Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Extended Assault in PG (M) v. PG
07-05-2022, 11:01 PM,
#6
RE: Extended Assault in PG (M) v. PG
And let's take a look at one Army's doctrine of the time.  From FM-17-40, Armored Infantry Company, November 1944:

f. Supporting Weapons...

(4) Vehicular Weapons.  Armored infantry normally fights dismounted. Under favorable conditions or in an emergency, either mounted or dismounted, is used to support the attack.  if mounted vehicular weapons are used, vehicle must be placed in position defilade and dispersed.  When not used for fire support, vehicles are kept in concealed and covered positions prepared to move forward upon call.  They should be disposed to protect the flank by fire against a counterattack from the front or flanks.

From pg 58 https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc11807/

Nowhere in the manual is it suggested to attack mounted in the halftracks nor have the halftracks conduct the assault with the dismounted infantry.  If used in the attack, the HTs support by fire from protected defilades   So how do you do that in Panzer Grenadier?
goosebrown likes this post
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Extended Assault in PG (M) v. PG - by Blackcloud6 - 06-13-2022, 04:35 AM
RE: Extended Assault in PG (M) v. PG - by Blackcloud6 - 07-05-2022, 11:01 PM
RE: Extended Assault in PG (M) v. PG - by PzIVF2 - 07-10-2022, 03:07 AM
RE: Extended Assault in PG (M) v. PG - by PzIVF2 - 07-16-2022, 05:21 AM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)