Equip Your WWII Army

Status
Not open for further replies.
I picked the Soviet T34 series as my primary tank because as a tanker believe me crew comfort takes a back seat to mechanical reliability and ease of operation. The M1 was not designed for a lot of crew comfort either, but you learn to improvise and adjust.

Mechanical reliability? Have you looked at the problems the T-34 had? Take a look what happened to the 2 T-34s the Soviets gave the US Army to test. The Shermans tracks had twice the service life of the T-34s. Have you ever been in a T-34? The M1s crew comport is a limo compare T-34. Here's a deal go drive a T-34 from Kuwait city to Bagdad and see if you still feel that way.

Russian vets that drove both like the Sherman for it's strengths and understood its weakness.
 
I like the Tempo G1200 off-road vehicle, with two engines and suspension that looks VERY trick, yeah it's German but it's quite fly.

the sucker not only had four-wheel drive, but, four-wheel steering.

two 600cc two-stroke two-cylinder motors! (I can presume they're light-ish on fuel consumption?)

top speed, 40 miles per hour.

behold,

http://www.tempo-dienst.de/Bilder/werksfotos.htm
http://www.military-vehicle-photos.com/picture/number608.asp
http://www.military-vehicle-photos.com/picture/number606.asp
http://www.armyvehicles.dk/tempog1200.htm
http://lanemotormuseum.org/tempo-g1200-1937

Tempo G1200.JPG
 
I have no need for heavy bombers because the Mosquito can do 90% of the job and strategic bombing is a waste of my resources.

Try reading-


The Collapse of the German War Economy, 1944-1945: Allied Air Power and the German National Railway
Alfred C. Mierzejewski


Tony
 
Mechanical reliability? Have you looked at the problems the T-34 had? Take a look what happened to the 2 T-34s the Soviets gave the US Army to test. The Shermans tracks had twice the service life of the T-34s. Have you ever been in a T-34? The M1s crew comport is a limo compare T-34. Here's a deal go drive a T-34 from Kuwait city to Bagdad and see if you still feel that way.

Russian vets that drove both like the Sherman for it's strengths and understood its weakness.

I also like the sloped armor and the main gun. I can change a track in an hour or two. Yes I have seen the crew compartment, it does not look like a smooth ride but soldiers will make modifications to add some crew comforts. Yes the Sherman was a great tank, but if my life is on the line, give me the armor and main gun of the T34. German Panthers and Tigers were also great for hitting power and survivability, but are a too maintenance intensive and bug prone for me.
 
Both Sweden and Poland went the American route and adopted the BAR and Browning M1917 water cooled HMG. I don't see any reason for a belt fed BAR in the aircraft role, the aircraft variant of the M1919 was proven and could be built on M1917 tooling.

FN also came up with a BAR with quick change barrel post war. This eventually led to the current NATO standard MAG 58.

Sweden probably should have just licensed the MG34 in the mid-Thirties. A 6.5mm version should be doable, though the MG34 did have reliability issues.

Sweden and Belgium adapted license produced FN version of the BAR - with rapidly exchangable barrels several years before ww2. Sweden in 1937 (6,5mm Kg m/38) and Belgium in 1932 (7,65mm Mle D).
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Interesting…


Ground

Pistol – M1911 .45
Rifle (bolt action) Enfield .303
Rifle - M1 Garand
Submachine gun – PPSh-41
Light squad MG – MG 42
Heavy MG – Browning M2 .50 (air cooled)
Light anti-tank weapon – RPzB 88mm Panzershreck
Light anti-tank gun – PaK 38 50mm
Anti-tank Gun – PaK 43/41 88mm
Light AAA – Oerlikon 20mm
Medium AAA – Bofors (Chrysler) M1 40mm
Heavy AAA - M2 90mm with SCR-584 director
Very Heavy AAA – 12.8cm FlaK 40 Zwilling (twin mount)
Light utility vehicle – Willys MB
Supply Truck - Studebaker US6 (M16A)
APC – Sd.Kfz 251
Tank – M-26 or T-34/85
Heavy Tank – IS-2
Medium Artillery – QF 25 pounder MK II
Heavy Artillery – 155mm Gun M2 (Long Tom)
Very Heavy Artillery – 240mm M1
SP Artillery – M-12 Motor Gun Carriage
Assault Gun – ISU-152-2

