HistoryNet.com RSS
ArmchairGeneral.com RSS

HistoryNet.com Articles
America's Civil War
American History
Aviation History
Civil War Times
MHQ
Military History
Vietnam
Wild West
World War II

ACG Online
ACG Magazine
Stuff We Like
War College
History News
Tactics 101
Carlo D'Este
Books

ACG Gaming
Boardgames
PC Game Reviews

ACG Network
Contact Us
Our Newsletter
Meet Our Staff
Advertise With Us

Sites We Support
HistoryNet.com
StreamHistory.com
Once A Marine
The Art of Battle
Game Squad
Mil. History Podcast
Russian Army - WW2
Achtung Panzer!
Mil History Online

Go Back   Armchair General and HistoryNet >> The Best Forums in History > Military/History Related Hobbies > Alternate Timelines > Xtreme Alternate History

Notices and Announcements

Xtreme Alternate History Alternatives to History with No Holds Barred!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 13 Jul 15, 17:07
T. A. Gardner's Avatar
T. A. Gardner T. A. Gardner is offline
General of the Forums
United_States
ACG 5 Year Service Ribbon Most Significant/Influential Tank Campaign Most Significant/Influential Fighter Campaign Most Significant/Influential Multi-Role Aircraft C 
Tournament 1 and preceding Mini-Polls Greatest/Best Tank of WW2 Campaign 
 
Real Name: T. A. Gardner
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 35,245
T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+]
T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nebfer View Post
Well assuming we are the sort to help Germany...

Things that might help.
roughly 1933
German Navy is to start working on a Automatic 37mm AA gun, at the same time a DP 5 inch gun, instead of their surface use only weapons.
Makes little or no difference. The Germans are better off with being shown a paradigm shift in naval warfare. They build 4 to 6 sizable aircraft carriers and equip them with good naval aircraft. Destroyers, cruisers, and the Dithmarschen ships are built to support them.
That, like the Dreadnought before WW 1 causes most of the RN to become obsolete overnight and puts Germany in a position to potentially challenge Britain at sea.

Quote:
Also at this time is to start building a large scale manufacturing plant for tanks, using the latest techniques. Even if we use the "German" method I still want it to be able to assemble 100 tanks at one time (IIRC this is twice the capacity of a number of German tank factories).
This will be difficult to accomplish as the Miester system of skilled craftsmen will push back just as they did historically. But, I'd counter showing the Germans how NC machines work. That would do two things: It improves productivity, and it reduces labor.



Yes, you can do this with 1930's - 40's technology.

Add in a QC program, some basic safety measures to reduce worker injuries, and how to calculate assembly line speed, and the Germans could have massively increased productivity.

Quote:
Around 1934, start consolidating military trucks and cars into at most 10 different types, basically the Schnell plan done about 5 years earlier. Also stick to them, unless a new one is urgently needed then replace it.

Consolidate the Panzer III and IV programs into one, but keep the Panzer IVs turret ring... Perhaps up the design weight to about 20 tons instead of 18ish tons while were at it.
Have the military standardize their requirements (ie., the "Mil-spec") and then show the Germans how to do calculations to reduce the weight of many vehicle parts starting with the body.
Also, showing basic means to increase fuel efficiency and eliminate wastage (such as adding a modern vapor recovery system which is very simple in design) to improve fuel use.
Let's say this leads to a 20% decrease in fuel use. That is dramatic and not a major amount of added effort to make happen.



Quote:
1935 Start working on a semiauto rifle to replace the K98...
I'd say this is almost irrelevant. If you "invent" a fiber glass filled plastic and show them how to mold thermoset and thermoplastics (giving them a number to start making) you eliminate the use of wood and the time it takes to make wooden stocks for rifles and other weapons.
Introduce drop / hammer forged barrels for many weapons (shorter barrels on things like an "assault rifle" or SMG, pistols, etc.) so that production times drop dramatically.


