PDA

View Full Version : Incongruous Weapons and Equipment Thread



Nickdfresh
09-04-2009, 01:29 PM
This pic is from the official Bundesarchiv and shows a Heer soldier in France waiting in ambush that appears to be armed with what looks like an old MP-18 machine-pistol. The soldier in the background is similarly armed. I didn't think there were two left in the Wehrmacht by 1944. :)

pdf27
09-04-2009, 01:46 PM
It doesn't look altogether dissimilar to a PPD-34 though, which the Wehrmacht did use captured examples of.http://world.guns.ru/smg/ppd-34.jpg

pdf27
09-04-2009, 01:49 PM
In fact, I'm pretty sure it isn't an MP-18, as the magazine feed on that is forward of the stock...
http://world.guns.ru/smg/mp18-I-1.jpg

Nickdfresh
09-04-2009, 01:55 PM
Ha! You're right it's probably not a MP-18. But it looks too long to be a PPD-34 though.

flamethrowerguy
09-04-2009, 04:29 PM
Italian Beretta MP 38/A submachine gun if I'm not mistaking. The Germans said "Grazie, Italia" in summer 1943 and called it Maschinenpistole 739 (i), a reliable but also a heavy weapon.

http://www.ww2incolor.com/d/37792-8/FJ_MP38

Nickdfresh
09-04-2009, 04:35 PM
That was sort of my next guess after reviewing photos. But what the hell was it doing in Normandy? :)

*Meh, I guess it's not that far from Northern Italy though...

flamethrowerguy
09-04-2009, 04:51 PM
*Meh, I guess it's not that far from Northern Italy though...

From an American point of view it isn't, no.
Concerning the original photo...I was wondering about the German soldier's helmet cover. It somewhat looks like the USMC pattern...and the soldier is wearing spurs! Now, that's incongruous.

Nickdfresh
09-05-2009, 11:18 AM
Perhaps they were mounted infantry trained for internal security/occupation duties prior to the invasion. That might also explain the secondary armament...

Rising Sun*
09-05-2009, 12:07 PM
Perhaps they were mounted infantry trained for internal security/occupation duties prior to the invasion. That might also explain the secondary armament...

Looks rather like bocage.

Perhaps mounted troops were thought to be better suited to that terrain?

Or it could just be a ceremonial spur that has nothing to do with riding horses?

pdf27
09-05-2009, 12:52 PM
Any idea what rank that guy is? The Binos and odd leather thing around his waist suggest he might be some sort of FOO rather than just plain infantry. Did the German officers have a thing about spurs?

flamethrowerguy
09-05-2009, 01:00 PM
Perhaps they were mounted infantry trained for internal security/occupation duties prior to the invasion. That might also explain the secondary armament...

Secondary armament? Officially maybe. From "Ordnance up front" by Roy Dunlap:

"No one ever bothered with any other kind of submachine gun if he could get hold of a Beretta M38, and keep it. The New Zealand boys especially loved them. Even the Germans liked it, and they hated to admit anything was good except their own stuff."

flamethrowerguy
09-05-2009, 01:06 PM
Any idea what rank that guy is? The Binos and odd leather thing around his waist suggest he might be some sort of FOO rather than just plain infantry. Did the German officers have a thing about spurs?

The original caption only says "officer".
German infantry regiments had a cavalry platoon as part of their headquarters company, maybe that's an explanation...

soldatidiplastica
09-05-2009, 07:12 PM
That was sort of my next guess after reviewing photos. But what the hell was it doing in Normandy? :)

*Meh, I guess it's not that far from Northern Italy though...

Hi, an interesting photo you've posted, i am not surprised the germans would have seized weapons from italian army depos as well as the well known camouflage fabric...many call italian camo.
Supplies were short at that time of the war...

Nickdfresh
09-05-2009, 09:09 PM
I wonder if this might not be a Norman hedgerow/the bocage....

Maybe it's northern Italy?

soldatidiplastica
09-06-2009, 01:03 PM
I wonder if this might not be a Norman hedgerow/the bocage....

Maybe it's northern Italy?

