Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

88's indirect fire?

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> 88's indirect fire? Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
88's indirect fire? - 1/6/2003 9:27:10 PM   
maniacalmonkey


Posts: 110
Joined: 7/5/2002
From: The Netherlands
Status: offline 		The German 88mm Flak gun, also used very effectively in an AT role, arguably the best AT gun in the war. But I keep picking up stuff about 88's used as indirect-fire artillery? I haven't found anything concrete on this... Did the Germans employ an 88mm Howitzer, or could the 88 Flak actually be fired indirect?

_____________________________

When cities burn and armies turn,
and flee in disarray,
Cowards will cry 'tis best to fly
and fight another day,
But warriors know it in their marrow when they
die and fall,
It is better to have fought and lost than not have
fought at all.
Post #: 1
Re: 88's indirect fire? - 1/6/2003 11:42:51 PM   
Panzer Leo

 

Posts: 526
Joined: 6/13/2001
From: Braunschweig/Germany
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by maniacalmonkey
[B]The German 88mm Flak gun, also used very effectively in an AT role, arguably the best AT gun in the war. But I keep picking up stuff about 88's used as indirect-fire artillery? I haven't found anything concrete on this... Did the Germans employ an 88mm Howitzer, or could the 88 Flak actually be fired indirect? [/B][/QUOTE]

Many direct fire guns were used adhoc as indirect support, even tanks by the US, captured 75mm Pak by Russians and the 88 also...but it was usually because of lack of real arty or the simple need to lumb some rounds at an area (to prevent enemy movement, e.g.)...it cannot be seen any close to the controled arty fire real arty batteries could bring up and really was a sort of improvisation...but if you got nothing else, well, what's your alternative - it's better then no arty, but not much :)

_____________________________

[URL=http://www.theblitz.org/member_sites/panzer_leo_spw@w/spwaw_h2h_modrework.php] [IMG]http://www.theblitz.org/member_sites/panzer_leo_spw@w/PzLeos-H2H-Title-1.jpg[/IMG] [/URL]

Mir nach, ich folge euch !

(in reply to maniacalmonkey)
Post #: 2
- 1/7/2003 1:21:53 AM   
Bing

 

Posts: 1366
Joined: 5/20/2000
From: Gaylord, MI, USA
Status: offline 		After taking cre of all the enemy armor there was, lacking anything else to shoot at, US tanks were used as indirect artillery fire weapons in the Korean War.

Somewhere I have a picture of Patton tanks lined up on a bulldozed embankment - insufficient elevation on level surfaces - firing away as artillery support. Per postings here, the accuracy was not the best due to lack of true field artillery mechanisms. But it gave them something to do.

Bing

_____________________________

"For Those That Fought For It, Freedom Has a Taste And A Meaning The Protected Will Never Know. " -
From the 101st Airborne Division Association Website

(in reply to maniacalmonkey)
Post #: 3
- 1/7/2003 3:36:12 AM   
James P

 

Posts: 58
Joined: 3/1/2001
From: Bedford, UK
Status: offline 		Yeah - I have seen lots of photo's of US armour being used for indirect fire in late 44 / early '45 - especially M10's for some reason (guess lack of German armour around and obsolete gun)

I have also read accounts of 88mm airbursts, although this could be down to misidentification by Allied troops i.e. every gun an 88mm and every tank a Tiger…..

_____________________________

Cheers, JP

(in reply to maniacalmonkey)
Post #: 4
- 1/7/2003 4:10:02 AM   
BARKHORN

 

Posts: 37
Joined: 12/12/2002
Status: offline 		All 88cm.Flak gun's came equipped with indirect fire equipment and actually were used quite often in this mode after all it was produced in greater number's than any other large artillery piece in the german inventory.As for the use of tank's in the indirect role I've got quite a few photo's of M-10's and Sherman's being used in this role in Italy,the static almost WWI type of fighting required every tube so these vehicle were driven up a dirt ramp to increase elevation and conducted fire mission's.

(in reply to maniacalmonkey)
Post #: 5
- 1/7/2003 4:22:54 AM   
maniacalmonkey


Posts: 110
Joined: 7/5/2002
From: The Netherlands
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by BARKHORN
[B]All 88cm.Flak gun's came equipped with indirect fire equipment and actually were used quite often in this mode after all it was produced in greater number's than any other large artillery piece in the german inventory.As for the use of tank's in the indirect role I've got quite a few photo's of M-10's and Sherman's being used in this role in Italy,the static almost WWI type of fighting required every tube so these vehicle were driven up a dirt ramp to increase elevation and conducted fire mission's. [/B][/QUOTE]

Whoa... :eek:

I bet an 88cm gun makes one [B]HELL[/B] of a bang! :p

Thanks for the info! Man, imagine that, excellent flak, excellent AT, [I]and[/I] (excellent?) indirect arty all rolled into a single field piece! Modern-day weapons industry would NEVER stand for it.