Quote:
Standardize on artillery types and calibers, curtail some of the larger gun calibers of marginal use vs manpower costs.
Far more importantly, improve the fire controls and communications systems for these weapons.


Quote:
1936
start working on a suitable tractor for military use, to assist construction work
A bulldozer and back hoe are good ideas. Add in a small, cheap, tractor that can tow a small artillery piece or loaded wagon replacing say, 4 horses doing this. It needn't be faster than about 10 mph at most but has good torque and pulling ability. Give it small wide low pressure tires for good off road use.
Something like this:



Quote:
1937
German navy investigates the use of snorkels for submarines
they also start work on a high capacity battery system also for submarines
Show the Germans AIP technology instead. Again, it is the paradigm shift that matters. AIP is doable. Introduce a large array sonar / hydrophone and a basic underwater fire control system for such subs.

Quote:
1939
A centralized program for Radar research is instituted, to better coordinate the different company's involved, also a 2nd look into uses of the cavity magnetron, the main reason the Germans did not bother with it in the first place was that magnetrons suck at coherence, which is what the Germans where looking for in radar...
Showing how to reliably use ionosphere scatter / skywave radio transmission (known but not well understood) gives a new secure communications system for the Navy. Add a reliable navigation system for aircraft at night to allow night bombing.
Travelling wave tubes, printed circuit boards, solid state diodes, resistors, probably a basic transistor, and other components along with showing the Germans how to make new circuits like a bi-stable flip flop using tubes (known as a "multivibrator" at the time) and what it can do.
Just applying known technology to new uses that didn't appear until later would help.

Quote:
Some time between 1937 and 1939 what becomes the He 177 is not modified to include dive bombing, this IIRC saves about a year of R&D time allowing more time to fix the aircraft's other bugs... As such the aircraft now enters service in late 1941 or early 1942.

They need the paradigm shift. Show Henkel and Messerschmitt how the area rule works, the all-flying tail, and supersonic aircraft work. Add a decent jet engine design from the late 40's early 50's they can make (maybe 3 or 4 different designs) with a simple afterburner and they have a supersonic jet.
Add a simple IR AAM design that can use extant Spanner German IR seeker research as it base and they get an AAM. Show them a simple beam rider like the Fireflash AAM that they can make.

Add in a SAM.

All of that is doable with 1930's- 40's technology.

Quote:
Also considers to consolidate the Sd.kfz 250 & 251 series for more streamlined production capability's.
Point out that the suspension system on these vehicles is insanely complex and that it needs to be grossly simplified for military use. This goes for much of Germany's pre-war vehicles. A simple steel or rubber-steel track for half tracks using a simplified leaf spring or Bellville washer suspension should be used.
Or, using something like the Pz I and II with a new superstructure to become something akin to the US M8 high speed tractor.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 14 Jul 15, 04:18
Michele's Avatar
Michele Michele is offline
General of the Forums
Italy
Most Significant/Influential Tank Campaign Most Significant/Influential Fighter Campaign Most Significant/Influential Multi-Role Aircraft C Tournament 1 of the ACG 2017-2018 
Greatest/Best Tank of WW2 Campaign 
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Udine
Posts: 6,665
Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100]
Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100] Michele is a pillar of the community [1100]
And the money for all of that also needs to come from the future. Actual, historical Nazi Germany was relying on junk securities, stealing from its own (Jewish) citizens, plucking its other citizens through taxation, state bonds and "voluntary" contributions, and plundering the Czech gold reserves to make ends meet and produce what it actually produce. You don't add all of the above on that budget.

