PDA

View Full Version : Guess what this cannon is?



FW-190 Pilot
11-10-2005, 04:39 PM
http://img386.imageshack.us/img386/4792/1233px.jpg
it seems powerful, do you think it be the cannon used in the german giant tanks?

Panzerknacker
11-10-2005, 06:14 PM
That is a Eisebanh K-5 (E) Glatt ( smoothbore) 210 mm railroad gun.

It was never used in tanks.

Man of Stoat
11-11-2005, 12:25 PM
Was that a WAH, FW190???

Firefly
11-11-2005, 02:13 PM
Imagine the size of tank needed to field that gun, it would be a veritable Land Ship!

IronFist
11-14-2005, 08:38 PM
I believe its the railway gun

Cuts
11-15-2005, 03:59 AM
I believe MoS was correct.

[21Pz]Stauffenberg
11-15-2005, 06:36 AM
Yes its a railway cannon, they needed two parallel railroad tracks to manouver.

In specific:
Name: 21 cm Kanone 12 (E)
Manufacturer: Krupp
Numbers produced: 2
Barrel:
Caliber (mm): 211
Battel lenght(Kal.): 157,8
Länge Züge (Bohrung) (Kal.): 131,4 (152,2) (Dunno what that is, so i cant translate)
Barrelweight (t): 99,708
Lafette:
Turnradius Height (°): (-0) +25 bis +55
Turnradius Side (°): 0,23
total weight(t): 317
total lenght (m): 41,36
HE shell:
shell weight(kg): 107,5
Number of propelling devices: 2
Vo (m/s): 1.500
range(km): 115,0

SS. Kallan
11-15-2005, 11:34 PM
That hits the spot, Stauffenberg.

chase
11-16-2005, 05:54 PM
Railway guns are useless! The idea of these giant weapons was ridiculous.
Dive bombers, or even heavier bombers were better than these behemoths.

SS. Kallan
11-16-2005, 08:41 PM
That's true chase, they really served no purpose. Not many were produced though, and I think the Germans were just trying to be innovative by developing these new weapons.

Hosenfield
11-16-2005, 09:59 PM
The reasons that the super-heavy cannon were develped were to hit underground bunkers and exteremely fortified targets. The SUper=heavies were used to break the Soviet Superfortresses at Sevestapol with its underground tunnels. Not many were made because this was a specialized weapon for a specialized situation.

FW-190 Pilot
11-17-2005, 12:57 AM
can they deployed on the normandy coast and used that as a mobile coastal defence?

SS. Kallan
11-17-2005, 02:41 AM
Yes, they could have deployed them over Normandie coast, but there were too few of them produced, and they were expensive to keep up. They were specialized weapons for specialized situations. A very similar heavy mobile artillery was the Karl Mortar, which was much better since it moved about on tracks.

[21Pz]Stauffenberg
11-17-2005, 04:53 AM
Before USA launched their moon project, they put millions of Dollars in experiments with such guns. They wanted to fire satelites in the air.
They came quite high, but the guns where dangerous, some exploded.
Also the satelites have to be built very strong so it can take the fast acceleration.
Project was cancelled as Rockets proved to be more promising.

IronFist
11-22-2005, 12:15 AM
The German Military used many railway guns such as that one in WWI also, capable of hitting Paris from a certain range. Never got close enough i believe. Overall not a big factor in any War. (Big Targets from the air)

PropaMcGanda
11-22-2005, 12:48 AM
Stauffenberg]Before USA launched their moon project, they put millions of Dollars in experiments with such guns. They wanted to fire satelites in the air.
They came quite high, but the guns where dangerous, some exploded.
Also the satelites have to be built very strong so it can take the fast acceleration.
Project was cancelled as Rockets proved to be more promising.

They should've mounted a few space cannons on some shermans. :lol:

[21Pz]Stauffenberg
11-22-2005, 08:10 AM
Super duper PERSHING?

arhob1
11-27-2005, 03:42 PM
Does anyone know if these rail road guns were ever successful? Someone mentioned Sevastopol but surely only a direct hit (or very close) would destroy under ground bunkers and I wouldn't have thought these would be too accurate considering their size and range?

Also - why are they smoothbores? What benefit does a smooth bore have over rifling?

Had to laugh at FW190 Pilots question about whether these were fitted to German heavy tanks, let him off though for posting a good pic.

Thanks

FW-190 Pilot
11-27-2005, 04:22 PM
Does anyone know if these rail road guns were ever successful? Someone mentioned Sevastopol but surely only a direct hit (or very close) would destroy under ground bunkers and I wouldn't have thought these would be too accurate considering their size and range?

Also - why are they smoothbores? What benefit does a smooth bore have over rifling?

Had to laugh at FW190 Pilots question about whether these were fitted to German heavy tanks, let him off though for posting a good pic.

Thanks
there is a tank call R-1500 or something
its over 1000 tons
i should have pointed this out first

chase
11-27-2005, 04:38 PM
Do you have a picture or any other info about this monster tank?