Impossible to tell, it is not a common hedgerow to be found in Italy at that time i guess, much better chance for it to be in France than in Italy.
Also the camouflage on the helmet appears to be US, and that would match the location as being Normandy soon after the landing, as it is known Gi's would soon dismiss such camouflage being too similar to german's.
This could also be "captured" material
So in the end i am biased towards the photo being shot in Normandy..
For what my guesses are worth ;)

flamethrowerguy
09-06-2009, 03:09 PM
Incongruous unit markings:

German 15th Panzergrenadier-Division, deployed on the western front (Sicily, Italian mainland, Southern France, Germany, Belgium, The Netherlands) against US troops mostly:

http://www.ww2incolor.com/d/50073-2/unbenannt

Nickdfresh
09-06-2009, 05:32 PM
Impossible to tell, it is not a common hedgerow to be found in Italy at that time i guess, much better chance for it to be in France than in Italy.
Also the camouflage on the helmet appears to be US, and that would match the location as being Normandy soon after the landing, as it is known Gi's would soon dismiss such camouflage being too similar to german's.
This could also be "captured" material
So in the end i am biased towards the photo being shot in Normandy..
For what my guesses are worth ;)


I'm not sure of the time-frame of the US Army using camo in Normandy, but it was VERY short lived. Camouflage was used on an experimental basis in response to both the effectiveness of German uniforms and the favorable battle experience of the USMC in the Pacific. But the effort was abandoned after numerous friendly-fire incidents in which unlucky US units were shot up by fellow Americans or Free/Commonwealth forces mistaking them for SS...

Nickdfresh
09-06-2009, 06:41 PM
Some examples:

German Waffen SS
http://www.target-arms.co.uk/images/target_arms_SS%20Tunic.JPG


US Army "Leopard Spot" camo similar to the Marines:
http://www.oakleafmilitaria.com/images/0712us-u1-1.jpg

flamethrowerguy
09-07-2009, 04:44 AM
Not only Waffen-SS, especially in Normandy German Heer units were oftenly equipped with marsh/tan pattern uniforms.

3595

flamethrowerguy
09-07-2009, 06:35 AM
I read that mostly soldiers of US 2nd Armoured Division aw well as 2nd, 4th and 30th Infantry Divisions were equipped with these camo uniforms.

http://www.ww2incolor.com/d/850-4/p013379.jpghttp://www.ww2incolor.com/d/306423-2/life_229

During the battles in Normandy there were indeed complaints by Waffen-SS commanders concerning several of their soldiers wearing captured US camo gear.

Nickdfresh
09-11-2009, 03:56 PM
I read that mostly soldiers of US 2nd Armoured Division aw well as 2nd, 4th and 30th Infantry Divisions were equipped with these camo uniforms.

http://www.ww2incolor.com/d/850-4/p013379.jpghttp://www.ww2incolor.com/d/306423-2/life_229


Yeah, there don't seem to be many photos of the US soldiers in camo in existence...

Notice the ones in the second pic above have lost the camouflage netting from their helmets...


During the battles in Normandy there were indeed complaints by Waffen-SS commanders concerning several of their soldiers wearing captured US camo gear.

Well, I guess they might have had a few friendly fire incidents themselves. BTW, friendly fire isn't very friendly when directed at you. :D

Nickdfresh
09-11-2009, 04:15 PM
Here's a nice thread over at Axis featuring Germans using captured arms...

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=71&t=99382

Panzerknacker
09-11-2009, 05:53 PM
This is my favorite:

http://img212.imageshack.us/img212/3451/germanthompsons9gn.jpg

Nickdfresh
09-11-2009, 06:11 PM
Ha! I think we have that one here somewhere also. I think I asked whether any Axis forces used numbers of captured Tommyguns and someone informed me that indeed numbers of Heer railway troops some crews used them...

Panzerknacker
09-11-2009, 06:13 PM
And they got some from the african victories, talking about africa this are germans with british .55 rifle Boys.

http://img266.imageshack.us/img266/4905/60309715fr7.jpg

tankgeezer
09-12-2009, 10:25 AM
those german fellows cant have as yet fired the beast, they look too happy.... The Boys was referred to as "Charley the Bastard" due to its sharp, and very unpleasant recoil.