Naval

DD – Sumner class
CL – Mogami class (yes, I know they are usually listed as CA, but they were originally launched as CL)
CA – Baltimore Class
Battleship – Iowa Class
Escort carrier – Commencement Bay Class
Fleet carrier – Essex Class (long hull, CV 14 onward)
Submarine – Balao class (the Sen Taka class was too late to make the list)
Fighter – F4U
Dive Bomber – Douglas Dauntless
Torpedo Plane – TBF
Aerial torpedo – Mark 13 Mod 10 (best air deployed torpedo ever)
Submarine torpedo – Type 95
Surface ship torpedo – Mark 15 Mod 3 (I love aspects of the Type 93, but the danger of the oxygen fuel tanks on a surface ship more than counter balances the advantages)


Aircraft (land based)

Escort fighter – P-51D
Fighter Bomber – P-47D Block 40
Heavy fighter - Type 156 Beaufighter Mark 21
Attack (single) – Il-2/10
Attack (multi) – B-25J
Bomber (medium) – Mosquito
Bomber (heavy) – Avro Lancaster
Bomber (Very heavy) – B-29
Transport – C-46
 
Query for those who selected British CVs... uh... why? Even if they come equipped with Hellcats, Corsairs, Avengers, or even (post 1944 cutoff) Skyraiders I'd still rather have Essex-class CVs; tougher, better range, better at UnRep, larger air group...

Think the brit carriers are tougher at some points, but i feel that the british cv's are a better choice, in general slightly smaller. The US ones are too big for my feeling (too many eggs in one basket as to speak).
And for the smaller escort carriers, the brit designs are simply tougher and more efficient


Isn't the M26 tank past the early 1944 limit that the OP posted?
 
Last edited:

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Think the brit carriers are tougher at some points, but i feel that the british cv's are a better choice, in general slightly smaller. The US ones are too big for my feeling (too many eggs in one basket as to speak).
And for the smaller escort carriers, the brit designs are simply tougher and more efficient


Isn't the M26 tank past the early 1944 limit that the OP posted?

Depends on what you want a carrier to do. If you expect it to be an offensive platform, you need a big airwing. On CVE's the Commencement Bay class were able to carry almost 2/3 the airwing of full size RN fleet carriers. Again, if the reason for the carrier is to carry enough aircraft to handle the mission (which in the case of U.S. CVE was more a CAS role than simply sub hunting) the choice is dependent on the mission.
 
For ground forces, Standardize on 7.62x54R, 12.7x99mm and .45ACP. Standard rifle will be the SVT-40, SMG will be the M1A1, LMG shall be the Madsen gun, and the standard Squad MG shall be the Browning M2.

Squad MG is the LMG. Browning M2 is a battalion level weapon.

Interesting…


Ground

Pistol – M1911 .45
Rifle (bolt action) Enfield .303
Rifle - M1 Garand
Submachine gun – PPSh-41
Light squad MG – MG 42

Common mistake on this thread. You now have three different rifle calibers.
 

NothingNow

Banned
Squad MG is the LMG. Browning M2 is a battalion level weapon.

Er, Company-level MGs then. Twas working off the Doctrinal idea of having a LMG for individual use in certain fire-teams (mostly general ones, and ones with Tank Hunting kit mostly, and for every Platoon to have at least a couple of M2s. The M2 would also of course be used on everything that could feasibly take it.

Other Bizarre Doctrinal nonsense I've been working on, and thought about throwing in for this is to split Tanks up between Dedicated Tank units, and then also have a 5-Tank Platoon organically in every Mechanized or Motorized Infantry Company for well, everything, with one normally delegated to each of the Platoons and to Company HQ. Tank Destroyers and SP-Artilery would be grouped into it's normal formations, with the exception of the Sherman which have at a minimum one M4A3(105) per company, in the HQ.
Anti-air would still be a Divisional thing, unless the Division's broken down to it's constituent Brigades or Battalions for some reason, where upon it devolves to the highest Independent acting level.
 
Er, Company-level MGs then. Twas working off the Doctrinal idea of having a LMG for individual use in certain fire-teams (mostly general ones, and ones with Tank Hunting kit mostly, and for every Platoon to have at least a couple of M2s. The M2 would also of course be used on everything that could feasibly take it.

In the US Army the M1919A4 was the company MG. Battalion HMG was the M1917. They only had the M2 if they had some trucks to move it with. These were 150lbs, you can move them with hand carts or pack mules if you had to, but it's still way too heavy to issue to companies.

