"Old equipment in a 1986 European conflict?" Topic

Would the soviets have used older equipment such as the ZSU 57-2 and T-55's in a European conflict circa 1986? I know some of the reserves had this older stuff, but would it have seen front line combat duty? Likewise, would the Americans still field M48 dusters and huey-cobras at that time?

I'd like to put some of the Battlefront Vietnam and Arab-Israeli Wars models to use in my 1986 games.

No US M48s MBTs AFAIK … If you mean M42 Duster SPAA –
M42 used by German Bundeswehr. The last M42A1 equipped ADA units left Vietnam in 1972 and the Duster was returned to the National Guard. The U.S. Army maintained multiple National Guard M42 battalions as a corps level ADA asset until the system was retired in 1988.

I guess it is up to you. The Poles were still making T 55s in 1979. My 80's vintage armored vehicle recognition cards had a T 55 card, so someone must have thought there was a possibility that they would be encountered on the battlefield.

Thanks for that info- so I would have to paint the M42 Dusters with Bundeswehr markings, but none for the Americans I guess. Any wisdom on the other weapon systems I mentioned?

Soviet doctrine called for committing older equipment in later waves. In a perfect world, front-line NATO equipment would have suffered so much attrition that they would face NATO reserve equipment, provide a final push to victory, or just hold "quiet" sectors.

The NVA still had T-55 in the mid 80s can't remember at what stage they were completely replaced by T-72,

Tally Ho!

I think you can safely assume Russian, category III divisions mobilizing in Russian would be drawing old equipment from depots. Even in the mid-'80s, the Russians could conceivably field any post-WWII (and a few WWII) pieces of equipment in follow on echelons.

The USMC still uses Cobras today albeit improved models. In '86 the vast majority of US attack helicopters were Cobras as the Army was just begining to field the AH-64. Between the single and twin engined versions, the US built a few thousand of the things, so coming up with uses for them should be easy. I came across four, twin engined Cobra models in my collection the other month and decided to use two for '80's USMC and two for Iranians (who still use older, twin engined models to this day).

pjm

Yes, AH-64 just started to replace the US ARMY AH-1s …

After the first nuke pops the Soviets would probably unleash their T-34 mothball reserve horde.

2nd and 3rd category divisions would have T-55's.

Many US NG and Army Reserve units would still have the M48s, as well as replacement equipment shipped from US depots. We still had M42 Dusters sitting in USAR motor pools in 86, so you would have seen those too 30-60 days after mobilization started (assuming Germany wasn't glowing in the dark by then). Likewise, Soviet and WP mobilized reserve divisions would have had the older equipment. The Russians had a saying: "An old tank is better than no tank." Like skippy says, the Soviets still had T-34/85s in storage in East Germany until 1989-90 and not for nostalgic reasons.

there might not have been many T-55's because the Russians had shipped them to Afghanistan to replace there T-80's . the suspension on the T-55 could handle the rough terrain better.

In my 6mm '80s Tank Regiment there was a 'training company' of 10 T55s. Not sure if there was an actual historical justification for it but they were cute. Challenger rules as I recall so if someone has the lists they might be able to shed some light.

Sorry Shaun, certainly not by the early 80s, the training vehicles would be whatever the unit was equipped with, older kit sent to the "trg set" run into the ground, used for spares and then sent to a base workshops for major service, upgrades etc. Of course not much point in training on a 4 man T-55 when equipped with a 3 man tank!

Tally Ho!

nickinsomerset,

The T55 was only ever fully replaced in one NVA Panzerdivision before reunification, with the other Panzerdivision only managing about 20% T72s. All of the Motorisierte-Schützen-Divisions were still equipped with T55s at reunification; my father's division only finished equipping with T55s in 1987.

Jurgen

The East German's still had T-55 tanks in front line divisions, including armored divisions until the end of East Germany. See here:
link

In fact, you'd likely see more T-55s than any other tank in Warpact units in 1986. However, you wouldn't see many, if any ZSU-57-2 in front line units. You would see plenty of ZSU-23-4 though, and plenty of SAM units of various types.

As far as the West goes, you would see M-48s in service with less wealthy NATO nations like Turkey and Greece. In fact Norway used the M24 Chaffee in upgraded form as the NM-116 until 1993. See here: link

"In fact, you'd likely see more T-55s than any other tank in Warpact units in 1986" Except of course GSFG which was T-64 and T-80 (3SA was T-64).

