Page 10 of 12

Re: 1939 Poles errata

Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2018 12:23 am
by gebhk
Arlequin - that is the organisation in the LMG manual. Just goes to prove....something. Anyway, if the section in fact really did contain 6 men, then it was exactly like the Polish cavalry SAW section.

a separate Team
Interesting that as a consequence of combat experience, the Germans went the Polish way, ie eliminated the internal formal division of the squad into SAW and rifle teams while the British went the other way. From the point of view of this discussion however, that is immaterial, the point is that whether separate team or not, a certain number of men were involved in serving the gun rather than popping off their rifles. And in virtually all armies (at least in 1939-40) that was 3-4 men, with 3 being the most common. On top of that, in some armies (like the Polish), the SAW team had its own team leader. Otherwise, the role was undertaken by one of the squad NCOs as part of his overall duties.

The main factor is that the BREN can keep that rate of fire up for a lot longer than the BAR whose barrel would be worn out in pretty short order if it kept up that ROF.
Isn't it the point that in the 'normal' ROF, the barrel did not overheat in either weapon. I guess the wz 28 had a significantly higher maximum 'normal' ROF than the Bren because of the radiator ribbing of the barrel. It was only when you switch over to rapid fire that barrel change needs to be effected in the Bren, while the wz 28 can only afford a moderate increase in ROF before the barrel overheats. That was why the Poles were experimenting with a barrel changing design for the BAR. It was not a priority because it was realised that some time would elapse before the logistics system would be able to supply ammo to the sharp end in quantities that allowed much rapid firing to be done.

Re: 1939 Poles errata

Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2018 12:45 am
by gebhk
And pity the poor rules designer trying to convert all of this mix of varying and evolving practices into a coherent and comprehensive whole without drowning us in minute detail and special rules. Plenty of potential here for tinkering to our hearts content in our own games.
Amen to that. What makes it worse is that the various roles and equipment were not permanently grafted onto the soldiers and were changed from one circumstance to another and from one tactical situation to another. And what the top brass thought would happen, as expressed in manuals and training, was often little more than a nodding acquaintance of reality.

Re: 1939 Poles errata

Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2018 1:38 am
by john de terre neuve
and archdukek said:
And pity the poor rules designer trying to convert all of this mix of varying and evolving practices into a coherent and comprehensive whole without drowning us in minute detail and special rules. Plenty of potential here for tinkering to our hearts content in our own games.
after 10 pages the voice of reason!

Re: 1939 Poles errata

Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2018 3:26 am
by Arlequín
Pity the poor soldier. The battalion trains up in 1940 and promptly ships out to the Middle East. Two years later replacements are sent out fresh from training with the new ideas and drills. The battalion then has to knock all that out of them, so that they will do it all properly like they have been for two years.

Nobody with any sense is going to say "But that's not what we did in training Corp".

Re: 1939 Poles errata

Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2018 3:42 am
by Truscott Trotter
Nobody with any sense is going to say "But that's not what we did in training Corp".
Well they might........
......but after they had finished peeling 500lbs of spuds they wouldn't say it again :D

Re: 1939 Poles errata

Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2018 8:59 am
by BaronVonWreckedoften
Don't knock it - make sure you get issued the dodgy peeling knife, and that's your entire war done and dusted.

Re: 1939 Poles errata

Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2018 9:16 am
by oozeboss
Truscott Trotter wrote:
Mon Nov 12, 2018 3:42 am
Nobody with any sense is going to say "But that's not what we did in training Corp".
Well they might........
......but after they had finished peeling 500lbs of spuds they wouldn't say it again :D
500?

Got off lightly.

Re: 1939 Poles errata

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2018 8:45 am
by gebhk
:)

To return briefly to the Poles......

The following comments about the supports' lists are not an argument for change, just comments. Do with them as you will ;)

List 1
The medical orderly was part of a team of three with two stretcher bearers. Rare for him to operate individually.

Short of kidnapping a passing civilian with his car (the platoon having someone who can drive in its ranks was about as likely as the Martians landing on the head of the Loch Ness Monster), I can’t see where a rifle platoon would acquire a car. And even if it did, where would they obtain fuel etc for it?

Wire cutting was entirely within the capability of the rifle squad so I don’t see the point of a wire cutting team.

Engineer teams usually came in sixes (section leader + 5 pioneers)

Re: 1939 Poles errata

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2018 8:47 am
by gebhk
List 2
The AT rifle had a crew of 1

The 46mm mortars had a crew of 4. The use of single mortars was verboten by manuals and C&P. A platoon should receive support from 2-3 mortars under the command of a sergeant or none at all.

Re: 1939 Poles errata

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2018 8:52 am
by gebhk
List 3
There were no snipers let alone sniper teams in the Polish Army. However 1-2 men in a squad could be upgraded to sharpshooters.