VonWeyer
09-13-2009, 01:10 AM
Check this out.

Panzerknacker
09-13-2009, 05:55 PM
those german fellows cant have as yet fired the beast, they look too happy.... The Boys was referred to as "Charley the Bastard" due to its sharp, and very unpleasant recoil.

Yup, in spite the fact it had a shoulder spring shock reducer and a generous muzzle brake. I must say the gun itself looks quite new.



Check this out.


Nice, any idea of the date of that photo.

flamethrowerguy
09-13-2009, 06:27 PM
Nice, any idea of the date of that photo.

If I remember correctly this photo was taken during an exhibition of captured weaponry in France in spring 1944.

VonWeyer
09-14-2009, 01:58 AM
Thanx FTG.

flamethrowerguy
09-20-2009, 10:33 AM
Some examples:

German Waffen SS
http://www.target-arms.co.uk/images/target_arms_SS%20Tunic.JPG

I read that shortly after the war loads of Waffen-SS camo clothing were shipped to the US because it was considered "ideal to wear while duck hunting.":lol:

flamethrowerguy
10-24-2009, 04:41 PM
Well, if that's not incongruous...disguised German bunker of the Atlantic Wall in France:

http://www.ww2incolor.com/d/86471-2/M_G15_6_1%23

tankgeezer
10-25-2009, 08:23 AM
The Swiss folks had similar ideas for concealing bunkers.

R Mark Davies
10-25-2009, 02:14 PM
The spurs on the German officer are not at all incongruous when you consider that the vast majority of German transport was the 'Transport Personal 4x4 Equine Mk 1'. This included personal mounts for officers (and this chap is certainly an officer).

Most of the German coastal defence formations had very large quantities of captured weaponry, with everything from Italian submachine guns to British antitank mines to Czech artillery to Russian Maxim MMGs to Polish antitank guns and French transport. Some formations in Normandy, such as 1. SS-Pz-Div 'LSSAH', had also been present at the disarming of Italian combat formations and equipped themselves wholesale with Italian equipment (1. SS in particular making good use of Italian camouflage cloth and Italian softskinned transport).

Panzerknacker
10-29-2009, 06:40 PM
Well in the Osprey book about the atlantic wall there are several pictures with emplacement of czech, french, russian and even british guns from 25 to 152 mm. The logistic for all those was a crackhead thing I guess.

Toothy german parachutist with Bren.

http://i33.tinypic.com/nxlyyr.jpg

steben
10-30-2009, 08:03 AM
Check this out.

It sure looks like exhibition, since the pit is made as it seems with more interest towards the spectator than the gunner's defense

Nickdfresh
10-30-2009, 08:38 AM
It looks like a battlefield trophy and the paratroop might be using it as a small arm until the ammo runs out. But does anyone know if the Bren could be easily reconfigured to take the German 7.92mm round?

tankgeezer
10-30-2009, 08:40 PM
It is possible to re-chamber a bren's barrel to fire the 7.92 mauser cartridge, if they captured enough to make it worth their while.
The only possible flieger bug maybe the the rim relief for the .303 (.540") this exceeds the max diameter of the mauser case head/rim. (.470") Beyond that, there is enough meat in the barrel to ream, and rifle the barrel to fire the other cartridge, which is generally, a bit larger and longer. The next bug may be in the magazine,mag. well, and feed system. The 7.92 is longer overall than its English counterpart. ([email protected] 3.075" ) (7.92 @ 3.228") Thats alot of cartridge to find room for. Having not held a Bren, (that I remember,) I cant say that there could be a way to make it hold, and feed the longer round without extensive rework(or even with it). But if the need, and availability were sufficient, Germany may have done it. My personal guess would be that if I were a Wehrmacht soldier with a bolt action rifle, I would happily take up a Bren if I came across one.

R Mark Davies
11-01-2009, 01:00 PM
He's wearing SMG mag pouches, which does tend to suggest that the Bren was a very short-term acquisition. There is another famous photo of German troops at Arnhem firing at British aircraft with a captured Bren (which is mounted on stacked ammo cases!).

