Yea im sure it would have ended entirely differently with those GI joes.
no i am sure if the us had planned it yes it would have ended differently
yes if the us got the fuel instead a us planned and run operation would and did do better after market garden
no the us army was not
better trained
nor more experienced
it was better equipped and better supplied
logistics wins wars
wasnt the UK mostly armed with murrican supplied tanks ?
So how come the air supply didnt really work out ?
because no one supplied their armies by air
germany supplied it by truck, train, and horse
on the western front it tried to do it by air supplying a pocket of german soldier but fell woefully short
yes and the us gave them as many tanks as they could man
just like japan with the air force the uk was bottle necked by trained operators
again look at the us advance after market garden, after the uk ‘softened;’ up germany
the red ball express was a miracle of logistics and even it could not supply the entire allied advance in europe that dwarfed the axis best pace by several times
it is possible on smaller scale actually. Did happen.
which i was talking didnt they supply like 30% of the minimum to prevent collapse
not 30% of what was required for a breakout, 30% of what was required to prevent immediate collapse and it took much of the german airforce to supply a nearly static force not one making a fast advance
I haven’t found the documents, but the configuration is possible.
Not precisely because I already explained that the lack of TNT in the Panzerblitz 2 limits them against Infantry where you have To hit them directly or very close to take down the infantry They don’t have the TNT power of the Wfr.Gr 210mm or an HVAR to take out infantry and tanks alike. The Panzerblitz fulfills one objective (tank destruction) but not the other effectively, where it barely makes an impact, and that is why the MK 108s compensate for this deficiency of the Panzerblitz 2, even though they are 14-16 Rockets
The FG42 is a carbine, a weapon specific to the Fallschirmjäger, not a machine gun; and it’s no coincidence that the MG34/42 was the one that fulfilled the purpose of a machine gun.
The only faction whose jet aircraft saw combat as interceptors, fighters, fighter-bombers, and reconnaissance aircraft
The FG42 saw Combat and the T20 did NOT, that’s the difference The Fallschirmjäger were used as riflemen after the Crete disaster and were deployed again in the Ardennes, and even then, Fallschirmjäger divisions were used How Riflemen with the FG42 or the STG44 and MKB 42
Yes in such small numbers it should be an event battle pass or premium and not tech tree again the 9000 fg42 could only arm 5 percent of the 180k paratroopers. The idea of it being made a general infantry rifle even at br5 insults the bravery of the millions of germans and allies of the axis that fought in ww2. Again neither the t20 nor the fg42 should be rifles in the tech tree. I see the brain rot has set I. Have fun playing with yourself.
7k-9k is more than 0 of the T-20 and those 230,000 Fallschirmjäger were used as firefighters with iron defenses as in Monte Casino, whether with the FG42, STG44, MG42
I’m not sure it makes sense to give this thing the Panzerblitz 2 instead of just the regular Panzerblitz. The Panzerblitz 2 was cancelled due to unsatisfactory performed and thus, unlike with the Panzerblitz, I am not aware of it being put into service. The two rockets use the same warhead so you’re not going to be losing out on AT performance either way.
It was used because reports said that a new, larger and more powerful variant of the Panzerblitz had been used, so the 2 was used There is a considerably high difference in penetration: 90 for the Panzerblitz 1 versus 180-220-300 penetration for the Panzerblitz 2
I don’t know where you heard this from, according to Military Aviation History the two rockets used the same warhead (the one from the Panzerschreck, which as you know has a much higher penetration than 90mm).
[quote=“CapitalLen, post:52, topic:175523”]
I don’t know where you heard this from, according to Military Aviation History the two rockets used the same warhead (the one from the Panzerschreck, which as you know has a much higher penetration than 90mm).
[/quote
From the information that the warheads are not the same Where is the ogive different, the one that is to the right of the ballistic layer
I’m not sure what your point is, all that image is showing is warheads for the 55mm R4M rocket (with the Panzerblitz 2 being the R4M rocket motor/body paired with the AT warhead). The original Panzerblitz was that same warhead paired with the German 80mm M8 rocket body (not to be confused with the American M8 rocket).