What sort of vehicle notes do you prefer?

What sort do you prefer

  • Short and pithy

    Votes: 10 24.4%
  • Full and detailed

    Votes: 28 68.3%
  • Shoot Vinnie, despite the fact he's spending hours researching something he knows nothing about just

    Votes: 3 7.3%

  • Total voters
    41

Vinnie

See Dummies in the index
Joined
Feb 9, 2005
Messages
16,007
Reaction score
1,823
Location
Aberdeen , Scotland
Country
llUnited Kingdom
This sort?
47a ZIS-42M:
The ZIS-5 truck (Russian Vehicle Note 47) had a half-track version produced from 1942 to try to aleviate the effects of bad roads. It was inspired by the French and German vehicles.
Underpowered and with a tremendous fuel consumption, the ZiS-42(M) was not the definite solution for the notorious bad road conditions, but instead it was a valuable stopgap until the arrival of the Lend-Lease all-wheel-drive trucks.

Or this sort?

48a Tetrarch(b):
Soviet military intelligence had little interest in British light tanks before the war. In April of 1941, GABTU knew about the Light Tank Mk.VI, Mk.I and MkIII cruiser tanks, the Mk.I infantry tank, and some kind of "heavy tank model 1940". Even in September, when negotiations about supplying the USSR with British vehicles were underway, the information on available tanks was sparse. The Light Tank Mk.VI and Light Tank Mk.VII "Tetrarch" got mixed up into one tank. The resulting "light Vickers tank" had a 37 mm gun with a coaxial machinegun, maximum armour thickness of 17.5 mm, weighed 8.5 tons, and had a maximum speed of 30 kph.
Data on tanks loaded on the first convoy in late September of 1941 is even more interesting to researchers, as it contains a "Light Tank Mk.8". This index was carried by the "Harry Hopkins" tank, but the characteristics listed show that it is undeniably a Tetrarch. The document said that 20 such tanks will arrive with PQ-1, but instead a batch of 20 Matildas and Valentines was sent. Supplies of lighter tanks were paused for the time being.
In early October of 1941, thanks to military intelligence, GABTU received characteristics of nearly all tanks built by Great Britain and the United States. In early December, GABTU received detailed information about production of British tanks. The numbers retrieved match up very well with modern data from British sources. The first 15 Mk.VII tanks were built in the fourth quarter of 1940, 30 in the first quarter of 1941, and 20 in the third quarter. 35 more tanks were awaited before the end of the year.
These numbers match perfectly with Tetrarch production numbers. Their registration numbers range from T.9266 to T.9365, or 100 tanks overall. Intelligence reports indicated that no tanks were planned for production in the first quarter of 1942, which indicated that production was being shut down. Reports also described plans for a new Light Tank Mk.8 with a mass of 10 tons and thicker armour.
By then, a batch of Tetrarchs was finally sent to the USSR. The light tanks were the first to come through the south passage. On December 27th, 1941, 20 tanks arrived at Zanjan, Iran. This batch was also the last, since due to the rather humble characteristics of the Tetrarch, further orders were pointless.
Photos and letters about this shipment indicate that at least a portion of the tanks were used. Among them were some of the first built Tetrarchs, T.9266, T.9267, and T.9268, built back in October-November of 1940. Photos of these tanks show insignia of the 10th Royal Hussars Regiment from the 1st Armoured Division. This unit was the first to receive Tetrarchs and used them as training tanks. To be fair, not all tanks sent were used. Serial numbers T.9315 and T9319 pop up in letters, and the tank currently displayed at Patriot Park has the serial number T.9328, all of which were built in the third quarter of 1941. These tanks had no markings and were not used as training tanks.
On May 25th, 1942, the 151st Tank Brigade began formation in Leninakan, Armenia. It was headed by Colonel V.A. Kornilov. According to documents, the Tetrarchs and their crews were included in the brigade. On June 20th, the brigade was included into the 45th Army of the North Caucasus Front.
The North Caucasus Front, especially its tank units, was a rather interesting formation. The most popular tank here (remember, this is the summer of 1942) was the T-26 (Russian Vehicle Note 6). The T-26 was also the most numerous in the 151st Tank Brigade. In total, as of early June of 1942, the brigade had 25 T-26es and 20 Tetrarchs, listed as MK-VII or MK-7.