Flecktarn,

we used to see both types at the Berlin parade. (And of course on imagery)

[/URL]

Tally Ho!

nickinsomerset,

What was shown in the parades might not have been entirely representative of what was actually in each division. I have no idea where that photograph came from or what unit it is actually of; do you have any more information about it?

My information on the distribution of tanks in NVA divisions comes from my father, who commanded a division, and his colleagues, some of whom were also divisional commanders. I clearly remember the transition in his division from T54s to T55s during the 1980s.

Jurgen

It is a photo I kept for recognition trg many years ago, cannot remember which barracks it was. One of these was Berlin, not sure where the others were, many years and a great deal of beer ago but all 1980s!

[/URL]

[/URL]

[/URL]

I would be interested in which NVA formations may have been in support of 3SA against BAOR and what kit they had. Anything I had is long gone.

Tally Ho!

When I was in 29th ASG n 1989-1992 (Kaiserslautern), there were acres and acres of M-60s and M-48s in War Reserve stocks. This was war reserve stuff, not POMCUS

Nick,

I will try to find out for you about the NVA formations supporting 3rd Shock Army; I am sure that my father or some of his friends will know. Which years are you interested in with regard to equipment? The only thing that I know at the moment is that 4. Motorisierte-Schützen-Division and 7. Panzerdivision were not among them as they were tasked with supporting the attack on the Americans around Frankfurt.

In reality, I very much doubt that many NVA formations would have taken much part in any offensive; certainly, several former division commanders have told me that they would not have done so.

Jurgen

"Soviet doctrine called for committing older equipment in later waves. In a perfect world, front-line NATO equipment would have suffered so much attrition that they would face NATO reserve equipment, provide a final push to victory, or just hold "quiet" sectors".

Another tactic I've read about, which apparently especially applies to submarine warfare, though could be used with air-to-air combat, tank battles, etc., is to push the oldest equipment out first, to localize enemy forces, cause enemy ammo shortages, etc.

Then, save the better stuff to come in to follow on closely, and clean up afterwards, when the enemy is fatigued and short of ammo. Hitting them with fresh, high quality units at that point, in order to break them.

Makes perfect sense, in a contrarian way to me, especially when your quality isn't up to that of your opponents. This would probably be especially true of whole land divisions.

Many thanks Jurgen,

My focus in the period when I was with 33 (UK) Armd Bde in the mid 1980s. It was very interesting speaking to ex NVA Bundeswehr Officers in the 90s, most similar to your friends. The Bundeswher, on the other hand, gave the impression that they would not stop until they reached Moscow!!

Tally Ho!

Mako 11,

A bit off-topic but this is what I used to do with my ACW units. All the green up front first.

We always had heaps of T-54 & T-55's in our games.(Poles, NVA, Czech's as well as GFS II MRD divs)
Depended on your scenario/story/justification for the game.

Sad to not be able to use my ZSU-57-2's.

I was in army in 1985-87, our motorized infantry neighbours had T-55, and our own artillery unit in 1985 still had WWII-designed 122mm howitzers and 160 mm mortars. I've seen T-80 once in 1987. Granted, we had all our equipment upgraded in 1986 with D-30 and Grad missile launchers.

"would the Americans still field M48 dusters "

I believe some of the Bundeswehr reserve units still had M48s.

Didn't know the US still have so many M48s about, were they A5s with the upgraded 105 ? I think in the ROK in the late 70s, the US 2ID's Tank Bns had M48A5s, IIRC … Glad Flecktarn and Barin are here, giving us old timer Cold War Warriors insights from "the other side" …

Our game from Saturday was based on the 1 RS Battlegroup, 33 (UK) Armd Bde. I included Bundeswehr M48, as on exercise in 86 I was having a brew in a woods as a Bn of these trundled past, ahh memories!!

[/URL]

Tally Ho!

I am going to try to persuade my father to post on here so that he can tell what he knows and reply to questions directly as it will be quicker than me having to email him every time.

Unfortunately, his English is only fair.

Jurgen

But better than my Deutch which after many years in Germany is rather restricted!!

Tall Ho and noch ein bier!!

Would it be practical for Soviets to drive T-55's in front of their better tanks? If the canon fodder mutinied they would certainly lose speed/surprise, and hundreds of smoking wrecks might interfere with the progress of the offensive.

