|
|
|
Notices |
Do you own this game? Write a review and let others know how you like it.
|
 |

January 5th, 2007, 06:05 PM
|
 |
Sergeant
|
|
Join Date: May 2006
Location: California
Posts: 245
Thanks: 0
Thanked 5 Times in 1 Post
|
|
Re: Red Army = most effective force !
Quote:
In my opinion, assuming a reasonable disruption by NATO, a WP advance would have stalled quite quickly after initial succes.
|
How big would the initial success be, How much territory could have been occupied in that golden period?
__________________
Кавказ-Берлин
|

January 5th, 2007, 08:43 PM
|
Captain
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Nijmegen
Posts: 948
Thanks: 1
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
|
|
Re: Red Army = most effective force !
Quote:
Smersh said:
How big would the initial success be, How much territory could have been occupied in that golden period?
|
Not that much. Measured in kilometres from the border I'd say you'd be counting in double digit numbers, with maybe in one or two 'schwerpunkts' in the (very) low triple digits. In some area's the territory gained might not even reach 50km depth.
And it wouldn't be a golden period either. WP losses would have been massive, much higher than NATO's losses (who would have had the advantage of defending). Whether they would be able to hold on to that territory is dubious, but too speculative to make any clear claims on.
But again, that's just my opinion.
Narwan
|

January 6th, 2007, 12:19 AM
|
 |
Sergeant
|
|
Join Date: May 2006
Location: California
Posts: 245
Thanks: 0
Thanked 5 Times in 1 Post
|
|
Re: Red Army = most effective force !
I hold the opposite view. I beleive west germany could have been over-run and occupied within a week. If the objective was to re-unify germany by force, then I think thats very possible. on the other hand a full-scale invasion and attempt to incorporate the whole of europe would be a stretch, although not maybe not impossible.
losses of course would be high, but if tactical nuclear weapons where used losses on both sides would be much higher, in addition to big envirinmental destruction.
In the end success and failure depends on alot of factors,strategic and tactical suprise,strategic objectives, western will, nuclear weapon use, etc.
__________________
Кавказ-Берлин
|

January 6th, 2007, 04:41 AM
|
 |
Sergeant
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 358
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Red Army = most effective force !
From what I worked out from talking to people who served in BAOR, is that it would come down too, if we run out of bullets to send down range before the Godless Commie Hordes(TM) ran out of spares to keep their tanks mobile.
They where of the opinion that if it didn't involve so many casualties, it wouldd be the worlds biggest comedy routine. Then it'd all be down to whose nerve broke first, and started hurling Brick bats at each other.
BAOR's main role was that of speed bump, and there was one fiction book which ended with BAOR getting Tac nuked by it's own side.
|

January 6th, 2007, 10:13 AM
|
 |
Captain
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Italy
Posts: 902
Thanks: 0
Thanked 55 Times in 51 Posts
|
|
Re: Red Army = most effective force !
"You can just as easily take out large sections of roads, crossroads etc with modern engineer and demolition equipment so as to make them unusable (as roads etc) for quite some time."
I don't know. You can put some demolition charges on the key points of a bridge and continue to use it until the last minute, then blow it up. Railroads are easy to take out too. But how would you destroy a paved road? Explosive charges? You will need to drill a lot of holes. Buldozers?
Tarmac and the underlying layers seem pretty hard for your typical dozer blade to negotiate quickly. At any rate every time I have seen it removed specialized equipment was used.And that hardware was comparatively rare.
I will also note that from what I remember from their doctrine the soviets emphasized the use of forward detachments to seize key passage points.That could be bad news for a bunch of engineers trying frantically to fill a road with holes.
"Tracked vehicles and all terrain wheeled vehicles can, but trucks will quickly become stuck"
I will note that most soviet vehicles have comparatively long unrefueled cruising ranges (like in the case of river fording it was accomplished with trade offs, see BMP-1 rear doors). The T-62 and the BMP-1 can, on paper, do more than 600Km. The T-55 can, on paper, do 600km, and so on.Those are not a trivial distances in Western Europe. I suspect that it was done on purpose to enable them to quickly seize NATO airbases and other key objectives without the hassle of dragging fuel trucks along. Which is not to say that trucks will not be needed but that "reasonable disruption" might be called in question. Again the specific historical period is important.
|

