Soviet medium mortars in T2K

[schnickelfritz]

What I am thinking of are Mobilization only and Cat 3 divisions, like the 124th MRD.

The 12.0cm PM-38 heavy mortar is as basic as it gets, while still being somewhat mobile. This piece set the pattern for basic, effective heavy mortars and was loved so much by the Germans that they used it as the pattern for the 12.0cm SGrW 42 and captured every one they could get.

The design was improved with the 12.0cm PM-43 and later 12.0cm 2B11, all being lighter versions of the same configuration.

I know a fellow with a wartime 8.0cm GrW 34 and carrying it while broken down is a chore, much less enough ammo to do any real effect.

Make that double or triple for a heavy mortar. As it is, the 12.0cm Soviet mortars do not really disassemble except for maintenance, the two wheeled carriage is permanently attached.

I would think that the 12.0cm models would be hooked to either a horse draw caisson of some type or pulled behind any truck large enough to pull it and carry a useful ammo load. At 70 pounds a case of 2 rounds, that's up to the GM to set, I think. I would assume you'd use a Ural 375 or similar vehicle whenever available.

A 12.0cm mortar seems to be the standard artillery piece in the year 2000 T2K setting for most pact usint of regimental size and up.

As far as the medium mortars go, I would assume there would be legions of WW2 era 82mm versions gathering dust in warehouses for this type of situation.

It's my impression that the Soviets/Russians NEVER throw useful weapons away. It's my understanding that they had warehouses of captured, arsenal serviced, preserved ex-Wehrmacht small arms until the mid-1990's. My guess is that they still do, even after selling a ton of that stuff off.

Thanks-
Dave

[Panther Al]

Hrm. Alright, I can see where a medium in the range of 82mm can be rather useful, the way I was looking at it, is regardless of the size, more often than not the mort and its ammo will be on a cart of some sort, if thats the case, my thinking was why not use the big one, not the medium?

[Raellus]

I agree that the "old-fashioned" 82mm would be common in Red Army units by 2000. They're simple, man-portable, and provide units of company and battalion size with effective indirect firepower. If terrorist groups like the IRA and PLO can make their own mortar-type launchers/bombs, then I would imagine it would be relatively easy to continue manufacture mortar ammo after the TDM. v2.2 introduced the shop-built WOJO mortar, capable of firing 81mm (NATO) and 82mm (WARPACT) bombs. Of all the "what-if" weapons of the late Twilight War, I think that the WOJO is one of the more plausible.

I think there's a line somewhere in the v1.0 or v2.2 rulebook that says that the mortar is the most common and widely used indirect fire support weapon in every army come 2000.

[Legbreaker]

With more and more units becoming foot mobile with a sprinkling of vehicles and livestock for the heavy equipment, I can definitely see mid range motars being exceptionally useful. They wouldn't want to be manpacked very far (a few kilometres would probably be far enough), but they do give a unit much needed supporting fire.

The big guns wouldn't be thrown away, however with the limited transportation options available in 2000, they would probably be restricted to defensive positions (cantonments) and along roadways and other transportation corridors (rivers and railways).

[HorseSoldier]

v2.2 introduced the shop-built WOJO mortar, capable of firing 81mm (NATO) and 82mm (WARPACT) bombs. Of all the "what-if" weapons of the late Twilight War, I think that the WOJO is one of the more plausible.

I think that one started out in the ver 1.0 Heavy Weapons Guide, but may be wrong.

I think there's a line somewhere in the v1.0 or v2.2 rulebook that says that the mortar is the most common and widely used indirect fire support weapon in every army come 2000.

I think in the timeline for '99 or 2000 there's verbiage about how mortars and ammunition for them is still being cranked out by combatants who lack the resources to make hydraulic buffers and high strength cannon barrels for howitzers and such.

[Abbott Shaull]

I believe they were both the v1 Heavy weapon guide and later in the basic rules at revision to give examples. It was one of the things the original rule set had pointed out, and adding them basic rules in later addition made sense to reinforce the point.

Honestly, I think any Militia or military units would keep their larger weapon in defensive position, even the 120 mm Mortars too. I can see these crews having responsibility of Medium or Light Mortars too that they take to the field for short duration operation in support of their units, depending on the needs. Like the Striker Brigade Mortar teams carry a lighter mortar that the gun crew can set up outside of the vehicle as needed. Even if the unit didn't have horses or other transport I can see where some troops could be pressed into service to move them by hand over limited distances.

[Abbott Shaull]

The next thing is that in light troops on NATO side the 81mm and 4.1" mortars were the heavy Mortars at Battalion while 60mm or smaller were company level. While on the Pact and Heavy NATO units the 81mm/4.1" Mortars were Company level weapons in Infantry type and some other units and the 120mm was the Mortars at Battalion with the exception being the Armor Cavalry units that had them down to Troop level.

[Legbreaker]

60mm may be the standard Company mortar for the US, but MANY countries throughout Nato and the world use the 81mm almost exclusively (60mm isn't even an option).