The Brits seem to be concentrating what little forces they have to spare, on the Mediterranean theatre. This makes some sense, as they do now seem to have sufficient forces in place to avoid losing El Iskandarîya, let alone the Suez Canal. They have, however, botched their logistics by shipping supplies into Alexandria, and then trucking them, through the desert, including areas with heavily damaged infrastructure, to Tobruch, where the port remains entirely inactive. Had they set up a convoy to Tobruch, they would likely be knocking on the doors of Bengazi right about now...It sounds like Germany has been contained but that Japan still is expanding its territory in mainland Asia. And the Middle East is still in the air. Which is good - let the Italians burn up men and equipment butting heads against the Brits.
Japan's success does put some pressure on the Soviet Union. A Japan that has secured it's own backyard and all the resources in South-East Asia, may feel confident enough to take on the Soviet Union, especially if we are still embroiled in our European war. Attempts to negotiate a non-agression pact have gone no-where, so there is a constant threat from the East, which forces the Red Army to keep substantial forces on the Manchurian border despite the fact that they could be quite helpful in the European theatre. Of course, the best case scenario is that the Japanese remain on the side-lines, allowing us to attack them at the opportune moment.I wish Allies were a tad more active in the Pacific. But what happens there, in the end, does not really matter much. Europe is the main course.
This does a disservice to the Soviet Union's Aeronautical industry. The Soviets got a license to produce the DC-3 back in 1939 after Aeroflot bought a 21 DC-3's from Douglas as a sweetener. Despite the similar appearance, the ensuing PS-84 passenger plane was quite different from the DC-3, using Shvetsov radial engines optimised for cold weather conditions and low altitude operations. (hence a lower operational ceiling and lower top speed than the DC-3) Due to the conversion to metric, structural reinforcements to the frame, and the use of thicker steel for the outer skin of the fuselage, the Soviet version was 50kg heavier, despite being 5cm shorter, and having a 19cm shorter wingspan. The planes were produced in the GAZ factories before the war, with 237 planes produced by June 1941. Immediately after Barbarossa, the Lisunov design bureau was responsible for the conversion of most of these civilian PS-84's into military transports, hence the name for the military variant: Lisunov Li-2. And then, a bunch of different purpose-built military variant started to be produced instead of the civilian variant. The Lisunov Li-2 is not directly based on lend-lease C-47's, but rather a Soviet-developed military variant of a civilian plane that was based on the DC-3. It is thus not surprising that the differences between the C-47 and the later Li-2D's (military transport) and Li-2VV's (bomber) was more pronounced than the difference between a civilian DC-3 and a PS-84.That Li-2D picture looks suspiciously like a lend lease DC3...
It appears his division lost the 'leg race' described in the last GPW update. If they cannot even be bothered to run fast for the Motherland then they are no loss.180 SD (VI SK, 4ya Armiya, 4th AG, Odessa HQ) was forced to surrender to German and Hungarian forces in Uzhorod on the 12th of September. (see GPW update to come)
A valid question.Will the Axis ever run ot of convoys?
I am disappointed the passenger version even had sound-deadening. Soviet citizens should rejoice at being deafened by the noise of glorious progress.The sound-deadening on the inside, a hold-over from the pre-war passenger version, was stripped out,
The Shvetsov M-62 radials were the Soviet copy of the Wright Cyclones they licenced in 1931. The 'optimisation' is a bit unclear, sources I've seen suggest they mostly just copied across the improvements found in the Cyclones that came with the DC-3s they brought. Indeed the Shvetsov engine design bureau was formed entirely to produce metric versions of the Wright engines and make Soviet copies which they would not need to pay a licence fee for.This does a disservice to the Soviet Union's Aeronautical industry. The Soviets got a license to produce the DC-3 back in 1939 after Aeroflot bought a 21 DC-3's from Douglas as a sweetener. Despite the similar appearance, the ensuing PS-84 passenger plane was quite different from the DC-3, using Shvetsov radial engines optimised for cold weather conditions and low altitude operations. (hence a lower operational ceiling and lower top speed than the DC-3) Due to the conversion to metric, structural reinforcements to the frame, and the use of thicker steel for the outer skin of the fuselage, the Soviet version was 50kg heavier, despite being 5cm shorter, and having a 19cm shorter wingspan
I suppose that might happen, but seems highly unlikely assumi typical British AI behaviour. Even 11 would be unlikely to pul that off.They are now 80km from Singapore, which is defended only by the brand new understrength 'Singapore HQ' which was hastily assembled to take over from the Far Eastern Theatre HQ. Unless the Allies ship in reinforcements within the next week, the UK will lose the city and all it represents.