It's getting a bigger and bigger and bigger project, requiring, as I mentioned above, the involvement and funding of an entire para-Nazi government from an alternate reality, and a rich one to boot.
__________________
Michele
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 22 Jul 15, 01:08
Nebfer's Avatar
Nebfer Nebfer is offline
Captain
United_States
ACG 5 Year Service Ribbon 
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Titusville
Posts: 783
Nebfer is on the path to success [1-99] Nebfer is on the path to success [1-99] Nebfer is on the path to success [1-99] Nebfer is on the path to success [1-99] Nebfer is on the path to success [1-99] Nebfer is on the path to success [1-99]
Quote:
Originally Posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
Makes little or no difference. The Germans are better off with being shown a paradigm shift in naval warfare. They build 4 to 6 sizable aircraft carriers and equip them with good naval aircraft. Destroyers, cruisers, and the Dithmarschen ships are built to support them.
That, like the Dreadnought before WW 1 causes most of the RN to become obsolete overnight and puts Germany in a position to potentially challenge Britain at sea.
True to a point, however getting Germany to build 4 or even 6 good aircraft carriers and the experience to use them in roughly a decade is extremely difficult to do. Though one problems is getting a reliable destroyer engine, as Historical ones where a bit lacking in that area. IIRC part of that problem was due to the lack of alloys that resisted corrosion (due to the expectations of them being scarce in wartime).

However the main reasons for what I was going at is that 1, Germany did not have a good DP gun in the 5 inch range in 1939. Here if they get one working by 1937ish and installed an it's destroyers and heavier units...

Their 37mm AA gun was fine in the 1920s and perhaps early 30s but by the end of the 1930s it's woefully inadequate, with a fire rate of 60 rounds per minute per mount...

So if they replaced the 8 twin 37mm mounts on say the Bismark with even just 8 single navalized 37mm Flak 18s (or the better 36s), would of improved things no? -True it probably would of not prevented it's sinking but at the least it would of made a better showing...

Quote:
This will be difficult to accomplish as the Miester system of skilled craftsmen will push back just as they did historically. But, I'd counter showing the Germans how NC machines work. That would do two things: It improves productivity, and it reduces labor.
true, though Germany did set up a dedicated tank plant at Nibelungenwerk, I'm proposing effectively a 2nd one, i'm also proposing for larger factory's, AFAIK many of the German tank factorys where fairly small, IIRC the plant that buit Tigers could IIRC only work on some 30 tanks at a time. Though Giving Germany CN machines would help a fair bit, IIRC the first ones where designed around 1942 (in the US).

Quote:
Have the military standardize their requirements (ie., the "Mil-spec") and then show the Germans how to do calculations to reduce the weight of many vehicle parts starting with the body.
Also, showing basic means to increase fuel efficiency and eliminate wastage (such as adding a modern vapor recovery system which is very simple in design) to improve fuel use.
Let's say this leads to a 20% decrease in fuel use. That is dramatic and not a major amount of added effort to make happen.
Would work. Even a 10% savings in fuel would be fairly beneficial.


Quote:
Far more importantly, improve the fire controls and communications systems for these weapons.
That could also be useful, from what I understand that the German system was accurate but slow to respond, say 15 minutes from time of call to first shots landing? where as the US system was at the lest just as accurate but a lot faster, say 5 minutes (AFAIK)?

I have heard that the Germans could do multi division fire missions like the US but generally rarely did this due to it was time consuming to set up, and I believe a lack of munitions... But im generally not well versed in artillery doctrines to say much.

Quote:
A bulldozer and back hoe are good ideas. Add in a small, cheap, tractor that can tow a small artillery piece or loaded wagon replacing say, 4 horses doing this. It needn't be faster than about 10 mph at most but has good torque and pulling ability. Give it small wide low pressure tires for good off road use.
For civilian ones one could possibly use that wood burning engines (or something along thoughs lines) they used a bit at the end of the war, to save on gasoline.

Though one thing to note while you often harp on the lack of engineering assets at all levels (among axis powers), at Division level I do not seem much of heavy engineering equipment present even among US units, a number of dump trucks sure and a few dozers... At Army level well their is less info on US engineers, and even less on German ones, I asked this question over at Axis history fourms a while back and they generally did not know much on this subject...

Quote:
Show the Germans AIP technology instead. Again, it is the paradigm shift that matters. AIP is doable. Introduce a large array sonar / hydrophone and a basic underwater fire control system for such subs.
Well Germany did experiment with AIP U-boats but IIRC where not exactly happy with the H202 powered boats, nether where the British who tested the idea after the war... Even So the "Electro-boat" was a step in the right direction in any case. What would of happened if Germany had 60+ Type 21 esk boats in operation by say mid 1942?