From a soldier's point of view, the best weapon was often the one that was lightest, most reliable and easiest to clean. The author George MacDonald Fraser described how, having been promoted to L/Cpl, he threw his newly-issued Thompson into a Burmese stream as soon as he could find a .303 rifle to replace it - the Thompson was just too damn heavy and prone to rust! Those factors far outweighed the firepower advantage. Similarly, Robert Morgan of the US 327th Glider Infantry Regiment, describes how he ditched his BAR for much the same reasons.

It does make me chuckle when my cadets, whose experiences of WW2 weapons goes no further than playing Call of Duty, often tell me that they would choose a Thompson or BAR over any other weapon... Of course, they've never had to carry one (or its ammo) or clean it or fire it.

steben
11-01-2009, 01:31 PM
He's wearing SMG mag pouches, which does tend to suggest that the Bren was a very short-term acquisition. There is another famous photo of German troops at Arnhem firing at British aircraft with a captured Bren (which is mounted on stacked ammo cases!).

From a soldier's point of view, the best weapon was often the one that was lightest, most reliable and easiest to clean. The author George MacDonald Fraser described how, having been promoted to L/Cpl, he threw his newly-issued Thompson into a Burmese stream as soon as he could find a .303 rifle to replace it - the Thompson was just too damn heavy and prone to rust! Those factors far outweighed the firepower advantage. Similarly, Robert Morgan of the US 327th Glider Infantry Regiment, describes how he ditched his BAR for much the same reasons.

It does make me chuckle when my cadets, whose experiences of WW2 weapons goes no further than playing Call of Duty, often tell me that they would choose a Thompson or BAR over any other weapon... Of course, they've never had to carry one (or its ammo) or clean it or fire it.

Goes without sayin (too much) that I feel the same way each time I see (for example Tamiya figurines) a daring proud german soldier picture with a MG42 shooting it from the waist... :rolleyes:

By the way: I see an MP40's barrel at rest next to the paratrooper...

flamethrowerguy
11-01-2009, 06:04 PM
How 'bout this one? The crew of this Pershing protected their vehicle's gun mantlet with some additional armour of a German Panther - as it was written about this photo...

http://www.cat1.de/MBI.jpg

Rising Sun*
11-02-2009, 05:20 AM
The author George MacDonald Fraser described how, having been promoted to L/Cpl, he threw his newly-issued Thompson into a Burmese stream as soon as he could find a .303 rifle to replace it - the Thompson was just too damn heavy and prone to rust! Those factors far outweighed the firepower advantage. Similarly, Robert Morgan of the US 327th Glider Infantry Regiment, describes how he ditched his BAR for much the same reasons.

Fraser's action mightn't have had much effect on his section, but the loss of a BAR or equivalent in a section is an entirely different matter.

The USMC in the Pacific learned to base their section tactics around the BAR and with good reason, and good effect.

I wouldn't accept a section member ditching the LMG section weapon for his personal convenience because he was too lazy to carry, clean and properly maintain it.

And I'd be seriously pissed off if the LM gunner put my section at risk by trading his weapon for another rifle, of which there were already plenty in the section and arranged on tactics around the LM gunner actually having an LMG which the section LM gunner had ditched for personal convenience.

Nickdfresh
11-02-2009, 06:04 AM
How 'bout this one? The crew of this Pershing protected their vehicle's gun mantlet with some additional armour of a German Panther - as it was written about this photo...

http://www.cat1.de/MBI.jpg

I believe this is one of the "Super Pershings" that was upgraded to "super" in the field. Two were sent from the factory...

Nickdfresh
11-03-2009, 08:16 PM
I believe this is one of the "Super Pershings" that was upgraded to "super" in the field. Two were sent from the factory...

Ha! I just got Hunnicut's book on the M-26 Pershing. I have several more pic's of the above tank if anyone wants to see them, including its unceremonious, ignominious decommissioning in June of 1945 (which seems ridiculous actually).

