Puzzling until my puzzler is sore...

[boogiedowndonovan]

Originally Posted by Adm.Lee

Re: Boomer and canon: odd that the US Marine brigade is listed apparently separate from the regiment that is its land component.

Also that there are "numerous smaller specialty and support units"-- that's something I could exploit in tweaking things for the history I want.

Could be that an MEU first deployed, then the rest of the regiment plus attachments arrived.

regarding "numerous smaller specialty and support units", 1-125 Field Artillery Minnesota National Guard was supposed to deploy to Norway if things went bad in RL. They (and the 4th MEB) had equipment pre-positioned in Norway.

In my campaign, a National Guard infantry brigade also goes to Norway. 3-172nd Infantry VT NG is the only mountain infantry unit in the US, in my campaign, 3-172nd is one of three other mountain infantry battalions that comprise the NG brigade sent to Norway (in my campaign 172nd IB, but I am not very imaginative). The 172nd IB includes 3-172nd, an NG battalion from Colorado and I can't remember the rest, will need to check notes when I am home.

[Adm.Lee]

Originally Posted by boogiedowndonovan

regarding "numerous smaller specialty and support units", 1-125 Field Artillery Minnesota National Guard was supposed to deploy to Norway if things went bad in RL. They (and the 4th MEB) had equipment pre-positioned in Norway.

In my campaign, a National Guard infantry brigade also goes to Norway. 3-172nd Infantry VT NG is the only mountain infantry unit in the US, in my campaign, 3-172nd is one of three other mountain infantry battalions that comprise the NG brigade sent to Norway (in my campaign 172nd IB, but I am not very imaginative). The 172nd IB includes 3-172nd, an NG battalion from Colorado and I can't remember the rest, will need to check notes when I am home.

OK. I'm running off a 1989 OB that I pulled off the web (tanknet?) It's as good a source as any other, AFAICT.

I thought the 172nd IB got inflated into the 6th LID? I do see a 3-172 IN, Vermont Guard, believed to be attached to the 10th.

I see a 1-125 FA battalion in the WI NG, in the 57th FA Brigade. I did think the Norway forces looked thin on heavy artillery, so I was thinking at least one FA brigade ought to end up there.

IMC, I was thinking if NATO was serious about an offensive up there, then the 29th LID (not in the USAVG, I believe?), a corps HQ, and some artillery ought to go. Some armor would help, too, but I'm sure that's all going to the real center of action, Germany. Maybe some choppers, instead, for some air-assault action.

[rant] Branching off into Corps HQs and numbers, why on earth are new-raised US HQs numbered so illogically? The existing numbers are all odd numbers, why are the low even numbers ignored? So, *I* think this one ought to be the VI Corps, and the two new corps that go to Germany can be the II and IV. [/rant]

[boogiedowndonovan]

Originally Posted by Adm.Lee

OK. I'm running off a 1989 OB that I pulled off the web (tanknet?) It's as good a source as any other, AFAICT.

I thought the 172nd IB got inflated into the 6th LID? I do see a 3-172 IN, Vermont Guard, believed to be attached to the 10th.

I see a 1-125 FA battalion in the WI NG, in the 57th FA Brigade. I did think the Norway forces looked thin on heavy artillery, so I was thinking at least one FA brigade ought to end up there.

IMC, I was thinking if NATO was serious about an offensive up there, then the 29th LID (not in the USAVG, I believe?), a corps HQ, and some artillery ought to go. Some armor would help, too, but I'm sure that's all going to the real center of action, Germany. Maybe some choppers, instead, for some air-assault action.

[rant] Branching off into Corps HQs and numbers, why on earth are new-raised US HQs numbered so illogically? The existing numbers are all odd numbers, why are the low even numbers ignored? So, *I* think this one ought to be the VI Corps, and the two new corps that go to Germany can be the II and IV. [/rant]

The 1989 NATO orbat is very good. I like it, but it isn't error free and the authors (pcallahan actually) admits it is still in a working state. I have it downloaded on my work computer (don't tell my corporate overlords.)

1-125th FA is listed as part of the 57th FA WI NG but it is a MN NG unit. It also looks like the authors weren't sure if 3-172nd had a parent unit as of 1989.

here is the unit history from the MN NG site

http://www.minnesotanationalguard.or...T0/history.php

In 1996, it was assigned the Norway mission. I have no idea if there was another NG FA battalion that was previously assigned.