To be fair to them, they did end up being beaten by a German Motorised Division, and it was a close-run thing. They ran quite quickly, but still lost, so they're dead to us now.It appears his division lost the 'leg race' described in the last GPW update. If they cannot even be bothered to run fast for the Motherland then they are no loss.
I guess getting deafened by the noise of glorious progress is what the passenger version of the Tupolev TB-3 is all about. Not only do you get no sound-deadening, you get an outer skin made of ill-fitting corrugated steel plates that are bound to rattle in flight.I am disappointed the passenger version even had sound-deadening. Soviet citizens should rejoice at being deafened by the noise of glorious progress.
Interesting, I should say my research on this is limited to a few online sources. While the M-62's were copies of the Wright cyclones in most respects, and 'optimisation' for low altitude flight does seem like smokescreen for bad performance, they were modified (beyond translating into metric) for improved cold weather reliability. It's not clear just how well these modifications worked, though. It's very likely the same modifications were applied to the american-made engines of the Lend-Lease C-47's. So, as I understand it, most of the design is American, but there was some cross-pollination where the M-62 got better by copying the newer Cyclones, but the newer Cyclones were themselves modified based on lessons learned from operating the M-62's in cold weather.The Shvetsov M-62 radials were the Soviet copy of the Wright Cyclones they licenced in 1931. The 'optimisation' is a bit unclear, sources I've seen suggest they mostly just copied across the improvements found in the Cyclones that came with the DC-3s they brought. Indeed the Shvetsov engine design bureau was formed entirely to produce metric versions of the Wright engines and make Soviet copies which they would not need to pay a licence fee for.
My suspicion is that the lower ceiling and weight of the Li-2 were due to the extra weight and shorter wingspan and the limitations of the copied engines, the 'optimisation' being something of a smokescreen to cover up those problems. That said once the improvements found in the more recent Cyclones were copied across to Soviet design I suspect the later Li-2s would be a lot closer in performance.
We'd prefer the British defend Singapore instead of increasing their presence in Greece, but it looks like they're not going to be doing what we prefer. As for 11, she'd need at least a full Naval Infantry Brigade to hold off the Japs, none of which have yet finished training. A small unsanctioned commando operation definitely isn't going to cut it, and the VVS isn't going to risk it's transport planes to fly troops into Singapore, not with large numbers of Japanese CAG's in the area, so they're not getting there in time anyway. And that's assuming the Brits even give us permission to go defend Singapore, which they won't because they would be rightfully worried that we would never leave, making Singapore de facto Soviet territory.I suppose that might happen, but seems highly unlikely assuming typical British AI behaviour. Even 11 would be unlikely to pul that off.
Outrun by running dogs. Sums it up really.To be fair to them, they did end up being beaten by a German Motorised Division, and it was a close-run thing. They ran quite quickly, but still lost, so they're dead to us now.
Yes. The diplo screen usually labels that “Impossible” and all you do is waste a diplomatic team if you try it.And that's assuming the Brits even give us permission to go defend Singapore, which they won't because they would be rightfully worried that we would never leave, making Singapore de facto Soviet territory.
I guess getting deafened by the noise of glorious progress is what the passenger version of the Tupolev TB-3 is all about. Not only do you get no sound-deadening, you get an outer skin made of ill-fitting corrugated steel plates that are bound to rattle in flight.
Per the several nurses and other medical professionals I've dated, that's a perfect way to maintain a perect record for safety: people aren't dead until they're warm and dead.2. The passengers would never have to worry about heat stroke.
