John

You re right about the rifle does not make the man. There is a big difference between a 'sharpshooter' and a 'sniper'. The sniper rifles themselves were pretty much all the same standard and the calibres weren't that far apart.It was more to do with the user, although the Japanese had a 7.5mm rifle which had a barrel so long that the propellant was completely burned out by the time the round left the barrel, which in turn meant that was no 'muzzle flash' whatsover. This meant that a well concealed sniper would very unlikely be discovered. A massive advantage, which is unrivalled even today. I have actually fired the three main wwii rifles,the mosin-nagant , mauser kar98 and the lee-enfield ,and i must admit, the differences in accuracy and comfort were minor, howver, being a Brit, if push comes to shove, I'd run with the lee-enfield.

Sounds like the famous incident of 'Three Ships Before Breakfast', where a German U-boat sunk three ships, I believe the Hogue, the Cressy and the Aboukir.He torpedoed them one after the other after they went in turn to assist each other after their Captains believed the ships had hit mines. I'll have to dig up the history out of the books at a later date. I think Firefly will know more about this , though. wub.gif

How did the USSR achieve Air superiority over the Luftwaffe? I cannot think of any aces, so did they achieve this by the German withdrawal to protect the homeland?

How collectable are these?

I don't understand why the German High Command rated Patton so highly. He was not used much, and he wasted men like no tomorrow. Maybe it was because he was daring ....... and an aggressive commander.

I have a term for any uninteresting unit... its 'Fish and Chip shop mob' wub.gif

On its own ground, definitely the Merkava. It could be a tricky one, as their concepts are different. The Merkava was certainly not built for speed or manoeverability. It was built for maximum protection. It also stores a large array of weapons ans has an enormous amount of ammunition. It is designed to stay on the battle field for long periods of time, pretty much self contained. The Challenger 2 certainly is well up there, but seems to have manoevreability, as one of its characteristics as well as massive slabbed armour. It seems to more of an offensive MBT , with all the armament emphasis around the main gun. The Merkava has all sorts on it from grenade launcher, 60mm mortar, .50 cal, 7.62mm, as well as some reports stating that it can now launch missiles down its barrel.It is also more of a defensive tank, designed to protect Israel from some of its neighbours.... wub.gif

Today's superior tank has to be the Merkava. The IDF have the most modern tank fighting experience in the world, and consequently developed their own armour through that experience. Their main aim was crew survival and protection, and firing first, which why the commander's job was the most dangerous as they always had their heads exposed. The tank is the world's heaviest, but still has an extremely low silhouette, particularly the turret, which has no ammunition stored above the turret ring. The Merkava is also one of the only tanks to the engine at the front for that extra bit of protection. It has an enormous array of weaponry, and the later MKs have 360 degree cctv built into it. All in all , awesome.

A butcher's blade...

Thankyou Aviator. A good post. I have seen that a firm has developed a 9mm weapon for shooting around the corner. The gun is hinged in the middle, and all the working parts are forward of the join, which has a video camera under the barrel , with a small monitor with a built in sight at the shoulder end. Bizarre, but alot of police/SF around the world have bought it. animal

But Rommel lost... and was beaten by Monty. I hope no-one will sugest Patton. I see him as wasteful with his men's lives and very ambitious.

You lot clearly know nothing! Anyone can clearly see that it is HMS Belfast... I can just see Ken Livingstone 's office in the background.... I'm going for USS Misssouri. :blink:

Which was the least common medal od WW1, less gallantry?

I don't think the D-Day landings would have entirely been repulsed. They may have lost a beach or two, which would have given a longer timescale. Also, Allied Naval gunfire was enormous, and as if that wasn't enough, we had total air superiority. Even if Hitler had brought up Tank Divisions, they would have been broken up by the Typhoon , Tempest etc ground attack that proved so destructable at that time. As for the Russians, they already had the Axis forces in retreat, and had done for some time, so that would be probably an unlikely outcome.

What is the largest RN ship this country ha :blink: s ever seen?

For a supposed finsihed campaign, why is it taking so long to get things sorted out over there?

Servants of the Crown do 16 years for their LSGC, because they only serve 22 years. The fire brigade serve 30 years and get theirs at 22 years.

So what did the Gardai have?

Yup, 1930s Japan... cheeky

What was bully beef? How did they cook anything in all that mud?

Oh well, they still don't now, though I did enjoy the Blck Sea... but than that would have been covered years later at Gallipoli....

Sounds bizarre, and very interesting. So good old Abe wasn't a particularly good bloke then. Funny, how history is selective... I still don't understand why they picked up arms , to be become the most casualty intensive war has has ever seen. Oh well... :blink:

I have some Civil Defence badges. Are they worth anything? Incidentally what did these folk do ?

What was the name of the weapon that the Germans developed for firing around corners?

The only thing I can think of, that they ate, are those ships biscuits , full of weevils. Did they ever get any fresh? What did they cook with? I know that the Germans regularly rotated their troops through the trenches and were encouraged to grow crops behind the lines. What did Tommy eat?