[Consim-l] PB/PL In Korea

[pldr]

The first issue of JagdPanther magazine had Korean War counters and
scenarios for PB.
The issue is impossible to find though. Maybe you could contact Steve
Cole for some info on the JP stuff.

My article on JP's history can be found here:
http://www.gis.net/~pldr/jpp.html

Pete de Rosa

----------
> From: Thomas Cundiff <tdcgunslinger at worldnet.att.net>
> To: consim-l at mailman.halisp.net
> Subject: [Consim-l] PB/PL In Korea
> Date: Saturday, February 10, 2007 4:31 PM
> 
> Howdy Gents,
> 
> A gentleman recently asked me why no one had developed counters for
PB/PL 
> for the Korean War?  I didn't have a good answer for him.  Perhaps
in the 
> past someone has made some efforts in that direction, I don't know.
 His 
> reasoning was that the new boards at Ward McBurney's Imaginative
Strategist 
> site fits very well into Korean terrain, lots of hill tops and
streams 
> without fords, etc. ... There hadn't been a great technological
change from 
> WWII.  Korea was largely an infantry battle, with some support here
and 
> there from armor, especially the UN forces.  Seemed to me he had a
good 
> idea.
> 
> In fact his idea was so good it seemed to me the next best question
was to 
> ask about the early Indo/Pakistani War (though perhaps this would
fit better 
> into AIW) and the Arab-Israeli war of 47-48.
> 
> I think these are good arenas to explore.  Do any of you have
thoughts and 
> possible counter ideas?
> 
> 
> 
> Some considerations for Korea are these:
> 
> 
> 
> Tthe M46 and M47 tanks were on the scene in 53, the Pershing was
the 
> mainstay of the US Army. The recoilless rocket was in widespread
use by both 
> the US and UK/Commonwealth forces. A number of US self propelled
artillery 
> pieces were now in service. France was operating several types of
new 
> armored cars and the AMX 13 series of tanks and its variants had
come on the 
> scene. England had developed the Humber Pig and the Saracen apc's.
And, of 
> course, there would be a need for North Korean, South Korean, and
Red 
> Chinese counters and their Soviet made equipment. There was
widespread use 
> of US, Soviet, and Japanese WWII surplus and cast off small arms by
both 
> North Korea and Red China in the early stages of the Korean War -
all had 
> seen hard service in WWII and were wore out. Later units would be
equipped 
> by new Soviet weaponry. So, early infantry from these nations would
need to 
> reflect the greater odds of equipment and supply failures due to
the nature 
> of the equipment available to them early. Later supply failure
would need to 
> be taken into account because US air interdiction controlled all
supply 
> routes. But, at least the rifles and machineguns the communist
forces were 
> using were new, having
> replaced the old wore out WWII surplus stuff that plagued them
early on.
> 
> There are several things to think about when it comes to factoring
Korean 
> War era units as opposed to WWII, even though the equipment was
nominally 
> the same.
> 
> Anyway, that's a beginning to the things I know to need
consideration in a 
> Korean War module.
> 
> Take Care,
> Tom
> Old Soldiers Magazine
> Website: http://mysite.verizon.net/rjlein/osm
> 
> Forum: http://www.armchairgeneral.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=179

> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Consim-l mailing list
> Consim-l at mailman.halisp.net
> http://mailman.halisp.net/mailman/listinfo/consim-l