User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 1/29/2015 10:49:47 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Download Wargame: AirLand Battle or European Escalation and profit Ridiculously hard Red dragon is more fun though better campaign still hard as fuck 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2015 10:50:01 PM EDT
[#2]
They had cooler looking uniforms and personal gear.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2015 10:55:47 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They had cooler looking uniforms and personal gear. Who? You can't seriously mean the WARPAC forces? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2015 11:09:38 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Who? You can't seriously mean the WARPAC forces? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
They had cooler looking uniforms and personal gear. Who? You can't seriously mean the WARPAC forces? Absolutely, just a style observation of course. Especially the East Germans and Czechs. Very cool combination of old and new. Very organic designs while our stuff was so utilitarian and beyond boring. Just my opinion. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2015 11:16:39 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Absolutely, just a style observation of course. Especially the East Germans and Czechs. Very cool combination of old and new. Very organic designs while our stuff was so[ utilitarian and beyond boring. Just my opinion. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
They had cooler looking uniforms and personal gear. Who? You can't seriously mean the WARPAC forces? Absolutely, just a style observation of course. Especially the East Germans and Czechs. Very cool combination of old and new. Very organic designs while our stuff was so[ utilitarian and beyond boring. Just my opinion. I guess we are gonna have to agree to disagree on that... Just for fun you should go use that old field gear, in the cold, both east and west and get back to me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2015 11:23:38 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I guess we are gonna have to agree to disagree on that... Just for fun you should go use that old field gear, in the cold, both east and west and get back to me. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
They had cooler looking uniforms and personal gear. Who? You can't seriously mean the WARPAC forces? Absolutely, just a style observation of course. Especially the East Germans and Czechs. Very cool combination of old and new. Very organic designs while our stuff was so[ utilitarian and beyond boring. Just my opinion. I guess we are gonna have to agree to disagree on that... Just for fun you should go use that old field gear, in the cold, both east and west and get back to me. I have. Their cold weather jackets are very warm. I was never impressed with the M65 field jacket when I was in. ETA: Oh you said field gear. Well some of it was practical enough, especially the East German stuff. The canteens and leather tab field gear of some of them not so much. Again, it was only an aesthetic argument. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2015 11:46:30 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Honestly from what I can tell reading most of these plans, most of the plans were basically counter attacks to NATO invasions (Best defense is a strong offense, or nuke his land and fight on it). The 1950's plan is actually rather defensive in nature, but they turn more aggressive as time goes on, but there is a defensive part to the 86 plan. Generally speaking the soviets didn't want to "conquer" the west (that was western propoganda mostly), I think they just wanted not fight on their own soil. No one in the warpac seriously thought (or at least hoped) the soviets would march west. Generally the Soviets based on their WW2 experience wanted a nice big buffer with the west beacuse the experience of fighting WW2 on their ground was not a particularly pleasant one. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Yup, thats why I said to take those reports with a huge grain of salt in some cases, some are ok. That view was totally disproven when the various Warpac oplans were "found" after the cold war ended. Every version of the CSLA (czech) plan aside from the 50's version has tactical nuke use featured prominently as part of the plan. Nuke the shit out of the west and march west... The plans are pretty optimistic as well, but I guess if you nuke the fuck out of everything before you step on the gas you don't expect much resistance. Why did they plan on going West in the first place? I get the whole East vs. West thing but...they had absolutely nothing to gain except an irradiated wasteland. Every previous war in history was basically about land. If you destroy the land, what's the point? Honestly from what I can tell reading most of these plans, most of the plans were basically counter attacks to NATO invasions (Best defense is a strong offense, or nuke his land and fight on it). The 1950's plan is actually rather defensive in nature, but they turn more aggressive as time goes on, but there is a defensive part to the 86 plan. Generally speaking the soviets didn't want to "conquer" the west (that was western propoganda mostly), I think they just wanted not fight on their own soil. No one in the warpac seriously thought (or at least hoped) the soviets would march west. Generally the Soviets based on their WW2 experience wanted a nice big buffer with the west beacuse the experience of fighting WW2 on their ground was not a particularly pleasant one. after reading some of these plans I absolutely agree. and being young enough to not have any emotional attachment to the cold war I have to agree. soviets didn't care so much about taking over the west, they just wanted to come far enough west to not have to fight on their own soil and like you said, wanted a "safety buffer" between us and them. and I guess a belt of iradiated wasteland between them and the west is a pretty good way to create such a buffer. despite all their rhetoric and propoganda the soviets seemed to have a more reactionary stance. and in some cases even a sort of victimhood attitude. "here's all those filthy capitalists who just want to destroy our peaceful beautiful communist land of plenty" though in fairness a lot of the NATO plans also seem very reactionary. neither side really seemed to PLAN on being the first to strike. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2015 11:48:09 PM EDT