It was delivered as a "Super" from the factory with a longer, more powerful 90mm gun generating superior muzzle-velocity and on-par with the King Tiger's 88mm gun performance. They decided to up armor the tank with spare Panther parts as well to sort of make an American 'King Tiger' or sorts. But this is not an unusual field modification, as I've read recently that several "Jumbo Shermans" owned by the US and British Armies were up=gunned with either the 76mm or the 17-pdr...

tankgeezer
11-03-2009, 10:08 PM
Of course we want to see them (well, I do anyway,,) especially the de-commissioning.

Nickdfresh
11-04-2009, 06:38 AM
I'll try to scan it later in that Pershing & US heavy tanks thread...

R Mark Davies
11-04-2009, 11:46 AM
Fraser's action mightn't have had much effect on his section, but the loss of a BAR or equivalent in a section is an entirely different matter.

The USMC in the Pacific learned to base their section tactics around the BAR and with good reason, and good effect.

I wouldn't accept a section member ditching the LMG section weapon for his personal convenience because he was too lazy to carry, clean and properly maintain it.

And I'd be seriously pissed off if the LM gunner put my section at risk by trading his weapon for another rifle, of which there were already plenty in the section and arranged on tactics around the LM gunner actually having an LMG which the section LM gunner had ditched for personal convenience.

I broadly agree. However, to clarify Bowen's case, he was the squad leader and in between Normandy and Holland he decided to acquire an extra BAR for himself in order to beef up his squad's firepower. But after lugging it around for a few execises, he decided to bin it. So I'd put this down to acceptable personal affectation rather than dereliction of duty. ;)

steben
11-04-2009, 03:05 PM
Luckily, the US army now uses belgian light MG's in their squads.

Panzerknacker
11-04-2009, 05:03 PM
This is definately "incongrous", trying to capture a russian without magazine in your submachinegun....:shock:

http://i38.tinypic.com/2iubyi9.jpg

flamethrowerguy
11-04-2009, 05:11 PM
It worked seemingly.:D
Maybe he had one round left in the chamber...

Panzerknacker
11-04-2009, 05:39 PM
Too bad that the pic is not from the left side, if so I could see if it is charged ( bolt fully back), probably not even that.

tankgeezer
11-04-2009, 05:42 PM
Its like the charms of a woman, half in what they have, the other half in what you think they have,,,,

Panzerknacker
11-04-2009, 05:49 PM
By now I am just getting women with just half...of each part.:lol:

This is interesting too, an "geballte ladung" but made with egg grenades not the cilindrical head sthd 24.

http://i36.tinypic.com/24ez24w.jpg

Deaf Smith
11-04-2009, 09:37 PM
Well in the Osprey book about the atlantic wall there are several pictures with emplacement of czech, french, russian and even british guns from 25 to 152 mm. The logistic for all those was a crackhead thing I guess.

Toothy german parachutist with Bren.

http://i33.tinypic.com/nxlyyr.jpg

I notice the Bren holder has sub-machine gun mag pouches on his belt. I suspect he was just photed with a captured Bren.

Deaf

VonWeyer
11-05-2009, 12:18 AM
Agreed...it looks like he is almost "mockingly" smiling with his captured prize.

tankgeezer
11-05-2009, 12:48 AM
He is a happy troopie, he finally has a good and trusty weapon.

flamethrowerguy
11-05-2009, 04:29 AM
http://i36.tinypic.com/24ez24w.jpg

That reminds me of this one of the extremely light Soviet AA action:

http://www.ww2incolor.com/d/283193-2/7

Nickdfresh
11-05-2009, 06:21 AM
Luckily, the US army now uses belgian light MG's in their squads.

And general purpose ones too...

http://www.americanspecialops.com/images/weapons/m240-sight.jpg

Nickdfresh
11-05-2009, 06:25 AM
That reminds me of this one of the extremely light Soviet AA action:

http://www.ww2incolor.com/d/283193-2/7

An effective tactic if you have enough riflemen, and a plane flying low and fast enough. I believe some US pilots in Vietnam ran into trouble if there were enough VC/NVA firing small arms at them unexpectedly at low level...

flamethrowerguy
11-05-2009, 07:30 AM
An effective tactic if you have enough riflemen, and a plane flying low and fast enough. I believe some US pilots in Vietnam ran into trouble if there were enough VC/NVA firing small arms at them unexpectedly at low level...