172nd IB was rolled into 6th ID in RL. Then when 6th ID was disbanded during the 90's drawdown and 1st brigade 6th ID was reflagged as 172nd IB. In the 2000s 172nd IB was a Stryker brigade, went to Irag, disbanded again and reactivated as a heavy brigade in Germany and disbanded again.

I used 172nd for my fictitious mountain infantry NG brigade because that number would be available in the T2k world. Although one site, globalsecurity.org I think, mentions that plans were made for a brigade of mountain infantry. And it also appears that there is a RL mountain infantry brigade as of 2006, 86th Infantry Brigade (Mountain) of which 3-172nd is a component.

29th LID does not exist in the T2k US vehicle guide, however if you look at the entry for the 46th Infantry Division, it looks like the authors used the 29th as a template, replaced one of the VA NG brigades with the 92nd IB from Puerto Rico and classified the division as an infantry division (H-series ToE?). Not sure why they did this, maybe they didn't have the information available at the time. But it is more logical to keep the 29th LID and send it to Europe, either Norway or possibly Germany with a rear area security mission as well as keep the 92nd IB in Puerto Rico or possibly Panama?

and if you follow the T2k ToE for LID, then it would have a battalion of light armor, LAV-75/M8 AGS or whatever.

in the end, it is your campaign to do as you see fit. just be careful of those who scream "you can't do that it's not canon"

and yay for slow Fridays.

[Adm.Lee]

Originally Posted by boogiedowndonovan

1-125th FA is listed as part of the 57th FA WI NG but it is a MN NG unit. It also looks like the authors weren't sure if 3-172nd had a parent unit as of 1989.

here is the unit history from the MN NG site

http://www.minnesotanationalguard.or...T0/history.php

In 1996, it was assigned the Norway mission. I have no idea if there was another NG FA battalion that was previously assigned.

OK, thanks.

29th LID does not exist in the T2k US vehicle guide, however if you look at the entry for the 46th Infantry Division, it looks like the authors used the 29th as a template, ... But it is more logical to keep the 29th LID and send it to Europe, either Norway or possibly Germany with a rear area security mission as well as keep the 92nd IB in Puerto Rico or possibly Panama?

It made sense to me, anyway.

and if you follow the T2k ToE for LID, then it would have a battalion of light armor, LAV-75/M8 AGS or whatever.

Yeah, that's pulling at me, too. I find myself partial to light tanks, or the equivalent.

[Benjamin]

ACE Mobile force also at times included a French battalion. Given that some canon sources state that the Soviets invaded Norway in mid-November, I had the full ACE Mobile force deploy to Norway as per pre-war plans. This included the French contingent which was recalled when US, UK, Canada crossed the IGB. Some Frenchmen refused to abandon their long time allies and remained in Norway. Such was the confused state of global affairs as the Twilight War grew to engulf the world.

Furthermore I kept Spain and Portugal in NATO but non-belligerents regarding the fighting in Germany. This changed in early July when Italian aircraft struck Spanish ports as part of their ill fated effort to clear NATO naval assets from the Med.

Of course my T2K differs from canon in that the Soviet temporarily capture Iceland (stolen from Red Storm Rising) and Italy's entry into the war against NATO forces the withdrawal back through Poland. I figured the Soviets would have made it clear in no uncertain terms to the US President that any German troops on Soviet soil would have meant immediate nuclear release. Thusly, both the Brits and US would tell the Germans that they are to in no way cross the Soviet border. Italy and Greece's entry into the war decides the issue as NATO rushes to shore up Austria and Bavaria. Of course Italy's stupid decision to launch pre-emptive strikes against Spanish ports equalizes the situation in the region.

Benjamin

[boogiedowndonovan]

Originally Posted by Benjamin

ACE Mobile force also at times included a French battalion. Given that some canon sources state that the Soviets invaded Norway in mid-November, I had the full ACE Mobile force deploy to Norway as per pre-war plans. This included the French contingent which was recalled when US, UK, Canada crossed the IGB. Some Frenchmen refused to abandon their long time allies and remained in Norway. Such was the confused state of global affairs as the Twilight War grew to engulf the world.

Yeah I seem to recall another Norway orbat that included a "renegade" Italians who stuck around after Italy withdrew from NATO. I thiink it was a DC working group orbat.

I do the same thing with the Belgians, although in my campaign the Belgians don't quit NATO and honor their NATO commitments.