General Discussion thread.

jemhouston · Post by **jemhouston** » Sun Dec 03, 2023 1:06 am

James1978 wrote: ↑Sun Dec 03, 2023 12:12 am Does anyone have any thoughts how how to explain Yugoslavia holding together as long as it did it TLWverse?

Better hold together, than have the Soviets come in? Stupid people get killed sooner and they so they can't play with matches in a refinery.

Belushi TD · Post by **Belushi TD** » Tue Dec 05, 2023 2:40 pm

James1978 wrote: ↑Sun Dec 03, 2023 12:12 am Does anyone have any thoughts how how to explain Yugoslavia holding together as long as it did it TLWverse?

Soviet invasion/suppression of one of the early rumbles of discontent? If its timed appropriately, and due to the dissolution of NATO, no one can object in a reasonable fashion.

Belushi TD

Jotun · Post by **Jotun** » Tue Dec 05, 2023 2:47 pm

Belushi TD wrote: ↑Tue Dec 05, 2023 2:40 pm Soviet invasion/suppression of one of the early rumbles of discontent? If its timed appropriately, and due to the dissolution of NATO, no one can object in a reasonable fashion.

Belushi TD

Uh…say again?

Bernard Woolley · Post by **Bernard Woolley** » Tue Dec 05, 2023 4:08 pm

Somebody in the wrong universe?

Belushi TD · Post by **Belushi TD** » Tue Dec 05, 2023 9:36 pm

Jotun wrote: ↑Tue Dec 05, 2023 2:47 pm
Belushi TD wrote: ↑Tue Dec 05, 2023 2:40 pm
James1978 wrote: ↑Sun Dec 03, 2023 12:12 am Does anyone have any thoughts how how to explain Yugoslavia holding together as long as it did it TLWverse?
Soviet invasion/suppression of one of the early rumbles of discontent? If its timed appropriately, and due to the dissolution of NATO, no one can object in a reasonable fashion.

Belushi TD
Uh…say again?

Sorry, didn't notice I hadn't quoted the post I was responding to. How's it look now?

Belushi TD

Jotun · Post by **Jotun** » Tue Dec 05, 2023 10:02 pm

Belushi TD wrote: ↑Tue Dec 05, 2023 9:36 pm
Jotun wrote: ↑Tue Dec 05, 2023 2:47 pm
Belushi TD wrote: ↑Tue Dec 05, 2023 2:40 pm
Soviet invasion/suppression of one of the early rumbles of discontent? If its timed appropriately, and due to the dissolution of NATO, no one can object in a reasonable fashion.

Belushi TD
Uh…say again?
Sorry, didn't notice I hadn't quoted the post I was responding to. How's it look now?

Belushi TD

Where in TLW did NATO dissolve? Were you in RD+20 mode when you wrote that?

Belushi TD · Post by **Belushi TD** » Wed Dec 06, 2023 1:25 pm

Well, crap... Yes, apparently, I was.

I sort of suck sometimes.

My apologies.

What's the proper way to go about fixing this? Do I need to delete my posts altogether, so that its not screwed up? Then the others can delete the quoted posts?

Belushi TD

Bernard Woolley · Post by **Bernard Woolley** » Wed Dec 06, 2023 3:01 pm

I can delete them if everyone wants me to.

Jotun · Post by **Jotun** » Wed Dec 06, 2023 9:15 pm

No harm done. I had a chuckle. He who is interested in Alternate History, hasn‘t mixed up different timelines in his head and posted confused stuff in the wrong thread cast the first stone .

I know I have, more than once

Belushi TD · Post by **Belushi TD** » Thu Dec 07, 2023 3:38 pm

Bernard Woolley wrote: ↑Wed Dec 06, 2023 3:01 pm I can delete them if everyone wants me to.

Feel free to do so if that is the will of the thread. I've shown my ass a large number of times in the 20 or so years I've been hanging around here, so one more or less won't matter to anyone's opinion of me or my opinion of myself.

My main concern is if it will provide a source of jarring alt reality and pull people out of "scene", as it were.

