These are my total contribution to the pain ting of this army with S.O.G. pain tin g the rest.
The Chaplain is from Westwind Productions and the Limber is from assorted “left over” Napoleonic bits and pieces.
At least I can now say I have contributed something to this army!
The 2.8 cm sPzB 41 was a weapon capable of firing 20 mm projectiles at an effective range of up to 500 m. What made the sPzB 41 unique, however, was its use of the Gerlich principle to increase the velocity of the projectile without the need of a larger charge.
Essentially, the bore was tapered down from an initial 28 mm to 20 mm at the end with 28 mm flanges squeezing the projectile until the bore tapered down, generating a muzzle velocity of around 1,400 meters per second.
The sPzB 41 used special ammunition that was heavily reliant on Tungsten as its main component which was in heavy demand, but not in enough supply.
While penetration at close range was decent for such a small anti-tank weapon, 60 mm penetration of armour angled 30˚ at 100 m, the light projectile meant that velocity was lost quite quickly, reducing the weapon’s effectiveness at range
The Brixia mortar is a 45 mm calibre light mortar mounted on a legged base and designed for operation by two crew.
The rear legs are fitted with a pad for the gunner to lay forward on behind the mortar, or sit upon when the situation allowed.
A lever allowed for operating the breech and firing the weapon, while ammunition was fed in by the loader.
Well trained teams could reach up to 18 rounds per minute, although operational rate of fire was less intense to avoid damage to the firing tube.
The Brixia mortar differed from comparable World War II weapons in that it was trigger fired with the help of separate ignition cartridges to be fed into a special magazine, making the weapon more similar to modern cannon-mortars than conventional parabolic grenade launchers of the time.
Next up will b e the sniper team.
The Greeks purchased both the Boys Anti-tank rifle and the P.I.A.T. from Great Britain. The later is not available in the Bolt Action lists.
I have already posted on the Boys anti-tank rifle previously so will not repeat myself here.
The casualty die will only be used when required.
The Bolt Action list allows for 2 Light Mortars or a Light Mortar and an 81mm Medium Mortar. This team provides for both options.
Only the Forward Observer left to complete the excellent work S.O.G. has done on these.
The Squad consists of an NCO with SMG
Infantryman with SMG
2 Infantrymen with rifles, one with Panzerfaust
2 Infantrymen with Assault rifles
Light Machine gun Team 1
Light Machine gun Team 2
This was the last of the infantry squad, leaving only three more figures for completion. Well done S.O.G.
Just for colour (pun intended) I wanted to field an infantryman with the Greek flag.
The problem was which flag to use. The first is the national Flag from 1942; the next is a military flag with a central depiction of St George slaying the dragon; the third is the Greek army flag and the fourth is the national Greek flag in 1941.
I then came across a photo of this 1942 Greek Propaganda Poster which sealed the deal.
The flag-bearer and the second medic
The medic can be used in a second platoon or as an orderly for the existing one.
More from S.O.G. tomorrow.
A second command for the Greeks that can be used to create a second platoon or for a Captain in a larger one.
The team consists of the Officer with pistol and two aides with rifles.
The third squad of eleven also consists of an NCO, Light Machinegun Team, a VB Launcher and seven riflemen for a total of 161 Bolt Action points.
Light Machine Gun Team
VB Launcher
NCO
Seven riflemen
This now completes a very basic 500 point Bolt Action list.
The 500pt list leaves three infantry men with rifles (one missing) and the medic as excess.
A final three more squads, a Captain. Anti-tank rifle, Sniper, light mortar and 2 priests are on the painting table at various stages of the b atch painting process. More of these will arrive soon.
The argument of this book is that “in recent years Anzac – the idea as much as the actual army corps – has become the dominant force within Australian history, overshadowing everything else. The commemoration of Anzac Day is bigger than ever, while Remembrance Day, VE Day, VP Day and other military anniversaries grow in significance each year. Pilgrimages to Gallipoli, the Somme and Kokoda are commonplace and popular military history dominates the bestseller lists. Anzac has seemingly become a sacred, untouchable element of the nation.” The book goes on to conclude that “the Anzac obsession distorts the rest of Australia’s history”.
The book is a polemical work that argues that the Anzac legend has an exaggerated and unhealthy predominance in Australian identity, and especially in Australian schools.
The argument goes:
I have real concerns about these arguments, not the least is that Australian is only one hundred and twenty three years old. During that time we have had WW1 (4 years), WW2 (5 years) Korean War (3 years), the Malayan Emergency (8 years), Vietnam (11 years), East Timor (14 years), and Afghanistan (21 years), just to name a few! That is a total of 66 years of war or a total of 53.65 % of time that Australia has been a nation. As a nation we have been at war more years than we have not.
Unfortunately war and the ANZAC tradition is very much a part of our nation. I wish it wasn’t but it is. Fact!
Australia became a Federation of Sovereign States on 1 of January 1901. Prior to that existed six separate Colonies of the United Kingdom. It could be argued that Australian history only began with Federation, and that prior to that it was only Colonial history, but I will leave that alone!
Robert Lewis states, “The problem is not that they mount an argument against the Anzac legend, but that the argument is consistently a weak one, or worse. This is not helped by a complete failure to define the key assertion: what exactly is meant by the ‘militarisation’ of history.”
For me it is even worse, as Historians they quote sources by only citing “some say”, they make assertions without any basis other than their own ideology, and they have even admitted not reading the documents they are condemning.
They have a right to their opinion but not to present ideology as fact.
I suggest that you read the full rebuttable from Robert Lewis in his Quadrant Online article “Cultural Warriors” which is linked above.
I am glad I read the book as it opened my eyes to the amount of twaddle out there posing as fact! Read it but borrow it from the library and don’t waste your hard earned on it like I did! If you do read it make sure you read it in conjunction with Lewis’ article and make up your own mind.
I have! I have given it two stars for having the guts to write this drivel!