The main goal of the 151st Tank Brigade in the 45th Army was guarding the border. The army, commanded by Lieutenant-General F.N. Remezov was located on the border with Iran. On May 21st, 1942, in the port city of Bandar Shah (now Bandar Torkaman), a receiving department for imported tanks was formed. The tanks themselves were only shipped to the USSR in the end of the summer, but trucks and various other Lend-Lease cargo used that route as well. The 45th Army and the 151st brigade guarded those supplies. In July, Tetrarch T.9328 was sent to Kubinka.
On January 1st, 1943, the 151st Tank Brigade (25 T-26es and 19 MK-7s) from Leninakan, as well as the 563rd (21 M3 Lights (Russian Vehicle Note 48) and 9 M4A2s (Russian Vehicle Note 50)) and 564th (10 T-34s (Russian Vehicle Note 14) and 20 T-26es (Russian Vehicle Note 6a)) Independent Tank Battalions were transferred to the Black Sea group of the Transcaucasian Front. Initially the tank brigade was subordinate to the 47th Army, where it faced its first battle.
Alas, the heroism of the tankers could not change the flow of events. Due to poor communication with artillery and retreat of the infantry, the tanks also had to fall back. Later days were spent in futility trying to break through the enemy's defenses once more.
Another tank from the 1st tank battalion was knocked out on January 27th. Thanks to energetic action on behalf of Senior Technical Lieutenant I.I. Fetisov, who personally drove another tank, the tank was evacuated from the battlefield. For his initiative, Fetisov received the "For Battle Merit" medal.
To strengthen the attack on January 31st, tanks of the 47th Army were united into one battalion commanded by Colonel Kornilov. By then, the 151st TBr reported only 14 functional tanks. On that day, the joint battalion went on to attack height 224.5. 6 tanks were lost in one day, including Bal's tank. By then, the tanks under his command destroyed 18 pillboxes and killed 70 enemy infantrymen. When Bal's tank was knocked out, he managed to drag wounded gunner Taranov from the tank, take him to the rear, and return to battle. Leading 50 infantrymen, the Senior Lieutenant managed to take the surviving pillboxes. For this, he was awarded with the "For Courage" medal. Sadly, even such heroism did not alter the overall battle.
As of February 1st, 1943, Kornilov's joint battalion contained 9 functional MK-7s. On that day, the tanks attacked again, but the offensive stalled without infantry support. Taking losses, Kornilov's tanks retreated to their initial positions. On the next day, the joint battalion was sent to the reserve. On February 11th, the battalion was transferred to the 216th Infantry Division, with which the tanks attacked height 224.6 the next day. The results were the same: the infantry did not support the tanks. The result was 4 burned and 5 knocked out vehicles. The attacks on subsequent days went about the same way. On February 28th, the 151st Tank Brigade was transferred to reserves and moved to the 56th Army.
In mid-March, the brigade received new tanks, including captured ones. Its own tanks, including 14 MK-7s (4 of them nonfunctional) were sent to the 563rd Independent Tank Brigade on March 19th, which took part in an unsuccessful landing at Novorossiysk. The nonfunctional tanks were sent to the 3rd Infantry Corps which used them as pillboxes in defense of the Shapsugskiy bridge.
Gradually, the Tetrarchs broke down. By the end of May, only 7 remained functional. They were transferred to the 132nd Independent Tank Regiment, which was likely not happy about this new addition. Thanks to a lack of parts and heavy use, only two tanks worked by September. There is information about transfer to the 5th Guards Tank Brigade, but it requires confirmation. One thing can be said for certain: the combat career of the Tetrarch in the Red Army was over in the fall of 1943. Not bad for a tank that served almost two years in total.
The last mention of Tetrarchs in the Red Army dates back to January of 1944. Repairs factory #66 (Tbilisi) lists 3 MK-7 tanks. 6 such vehicles were brought to the factory in 1943, but 3 of them were written off by January. The same fate awaited the remaining tanks, as no spare parts were found to repair them.
See also Russian Vehicle Note N & Note LL
 

