Remove ads

East Africa 1930: An ORBAT Quest

Reader mode
You are ignoring content by this member.
thepsyborg said:
Why 6.5 Carcano over 6.5 Swedish?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I was only quoting what Ian McCollum said in the video: i've no problem with the 6.5mm Swedish (apart maybe being slightly more powerful than 6.5mm Carcano)

dreameater said:
About the Carabinieri perhaps making them a mix of national guard and guerilla's might work or full time guerilla/skirmishing force
We can replace the policing role by integrating local respected figures into the state. Some might be bit more sleezier the other but integrating local community leaders into the state structure seems like a good cost cutting measure for policing while allowing the Carabinieri to specialize (we may need to split off a small mountain police force but overall it would be a reduction in costs overall). We should also start thinking of plans to deal with the Japanese army officials in case relations sour so they cannot coup us(covertly we still want Japanese investment but coup proofing is in order).

Reddit - Dive into anything

www.reddit.com www.reddit.com
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I don't think that making the Carabinieri a national guard force will help us. Sure, a national guard service is necessary, but I think that using them in the same way of the italians is the best solution: i've heard only positive account about them after WW1.
Moreover i think that their organization and way of doing their work has something beutifull:


What is charme me about their system is that they, by being garrisoned in foreign regions from that in wich are borne/live and by integrating with the local community, create a sense of national unity and effectively fight crime. It has something poetic about it.

(This of course ignore their mistakes just after the italian unification...)

The only things that I disagree with user C_Z plan is about the choice of firearms (i don't think we will please the Japanese by adopting their same rifle), slightly more responsability given to the Carabinieri, and different rationale for the Perinos (as a matter of fact, they weren't put in fortresses becouse of their weight, that is on the average side for an HMG, 27 Kg similar to a Maxim PM-1910 , but because the Italians thought of it as a "secret weapon")
 
AMel said:
I was only quoting what Ian McCollum said in the video: i've no problem with the 6.5mm Swedish (apart maybe being slightly more powerful than 6.5mm Carcano)


I don't think that making the Carabinieri a national guard force will help us. Sure, a national guard service is necessary, but I think that using them in the same way of the italians is the best solution: i've heard only positive account about them after WW1.
Moreover i think that their organization and way of doing their work has something beutifull:


What is charme me about their system is that they, by being garrisoned in foreign regions from that in wich are borne/live and by integrating with the local community, create a sense of national unity and effectively fight crime. It has something poetic about it.

(This of course ignore their mistakes just after the italian unification...)

The only things that I disagree with user C_Z plan is about the choice of firearms (i don't think we will please the Japanese by adopting their same rifle), slightly more responsability given to the Carabinieri, and different rationale for the Perinos (as a matter of fact, they weren't put in fortresses becouse of their weight, that is on the average side for an HMG, 27 Kg similar to a Maxim PM-1910 , but because the Italians thought of it as a "secret weapon")
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The main problem is using a military force for policing matter which typically doesn't mix well as such I'd like to mostly outsource the actual policing work as much as possible to the communities themselves and leave it as a tertiary or other another departments concern.
 
C_Z said:
Since voting's open and I should probably get to sleep, here's a quick thrown-together plan (along with the logic behind it):

[] Plan: Insert Snappy Plan Name Here
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Broadly on board with this plan. Couple thoughts.

- Agree about maybe add a write-in for the "internal security and riot control" option to emphasize that this is more like...a national police/guard sort of role than local heavies? I think incorporating trusted local figures too easily becomes "the local big man's goons," you want to build an independent institution.

- Are you sure I can't change your mind about the HMGs? Both models have their flaws, but I think a) the army is much more likely to end up using HMGs at all in the first place, especially with the doctrines we're discussing, so which is left with the Carabinieri is a bit of a wash; hell, I'd accept write-in: just put the Type 3s in storage b) there's little cost in the short term to making the inventory swap.
 
Potato Anarchy said:
Broadly on board with this plan. Couple thoughts.

- Agree about maybe add a write-in for the "internal security and riot control" option to emphasize that this is more like...a national police/guard sort of role than local heavies? I think incorporating trusted local figures too easily becomes "the local big man's goons," you want to build an independent institution.

- Are you sure I can't change your mind about the HMGs? Both models have their flaws, but I think a) the army is much more likely to end up using HMGs at all in the first place, especially with the doctrines we're discussing, so which is left with the Carabinieri is a bit of a wash; hell, I'd accept write-in: just put the Type 3s in storage b) there's little cost in the short term to making the inventory swap.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That's why I suggested subdividing it into a third division which will be used specifically for policing. While making a second formed out of locals for policing and let the villages tend to themselves most of the time. Were on a budget here be pragmatic like the Ottomans lol.
 
Last edited:
You are ignoring content by this member.
Potato Anarchy said:
Broadly on board with this plan. Couple thoughts.