FW-190 Pilot
11-27-2005, 04:43 PM
sure i do
http://i.somethingawful.com/booklist/images/monster02.gif
http://i.somethingawful.com/booklist/images/monster03.gif
its call P-1500, sorry
and its never been completely built, one of them is half build and use as a battery in norway

Dani
11-27-2005, 11:24 PM
its call P-1500, sorry
and its never been completely built, one of them is half build and use as a battery in norway

P 1000 turret ended up at coastal defence battery (Batterie Oerlander) near Trondheim, Norway.

In December of 1942, Krupp created new design of 1500 ton tank - P 1500. It frontal armor would be 250mm thick and it would be armed with 800mm super heavy mortar "Dora" type and possibly two 150mm artillery pieces. P 1500 would be powered by two or four submarine diesel engines. In early 1943, Albert Speer cancelled both projects.

Quoted from achtungpanzer.

Dani
11-27-2005, 11:49 PM
As for the Dora and Gustav:

http://www.aopt91.dsl.pipex.com/railgun/Content/Railwayguns/German/Dora%20index.htm

http://www.aopt91.dsl.pipex.com/railgun/Content/Railwayguns/German/Dora-fate_USApics.htm

HG
11-28-2005, 04:06 PM
The battle of Sevastopol was mostly due to the world largest rail gun ever produced durning the war. It had a crew of a 2000 men to set up and fire it, I am obviuosly talking about Gustav. It had a 80cm cannon and had a special 7100-kg concrete-piercing shells. It fired at best one round every 15 minutes. After the battle of Sevastopol it was scrapped and the parts used for other railway guns. Then there was Thor and Karl also a wich were on tracks and had a 42cm barrol but it was very short and not so long as the railway guns.

Henk

arhob1
11-29-2005, 03:19 AM
FW190 wrote ...


there is a tank call R-1500 or something
its over 1000 tons
i should have pointed this out first

My humble apologies FW190 pilot, I thought you were leading us astray suggesting that such a beast existed.

Man of Stoat
11-29-2005, 03:28 AM
One word concerning these "super tanks":

BRIDGES

Dani
12-01-2005, 02:22 AM
Check this:http://www.track-link.net/gallery/119 :shock:

raiydeck
12-01-2005, 03:32 AM
Thanks for that awesome link Dani, you made me join this forum :)
Cheers

Raiydeck

Cuts
12-01-2005, 07:07 AM
One word concerning these "super tanks":

BRIDGES



Point taken, two more have just occured to me:

ROADS and TOWNS

Firefly
12-01-2005, 07:47 AM
Re-fuelling? How many tankers would it need? Ammo supply! So many things to think about!

BDL
12-01-2005, 08:05 AM
Re-fuelling? How many tankers would it need? Ammo supply! So many things to think about!

Just imagine the track bash

Firefly
12-01-2005, 09:30 AM
I really think that beyond a certain size, things just become too difficult to support these giant Land-ships. Its all well having a roaming beheamoth that can fire a supershell 23 miles. In all honesty though none of them were practical. Even the Tiger 1 had problems with a lot of bridges, never mind about the King Tiger and that mighty waste of Steel, the JagdTiger.

Cuts
12-01-2005, 09:47 AM
I really think that beyond a certain size, things just become too difficult to support these giant Land-ships. Its all well having a roaming beheamoth that can fire a supershell 23 miles. In all honesty though none of them were practical. Even the Tiger 1 had problems with a lot of bridges, never mind about the King Tiger and that mighty waste of Steel, the JagdTiger.

G5
8)

Panzerknacker
12-02-2005, 06:07 PM
Some more pics of this particular railway gun. Check those stats ..1625 m/s muzzle velocity :shock:

http://img209.imageshack.us/img209/333/k120tj.jpg

http://img209.imageshack.us/img209/3498/21cmk124hc.jpg

Monty's Double
12-07-2005, 10:15 AM
Couple of points:

1) Santa doesn't exist
2) She wasn't really washing her hair, she just thought you smelled funny
3) The KV-VI is a hoax

Sorry guys.

PzKpfw VI Tiger
12-07-2005, 03:47 PM
:!: Monty's Double, please get on topic. Thanks :wink:

Dani
12-07-2005, 04:12 PM
:!: Monty's Double, please get on topic. Thanks :wink:

Monty's Double expressed (in an unorthodox way) his opinion on KV posted by me earlier (http://www.track-link.net/gallery/119)

I don't want to comment because I haven't any new information. Could be a hoax or could be true. Time (and opening of the ex-Soviets archive :wink: ) will tell.

Monty's Double
12-08-2005, 03:01 AM
Apologies for my facetiousness, just trying to let people down gently. Check the references at the bottom of the article:


Dreadful Din on the Eastern Front, Erich Maria Remarque Jr.; Podzun Verlag; 1951


Do I need to say more?

BDL
12-08-2005, 10:27 AM
:!: Monty's Double, please get on topic. Thanks :wink:

Monty's Double expressed (in an unorthodox way) his opinion on KV posted by me earlier (http://www.track-link.net/gallery/119)

I don't want to comment because I haven't any new information. Could be a hoax or could be true. Time (and opening of the ex-Soviets archive :wink: ) will tell.

That is the stupidest idea of a tank design I'v ever seen, I'd give it twenty minutes in combat, if the crew were lucky.