Honza

The Art Of Wargames
Silver Supporting Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2005
Messages
12,174
Reaction score
1,005
Location
Oxfordshire
Country
llCzechia
The ones we have been given in chpt H will do just fine. Something in between the two options above.
 

lluis61

Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2017
Messages
236
Reaction score
196
Location
Barcelona
First name
Luis
Country
llSpain
Despite I have voted for the details, something intermediate could suit me. And thank you very much for your work!
 

xenovin

Elder Member
Silver Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2010
Messages
1,858
Reaction score
952
Location
Skynet
First name
Vincent
Country
llUnited States
I think you might want to break it down into the existing short specs in CHH now followed by the expanded history above. That way players looking for scenario specific data can get it quickly and the history dorks like me can keep reading the expanded history section.
 

Philippe D.

Elder Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Messages
1,396
Reaction score
551
Location
Bordeaux
Country
llFrance
I'd like to have vehicle notes where the rules-related part is clearly separate from the historic information. It's nice to have the information, but when I scan the Chapter H pages for rules before playing a scenario, it would be nice to be able to tell them apart at a glance. Or even to have the two parts appear on separate pages.
 

Paul M. Weir

Forum Guru
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Apr 3, 2004
Messages
8,318
Reaction score
3,278
Location
Dublin
First name
Paul
Country
llIreland
I found the Tetrarch article most illuminating and it very nicely fills yet another gap in my knowledge. Prior to that I had only the vaguest idea of the numbers, geography and possible usage. However it is an article, not a vehicle note.

So what do I think should be in a vehicle note, assuming the information is available. Many of the below categories could be single sentences.
Numbers: Numbers built and issued.
Dates: Production date ranges and initial combat introduction with some idea of when the last were used.
Geography: Roughly where they saw service (eg Caucuses, Black Sea, North Africa) or seen in most fronts.
Units: The most common type of unit they were issued to (eg Panzerjager vs Panzer) and what if any other type of vehicle they were usually mixed with, if applicable.
Lineage: A new design or from a previous vehicle, whether further developed into another vehicle. Original purpose of a vehicle.
Quirks: Things like high or low power, cramped compartments, unreliability, etc. Basically what the users most liked or disliked about same.

Often a single paragraph can cover most of the above categories like:

The Wehrmacht foresaw the need to deal with the reported Soviet T-1000 Troll and in June '40 asked Rheintöchter to design a counter. Rheintöchter produced 1 prototype and 20 production Cinders Ausf A based upon a carriage powered by 6 Ratte units and lightly armoured with 17mm of Magikstall early in '41. Assigned to Army Group South in Operation Barbarossa, they easily dealt with the last few Trolls encountered using the fully turreted 20cm MagikWandwaffe 40/1. Due to it's low power and large but narrow wheels bogging in the Ukrainian mud and the disappearance of suitable targets, the last Cinders were withdrawn in the Winter of '41, disarmed and relegated to latrine duty. The Cinder was seen as a development dead end. The Cinders were also notorious for breaking down at midnight, though the air cooled Ratte units otherwise coped well with winter weather. Cinders were organised in a Corps level special company (Sondermagik 201) with 4 platoons each of 4 Cinders and a SdKfz 250/3 command vehicle with 4 reserve Cinders as spares, though the reserve Cinders were often organised as an ad hoc combat platoon.

As you can see a lot of useful information in a single paragraph. Once that compact version is done then you might consider a brief paragraph with colourful anecdotes as part of the Notes. I don't know what format you intend to publish in. If in electronic form then you might have a "See also" that directs to a more extensive history later in the document or allow the user to click and expand to expose the fuller account. Keeping the initially visible note compact means users can more quickly find what they want as well as avoiding the "hit in the face with a big wet fish" effect that too large a body of text can have.

So while the ZiS-42 (it's ZiS not ZIS, Zavod imeni Stalina = Factory named after Stalin) size note would be suboptimal (though what can you say about something like the US 2.5 ton truck used by everybody, everywhere), but the Tetrarch one is overkill for notes.
 