Forces engaged in battle: | Forces killed in action: | Prisoners (of war): | |
Italy | 16.986 | 446 | 0 |
Germany | 90.555 | 3.915 | 7.192 |
AXIS | 107.541 | 4.361 | 7.192 |
Soviet Union | 162.789 | 3.037 | 0 |
Air to ground damage | KIA air crew | Fighters deployed | Fighters lost | Bombers deployed | Bombers lost | |
AXIS | 1.633 KIA | 0 | / | / | / | / |
Soviet Union | / | 40 | 127 x La-7VM (CAG) | 2 x La-7VM (CAG) | 128 x Il-10VM (CAG) | 1 x Il-10VM (CAG) |
Forces engaged in battle: | Forces killed in action: | Prisoners (of war): | |
Bulgaria | 13.995 | 902 | 0 |
Italy | 11.996 | 579 | 0 |
AXIS | 25.991 | 1.481 | 0 |
Soviet Union | 43.989 | 32 | 0 |
Air to ground damage | KIA air crew | Fighters deployed | Fighters lost | Bombers deployed | Bombers lost | |
Germany | 49 | 336 x Me-109 (Int) | 49 x Me-109 (Ftr) | |||
Soviet Union | 107 | 496 x Yak-7 (Int) | 43 x Yak-7 (Int) | 74 x TB-3 (Str) | 8 x TB-3 (Str) |
Air to ground damage | KIA air crew | Fighters deployed | Fighters lost | Bombers deployed | Bombers lost | |
Germany | 1.293 Naval Base Infrastructure 199 KM personnel KIA 12. TTF (TP) 30. UBF (SS) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Soviet Union | 0 | 0 | 64 x La-7VM (CAG) | 0 x La-7VM (CAG) | 64 x Il-10VM (CAG) | 0 x Il-10VM (CAG) |
Forces engaged in battle: | Forces killed in action: | Prisoners (of war): | |
Bulgaria | 5.996 | 122 | 0 |
Germany | 96.921 | 2.162 | 0 |
AXIS | 102.617 | 2.284 | 0 |
Soviet Union | 153.943 | 1.751 | 0 |
Air to ground damage | KIA air crew | Fighters deployed | Fighters lost | Bombers deployed | Bombers lost | |
Germany | 374 | 157 x FW-190 (Ftr) | 74 x FW-190 (Ftr) | 330 x Ju-88 (Tac) 26 x Ju-290 (Nav) | 39 x Ju-88 (Tac) 16 x Ju-290 (Nav) | |
AXIS | 1.471 KIA | 374 | ||||
Soviet Union | 142 KIA | 30 | 372 x Yak-7 (Int) 360 x La-7 (Ftr) | 6 x Yak-7 (Int) 4 x La-7 (Ftr) | 200 x Yak-4 (Tac) 480 x Il-10 (CAS) | 5 x Yak-4 (Tac) 5 x Il-10 (CAS) |
Forces engaged in battle: | Forces killed in action: | Prisoners (of war): | |
Hungary | 13.945 | 255 | 0 |
Germany | 137.155 | 3.467 | 0 |
AXIS | 151.100 | 3.722 | 0 |
Soviet Union | 216.105 | 6.522 | 0 |
Air to ground damage | KIA air crew | Fighters deployed | Fighters lost | Bombers deployed | Bombers lost | |
AXIS | 4.437 KIA | |||||
Soviet Union | 0 KIA | 70 | 372 x La-7 (Ftr) | 12 x La-7 (Ftr) | 201 x Yak-4 (Tac) 486 x Il-10 (CAS) | 7 x Yak-4 (Tac) 22 x Il-10 (CAS) |
Forces engaged in battle: | Forces killed in action: | Prisoners (of war): | |
Italy | 17.500 | 6 | 0 |
Germany | 135.280 | 3.469 | 0 |
AXIS | 152.780 | 3.475 | 0 |
Soviet Union | 136.583 | 2.649 | 0 |
Air to ground damage | KIA air crew | Fighters deployed | Fighters lost | Bombers deployed | Bombers lost | |
Germany | 1,668 Infrastructure 65.931 t of Supplies | 243 | 265 x Me-109 (Int) 93 x FW-190 (Ftr) | 86 x Me-109 (Int) 1 x FW-190 (Ftr) | 180 x Ju-88 (Tac) | 39 x Ju-88 (Tac) |