Belushi TD

Jotun · Post by **Jotun** » Sun Dec 31, 2023 7:37 pm

Since the Russians first deployed their top-attack AT mine in the Ukraine war, Rheinmetall did not sit idle and reactivated a 90s' vintage project in less than a year, the Area Defence Weapon which was shelved thanks to the Peace Dividend. It is a sensor-fused top attack mine that uses the SMArt 155mm EFP warhead (something tells me this concept is exactly what the Russians ripped off). The mine can be programmed to attack upon detecting specific vehicle signatures and has an attack radius of 100 meters. All ADWs are networked and can be put on standby, activated and reprogrammed throughout their deployment.

I remember posting the concept a few years back on the old-old forum as an idea for TLW and somebody laughed it off as outlandish. Ahem...^^

Apart from the networking, I think this piece of ordnance could still find its way into TLW. Thoughts?

Jotun · Post by **Jotun** » Fri Jan 26, 2024 3:32 pm

No thoughts, apparently

In other news, I found a printout of the "Great East German Housecleaning" file with about half to two thirds of the final text in a carboard box filled with old s***.

I‘ll retype the text and bullshit myself through the missing part. Stay tuned.

James1978 · Post by **James1978** » Wed Jan 31, 2024 2:29 am

Jotun wrote: ↑Sun Dec 31, 2023 7:37 pm Since the Russians first deployed their top-attack AT mine in the Ukraine war, Rheinmetall did not sit idle and reactivated a 90s' vintage project in less than a year, the Area Defence Weapon which was shelved thanks to the Peace Dividend. It is a sensor-fused top attack mine that uses the SMArt 155mm EFP warhead (something tells me this concept is exactly what the Russians ripped off). The mine can be programmed to attack upon detecting specific vehicle signatures and has an attack radius of 100 meters. All ADWs are networked and can be put on standby, activated and reprogrammed throughout their deployment.

I remember posting the concept a few years back on the old-old forum as an idea for TLW and somebody laughed it off as outlandish. Ahem...^^

Apart from the networking, I think this piece of ordnance could still find its way into TLW. Thoughts?

So, basically an off-route mine?
I don't see why they wouldn't be around - on both sides. Though I am slightly skeptical about how long the networked/on-off features will work will work after deployment.

Could be interesting if say NATO captures a bunch of Soviet trucks and starts using them, then rolls past a "lost"/"deactivated" minefield of the things.

James1978 · Post by **James1978** » Wed Jan 31, 2024 2:32 am

Jotun wrote: ↑Fri Jan 26, 2024 3:32 pm No thoughts, apparently

In other news, I found a printout of the "Great East German Housecleaning" file with about half to two thirds of the final text in a carboard box filled with old s***.

I‘ll retype the text and bullshit myself through the missing part. Stay tuned.

In a related vein, I've read that the NVA was planning to disband the Tank Regiments in their MSDs for budget/demographic reason near the end in @. Any thoughts on what happened in TLWverse?

Johnnie Lyle · Post by **Johnnie Lyle** » Wed Jan 31, 2024 3:44 am

James1978 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 31, 2024 2:32 am
Jotun wrote: ↑Fri Jan 26, 2024 3:32 pm No thoughts, apparently

In other news, I found a printout of the "Great East German Housecleaning" file with about half to two thirds of the final text in a carboard box filled with old s***.

I‘ll retype the text and bullshit myself through the missing part. Stay tuned.
In a related vein, I've read that the NVA was planning to disband the Tank Regiments in their MSDs for budget/demographic reason near the end in @. Any thoughts on what happened in TLWverse?

That’s an interesting question, because tanks are hard on the budget, but require a lot less manpower than comparable mech infantry units. What was their reasoning on the demographic front?

James1978 · Post by **James1978** » Wed Jan 31, 2024 6:26 am

Johnnie Lyle wrote: ↑Wed Jan 31, 2024 3:44 am
James1978 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 31, 2024 2:32 am
Jotun wrote: ↑Fri Jan 26, 2024 3:32 pm No thoughts, apparently

In other news, I found a printout of the "Great East German Housecleaning" file with about half to two thirds of the final text in a carboard box filled with old s***.

I‘ll retype the text and bullshit myself through the missing part. Stay tuned.
In a related vein, I've read that the NVA was planning to disband the Tank Regiments in their MSDs for budget/demographic reason near the end in @. Any thoughts on what happened in TLWverse?
That’s an interesting question, because tanks are hard on the budget, but require a lot less manpower than comparable mech infantry units. What was their reasoning on the demographic front?