Last edited:

Yuri0352

Elder Member
Silver Supporting Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2014
Messages
1,714
Reaction score
650
Location
25-30 Hexes
Country
llUnited States
I'd like to have vehicle notes where the rules-related part is clearly separate from the historic information. It's nice to have the information, but when I scan the Chapter H pages for rules before playing a scenario, it would be nice to be able to tell them apart at a glance. Or even to have the two parts appear on separate pages.
I prefer Paul's suggestion.
Please, no separate or additional pages per vehicle note! My page -protected Chapter H binder (which includes the plethora of BFP vehicle/aircraft notes) already weighs as much as a .30 cal. ammo can.
 

Vinnie

See Dummies in the index
Joined
Feb 9, 2005
Messages
16,007
Reaction score
1,823
Location
Aberdeen , Scotland
Country
llUnited Kingdom
I prefer Paul's suggestion.
Please, no separate or additional pages per vehicle note! My page -protected Chapter H binder (which includes the plethora of BFP vehicle/aircraft notes) already weighs as much as a .30 cal. ammo can.
Since these are likely to only ever be electronic, they shouldn't weigh much!
More seriously, I've tried to limit the rules matters to only daggered notes or multi applicable notes.
In fact, I've not done the MAVN yet.
 
Last edited:

Paul M. Weir

Forum Guru
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Apr 3, 2004
Messages
8,318
Reaction score
3,278
Location
Dublin
First name
Paul
Country
llIreland
Since these are likely to only ever be el3ctronic, tgey shiukdnt wrigh much!
In that case you might consider a "show"/"hide" or "more"/"less" button, like you see in Wiki and a few other sites where you want to give more extensive information, yet still want to present a compact set of notes at first glance.
 

Vinnie

See Dummies in the index
Joined
Feb 9, 2005
Messages
16,007
Reaction score
1,823
Location
Aberdeen , Scotland
Country
llUnited Kingdom
In that case you might consider a "show"/"hide" or "more"/"less" button, like you see in Wiki and a few other sites where you want to give more extensive information, yet still want to present a compact set of notes at first glance.
A bit beyond my programming capability....
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,062
Reaction score
5,204
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
A bit beyond my programming capability....
A quick way to do it. Each "id" on the page must be unique.
HTML:
<html>
<head>
<title>Show/Hide longer</title>
<script> function toggleShowHide( theButton, elementId ) {
  var showHideItem = document.getElementById( elementId );
  if ( showHideItem.style.display === 'none' ) {
     showHideItem.style.display = '';
     theButton.innerHTML = 'Hide...';
  }
  else {
     showHideItem.style.display = 'none';
     theButton.innerHTML = 'Show more...';
  }
}
</script>
</head>
<body>
<p>this is a short paragraph.</p>
<button onclick="toggleShowHide( this, 'showHideItem' );">Show more...</button>
<p id="showHideItem" style="display:none;">This is the longer version.</p>
</body>
</html>
JR
 

Vinnie

See Dummies in the index
Joined
Feb 9, 2005
Messages
16,007
Reaction score
1,823
Location
Aberdeen , Scotland
Country
llUnited Kingdom
I managed to make a pop out menu, so this should be possible. I'm just not certain how much time it will take given that it took a month and a half to get the German vehicle notes done. I haven't even started to add Red Factories yet...
 

bprobst

Elder Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2003
Messages
2,093
Reaction score
752
Location
Melbourne, Australia
First name
Bruce
Country
llAustralia
What sort of vehicle notes do I prefer?

Official ones, but that doesn't seem to be an option in the poll.

I don't see the point otherwise.
 

JRKrejsa

Elder Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2005
Messages
3,329
Reaction score
666
Location
USA
Country
llUnited States
More info than the first example, slightly less than the second.
 

hongkongwargamer

Forum Guru
Joined
Apr 4, 2013
Messages
5,688
Reaction score
2,774
Location
17 hexes
Country
llPortugal
Sir .. if you haven't been nominated to write the Chapter H notes for these counters - you should be.

One of the pleasures in life for me is to read Chapter H notes .. and you are doing a terrific job at it! THANKYOU
 
Top