[#8]
It can't possibly simulate the "joy" of any of that do you get to hear your crew cussing? I wanna see a vid of the track fix if there is one. The fix of the track is just a graphic of the detracked vehicle. A timer comes up simulating the time to fix depending on the extent of the damage, number of available crew, other support vehicles with spares, etc. nearby. When timer is up, fixed tracks show up on vehicle, completely what you'd expect from a military trainer simulator 
The CIA reports like Harlikwin said do have to be taken with a shaker of salt, because the reports are from that time period. You might see better info looking at the stuff from after the fall of the Soviet Union to get a better idea of what the actual plans were for all parties involved in a given time frame. I just thought they were interesting reading. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2015 11:54:23 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The fix of the track is just a graphic of the detracked vehicle. A timer comes up simulating the time to fix depending on the extent of the damage, number of available crew, other support vehicles with spares, etc. nearby. When timer is up, fixed tracks show up on vehicle, completely what you'd expect from a military trainer simulator
The CIA reports like Harlikwin said do have to be taken with a shaker of salt, because the reports are from that time period. You might see better info looking at the stuff from after the fall of the Soviet Union to get a better idea of what the actual plans were for all parties involved in a given time frame. Quote HistoryQuoted:
It can't possibly simulate the "joy" of any of that do you get to hear your crew cussing? I wanna see a vid of the track fix if there is one. The fix of the track is just a graphic of the detracked vehicle. A timer comes up simulating the time to fix depending on the extent of the damage, number of available crew, other support vehicles with spares, etc. nearby. When timer is up, fixed tracks show up on vehicle, completely what you'd expect from a military trainer simulator
The CIA reports like Harlikwin said do have to be taken with a shaker of salt, because the reports are from that time period. You might see better info looking at the stuff from after the fall of the Soviet Union to get a better idea of what the actual plans were for all parties involved in a given time frame. ya know it certainly seems to me as well that the more outlying soviet states were writeoffs to keep things from getting into russia proper. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2015 12:05:44 AM EDT
[#10]
Yea, basically armed satellite countries acting as big buffer zones.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2015 12:09:15 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yea, basically armed satellite countries acting as big buffer zones. sucks to be them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2015 12:38:54 AM EDT
[#12]
I was a crewchief in an attack helicopter company in Germany in the late 70's. While we trained hard to take out Soviet tanks with TOW missiles, I think most of us assumed we'd be nuked or gassed in our beds before we knew there was a war on.
The plan seemed to be that somehow there'd be some warning that would cause our forces to be put on alert and disperse to off base areas before the attack came. Seems pretty unlikely to me that the Soviets would have told us they were coming. While we trained for conventional warfare, I think most of us believed that nukes would start flying as soon as the bad guys crossed the border. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2015 12:48:44 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The fix of the track is just a graphic of the detracked vehicle. A timer comes up simulating the time to fix depending on the extent of the damage, number of available crew, other support vehicles with spares, etc. nearby. When timer is up, fixed tracks show up on vehicle, completely what you'd expect from a military trainer simulator
The CIA reports like Harlikwin said do have to be taken with a shaker of salt, because the reports are from that time period. You might see better info looking at the stuff from after the fall of the Soviet Union to get a better idea of what the actual plans were for all parties involved in a given time frame. I just thought they were interesting reading. Quote HistoryQuoted:
It can't possibly simulate the "joy" of any of that do you get to hear your crew cussing? I wanna see a vid of the track fix if there is one. The fix of the track is just a graphic of the detracked vehicle. A timer comes up simulating the time to fix depending on the extent of the damage, number of available crew, other support vehicles with spares, etc. nearby. When timer is up, fixed tracks show up on vehicle, completely what you'd expect from a military trainer simulator
The CIA reports like Harlikwin said do have to be taken with a shaker of salt, because the reports are from that time period. You might see better info looking at the stuff from after the fall of the Soviet Union to get a better idea of what the actual plans were for all parties involved in a given time frame. I just thought they were interesting reading. They need to upgrade it so its more of an experience  Cursing, your crew sweating trying to get it fixed, more cursing when shit doesn't work etc...