- Agree about maybe add a write-in for the "internal security and riot control" option to emphasize that this is more like...a national police/guard sort of role than local heavies? I think incorporating trusted local figures too easily becomes "the local big man's goons," you want to build an independent institution.

- Are you sure I can't change your mind about the HMGs? Both models have their flaws, but I think a) the army is much more likely to end up using HMGs at all in the first place, especially with the doctrines we're discussing, so which is left with the Carabinieri is a bit of a wash; hell, I'd accept write-in: just put the Type 3s in storage b) there's little cost in the short term to making the inventory swap.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

It's considered gerrymandering if i change my plan to attract more peapoles? and if not, what changes you suggest to my plan?
 
AMel said:
i've no problem with the 6.5mm Swedish (apart maybe being slightly more powerful than 6.5mm Carcano)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yeah, that's kind of the reason I prefer it; the 6.5 Swedish has enough extra oomph (combination of slightly higher case capacity and much higher pressure limits, even before the '41 introduction of the spitzer bullet giving it tremendous retained energy at range) to be a comfortably viable MMG cartridge, and not so much as to render it impractical in first-gen self-loading rifles and even full-size battle rifles (it has a bit over half the recoil energy of .30-06, just under two-thirds of .308); 6.5 Swede could be the only cartridge we need until the Armalites take over everything.

Carcano's perfectly fine as a rifle cartridge but I suspect would be comparatively underwhelming in MMGs.
 
Last edited:
You are ignoring content by this member.
thepsyborg said:
Yeah, that's kind of the reason I prefer it; the 6.5 Swedish has enough extra oomph (combination of slightly higher case capacity and much higher pressure limits, even before the '41 introduction of the spitzer bullet giving it tremendous retained energy at range) to be a comfortably viable MMG cartridge, and not so much as to render it impractical in first-gen self-loading rifles and even full-size battle rifles (it has a bit over half the recoil energy of .30-06, just under two-thirds of .308); 6.5 Swede could be the only cartridge we need until the Armalites take over everything.

Carcano's perfectly fine as a rifle cartridge but I suspect would be comparatively underwhelming in MMGs.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Uhh, but didn't also the swedish adopted a different cartridge for their MMG? the 8mm Swedish?
 
Potato Anarchy said:
Broadly on board with this plan. Couple thoughts.

- Agree about maybe add a write-in for the "internal security and riot control" option to emphasize that this is more like...a national police/guard sort of role than local heavies? I think incorporating trusted local figures too easily becomes "the local big man's goons," you want to build an independent institution.

- Are you sure I can't change your mind about the HMGs? Both models have their flaws, but I think a) the army is much more likely to end up using HMGs at all in the first place, especially with the doctrines we're discussing, so which is left with the Carabinieri is a bit of a wash; hell, I'd accept write-in: just put the Type 3s in storage b) there's little cost in the short term to making the inventory swap.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yeah, I just wasn't sure what that write-in should be. I'm open to suggestions.

My concern with integrating locals is similar. It seems like it'll spiral into corruption if we rely entirely on it. We can and should work with local leaders, but I don't want to offload things entirely to them.

If the change is desired then I'll make it, I just didn't think it was useful. I don't have strong qualms about shuffling the machine guns.

That said, I disagree on the army being more likely to use HMGs. As the border guards, the Carabinieri will presumably be the ones manning the border fortifications, and fixed defences are where bulky, water cooled machine guns are most acceptable. I'd like to, long term, pivot the army towards LMGs/GPMGs that are more useful in maneuver warfare.
 
My thoughts about the Carabinieri is something based a little more off of what the Ukranians have done with their TDF - a reserve/militia that will augment the regulars in wartime and provider some policing / local sense of national unity in peace (so a sort.of TDF/border guard combo)
 
You are ignoring content by this member.
Rat King said:
My thoughts about the Carabinieri is something based a little more off of what the Ukranians have done with their TDF - a reserve/militia that will augment the regulars in wartime and provider some policing / local sense of national unity in peace (so a sort.of TDF/border guard combo)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I like this idea, mind if use it in my plan?
 
AMel said:
---[X] FN Model D or, if not count, Carcano Mod.91/28 TS with Tromboncino Mod.28, if also not count, Japanese ZH-29
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The FN Model D doesn't exist yet. The FN Model 30 is in development, using the Colt Machine Rifle model 1925 (the R75) that FN has licensed. Similarly, the Japanese ZH-29 won't exist until sometimes between 1931 and 1935-ish, when the IJA invites Tokyo Gas & Electric to make a semi-automatic rifle.

AMel said:
Uhh, but didn't also the swedish adopted a different cartridge for their MMG? the 8mm Swedish?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Sweden used machine guns in both 6.5x55 mm and 8x63 mm calibers at the same time.
 