As for AA, you don't need them at all if you have air supremacy. Without it you're going to need them at least at the regimental level. Even 40mm Bofors can't cover a division stretched out for miles.

Why not use the SVT-40? The Russians produced over a million of the rifles during the war.

The rifle is fine, but there's no excellent LMG that fires 7.62x54R. Rifles are not as important as machine guns. It's better to chose a great machine gun and then find a rifle chambered for the same ammo to support it.
 
Last edited:
Didn't realize Navy and Air Force were part of this too.

Aircraft carrier: Essex class
Light carrier: Independence class
Battleship: None
Monitor: Roberts class
Heavy cruiser: Deutschland class
Light cruiser: Cleveland class
Destroyer: Matsu class
Ocean submarine: Type XXI class
Coastal submarine: Type XXIII class

Fighter: Hawker Tempest
Heavy bomber: B-29
Medium bomber: A-26
Night fighter: Mosquito
Reconnaissance: Ki-46
Naval fighter: F8F Bearcat
Naval bomber: Grumman Avenger
Ground attack: Il-10
Liaison: Fieseler 156
Transport: C-47
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Squad MG is the LMG. Browning M2 is a battalion level weapon.



Common mistake on this thread. You now have three different rifle calibers.


Well, I gave the Enfield a shout out since it was probably the ultimate expression of the bolt action rifle.

The Garand was simply the best personal weapon of the war, hands down. Sub guns in the American calibers were simply God-Awful, but sub guns are too handy to ignore.

The U.S. also actually USED three different/pistol rifle calibers during the war in the 30-06, the .30 carbine, and the .45. There were also .38 revolvers and even some 9mm.

Supply chain in this sort of set up are always going to be a POS unless you adopt all of a single country's weapons (and frequently not even then, as the above example indicates).

If a logical set up that would allow for a simple supply chain that might have been mentioned in the OP. However it seemed that the OP was for a mix and match.

If you want, you can just replace all the non U.S. systems with the G.I. versions. I didn't, however, understand that was being looked for since the OP states:

...could pick and choose from all the various armies equipment, how would I equip my WWII army
 
Army
Rifle: StG44 (Germany)
Pistol: Colt M1911A1 (USA)
SMG: MP40 (in 45ACP) (Germany)
LMG: MG42 (in 30-06) (Germany)
HMG: M2HB (USA)
Hand Grenades: Model 24 Hand Grenades (Germany)
Sniper Rifle: M1903 Springfield A4 (USA)
Light Mortar: Type 89 Grenades Discharger (Japan)
Medium Mortar: M1 Mortar (81mm) (USA)
Heavy Mortar: M1938 120mm Mortar (USSR)
Recoilless rifle: Bazooka (USA)
Flamethrower: M2 Flamethrower (USA)
Light Artillery: M1 pack howitzer (75mm) (USA)
Medium Artillery: M101 howitzer (105mm) (USA)
Heavy Artillery: M114 howitzer (155mm) (USA)
Super Heavy Artillery: M115 Howitzer (203mm) (USA)
MRLS: All of the Katyusha rocket launchers (USSR)
Light AAA: 20mm Oerlikon (Switzerland)
Medium AAA: 40mm Bofors (Sweden)
Heavy AAA: 90mm M1 (USA)
Very Heavy AAA: 12.8cm Flak 40 (Germany)
Radar: SCR-584 (USA)
Light Tank: M24 Chaffee (USA)
Medium Tank: T34/85 (USSR)
Heavy Tank: IS-2 (USSR)
Engineering Gear: USA
Logistic Train: USA

Navy
Aircraft Carriers: Essex Class Long Hull mod (USA)
Escort Carriers: Sangamon Class (USA) (Would went with the Commencement Bay Class but not in use in 1944)
Battleship: Iowa Class (USA)
Heavy Cruiser: Baltimore Class (USA)
Light Cruiser: Cleveland Class (USA)
Anti-Air Light Cruiser: Dido Class (UK)
Destroyer: Allen M Summer Class (USA)
Destroyer Escort: Rudderow Class (USA)
Torpedo Boat: E-boat (Germany)
Submarine: Type XXI with Japanese Long Lance Torpedoes (Germany)?
Fighter: F4U Cosair (USA)
Dive Bomber: Fairey Barracuda (UK)
Torpedo Bomber: Grumman TBF (USA)
Cargo ship: Liberty Ships (USA)
Tankers: T3 (USA)
Fleet Train: USA
Amphibious warfare Ship: USA