And yeah, the CIA stuff is period, so are the warpac documents, one is what the west thought they would vs. what they would actually do. We look at this 25 years later with some hindsight. In general most of the CIA stuff has some truth and a fair amount of biased fiction in it IMO. The same would be true if you would read the GRU/KGB files I imagine. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2015 12:49:51 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I was a crewchief in an attack helicopter company in Germany in the late 70's. While we trained hard to take out Soviet tanks with TOW missiles, I think most of us assumed we'd be nuked or gassed in our beds before we knew there was a war on. The plan seemed to be that somehow there'd be some warning that would cause our forces to be put on alert and disperse to off base areas before the attack came. Seems pretty unlikely to me that the Soviets would have told us they were coming. While we trained for conventional warfare, I think most of us believed that nukes would start flying as soon as the bad guys crossed the border. Turns out you were right 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2015 8:45:49 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why did they plan on going West in the first place? I get the whole East vs. West thing but...they had absolutely nothing to gain except an irradiated wasteland. Every previous war in history was basically about land. If you destroy the land, what's the point? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Yup, thats why I said to take those reports with a huge grain of salt in some cases, some are ok. That view was totally disproven when the various Warpac oplans were "found" after the cold war ended. Every version of the CSLA (czech) plan aside from the 50's version has tactical nuke use featured prominently as part of the plan. Nuke the shit out of the west and march west... The plans are pretty optimistic as well, but I guess if you nuke the fuck out of everything before you step on the gas you don't expect much resistance. Why did they plan on going West in the first place? I get the whole East vs. West thing but...they had absolutely nothing to gain except an irradiated wasteland. Every previous war in history was basically about land. If you destroy the land, what's the point? The Russians feared the West, and they still do. Paranoia is a cornerstone of their national psyche. Much like a cornered animal they're prone to attacking. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2015 9:27:49 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The Russians feared the West, and they still do. Paranoia is a cornerstone of their national psyche. Much like a cornered animal they're prone to attacking. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Yup, thats why I said to take those reports with a huge grain of salt in some cases, some are ok. That view was totally disproven when the various Warpac oplans were "found" after the cold war ended. Every version of the CSLA (czech) plan aside from the 50's version has tactical nuke use featured prominently as part of the plan. Nuke the shit out of the west and march west... The plans are pretty optimistic as well, but I guess if you nuke the fuck out of everything before you step on the gas you don't expect much resistance. Why did they plan on going West in the first place? I get the whole East vs. West thing but...they had absolutely nothing to gain except an irradiated wasteland. Every previous war in history was basically about land. If you destroy the land, what's the point? The Russians feared the West, and they still do. Paranoia is a cornerstone of their national psyche. Much like a cornered animal they're prone to attacking. You can thank the Mongols for that little personality trait. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2015 9:31:00 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You can thank the Mongols for that little personality trait. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Yup, thats why I said to take those reports with a huge grain of salt in some cases, some are ok. That view was totally disproven when the various Warpac oplans were "found" after the cold war ended. Every version of the CSLA (czech) plan aside from the 50's version has tactical nuke use featured prominently as part of the plan. Nuke the shit out of the west and march west... The plans are pretty optimistic as well, but I guess if you nuke the fuck out of everything before you step on the gas you don't expect much resistance. Why did they plan on going West in the first place? I get the whole East vs. West thing but...they had absolutely nothing to gain except an irradiated wasteland. Every previous war in history was basically about land. If you destroy the land, what's the point? The Russians feared the West, and they still do. Paranoia is a cornerstone of their national psyche. Much like a cornered animal they're prone to attacking. You can thank the Mongols for that little personality trait. And Swedes, Poles, French and Krauts. Russia has been invaded countless times. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2015 9:32:31 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And Swedes, Poles, French and Krauts. Russia has been invaded countless times. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Yup, thats why I said to take those reports with a huge grain of salt in some cases, some are ok. That view was totally disproven when the various Warpac oplans were "found" after the cold war ended. Every version of the CSLA (czech) plan aside from the 50's version has tactical nuke use featured prominently as part of the plan. Nuke the shit out of the west and march west... The plans are pretty optimistic as well, but I guess if you nuke the fuck out of everything before you step on the gas you don't expect much resistance. Why did they plan on going West in the first place? I get the whole East vs. West thing but...they had absolutely nothing to gain except an irradiated wasteland. Every previous war in history was basically about land. If you destroy the land, what's the point? The Russians feared the West, and they still do. Paranoia is a cornerstone of their national psyche. Much like a cornered animal they're prone to attacking. You can thank the Mongols for that little personality trait. And Swedes, Poles, French and Krauts. Russia has been invaded countless times. Truth. In my readings, though, it seems like the Mongols were by far the bloodiest and furthest reaching in their history. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2015 10:25:53 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have. Their cold weather jackets are very warm. I was never impressed with the M65 field jacket when I was in. ETA: Oh you said field gear. Well some of it was practical enough, especially the East German stuff. The canteens and leather tab field gear of some of them not so much. Again, it was only an aesthetic argument. Our Bundeswehr partner unit brought over some East German gear after reunification-their NBC gear was absolute clown shoes, and the tab on the bayonet sheath for wire cutting broke off the first time we tried to cut concertina with it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2015 10:42:10 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
US M60/M48's M113s Cobra M109's for arty among others CAS, F4's Germans Leopard1/M48's Marder They didn't really do much in the way of attach helos. MBB105 but I think that was the 80's IIRC M109's for arty among others CAS, Alpha jets Soviet T64 (still the premier tank in the 70s) T72 T62's/T55 for second and third line divisions. BTR-70's BMP1 CAS: Su-17's mainly The rest of the Warpac was generally running T55's with various upgrades during the 70's. IIRC they didn't get T72's till the early 80's. They had their own versions of BTRs. CAS was generally older soviet models, SU-7's SU-22's. Generally speaking NATO didn't have much of an advantage equipment wise as happened in the 80's. T-64/72's could easily frontally kill M60's M48s and Leopard 1's. Again, the war would have been nuclear on day 1. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The thread about the Fulda Gap has me wondering: What equipment would've each side had in the mid-70s? I know that the M60 would've been our MBT and the T72 theirs probably, but what about APC (M113 v. BMP or BTR?), rotary and fixed wing (Cobra v. Hind? no idea on fixed), artillery (no clue), etc? I suppose Huey and Mi8 would've been the mules of the air still. Were there a lot of M48s and T55 or 64 around? What CAS aircraft were there for each side since the A10 and SU25 weren't yet operational, correct? This is all conventional, of course. CBRN is a completely different matter. I was born in '81 so by the time I could care about such things we had Apaches, A10s, F15/16s, and Abrams everywhere. ETA: if you have a link that's a good resource for me to check out I'd love to have it. Thanks! US M60/M48's M113s Cobra M109's for arty among others CAS, F4's Germans Leopard1/M48's Marder They didn't really do much in the way of attach helos. MBB105 but I think that was the 80's IIRC M109's for arty among others CAS, Alpha jets Soviet T64 (still the premier tank in the 70s) T72 T62's/T55 for second and third line divisions. BTR-70's BMP1 CAS: Su-17's mainly The rest of the Warpac was generally running T55's with various upgrades during the 70's. IIRC they didn't get T72's till the early 80's. They had their own versions of BTRs. CAS was generally older soviet models, SU-7's SU-22's. Generally speaking NATO didn't have much of an advantage equipment wise as happened in the 80's. T-64/72's could easily frontally kill M60's M48s and Leopard 1's. Again, the war would have been nuclear on day 1. M109s and m110s at that point, Still rocking the 8 inch for extra ass whooping power |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2015 10:53:26 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And Swedes, Poles, French and Krauts. Russia has been invaded countless times. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Yup, thats why I said to take those reports with a huge grain of salt in some cases, some are ok. That view was totally disproven when the various Warpac oplans were "found" after the cold war ended. Every version of the CSLA (czech) plan aside from the 50's version has tactical nuke use featured prominently as part of the plan. Nuke the shit out of the west and march west... The plans are pretty optimistic as well, but I guess if you nuke the fuck out of everything before you step on the gas you don't expect much resistance. Why did they plan on going West in the first place? I get the whole East vs. West thing but...they had absolutely nothing to gain except an irradiated wasteland. Every previous war in history was basically about land. If you destroy the land, what's the point? The Russians feared the West, and they still do. Paranoia is a cornerstone of their national psyche. Much like a cornered animal they're prone to attacking. You can thank the Mongols for that little personality trait. And Swedes, Poles, French and Krauts. Russia has been invaded countless times. Which I don't understand. Caviar isn't that tasty. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2015 11:28:32 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: after reading some of these plans I absolutely agree. and being young enough to not have any emotional attachment to the cold war I have to agree. soviets didn't care so much about taking over the west, they just wanted to come far enough west to not have to fight on their own soil and like you said, wanted a "safety buffer" between us and them. and I guess a belt of iradiated wasteland between them and the west is a pretty good way to create such a buffer. despite all their rhetoric and propoganda the soviets seemed to have a more reactionary stance. and in some cases even a sort of victimhood attitude. "here's all those filthy capitalists who just want to destroy our peaceful beautiful communist land of plenty" though in fairness a lot of the NATO plans also seem very reactionary. neither side really seemed to PLAN on being the first to strike. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Yup, thats why I said to take those reports with a huge grain of salt in some cases, some are ok. That view was totally disproven when the various Warpac oplans were "found" after the cold war ended. Every version of the CSLA (czech) plan aside from the 50's version has tactical nuke use featured prominently as part of the plan. Nuke the shit out of the west and march west... The plans are pretty optimistic as well, but I guess if you nuke the fuck out of everything before you step on the gas you don't expect much resistance. Why did they plan on going West in the first place? I get the whole East vs. West thing but...they had absolutely nothing to gain except an irradiated wasteland. Every previous war in history was basically about land. If you destroy the land, what's the point? Honestly from what I can tell reading most of these plans, most of the plans were basically counter attacks to NATO invasions (Best defense is a strong offense, or nuke his land and fight on it). The 1950's plan is actually rather defensive in nature, but they turn more aggressive as time goes on, but there is a defensive part to the 86 plan. Generally speaking the soviets didn't want to "conquer" the west (that was western propoganda mostly), I think they just wanted not fight on their own soil. No one in the warpac seriously thought (or at least hoped) the soviets would march west. Generally the Soviets based on their WW2 experience wanted a nice big buffer with the west beacuse the experience of fighting WW2 on their ground was not a particularly pleasant one. after reading some of these plans I absolutely agree. and being young enough to not have any emotional attachment to the cold war I have to agree. soviets didn't care so much about taking over the west, they just wanted to come far enough west to not have to fight on their own soil and like you said, wanted a "safety buffer" between us and them. and I guess a belt of iradiated wasteland between them and the west is a pretty good way to create such a buffer. despite all their rhetoric and propoganda the soviets seemed to have a more reactionary stance. and in some cases even a sort of victimhood attitude. "here's all those filthy capitalists who just want to destroy our peaceful beautiful communist land of plenty" though in fairness a lot of the NATO plans also seem very reactionary. neither side really seemed to PLAN on being the first to strike. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2015 11:30:43 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
M109s and m110s at that point, Still rocking the 8 inch for extra ass whooping power Having listened in on tapes of WP comms traffic for arty, calling for fire for them=DMV on bring your retarded kids to work day vs. calling for fire for us=AMEX black card concierge service. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2015 1:28:53 PM EDT
[#24]
Having listened in on tapes of WP comms traffic for arty, calling for fire for them=DMV on bring your retarded kids to work day vs. calling for fire for us=AMEX black card concierge service. That would have been interesting hearing the actual calls for artillery from the Commblock. 
Regimental Fire mission, you can hear that the enemy is getting a crap ton of DPICM on the other end. This series of videos filmed in Germany in the 80's on handling the Soviet onslaught might be interesting for you guys.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