Walters H202 powered projects would of been interesting (IIRC the type 21s hull was partly based on the use of Walters engines -but not used), though Walter I believe first pitched the ideas in 1934ish, but was not accepted until 1939, so one could shave about 4 years off that. However I do not know if one could seriously improve the reliability of the H202 boats in the 4 years extra one could get...

I do not know if one could seriously work with some of the other AIP techs technically available, like fuel cells.

Though the type 21s did have a reasonable hydrophone system and active sonar which could be used to plot torpedo solutions.


Quote:
Showing how to reliably use ionosphere scatter / skywave radio transmission (known but not well understood) gives a new secure communications system for the Navy. Add a reliable navigation system for aircraft at night to allow night bombing.
Travelling wave tubes, printed circuit boards, solid state diodes, resistors, probably a basic transistor, and other components along with showing the Germans how to make new circuits like a bi-stable flip flop using tubes (known as a "multivibrator" at the time) and what it can do.
Just applying known technology to new uses that didn't appear until later would help.
IIRC did't the Germans have some experience in this area? I ive heard they had some radios capable of atmo bouncing?


Quote:
Point out that the suspension system on these vehicles is insanely complex and that it needs to be grossly simplified for military use. This goes for much of Germany's pre-war vehicles. A simple steel or rubber-steel track for half tracks using a simplified leaf spring or Bellville washer suspension should be used.
Or, using something like the Pz I and II with a new superstructure to become something akin to the US M8 high speed tractor.
Well I think it perhaps would be better to tell them that the benefits are not necessarily better than some of the others. IIRC the reason for the interleaved suspension was to allow for a smother ride which provided better crew comfort IIRC, which has a number secondary benefits. Though the downside was more complicated manufacturing and maintenance issues... Though a while back I had the thought of using the Panzer II chassis as a APC, just shove the engine forward, and I believe you could find room for about 6 to 8ish dismounts back their. Though perhaps the chassis they used for the SiG 33 could work (the one with the extra road wheel)?

AFAIK the German operational reports do not seem to indicate that the Panther was not that unreliable compared to the Tiger and Panzer IV however. Though over all operational capability could be better IIRC if one provided more spare parts, I do not recall if the Germans provided much in the way of replacement parts.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 22 Jul 15, 03:12
T. A. Gardner's Avatar
T. A. Gardner T. A. Gardner is offline
General of the Forums
United_States
ACG 5 Year Service Ribbon Most Significant/Influential Tank Campaign Most Significant/Influential Fighter Campaign Most Significant/Influential Multi-Role Aircraft C 
Tournament 1 and preceding Mini-Polls Greatest/Best Tank of WW2 Campaign 
 
Real Name: T. A. Gardner
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 35,245
T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+]
T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nebfer View Post
True to a point, however getting Germany to build 4 or even 6 good aircraft carriers and the experience to use them in roughly a decade is extremely difficult to do. Though one problems is getting a reliable destroyer engine, as Historical ones where a bit lacking in that area. IIRC part of that problem was due to the lack of alloys that resisted corrosion (due to the expectations of them being scarce in wartime).
Japan and the US had less than a decade in 1935. Both started with one basic carrier to try things out. The Germans have the advantage of being able to copy what everybody else is doing instead. Catching up shouldn't be a problem.
The reason the German DD's (and many other ships) had such poor reliability was they went with too high a pressure and temperature for the system. German DD's ran at 2100 psi or there about and about 750 degrees. The US ran 600 psi at about 550 degrees. Most other navies weren't even going that high to get reliable plants.
Postwar, the US tried out running DD's at those kinds of numbers only to find the same problems. With superheated steam it's too easy to get water hammer, hard to fix problems, and the plant is down right dangerous. A small steam leak and you better have your broomstick with you. You wave it up and down as you walk. If it suddenly gets cut in two you found the steam leak. Better that broomstick than you...