AXIS | 1.349 KIA | |||||
Soviet Union | 0 | 306 | 496 x Yak-7 (Int) 248 x La-7 (Ftr) | 88 x Yak-7 (Int) 6 x La-7 (Ftr) | 63 x TB-3 (Str) 201 x Yak-4 (Tac) 248 x Il-10 (CAS) | 12 x TB-3 (Str) 52 x Yak-4 (Tac) 6 x Il-10 (CAS) |
Forces engaged in battle: | Forces killed in action: | Prisoners (of war): | |
Germany | 103.102 | 1.868 | 0 |
Soviet Union | 139.893 | 607 | 0 |
Air to ground damage | KIA air crew | Fighters deployed | Fighters lost | Bombers deployed | Bombers lost | |
AXIS | 302 KIA | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Soviet Union | 0 KIA | 1 | 124 x La-7 (Ftr) | 1 x La-7 (Ftr) | 245 x Il-10 (CAS) | 0 x Il-10 (CAS) |
Forces engaged in battle: | Forces killed in action | Prisoners of War | |
Bulgaria | 17.794 | 325 | 0 |
Germany | 112.524 | 2.857 | 0 |
AXIS | 130.318 | 3.182 | 0 |
Soviet Union | 121.771 | 3.660 | 0 |
Air to ground damage | KIA air crew | Fighters deployed | Fighters lost | Bombers deployed | Bombers lost | |
Slovakia | 60 | 0 | 0 | 95 x A.304 (CAS) | 20 x A.304 (CAS) | |
AXIS | 3.114 KIA | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Soviet Union | 0 KIA | 65 | 496 x Yak-7 (Int) 369 x La-7 (Ftr) | 1 x Yak-7 (Int) 14 x La-7 (Ftr) | 201 x Yak-4 (Tac) 486 x Il-10 (CAS) | 2 x Yak-4 (Tac) 23 x Il-10 (CAS) |
Forces engaged in battle: | Forces killed in action | Prisoners of War | |
Italy | 8.994 | 169 | 0 |
Bulgaria | 15.450 | 194 | 0 |
Germany | 89.800 | 4.388 | 0 |
AXIS | 114.244 | 4.751 | 0 |
Soviet Union | 142.177 | 2.810 | 0 |
Air to ground damage | KIA air crew | Fighters deployed | Fighters lost | Bombers deployed | Bombers lost | |
Hungary | 108 | 0 | 0 | 179 x Ju-86 (Tac) | 54 x Ju-86 (Tac) | |
AXIS | 1.773 KIA | 0 | ||||
Soviet Union | 0 KIA | 7 | 372 x Yak-7 (Int) 370 x La-7 (Ftr) | 4 x Yak-7 (Int) 1 x La-7 (Ftr) | 201 x Yak-4 (Tac) 491 x Il-10 (CAS) | 0 x Yak-4 (Tac) 1 x Il-10 (CAS) |
Forces engaged in battle: | Forces killed in action | Prisoners of War | |
Hungary | 5.968 | 43 | 0 |
Bulgaria | 35.040 | 2.310 | 0 |
Germany | 30.093 | 1.390 | 0 |
AXIS | 71.101 | 3.743 | 0 |
Soviet Union | 153.281 | 1.238 | 0 |
Air to ground damage | KIA air crew | Fighters deployed | Fighters lost | Bombers deployed | Bombers lost | |
Hungary | 28 | 370 x CR.42 (Int) | 28 x CR.42 (Int) | 0 | 0 | |
AXIS | 1.939 KIA | 28 | ||||
Soviet Union | 0 KIA | 80 | 372 x Yak-7 (Int) 495 x La-7 (Ftr) | 0 x Yak-7 (Int) 18 x La-7 (Ftr) | 201 x Yak-4 (Tac) 741 x Il-10 (CAS) | 13 x Yak-4 (Tac) 18 x Il-10 (CAS) |
Forces engaged in battle: | Forces killed in action | Prisoners of War | |
Hungary | 30.102 | 1.691 | 0 |
Germany | 61.120 | 1.104 | 0 |
AXIS | 91.222 | 2.795 | 0 |
Soviet Union | 87.085 | 1.540 | 10.704 |