I guess the fact that they are using scopes wouldn't make it easier to score a hit because of limited vision...

tankgeezer
11-05-2009, 08:54 AM
In the 70's, U.S. basic training included training in squad engagement of aircraft, whether fighters, or transports,etc. Usually, it amounted to one, perhaps two hits out of ten shots fired, whether these would cause enough damage to force a withdrawal is anyone's guess.

Panzerknacker
11-05-2009, 04:56 PM
Bringing down an aircraft with 5,56mm ?...hmmmm :)


That reminds me of this one of the extremely light Soviet AA action

This was the medium AAA, PTRD 14,5mm.

http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/400/y03zb1.jpg

tankgeezer
11-05-2009, 05:14 PM
Well, if the plane was low enough, cant reach out too far with the 5.56, but it may keep the baddies off your back for awhile...

Panzerknacker
11-05-2009, 05:41 PM
I guess a well placed bullet could pierce the cockpit plexiglass....

Nickdfresh
11-05-2009, 05:54 PM
Actually, an aircraft, especially a jet flying at several hundred miles per hour, could be peppered by dozens of 5.56mm or 7.62mm rounds that could cause significant damage not unlike a flak burst...

steben
11-06-2009, 06:11 AM
Aircraft (at least those in WWII) were made out of sheet metal, a foil. One doesn't need much armour penetration force.
Most AA ammo was HE, not AP.

Nickdfresh
11-06-2009, 07:14 AM
Aircraft (at least those in WWII) were made out of sheet metal, a foil. One doesn't need much armour penetration force.
Most AA ammo was HE, not AP.

Even a jet flying several hundred kilometers and hour is going to have a hard time if flying into bullets showering the plane. Even bits of flak the size of your finger could severally damage engines, fuselages, etc...

Saxon
11-06-2009, 07:40 AM
How 'bout this one? The crew of this Pershing protected their vehicle's gun mantlet with some additional armour of a German Panther - as it was written about this photo...

http://www.cat1.de/MBI.jpg

Looks like front hull armour has also been added.

The Pershing tracks should stick out about a foot in front of hull, but this modded Pershing armour is about level with the front tracks.

tankgeezer
11-06-2009, 12:49 PM
Aircraft (at least those in WWII) were made out of sheet metal, a foil. One doesn't need much armour penetration force.
Most AA ammo was HE, not AP.
While small bore A.A. gun fire(.50cal or smaller) was generally A.P. incendiary, the explosive projectiles are used in A.A. guns of 20 mm and larger. Its not that smaller exploders cant be made, its that they would yield no practical benefit over the more easily and cheaply produced A.P.I. ammo.
The use of infantry squads to fire on low flying aircraft has been well practiced, and is surprisingly effective. They use only general issue ammunition.

Panzerknacker
11-06-2009, 09:14 PM
How 'bout this one? The crew of this Pershing protected their vehicle's gun mantlet with some additional armour of a German Panther - as it was written about this photo...

Definately a good idea, beside that spaced armor probably gave more chances against the panzerfaust.

Interesting photo of Degtyarev Shpagin DShK 38 12,7mm machinegun in Luftwaffe hands.

http://i36.tinypic.com/25usdj9.jpg

George Eller
11-07-2009, 08:11 PM
-

From: U.S. Army In World War II, 50th Anniversary Commemorative Edition, Volumes: The European Theater / The Mediterranean Theater / The War Against Japan - Pictorial Records, Kent Roberts Greenfield - General Editor (1953) thru Maurice Matloff - General Editor (1972), The National Historical Society, 1994.

http://img254.imageshack.us/img254/5228/americansoldierscamofla.jpg

-

http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/1917/americansoldiersmg3401.jpg

-

http://img254.imageshack.us/img254/6848/americansoldiersgermanj.jpg
These men apear to be Japanese-American soldiers of the famous 442nd RCT (Regimental Combat Team)

-

http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/416/americansoldiersflak880.jpg

-

http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/9351/americansoldiersgermant.jpg

-

http://img254.imageshack.us/img254/7686/americansoldiersgermanh.jpg

-

http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/4774/americansoldiersjapanes.jpg

-

Nickdfresh
11-07-2009, 08:47 PM
Nice pics and text George, good to see you...