Quote:
However the main reasons for what I was going at is that 1, Germany did not have a good DP gun in the 5 inch range in 1939. Here if they get one working by 1937ish and installed an it's destroyers and heavier units...
An early decision to go with a navalized 12.8cm Flak 40 would have worked. That gun started development in 1935 - 36 so it could have gotten to a usable state by 1939 or 40. In the interim, they could go with the 10.5cm in dual mounts. With a good fire control system they'd make up for the lack of a heavier gun with rate of fire and good ability to get on target.

Quote:
Their 37mm AA gun was fine in the 1920s and perhaps early 30s but by the end of the 1930s it's woefully inadequate, with a fire rate of 60 rounds per minute per mount...

So if they replaced the 8 twin 37mm mounts on say the Bismark with even just 8 single navalized 37mm Flak 18s (or the better 36s), would of improved things no? -True it probably would of not prevented it's sinking but at the least it would of made a better showing...
Or, just have them adopt the 4cm Bofors since they already had some in stock and could buy them from Sweden until they got a plant established to make them in Germany.


Quote:
That could also be useful, from what I understand that the German system was accurate but slow to respond, say 15 minutes from time of call to first shots landing? where as the US system was at the lest just as accurate but a lot faster, say 5 minutes (AFAIK)?

I have heard that the Germans could do multi division fire missions like the US but generally rarely did this due to it was time consuming to set up, and I believe a lack of munitions... But im generally not well versed in artillery doctrines to say much.
The German system required more time to plot fire and then get the batteries on target. They generally went for more direct support with fewer guns as the compromise.
Getting rid of horse drawn artillery entirely and developing a good fire control and communications system is more an organizational exercise than one requiring lots of manufacturing capacity.


Quote:
For civilian ones one could possibly use that wood burning engines (or something along thoughs lines) they used a bit at the end of the war, to save on gasoline.
Go with kerosene or white gas instead. Maybe show them how to run vehicles on propane.

Quote:
Though one thing to note while you often harp on the lack of engineering assets at all levels (among axis powers), at Division level I do not seem much of heavy engineering equipment present even among US units, a number of dump trucks sure and a few dozers... At Army level well their is less info on US engineers, and even less on German ones, I asked this question over at Axis history fourms a while back and they generally did not know much on this subject...
The US Army held the machinery at corps level in engineering equipment companies. One of these was designed to mechanize a combat engineer battalion.
The organization of a combat engineer battalion with an attached engineering equipment company is about the same as a See Bee battalion normally is. It is really an amazing amount of gear when you combine the two.
The US Army did it the way they did because their combat engineers were not expected to build bases or airfields and other major construction on a regular basis. So, they made the equipment for that available on an "as needed" basis instead.


Quote:
Well Germany did experiment with AIP U-boats but IIRC where not exactly happy with the H202 powered boats, nether where the British who tested the idea after the war... Even So the "Electro-boat" was a step in the right direction in any case. What would of happened if Germany had 60+ Type 21 esk boats in operation by say mid 1942?
Nobody tried an AIP boat like modern ones. The H2O2 boats would have proven disastrous in operational use just like Russian, US, and British experimental ones did post war.

Quote:
Walters H202 powered projects would of been interesting (IIRC the type 21s hull was partly based on the use of Walters engines -but not used), though Walter I believe first pitched the ideas in 1934ish, but was not accepted until 1939, so one could shave about 4 years off that. However I do not know if one could seriously improve the reliability of the H202 boats in the 4 years extra one could get...
Showing the Germans how to build a decent fast submarine running on diesels and batteries with a 1950's ish sonar system, snorkel, and fire controls would have been devastating enough. They likely could have kept that all secret from the Germans.
But an ethanol- LOX steam turbine is definitely a possibility. You build this as an add on to a diesel system for bursts of speed. Storing LOX in a dewer is already extant technology.
The LOX can also be used to replenish the air in the boat to stay fully submerged longer.