Air to ground damage | KIA air crew | Fighters deployed | Fighters lost | Bombers deployed | Bombers lost | |
Hungary | 3,374 Infrastructure 205.829 t of Supplies 5.489 m^3 of Fuel | 100 | 0 | 0 | 95 x Ju-87 (CAS) 70 x Ju-86 (Tac) | 23 x Ju-87 (CAS) 27 x Ju-86 (Tac) |
AXIS | 2.999 KIA | 100 | ||||
Soviet Union | 0 KIA | 122 | 372 x Yak-7 (Int) 248 x La-7 (Ftr) | 1 x Yak-7 (Int) 17 x La-7 (Ftr) | 81 x TB-3 (Str) 495 x Il-10 (CAS) | 3 x TB-3 (Str) 40 x Il-10 (CAS) |
Forces engaged in battle: | Forces killed in action | Prisoners of War | |
Hungary | 5.996 | 16 | 0 |
Soviet Union | 21.991 | 5 | 0 |
Air to ground damage | KIA air crew | Fighters deployed | Fighters lost | Bombers deployed | Bombers lost | |
Bulgaria | 27 | 102 x He-51 (Int) | 27 x He-51 (Int) | 0 | 0 | |
Soviet Union | 0 KIA | 9 | 128 x La-7VM (CAG) | 3 x La-7VM (CAG) | 128 x Il-10VM (CAG) | 3 x Il-10VM (CAG) |
Last 10 days | Engaged in Battle | Killed in battle | Killed by bombs | Air Crew KIA | KIA at sea | Total KIA | Prisoners of War |
Slovakia | 0 | 0 | / | 60 | 0 | 60 | 0 |
Bulgaria | 88.275 | 3.853 | / | 27 | 0 | 3.880 | 0 |
Hungary | 56.011 | 2.005 | / | 236 | 0 | 2.241 | 0 |
Italy | 55.476 | 1.200 | / | 0 | 0 | 1.200 | 0 |
Germany | 856.250 | 24.620 | / | 741 | 199 | 25.560 | 7.192 |
AXIS | 1.056.012 | 31.678 | 19.087 | 1.064 | 199 | 52.028 | 7.192 |
Soviet Union | 1.379.607 | 23.851 | 157 | 925 | 0 | 24.933 | 10.704 |
GPW (90 days) | Engaged in Battle | Killed in battle | Killed by bombs | Air Crew KIA | KIA at sea | Total KIA | Prisoners of War |
Slovakia | 43.839 | 2.912 | / | 269 | 0 | 3.181 | 0 |
Bulgaria | 329.464 | 11.993 | / | 60 | 310 | 12.363 | 0 |
Hungary | 2.061.637 | 32.531 | / | 1.228 | 0 | 33.759 | 0 |
Italy | 171.360 | 6.090 | / | 573 | 1.003 | 7.666 | 0 |
Germany | 6.274.809 | 203.415 | / | 7.078 | 7.257 | 217.750 | 25.486 |
AXIS | 8.886.093 | 256.941 | 132.934 | 9.206 | 8.570 | 407.656 | 25.486 |
Soviet Union | 11.513.546 | 212.578 | 2.421 | 5.663 | 1.267 | 222.990 | 68.482 |
GPW (80 days) | Fighters | Small Bombers | Medium Bombers | Large Bombers | Transports |
Slovakia | / | 89 x A.304 | / | / | / |
Bulgaria | 60 x He-51B | / | / | / | / |
Hungary | 252 x CR.32/CR.42 | 272 x Ju-87B-2 | 389 x Ju-86K-2 | / | / |
Italy | / | / | 53 x SM.79-III 41 x CZ.1007bis | / | 11 x SM.75bis |
Germany | 1.053 x FW-190A-3 861 x Me-109G-5 | 159 x Hs-129B-2 | 1.237 x Ju-88A-4 | 61 x Ju-290 | 8 x Me-232D-1 |
AXIS | 1.173 x Int, 1.053 x Ftr | 520 x CAS | 1.667 x Tac, 53 x Nav | 61 x Nav | 19 x Tra |
Soviet Union | 1.082 x Yak-7 993 x La-7 254 x La-7VM | 1.056 x Il-10 254 x Il-10VM | 513 x Yak-4 | 72 x TB-3 | 47 x Li-2 |
Truly a mystery. Off the top of my head, was Yvonne perhaps the name 11 used during her first adventure with the French?the killer used the murder weapon, a small dagger, to pin a note to his chest. It said:"Nice try, Yvonne."