"Would it be practical for Soviets to drive T-55's in front of their better tanks?"

I think you are thinking too tactically here. It is using 2nd line formations to do recce by combat and/or lead the assault with the better units reserved for deep operations.

Exactly how the Red Army beat the Germans in WW2.

The deployment of GSFG seems to suggest that they didn't seriously consider doing this, but who knows what their actual wartime deployment would have looked like, nor their tactical response to a solid NATO defensive line. Batter their Cat I divisions to bits against it? Or blast it apart with nuclear weapons, pile in the Cat II stuff to mop up and then the Cat Is drive off into the operational depths.

It partly depends on how deployed NATO are when it all kicks off which in turn is dependant on how long the 'period of rising tension' is beforehand. If it is literally just a Race to the Rhine then I'd expect to see the better stuff leading. If NATO have had three months to get dug along the East German border, then possibly something different.

For my 1981 campaign I went with the scenario in SPIs Central Front series. NATO forces largely up to war strength but still in their deployment areas, which produces some pleasingly fluid tank battles as both sides dash to occupy/penetrate the natural defensive barriers.

One of the BRIXMAS tasks was to identify any change in activity or build up of logistics etc that would indicate an offensive in the making. In theory this meant we would have had a good bit of time to prepare and stack upo with yellow handbags in case of a shortage!!

Tally Ho!

As for tactics, I think the T-55 had adequate NBC protection, so it would do fine as a second/third echelon tank!

Does your game have to take place in 1986?

You could call it "Cuban Missile Crisis Goes Hot," set it in 1963, and use all of those vehicles…?

(Edit: Not Cobras, though…)

I have recently gotten into FoF and was looking for Soviets in 15mm. I inquired with Khurasan miniatures if see if they were going to produce Soviet, and found that they were going to do Soviets for 1950s to 1970s but not 1980s. At first I was disappointed because I grew up reading the Clancy books, reading the Team Yankee comic and playing NATO from Victory Games. Later, I thought about it and said "why not??" Why not play the Soviet Assault BEFORE the arrival of the NATO super tanks and enjoy some slugfests where there isn't a mile of burning T-72s. As I started building terrain, I started researching REFORGER pics and got even more encourage to model a Disco Era invasion. I am currently cutting off the bottles of mosquito repellent off 15mm Vietnam Infantry and painting them as 1970s Americans in Germany. I am having a little trouble replacing the M79, but I might be able to use styrene rod to make M203s. I will have use for the T-55s in my skirmishes. Two possible alternate histories: 1979 – the Carter Administration's response to the Soviet Intervention in Afghanistan has provoked a response from the Politburo and the strategy is determined. Why fight the Americans in the Middle East when the Soviet Army is so strong in Europe?
1975- The World Wide "Peoples" Offensive. April 1975, the Armies of North Vietnam are cutting through South Vietnam. Kim IL Sung, against the warning of the People's Republic of China, orders the North Korean Army to capture Seoul. The United States is focused on the Asian theater as reinforcements are rushed to South Korea and Congress debates a re-intervention in South Vietnam. China threatens direct intervention if US forces return to the South China Sea. With the recent success in Angola and revolution brewing in Central America, the Politburo wonders…will there ever be another time like this? By May Day, Soviet tanks are streaming into West German.

Nick,

Apologies for the slow reply but it has taken a while to gather the information (old men do not do things quickly!).

The only NVA divisions supporting 3SA against the British would have been:

17. Motorisierte Schützendivision
19. Motorisierte Schützendivision

Most of the NVA was tasked to go either north of Hannover or south of Kassel or keep an eye on the lines of communication.

17. Motorisierte Schützendivision was a Mobilmachungsdivision (Mobilisation division) and was equipped with T54s, T55s and BTRs (Mostly 60s and 70s).

19. Motorisierte Schützendivision was a Reservedivision (Reserve division) and was equipped with T55s (a handful of T54s), with APCs being mostly BTRs with a very few BMP1s.

The agreed view of the old men is that both divisions would have been more of a danger to themselves than to the British and would mainly have been used for securing areas that 3SA had already passed through.

In addition, 1. Motorisierte Schützendivision was tasked with being part of the attack on West Berlin.

I hope that this is of use.

Jurgen

Jurgen,

many thanks both to you and your "young friends" as all us ex soldiers like to think of ourselves! And I remain glad there is more chance of us raising a toast together than fighting!!