Quote:
Though the type 21s did have a reasonable hydrophone system and active sonar which could be used to plot torpedo solutions.
But, they couldn't do it in three dimensions. The first system that allowed that was the US PUFFS system.

Quote:
IIRC did't the Germans have some experience in this area? I ive heard they had some radios capable of atmo bouncing?
Everybody knew about transmitting "sky waves." The problem was nobody knew how to do it reliably and predictably. In the 50's that knowledge became available.

Quote:
Well I think it perhaps would be better to tell them that the benefits are not necessarily better than some of the others. IIRC the reason for the interleaved suspension was to allow for a smother ride which provided better crew comfort IIRC, which has a number secondary benefits. Though the downside was more complicated manufacturing and maintenance issues... Though a while back I had the thought of using the Panzer II chassis as a APC, just shove the engine forward, and I believe you could find room for about 6 to 8ish dismounts back their. Though perhaps the chassis they used for the SiG 33 could work (the one with the extra road wheel)?
You build something like this:





Then go to something like this based on a Pz III chassis.



Quote:
AFAIK the German operational reports do not seem to indicate that the Panther was not that unreliable compared to the Tiger and Panzer IV however. Though over all operational capability could be better IIRC if one provided more spare parts, I do not recall if the Germans provided much in the way of replacement parts.
I think the Germans could have greatly improved reliability of most of their vehicles in a number of ways.

A couple of other things to throw out:

Show them how to build pre-fabricated buildings and structures. That way when they invade Russia they can put up buildings quick to survive the winter.

Another thing would be to give them simple commercial technology they could put into production quickly that is new and awesome. That would lead to a big economic boom and bring cash into the economy.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 01 Dec 15, 15:50
Imperial's Avatar
Imperial Imperial is offline
General of the Forums
Romania
ACG Ten Year Service Award ACG 5 Year Service Ribbon 
 
Real Name: Robert
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Bucharest
Posts: 6,155
Imperial is simply cracking [600]
Imperial is simply cracking [600] Imperial is simply cracking [600] Imperial is simply cracking [600] Imperial is simply cracking [600] Imperial is simply cracking [600] Imperial is simply cracking [600] Imperial is simply cracking [600] Imperial is simply cracking [600] Imperial is simply cracking [600] Imperial is simply cracking [600] Imperial is simply cracking [600]
Interesting thread, but I believe the biggest kind of influence one can have with time travel has been missed.

You don't use it to give weapons, technology or one-time insight about an event.

Nope. You use it to gain influence. You know what will happen, so you and your team contact the intelligence services in each of the big powers. And start feeding them data. They get interested in you, the data is confirmed by events. You gain their complete confidence. From that point on, you can influence them. And, as a team, the whole timeline. For example, feed power A false info so it reacts in the desired way toward power B, use the reaction to influence power B to act as desired toward power C, etc.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 07 Dec 15, 19:25
Roadkiller's Avatar
Roadkiller Roadkiller is offline
Major General
Canada
ACG Ten Year Service Award ACG 5 Year Service Ribbon Best Pin-Up Of World War II Tournament 1 of the ACG 2017-2018 
 
Real Name: Art
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: HQ
Posts: 2,862
Roadkiller is simply cracking [600]
Roadkiller is simply cracking [600] Roadkiller is simply cracking [600] Roadkiller is simply cracking [600] Roadkiller is simply cracking [600] Roadkiller is simply cracking [600] Roadkiller is simply cracking [600] Roadkiller is simply cracking [600] Roadkiller is simply cracking [600] Roadkiller is simply cracking [600] Roadkiller is simply cracking [600] Roadkiller is simply cracking [600] Roadkiller is simply cracking [600]
Given that Nazi Germany over reached itself and achieved far more than it should have, I would say someone has already been messing with history. We are living in the alternate timeline
__________________
Amateurs study tactics, Professionals study logistics.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Please bookmark this thread if you enjoyed it!


Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 15:05.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.