Was that the AI using some initiative or do you run amphibious ops? Or is the VDV a paratroop outfit?but opened up the opportunity to take Oslo unopposed, an opportunity that was pounced on by the VDV, which landed in the city at 5am that same day.
And May the SS fanatics pay a high one, as ever. Vur ha ... er, Huzzah! Ourah!They will now face the consequences of their own hubris, and pay the price in blood.
Uh oh, these words may land the general in hot water (or a cold grave) if (when) Stalin hears about it from one of the Commissars.The enemy has broken our lines, and our spirit. We must withdraw now, but we will return." - LtGen. Krasnopevtsev explaining his decision to withdraw his XXX MSK from Zelva (2).
Even if the situation was soon retrieved.Two fresh Soviet Divisions easily routed the first exhausted Germans to arrive in Zelva (4) on the 14th.
Generally another successful interlude, with more casualties the Axis swine can’t afford.Totals losses:
Last 10 daysEngaged in BattleKilled in battleKilled by bombsAir Crew KIAKIA at seaTotal KIAPrisoners of WarSlovakia00/600600Bulgaria88.2753.853/2703.8800Hungary56.0112.005/23602.2410Italy55.4761.200/001.2000Germany856.25024.620/74119925.5607.192AXIS1.056.01231.67819.0871.06419952.0287.192Soviet Union1.379.60723.851157925024.93310.704
It always seems to be fiercely contested by the Germans, whichever game universe you are in.the drive to the Baltic Coast has not only stalled, but been pushed back, at great cost to both sides.
Indeed. It is 'impossible' for the Soviet Union to get transit rights to British territory.Yes. The diplo screen usually labels that “Impossible” and all you do is waste a diplomatic team if you try it.
1. it would be well ventilated.
2. The passengers would never have to worry about heat stroke.
I think there is such a thing as too much ventilation, and frostbite and hypothermia are real issues, even if medical professionals might prefer to heat up the bodies before declaring them dead... Then again, it's nothing a bottle of vodka can't fix, right?Per the several nurses and other medical professionals I've dated, that's a perfect way to maintain a perfect record for safety: people aren't dead until they're warm and dead.
That's a bingo!Truly a mystery. Off the top of my head, was Yvonne perhaps the name 11 used during her first adventure with the French?
The VDV are the legendary Soviet Airborne forces first founded in the late 1930s. They started out as purely Paratroopers in ww2, but today they are a whole separate branch of Russian Armed forces, a bit like the USMC in a way, except that they are meant to be rapidly deployable by air instead of by sea. As for the landing in Oslo, the VDV is under human control, so all the airborne operations were planned and triggered by yours truly. (for the sake of realism, I didn't send in the paratroopers as soon as I noticed the city had been deserted, but only once the Oslo Garrison had shown up on the front) There was also an unopposed amphibious landing by Mountain Riflemen to the north of Stavanger, to cut off the escape of two Divisions between the landing area and Stavanger, as the regular Rifle Division that was making it's way there overland from Bergen got stuck in the mountains for a week.Was that the AI using some initiative or do you run amphibious ops? Or is the VDV a paratroop outfit?
Uh oh, these words may land the general in hot water (or a cold grave) if (when) Stalin hears about it from one of the Commissars.