Air Force
Jet Fighter: Me 262 (Germany) (It would been in service before 1944 if not for Hilter)
Fighter: FW 190A-7 (Germany)
Escort Fighter: P-51D (USA)
Interceptor: Spitfire late models (UK)
Night Fighter: Mosquito (UK)
Close Air Support: IL-2 (USSR)
Medium Bomber: B-25H Mitchell (USA)
Heavy Bomber: Avro Lancaster (UK)
Flying Boat: Short Sunderland (UK)
Army Support: Westland Lysander (UK)
Medium Transport: C-47 (USA)
Heavy Transport: C-54 (USA)
Recon: FW 189 (Germany)
I went with the best from all sides.
 
The Garand was simply the best personal weapon of the war, hands down. Sub guns in the American calibers were simply God-Awful, but sub guns are too handy to ignore.
No argument there.

The U.S. also actually USED three different/pistol rifle calibers during the war in the 30-06, the .30 carbine, and the .45. There were also .38 revolvers and even some 9mm.

US only had one RIFLE cartridge. SMLE, Garand, MG42 would require .303, 30-06, and 7.92 in the same company. Most countries had one rifle cartridge and one pistol cartridge. Also the American way of doing things is a reflection of American industrial and logistical might, not something others should try to copy.

This is the problem with picking the best of each type and cram it into one army, as is the case of this thread. It only creates logistical nightmare which makes things worse. In the real world you have to make choices. Without trade offs the wish list is not interesting.
 

NothingNow

Banned
In the US Army the M1919A4 was the company MG. Battalion HMG was the M1917. They only had the M2 if they had some trucks to move it with. These were 150lbs, you can move them with hand carts or pack mules if you had to, but it's still way too heavy to issue to companies.
We're talking a more or less Fully motorized Army, so weight isn't as much of an issue, but it's also out of the necessity to support a smaller military overall, maybe able to field four divisions to europe tops.

As for AA, you don't need them at all if you have air supremacy. Without it you're going to need them at least at the regimental level. Even 40mm Bofors can't cover a division stretched out for miles.

Yeah, and I'd be planning for the likelihood that I won't have it, which again, is fairly reasonable. DIVAD has things like Bofors and 90mm guns, Battalion AD also has Bofors in quantity, with a few Oerlikons on the Crusaders and on some trucks.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
No argument there.



US only had one RIFLE cartridge. SMLE, Garand, MG42 would require .303, 30-06, and 7.92 in the same company. Most countries had one rifle cartridge and one pistol cartridge. Also the American way of doing things is a reflection of American industrial and logistical might, not something others should try to copy.

This is the problem with picking the best of each type and cram it into one army, as is the case of this thread. It only creates logistical nightmare which makes things worse. In the real world you have to make choices. Without trade offs the wish list is not interesting.

Interesting perspective. I find it to be exactly the opposite. The a la carte method allows you to select the best of each country's systems. It shows that no country did everything right, no matter how much they did well.
 
Moving on to the air force, and keeping with German unless there is a clearly superior alternative:

Aircraft:
Single engine fighter: FW 190D. Lots of good candidates here, so I went with the best German fighter.
Twin engine night fighter: De Havilland Mosquito. Clearly superior.
Ground attack aircraft: Hawker Typhoon/Tempest. Can double as fighters at need.
Medium bomber: Douglas A20 Havoc. Fast and carries a heavy load.
Heavy bomber: Consolidated B24 Liberator. Largest bomb load and greatest range, since the B29 isn't available yet.

Tactical recon: Mosquito variant.
Liaison: Fieseler Fi56 Storch. Can take off in as little as 40m and land in as little as 13m; who needs runways?
Transport: Douglas C47 Skytrain. Some of them are still flying today.
Naval patrol: Consolidated PBY Catalina.
Seaplane: Arado Ar196.

Carrier fighter: Curtiss F6F Hellcat.
Carrier dive bomber: Douglas SBD Dauntless. Newer is not always better.
Carrier torpedo bomber: Martin TBM Avenger.

Quite a mix, I know. I'd rearm them all with German 20mm cannon and MGs to simplify ammo supply, but otherwise leave them as is.
 
Last edited:
Top
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top