Tally Ho!

Nick,

One of the interesting things that was in my father's email about this is that one of his former colleagues stated that the Soviets were not inclined to let the regular NVA divisions take on the British as they felt that they would be the toughest of their opponents and that the NVA divisions were neither well enough equipped nor well enough motivated to have much value against them; that is why only second-line NVA divisions were assigned, for rear-area security.

Jurgen

Interesting, the Russians did not allow the Czech guards to have live ammo when Brezhnev visited Prague, in the early seventies.

I knew the Russians, in the 70's, thought the Chieftain tank has twice the effectiveness of the other NATO tanks. That is, if it's Leyland powerpack could limp its way to the MLR!

Jurgen, were the T-72 equipped NVA units then seen as politically more reliable?

Milites,

Only the two Panzer Divisions had T72s; of these only 9. Panzerdivision was fully equipped with T-72s by reunification, with 7. Panzerdivision having about 20% T-72s.

I am not aware that they were regarded as being any more politically reliable than the other divisions but I will send another email:).

Jurgen

Milites,

It seems that political reliability was not a reason for receiving newer equipment; the planned role was the key factor.

Jurgen

Nick,

A correction to my comment on 19. Motorisierte Schützendivision.

I should have written that they had a mix of T55s and T54s in almost equal numbers; I was distracted by some information about 20. Motorisierte Schützendivision, which had, for some reason, a few T72s.

Jurgen

It seems that political reliability was not a reason for receiving newer equipment

The NVA did receive the BMP-2 (M1981) and the BTR-70 ahead of some WP units however (or rather the BTR-70 ahead of GSFG, the BMP-2 was received before other WP members).

Interesting, given your comments about the willingness of NVA units to support GSFG units. Surely the regime was aware of the reluctance of its senior officers to take part in any possible operation, and if they were would the T-72 equipped divisions have had their commanders replaced, in the event of a conflict. THE GDR never struck me as a place that tolerated dissent.

Or was it the other WP nations were even less reliable so the NVA were being given sweeteners, in the form of newish kit?

Sorry for all the questions Jurgen, but people like yourself, who bring a different perspective, are why I value TMP so much.

Milities,

I think one of the issues here is working out what is reality and what is old men saying things that make them look better.

The reluctance to invade West Germany is something that I have only heard of since reunification; I never heard it mentioned or discussed before them. However, that could be because, in the Workers' Paradise, you never know who the Stasi informers were. As far as my father knew, my mother or I could have been one,

The NVA was not unwilling to go into action in support of the USSR; after all, NVA units served in Afghanistan. However, it does seem that it may have been unwilling to engage in combat with fellow Germans and destroy German towns and cities.

It is an area that really needs a lot more research before those who were in positions of authority at the time are no longer with us.

Jurgen

"…after all, NVA units served in Afghanistan"

Thanks for your many interesting comments, Jurgen, but this statement really surprises me. I am skeptical.

I know they provided medical support by flying out wounded Afghans to East German medical facilities. Given their military training and support to other fledgling Communist countries, I'd be surprised if they did not operate similar programmes with the DRA.

"However, it does seem that it may have been unwilling to engage in combat with fellow Germans and destroy German towns and cities."

Were they less reluctant to fight the other allies? If they were assigned to take West Berlin, they undoubtably be fighting Germans and damaging German housing.

Tuscaloosa,

40 'Willi Sanger' Fallschirmjäger Bataillon was in Afghanistan. This was an unusual unit as it was directly controlled by the Ministerium für Nationale Verteidigung and was outside the normal NVA command structure.

Jurgen

Ghost,

The Soviets seem to have regarded the NVA as being more loyal than most of the other "allies", which is not really saying a lot.

Two NVA divisions were assigned to take West Berlin, supported by a Soviet independent motorised rifle brigade. However, in 1988 this plan was changed to blockading West Berlin. Would the NVA have obeyed orders to attack West Berlin? Who knows?

The NVA would probably have been more willing to fight non-German enemies, but that would still have involved destruction of bits of Germany. Again, I am not sure how much is old men wanting to appear better than they were but, having talked with them, I am inclined to think that they would at the very least have very deep concerns about engaging in an offensive war into West Germany.

There can never be a definitive answer to this as, thankfully, the only way of providing a definitive answer never happened and nobody had to make the decision.

Jurgen