In some areas the situation on the front is dire, with a lot of exhausted troops and few reserves, but those are local disadvantages which could well feel overwhelming for local commanders. I'm sure the part about losing their spirit will not be in the official report. It's still one hell of a risk, though the retrieval of the situation surely helps to potentially sweep this lapse under the rug.Even if the situation was soon retrieved.
Large-scale Amphibious operations being a new concept in the Soviet Union, I didn't expect anything near a British level of proficiency, but what I saw was truly horrifying.
In this universe the problem for the British isn't the amphibious operation itself, but the availability/delivery of troops to reinforce the beachhead and actually take advantage of successful landings, not even weeks after they occured. Historically, the Brits were at the forefront of the development of amphibious assault landing tactics in the inter-war years, partly due to the fiasco in Galipoli. They even held massive amphib exercises in India in the 30s. Of course in ww2, some mistakes were made and what they had developed in peacetime, even with extensive exercises, had to be adapted and improved, hence Narvik and Dieppe, neither of which was anywhere near as catastrophic a fiasco as Galipoli.While the Brits may be doing swimmingly in this universe, in ours in Sept. 1942 the memory of Gallipoli, Narvik, and Dieppe would not have exactly caused people to associate the British with proficiency in amphib operations.
Norway is looking good, but it will still take a lot of time to secure all of it, partly because the weather is terrible, but also because even after eliminating 6 Divisions in the South, the Germans still have 5 Divisions up north, (2 H Arm, 2 Arm, and 1 Mtn), which even as they are likely mostly out of supplies and fuel, still have to be dealt with. There is also another frustrating issue that has appeared, but more on that in the next GPW updates.Quite the few weeks for the Red Army. Norway has me feeling positive, both due to the seemingly imminent destruction of several German divisions and because it frees up troops for the strategic reserve. And, of course, it frees up the marines and VDV! Perhaps a strike into Denmark is next in the cards, or raiding attacks on the German northern coast? Cutting off the Axis troops in Denmark and moving the main line of resistance there from the Danish isles to the Kiel canal would really cause panic in the OKW, but then again, taking ground on the Baltic coast only to destroy infrastructure and industry and withdraw before German forces can be brought to bear would make the supply situation very chaotic indeed, and force the Germans to devote significant troops to garrisoning the area.
Indeed, there's a trapped Heavy Panzer Division, 1 sPzD to be precise. If we take it down, the Red Army will soon have parity in Heavy Tanks on the main front. (4 Divisions on each side, not counting Norway). Once the Baltics are recovered, there will have to be a rebalancing of the main front. 2 AG's area of operations will have to be shifted south to free up 11ya Mot Armiya for the next offensive operation, wherever that may be. It's difficult to gauge when this will occur, and how many enemy troops could potentially be captured. Progress in the Baltics seems to be slow but positive. It could take a while, there's an awful lot of grinding battles and back-and-forth's going on. With the AI it could, of course, always go wrong.Riga being isolated is perhaps the best news in the last report. That looks like a heavy Panzer division we caught, too! Now if only the generals will see the urgency of the situation and crush the encircled units at any cost... Really, the northern and southern ends of the front seem to be doing okay-ish, but the center, particularly to the west of Pripyat marshes, seems to be slowly folding. Of course, assuming the Hungarians can be dealt a coup de grace, and the Baltic 1st front continues the stellar progress from the last update, that frees up units to shore up the center - or pressure the flanks of the overstretched German salient.
In this universe the problem for the British isn't the amphibious operation itself, but the availability/delivery of troops to reinforce the beachhead and actually take advantage of successful landings, not even weeks after they occured. Historically, the Brits were at the forefront of the development of amphibious assault landing tactics in the inter-war years, partly due to the fiasco in Galipoli. They even held massive amphib exercises in India in the 30s. Of course in ww2, some mistakes were made and what they had developed in peacetime, even with extensive exercises, had to be adapted and improved, hence Narvik and Dieppe, neither of which was anywhere near as catastrophic a fiasco as Galipoli.