George Eller
11-07-2009, 09:00 PM
Nice pics and text George, good to see you...
-

Thank you Nick, I guess it has been awhile.

Been kind of involved with other things...

-

Rising Sun*
11-08-2009, 02:18 AM
-

Thank you Nick, I guess it has been awhile.

Been kind of involved with other things...

-

George,

Good to see you back.

We've missed you.

Panzerknacker
11-08-2009, 12:58 PM
Japanese -americans with german equipment, that was weird. welcome back dear Jorge.

George Eller
11-08-2009, 09:46 PM
George,

Good to see you back.

We've missed you.
-

Thanks RS :)

-


Japanese -americans with german equipment, that was weird. welcome back dear Jorge.
-

I thought the same thing PK, very unusual.

Thanks for the welcome back :)

-

VonWeyer
11-09-2009, 01:00 AM
Hey George it's good to see you're back.

George Eller
11-09-2009, 01:09 AM
Hey George it's good to see you're back.
-

Many thanks VW :)

-

flamethrowerguy
11-10-2009, 11:37 AM
Somebody just posted this one at the photo section and called it an armoured trolley...

http://www.ww2incolor.com/d/346292-2/tr4

What the...?

Nickdfresh
11-10-2009, 11:50 AM
Somebody just posted this one at the photo section and called it an armoured trolley...

http://www.ww2incolor.com/d/346292-2/tr4

What the...?

Or maybe they're just "Team Biathlon" contestants? :)

Panzerknacker
11-10-2009, 04:01 PM
I remember that photo from "Deutsche Panzer raritaten 1935-45".

tankgeezer
11-10-2009, 04:39 PM
And here I thought they were out wassailing..

Panzerknacker
11-10-2009, 04:46 PM
Agreed. This is a german small boat with some kind of machinegun wich is not german.

http://i34.tinypic.com/e687lg.jpg

Rising Sun*
11-10-2009, 05:47 PM
Somebody just posted this one at the photo section and called it an armoured trolley...

http://www.ww2incolor.com/d/346292-2/tr4

What the...?


If you were going to go to the trouble of constructing what looks like an armoured sled, why wouldn't you add another foot or so of armour with gun ports instead of leaving the riflemen's heads fully exposed? As it is, a shot from one side can hit riflemen on either side.

pdf27
11-10-2009, 05:51 PM
Is it actually armoured? It looks like it's intended for snowy conditions, in which case the ground pressure would be critical. Anything heavier than splinter plate would probably be too much.

Deaf Smith
11-10-2009, 07:37 PM
If you were going to go to the trouble of constructing what looks like an armoured sled, why wouldn't you add another foot or so of armour with gun ports instead of leaving the riflemen's heads fully exposed? As it is, a shot from one side can hit riflemen on either side.

And an airburst from a mortar or AAA gun would just cream them. It would be a death slead. Even a thrown grenade exploding over them would be awful.

Deaf

Rising Sun*
11-11-2009, 07:18 AM
Is it actually armoured? It looks like it's intended for snowy conditions, in which case the ground pressure would be critical.

On closer inspection in light of your post, you may well be correct.


Anything heavier than splinter plate would probably be too much.

But why bother using a tank to push a sled with about a section of riflemen aboard when a similar firepower, and tactically more flexible and better, result could be achieved more easily and cheaply with two or three Bren carrier type vehicles adapted for snow with suitable MGs with a tank independently in the rear? Or forward, or anywhere else it wants to go for tactical advantage without being bound to the sled?

Panzerknacker
11-11-2009, 08:55 AM
They had no an equivalent ot the bren carrier, the most close was the KFZ 2 Kettenkrad, but it was unarmored. The trolley was armored to withstand mg fire.