January 6th, 2007, 11:39 AM
|
Corporal
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 51
Thanks: 0
Thanked 5 Times in 1 Post
|
|
Re: Red Army = most effective force ! *DELETED*
Post deleted by baggypants
|

January 6th, 2007, 12:10 PM
|
Major
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Kladno, Czech Republic
Posts: 1,176
Thanks: 12
Thanked 49 Times in 44 Posts
|
|
Re: Red Army = most effective force !
The road range is problematic the moment you have to go off-road. Even more problematic the moment you have to fight, as that includes lots of dashes to the nearest cover, reversing etc. 
__________________
This post, as well as being an ambassador of death for the enemies of humanity, has a main message of peace and friendship.
|

January 8th, 2007, 11:03 AM
|
Corporal
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 104
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Red Army = most effective force !
[/quote]
How big would the initial success be, How much territory could have been occupied in that golden period?
[/quote]
depending on operational/ and some strategic suprise being achieved by the WAPA, assuming moderate WP air superiority for the first few days, and moderate SF action, all within the 1980-85 timeframe, i would give the WP good chances in breaking NORTHAG completly. the belgiums and dutch are good soliders and each have national distinctive charachteristics (IIRC the belgiums could mobilise very quickly, and the dutch had a very smart supply system), but the real question would have been if they could retreat fast enough to keep their armies intact. if NORTHAG was smart and the germans did not insist on saving Hamburg AND the dutch and belgiums could save their army in a retreat they, together with BOAR and the germans, could probablly have stablised the line at Hannover by D+3/5. OTOH the chance that the dutch or belgiums would simply disintigrate given the equipment pairing (old Leos against T-72/80s/ BMPs) was simply very large in such great terrain. CENTAG and US VII Corps OTOH would probablly have stopped them within 20-50km, at least until the second echalon would hit.
@on supply and obstacles.
austria was "obstacle mad" and prepped everything imaginable for demolition, also it had the heaviest fortified lines in europe (possible exception of the swiss), and still the ability of solid engineers and good planning to overcome these hindrances are not that great, IF terrain and weather play their part. having said this the germans were perfectly willing to blow everything to hold the WP, this included even "over the road canals" (water cannals that are in effect "reverse bridges" over a roadway, if you know what i mean) - the questions is how often you are actually able to do this: demo lines are very easily cut by arty fire, especially 120mm airburst (i have no idea why, angle maybe?), also you can simply kill the demo team instead, there are a lot of options, the point being that at 10-25% faliure rating for each obstacle you will have a lot of obstacles left open that you PLAN on being closed, it makes your reserves very hard to position. as PLASMACRAB correctly pointed out, most of not all transportation infrastructure build in many european countries (incl. germany) post war had very definte national defence guidelines, there are dozens of interesting websites and pictures on the web for anyone that is intersted. NARWAN i talked to a HV District commander (Tromso) some years ago and he also confirmed that you, like austria, had pre-mined basicaly everything he said however the main problem was not the 51st(?) MRD advancing out of Kola but was the SOV airborne and marine forces landing in your area and capture the mob locations.
BAGGYPANTS talked about the high casulties needed to "breach" obstacles with speed - i agree. the only real cliche that is certainly right was the WAPA acceptance of casulties compared with western armies - you can see it in what they consider the minimum for combat effective (a MRR)= 30-40% (!!) while IIRC in the US it would be 50-60%.
if the WP was unlucky and the terrain was really muddy and wet, fine, little off-road movement of supplies possible, but in the NORTHAG area the monster ZIL trucks were perfectly capable of driving over fields, and most trucks have a recovery winch anyway. furthermore you cannot compare germany WWII with germany of today, there are MANY TIME more roads and villages today and the armies really are SMALLER then they were then (the amount of vehicles actually in use is not disimilar).
logistics is a science, not (or not only) an art, and people learn how to do it for YEARS. as i mentioned, the WAPA had some very easy solutions to complex problems, and traffic management for WAPA was very easy as they have their own "Kommandanten Force" troops that were its own command and purly in charge of managing traffic and logistic flow, unlike the west, that left it all the poor MPs who would be complelty overwhelmed. just imagine an expected 3-6 MILLION german refugees heading west in their own personal autombiles, all within 1 week, and you can see that the main thing getting in the way of the WP tanks could very well be VW Beatles...
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Hybrid Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|