Planes under license from Tannu Tuva? Strange times indeed.The republic of Tannu Tuva has sent over technicians, blueprints, and engineers for the license production of a Bomber Aviation Regiment consisting of 101 Tannu Tuvan Tupolev SB-2's (Tac).
Spreading the good word about Stalinist Socialism is indeed an accurate statement: there can’t be more than one of them to say. Don’t tell Beria I said that.Today, 10 spies have been infiltrated into Sweden, some disguised as diplomats, and others, sneaking across the Norwegian or Finnish borders. Their job is to spread the good word about Stalinist Socialism, and a potential alliance to the Comintern.
Yes, when a Division is taken prisoner, it has to be replaced as quickly as possible, hence the people's Militia (Gar) as a stop-gap, just in case the line breaks. If that doesn't happen, retraining them to full Rifle Divisions to fully replace the lost units makes sense. This happened OTL with Opolcheniye and NKVD units getting retrained and rearmed to the standards of a regular rifle division.Much like a true government, the Soviets have started to retrain some units, while producing more of them (speaking of the Garrison brigades).
Planes under license from Tannu Tuva? Strange times indeed.
Surprisingly, Tannu Tuva are the only other Comintern state to have developed bombers. Theirs are clearly inspired by our old Tupolev SB-2's, which means they are cheaper and easier to build than our own Yak-4's. As our aeroplane industry hasn't mass-produced twin-engine planes since 1936, they can use all the help they can get to get back up to speed.Bombers from... Tannu Tuva? I didn't know they had bombers. Huh. Well, at least we're getting new ships, and new barely-trained conscript units with Tsar-era weaponry to go with them, I guess?
Do we have a traitor in our midst? I won't tell Beria, this time, but if this becomes a pattern we have a serious problem.Spreading the good word about Stalinist Socialism is indeed an accurate statement: there can’t be more than one of them to say. Don’t tell Beria I said that.
Well, taking Sweden by force means we won't get access to their excellent Destroyer designs. There's a good chance they'll burn the blueprints out of spite. Ideally, we want to nudge them to our side so we can profit from their naval knowhow to speed up the modernisation of the Red Navy without expending too much leadership. The Strategic resources, and depriving Germany of a nearby source of steel are just bonuses. Of course, if it doesn't work out, we'll have to kickstart their revolution by kicking in the door, but that's really the worst case scenario. From a realpolitik point of view, Sweden willingly joining the Comintern is their best move. As the Soviet Union already has a potential stranglehold on their trade, and the SU will soon be their only neighbour. In case we decide to attack them, there is no way any foreign power can get to them before the Red Army forces a surrender. It would just be better for everyone if they just admitted reality and negotiated favourable terms for joining the Comintern now, while we have bigger problems to deal with, maybe send some expeditionary forces to the Red Army to increase their standing within the alliance, and of course sell tons of licenses for their Destroyer designs.Hopeful, but not too optimistic, regarding the spy operations slated for Sweden. We might have to settle for teaching them the joys of communism by force once this war is sorted.
Considering the light carriers are slower than fleet carriers (they're really more like armoured carriers), a high speed fleet is out of the question, and combining Heavy Cruisers with fleet carriers is a bad idea as the screens in such a fleet will stay out of the fire distance to protect the CV's and the CA's will be on their own in the enemy line of fire. This does not happen with CVL's. The next update will not be the GPW report, but one detailing the new and revised plans for the Red Navy, including a brief overview of the Kirov-class and the Kharkov-class. The main difficulty for the Red Navy is that it is called upon to do a lot of things with very limited resources and ships which are obsolescent at best. This recent increase in investment was long over due, and is insufficient to meet it's long term goals, but it's a step in the right direction. More on that in the next update, which will likely be posted next weekend.Looking forward to the GPW report. Losing a destroyer flotilla is always concerning, though as far as losses go, there are a lot worse things. Overall the report looks positive, and a new class of both escort carrier and heavy cruiser should give the Red Navy a bit more versatility and presence. Will building light carriers instead of fleet carriers be a trend, or is the leadership perchance planning a high-speed battlegroup centered around a light carrier or two supported by heavy cruisers?