And they way the Bren carrier was also unarmored in the top so a mortar would cream the crew too.

Nickdfresh
11-11-2009, 08:58 AM
I imagine that this was no battle-sled, and was only a way of ferrying troops around behind, and to, the lines...

pdf27
11-11-2009, 12:48 PM
But why bother using a tank to push a sled with about a section of riflemen aboard when a similar firepower, and tactically more flexible and better, result could be achieved more easily and cheaply with two or three Bren carrier type vehicles adapted for snow with suitable MGs with a tank independently in the rear? Or forward, or anywhere else it wants to go for tactical advantage without being bound to the sled?
Because something like that can be knocked up quickly and easily with some scrap steel and an arc welder, and can then be towed by any available tracked vehicle. Specialist vehicles (which as PK correctly notes the Germans didn't even produce) would often be unavailable - hardly a surprise given the appalling state of the German supply lines in Russia, where any such sledge-type arrangement would presumably be used.

flamethrowerguy
11-21-2009, 01:53 PM
Never heard of these before...

3781

So-called "Bazooka pants" on a German Panzer IV-J, not to mix up with the regular solid steel skirts. These net-like "pants" were suppose to offer an extra protection against all kinds of rocket-type weapons but were clearly a sign of German late-war resource shortage as well.

Patdau
11-22-2009, 05:25 AM
booth side armors have been tested in 1943 : the "Thoma" wire netting gave the best results against anti-tank 14.5mm russian rifle. But at this time they didn't found how to fix them correctly on each side there for the others were choosen.
It's only late 44 that they made hinged supports fixed to a tube and started production.
Among problems posed by the full skirts, there is for example the weight and the fact that if they stop well the first missile they can be so damaged that they do not serve any more much later. And wire nettings improve the camouflage of the machine and weigh much less heavy.

flamethrowerguy
11-22-2009, 07:08 AM
As we can see the Soviets did something similar to get some extra protection for the turrets by the end of the war...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/archive/9/9b/20091013173615%21T34_85_4.jpg
Photo taken in Berlin, May 1945.

Nickdfresh
11-22-2009, 09:25 AM
And used today. I believe such a device might useless against ballistic projectiles or perpetrators (I think I've read that applique "armor" such as logs or sandbags were useless against German tank shells, but were effective and lessening the hit from panzerfausts), but were intended to detonate/dissipate HEAT rounds before it could contact the armor plate...

http://i264.photobucket.com/albums/ii165/woodmr/sm71775.jpg

ubc
11-22-2009, 02:54 PM
Actually the wiremesh screens were very effective at defeating smaller brittle core ATR completely destroying them before they could damage the belly armor. They also were effective and preventing HE ammo from damaging the tracks. They were never intended to defeat Shaped charge ammo, that was a unintended benifit.

Modern desendant is the perforated plate armor that is very effective at defeating various types of KE projectiles and has reasonably good Anti HEAT protection as well. Many tanks and AFVs have utilized this technology.

Uyraell
01-30-2010, 03:47 AM
The "battle sled" posted earlier may not be for battle.
Accounts I have read suggest that such sleds were built primarily for towing supplies, and were only later used as evacuation vehicles, or to ferry troops about in rear-echelon areas.
I have a vague recollection of such things being mentioned in Sajer's book, though I'd have to go back and re-read it to confirm this.

Kind Regards, Uyraell.

Nickdfresh
08-24-2010, 07:19 AM
Bump. I've recently again seen some "stock footage" generally used in documentaries on Normandy after D-Day showing presumably a German (Heer?) sniper using a scoped British Lee Enfield. Has anyone else seen this?

Edit: Now that I think of it, I think he may have been a Fallschirmjäger wearing a camouflage tunic...

Nickdfresh
08-24-2010, 07:40 AM
I stole this from axishistory.

http://img167.imageshack.us/img167/2308/americantank01rx2.jpg

U.S. soldiers riding on a British Churchill tank with one of them carrying a Sturmgewehr! :shock:

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=71&t=99382&start=105