attack. Any other way and all I can forsee is a loss of the vehicle quickly.
Which is still ridiculous and not a ringing endorsement for the setting either. They can’t manufacture parts or support armies in the field, yet all sides can engineer a engine replacement, manufacture this, ship these globally, and refurbish every vehicle in the fleet combat or combat support with a new gasoline / ethanol motor. See the shortfalls in that.
It is elemental handwavium for the sake of having military vehicles for the players and the opposing forces. Let’s just call that what it is.
Yup, I bought my first copy of T2k in 1986, doesn’t mean the story holds water any better than a colander then or now. Would be better to dispense with the ethanol foolishness and state that the coal oil conversion process doesn’t have the same outputs as the pre-war petrochemical. So it takes months to get enough for a large offensive. Easy peasy, still works with the slow advance and long periods of settling in.
Which is again ridiculous given the simplicity of rudimentary shape charges with a government capable of doing so. Panzerfausts and Bazookas can comeback into fashion if everyone is into WW2 relics and bank cars.

Which is a plot point necessary for the author versus a ringing endorsement of combined arms theory. It was necessary for the story, so that is the way it went.

Urban Guerrilla

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

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

US Vehicle Guide

Peacekeeper entry

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

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

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

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

Soviet Army Vehicle Guide

BRDM-3

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

again showing that antitank weapons are at a premium by 2000

Red Star Lone Star

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

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

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

Lets go with number one. Bank cars.

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

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

Use it as an APC, lose it quickly.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Peacekeeper Armored cars;

One was forsale at DRMO recently for about 5k.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Sorry, skipped over your post replying to others so here goes.
I do. For two reasons, first because when the Soviet Union collapsed in our real world timeline of 09 November 1989 the little wars happening all over the world especially in Africa, South America, and South East Asia drastically reduced in size and intensity. Those wars were fueled by money and weapons from mostly NATO (primarily the U.S., I admit that) and the USSR mostly to preserve or limit the other factions influence in the area.
With a strong USSR and Warsaw Pact still in existence those wars never stop or lower their intensity. The Pact allies like Cuba, North Korea, Angola, Venezuela don’t really decline or stop their military misadventures regionally or globally. For this reason I assert there really isn’t much in the way of military surplus vehicles or artillery because some place, at some time, somebody is using this stuff trying to kill someone else. What would not be acceptable first line equipment in Europe for the coming WW3 in mostly effective somewhere that either side isn’t using that sophisticated equipment or fighting Kursk level pitched battles.
I keep iterating that the surplus will be WW2 and Korea as though they are easy to operate and could be effective in some situations these are now vulnerable to the least effective of anti armor weapons like the 40mm grenade. That makes spending money and diverting resources to these as fighting vehicles decidedly less worthwhile.
It isn’t unique. Anywhere that has a machine shop for repair of heavy construction equipment has the multi ton hoists, lathes, mills, and the large toolsets to work on these things. Literally, every county, multiple in every state everywhere there is a Department of Transportation. Additionally, any dealership that sells heavy construction equipment such as Caterpillar, Case, or John Deere has a repair bay with all the same stuff. The only thing unique about Mr. Littlefield’s shop is some of the unique expertise and the manuals available. I can think of four or five places in Pueblo down there that would all escape the nuclear exchange and would only need electricity.
Prime movers are used to tow artillery in poor terrain where there is a risk of counter battery fire or bombing by tactical aircraft. Depends on if there is artillery to be towed to start with, then if saddling a unit with a cantankerous beast of a machine that has no spare parts is worth the effort.
There is a big difference between combat engineering and reconstruction. Combat engineering vehicles are either put up obstacles to slow, channel or stop an enemy advance or trying to tear down the other guy’s defenses. This is all done while being fired upon as both sides are in contact. Only the most heavily armored are expected to survive this like a M728. Even then, a mass effort is in place just for that one combat engineering vehicle. Infantry are screening to counter enemy infantry, the smoke unit is pumping out hectares of smoke, artillery is firing at known enemy concentration and enemy held road junctions, tacair and air superiority is overhead. The enemy is going to pour artillery onto that combat engineering vehicle just to prevent a breakthrough.
As to conversions, mortar carriers, sure those only need to be armored enough to survive counter battery fire up to 152mm or 155mm detonating at 50 meters. Those don’t get close enough to the infantry battle line to be threatened by AT weapons. As to personnel carriers, only in the sense as the battle taxi like an M113; protecting the infantry from small arms and shrapnel and bring them within 500 to 1000 meters of the objective while attempting to support the infantry dismounted movement with long range heavy machinegun fire. Expect to lose them though. When the enemy is in range so are you. Some of these would be vulnerable to 14.5 KPV and certainly 23mm ZPUs in a ground role, those weapons outranging the M2HB.
No, you don’t have anywhere near a Brigade strength and only close to the strength of ONE mechanized infantry company all the while diverting resources that could have better supplied a Brigade strength unit with fuel, ammunition, and support weapons.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A Note from the Moderator(s)
 

Hey fellas,

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

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

Thanks.

I think these items do have their place if refurbished. Rear area security missions like the seaport, airfields, and resources like a nuclear power plant, desalinization plant. Those things. Then these WW2 relics earn their keep freeing up newer more capable platforms for the fight on the southern border. In those missions they are unlikely to be used hard enough to tear through parts or come up against modern AT weapons and soldiers with the training to use them.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

and his shop and those techs are the real prize

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

either way more than nuff said on this subject

*** Thread Necromancy ***


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

But would you agree Olefin, a Sherman is much easy to maintain and the build spare parts for than a modern tank like a Abrams.

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

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


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

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

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

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

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


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

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

Mad Mike

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

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

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

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


Mad Mike

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

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

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


Mad Mike

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

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

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

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

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

I think the standard T2K armies are far too small

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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