[X] Plan Techincal Reforms, Fixes and Trials

Plan that has my vote so far. I just lurk but I would prefer to not have the Arisaka cartridge. Personal preference.
 
Updated my plan's wording a bit:

C_Z said:
[X] Plan: Insert Snappy Plan Name Here

-[X] New: Arisaka Type 38 - 6.5×50 mm
-[X] Write-in: New: Mannlicher M95/30 - 8x56 mmR
-[X] New: Auto-Ordnance Thompson Gun Military Model - 11.43×32 mm

-[X] Form an Army Headquarters unit to manage the overall functions. This will not be particularly effective without doctrinal reform, but it will inform what is expected of the Army.
-[X] Attach the 2nd Regiments Training company to Army HQ as a centralised training unit. This will begin to solve some of the training issues the army faces.
-[X] Attach the 1st Regiments Artillery detachment to Army HQ as a fire support unit for the army as a whole.
-[X] Attach the 1st Regiments Cavalry company to Army HQ as a reconnaissance and quick response force.

-[X] Military organisation with police and security units.

-[X] Border Patrol
-[X] Wilderness Rangers
-[X] Partisan and Skirmish Warfare
-[X] Write-in: Internal Safety, Security, and Policing
-[X] Write-in: Military Reserve and Recruitment Pool
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Tried to bring it closer to the TDF's remit according to Wikipedia while being aware that we're in a much more rural area than Ukraine (so "deployment at checkpoints" and "search and rescue" is probably equivalent to wilderness rangers and border patrol). Overall, however, I wanted to keep things simple and avoid having a dozen different write-ins. Also watered down the wording so they're not riot cops, even though, practically speaking, they (or the army) will be called in if there is a riot, we're in the 1930s after all.
 
To sort of ramble about the future of the army and what we might want to consider...

Right now we have basically somewhat small brigade equivalent as our whole regular army.

Grand total of about 6,300 men under arms.

Our total military-usable population is about 120,000. Obviously we don't want to just gun straight for a permanent 120,000 man standing army, but it might be worth considering how we eventually want to organize.

Potential ORBAT would look something like this, cribbing from the Japanese structure:

Army Level
-HQ / General Staff
-Army Artillery Reserve (potentially up to a whole artillery regiment, but MONEY, so probably just a battalion of 12 guns)
-Army Cavalry Reserve (potentially a cavalry battalion that may or may not end up with armored cars to act as a faux-motorized/mechanized reserve unit)
-Signals Unit
-Army Engineers
-Transport Regiment
-Field Hospitals/Medical Unit
-Veterinary Unit
-Ordnance Unit
-Training Unit (Size TBD)

Then:

Reorganize our brigade to:
-HQ
-Engineer Company
-Transport Regiment (Porters, pack horses, trucks, etc., depending on what we do)
-Recon Company
-Signal and Escort Company (for runners and flags, since we are unlikely to have a lot of radios; maybe field telephones)
-3 Regiments of Infantry, each:
--HQ
--Regimental Gun Section (4 mountain/man packed light guns)
--Three battalions infantry, each ~900 men:
---HQ
---Three or four rifle companies
---MG Company w/ Heavy MGs
---Battalion gun/mortars (2 to 6 light guns or mortars, man portable to give battalions some pocket artillery; heavy mortars probably cheaper and might work better for our terrain)


This would give us 5,400 riflemen/infantry, but each 1800 men (regiment) would also have ~36 heavy machine guns, up to 18 mortar tubes, and four light howitzers (not counting light machine guns below the company level). Depending on how we end up reacting to the threat of enemy air, we might also introduce regimental AA companies.

The army level reserve would then also give us an additional 12 guns, plus potentially a "cavalry" reserve of about ~1000 men to be used as a fire brigade/RRF/army recon.

Looking at the Carabinieri, it's a bit trickier since we do want them to be somewhat standardized. I think keeping the regional makeup is probably for the best. So North, North-West, South, but standardize the unit sizes (potentially introduce regiments and battalions as parent level organizations) and potentially expand on number of HMGs available. Possibly also break off certain specialized units into their own thing under the Carabinieri umbrella (like boats/lake/river patrol).

We might also potentially want to expand our coastal forces, either as their own force or tied in under the army command as independent "coast defense battalions" that are smaller in manpower than the infantry battalions, but have comparatively more machine guns for AA/anti-landing/anti-boat work, combined with separate coastal artillery batteries.
 
Last edited:
AMel said:
Umm, Rat King? your Brigade structure isn't pretty much similar to the one that will be the result of my plan?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Potentially? But our initial army reforms here are "quick fixes"; transferring whole battalions between regiments is probably going to make people finicky. And I would rather not scoop up a bunch of army surplus before we've even standardized what our new rifle and MG round is going to be.

I'm spitballing about the future and am sort of more in favor of taking a measured approach rather than rushing to do it all at once.
 
Last edited:
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top