Not enough 18 year olds. Which was a problem hitting a LOT of countries as the 1980s came to a close - including NATO countries. To maintain force levels, they'd have to take an ever increasing proportion of 18yo males each year - which also meant fewer new workers entering the labor force each year. For the 1991-1995 induction groups, they were looking at a 10,000+ shortfalls each year. Even increasing the term of service form 18 to 24 months was not expected to have much effect. Now apparently they were already making use of women in admin, medical and communications, and were increasingly using them as technicians. I don't know that we've ever discussed increased roles for women in the Soviet/WP armed forces post-POD, but we probably should.

The NVA only had six active duty divisions, plus five reserve/mobilizations divisions.
BUT, all of their active divisions were NATO Category I for manning. That was not the case in other Warsaw Pact armies.

As for the tanks. I suspect having to buy 400ish fewer T-72s to replace T-55s does have an impact on the procurement/modernization budget, or at least frees up money for other priorities.

As I recall, Jotun's "Great East German Housecleaning" file, the post-POD period did nothing to improve the DDR demographics or the economy.

Matt Wiser · Post by **Matt Wiser** » Wed Jan 31, 2024 8:08 am

There was an EGAF film posted to both Facebook and Youtube a while back: it showed EGAF MiG-21s and -23s, and in the GCI Center, there were women serving as communications officers, plotters, and radar operators. Not sure when the film was made, but it looked to be the early '80s. I'd say the WARPAC as a whole probably decided to start using women in those kinds of jobs in the late '80s-early '90s to make up for not enough 18-year old males, and freeing up the men who would've been drafted into those specialties to be sent into ground forces.

Jotun · Post by **Jotun** » Wed Jan 31, 2024 9:29 am

I looked up the "get eid of the MSD tank regiments" and it looks a lot like there is something to it. The DDR announced abolishment of six tank regiments and a fighter/fighter bomber squadron in January 1989, ostensibly as a peace gesture. I imagine financial, spare parts and demographic reasons were behind that.
The USSR had more important issues than continuing to prop up Little Prussia, and on their own, the DDR simply couldn‘t keep up the high level of army readiness any more.

I guess the TLW situation is only really plausible with a lot of handwavium, especially given the financial situation of much of the WP in 89/90. Not as bad as RD +20, of course, but a good bit. Anyway, the above could explain the comparative lack of really modern weapon systems in the Warsaw Pact armies even 15 years after the POD. The T-95 still is rare and the backbone of the Red Army still is the T-90, with the satellite states being in an even worse position.

Simon Darkshade · Post by **Simon Darkshade** » Tue May 14, 2024 4:44 pm

I got in a bit of a creative mood and put together this version of the British Army Order of Battle, with each major combat unit having their equipment listed nicely after it; sort of halfway between what Bernard has in the official thread and the 1989 source BAOR orbat by Louie, if you like. It is a bit of a thankyou to Bernard and his supporting TLW authors and workers for providing us with such an interesting subject to ponder over.

I've popped it in spoilers as not to distort the page too much.

The British Army effectively has 6 divisions in the field in Germany and what amounts to one in Denmark and a light one/field force in Norway. An interesting split. There are more Regular Army infantry battalions deployed on Home Defence than one might initially think, which is an interesting function of prewar planning and choices.

The Danish situation of UKMF serving as the basis of a 'Commonwealth Division' is an interesting bit of historical resonance, given 5th Infantry Division's ever-so brief late 1960s rebirth in just such a role and location, alongside 3rd Infantry Division.

Spoiler!

Mario Rossi · Post by **Mario Rossi** » Tue May 14, 2024 5:01 pm

Absolutely stunning!

History, Politics And Current Affairs

General Discussion thread.

Re: General Discussion thread.

Re: General Discussion thread.

Re: General Discussion thread.

Re: General Discussion thread.

Re: General Discussion thread.

Re: General Discussion thread.

Re: General Discussion thread.

Re: General Discussion thread.

Re: General Discussion thread.

Re: General Discussion thread.

Re: General Discussion thread.

Re: General Discussion thread.

Re: General Discussion thread.

Re: General Discussion thread.

Re: General Discussion thread.

Re: General Discussion thread.

Re: General Discussion thread.

Re: General Discussion thread.

Re: General Discussion thread.

Re: General Discussion thread.