_____________________________

When cities burn and armies turn,
and flee in disarray,
Cowards will cry 'tis best to fly
and fight another day,
But warriors know it in their marrow when they
die and fall,
It is better to have fought and lost than not have
fought at all.

(in reply to maniacalmonkey)
Post #: 6
- 1/8/2003 4:36:52 AM   
BARKHORN

 

Posts: 37
Joined: 12/12/2002
Status: offline 		Oop's:)

(in reply to maniacalmonkey)
Post #: 7
- 1/8/2003 4:59:04 AM   
Bing

 

Posts: 1366
Joined: 5/20/2000
From: Gaylord, MI, USA
Status: offline 		"I bet an 88cm gun makes one HELL of a bang! "

Not any bigger than a 155 and considerably less so than an 8" field piece and a peashooter compared to naval 15" to 17" rifles.

Bing

_____________________________

"For Those That Fought For It, Freedom Has a Taste And A Meaning The Protected Will Never Know. " -
From the 101st Airborne Division Association Website

(in reply to maniacalmonkey)
Post #: 8
- 1/8/2003 6:41:38 AM   
maniacalmonkey


Posts: 110
Joined: 7/5/2002
From: The Netherlands
Status: offline 		Let's see... 17" x 2.4 = 40.8 cm

So imagine firing a shell twice the diameter of a naval 17".

Compare:

[I]BOOOOOOM![/I]


To:

[I]* utter silence*[/I]

Because no eardrum within hearing range would survive a bang like that :D

_____________________________

When cities burn and armies turn,
and flee in disarray,
Cowards will cry 'tis best to fly
and fight another day,
But warriors know it in their marrow when they
die and fall,
It is better to have fought and lost than not have
fought at all.

(in reply to maniacalmonkey)
Post #: 9
- 1/8/2003 8:36:11 AM   
Goblin


Posts: 5547
Joined: 3/29/2002
From: Erie,Pa. USA
Status: offline 		An 88mm is around 3.5 inches, give or take a little.

Goblin

_____________________________

http://www.spwaw.com/phpBB2/index.php

(in reply to maniacalmonkey)
Post #: 10
- 1/8/2003 11:07:21 AM   
Possum

 

Posts: 349
Joined: 3/27/2000
From: Adelaide, SA, Australia
Status: offline 		The Nashorn 88mm Tank Destroyer came standard with Artillery Dial Sights, and Communications gear, to allow it to take indirect fire missions direct from a fire control director.
It was also capable of elevating it's main gun up to around 45 deg too.

_____________________________

"We're having a war, and we want you to come!"
So the pig began to whistle and to pound on a drum.
"We'll give you a gun, and we'll give you a hat!"
And the pig began to whistle when they told the piggies that.

(in reply to maniacalmonkey)
Post #: 11
- 1/8/2003 7:09:27 PM   
maniacalmonkey


Posts: 110
Joined: 7/5/2002
From: The Netherlands
Status: offline 		I hate explaining jokes...

Were Barkhorn and I the only ones who noticed the 88[B]cm[/B] typo? Too bad, I thought it was kinda funny :D

_____________________________

When cities burn and armies turn,
and flee in disarray,
Cowards will cry 'tis best to fly
and fight another day,
But warriors know it in their marrow when they
die and fall,
It is better to have fought and lost than not have
fought at all.

(in reply to maniacalmonkey)
Post #: 12
- 1/8/2003 7:20:24 PM   
Belisarius


Posts: 4041
Joined: 5/26/2001
From: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by maniacalmonkey
[B]I hate explaining jokes...

Were Barkhorn and I the only ones who noticed the 88[B]cm[/B] typo? Too bad, I thought it was kinda funny :D [/B][/QUOTE]

Nah, I noticed it too, but since you guys already had pointed it out, I found it meaningless to post replies like "Wow, and Gustav & Dora was only [B]80[/B] cm... " ;) :p

_____________________________


Got StuG?

(in reply to maniacalmonkey)
Post #: 13
- 1/8/2003 7:26:53 PM   
Kraut


Posts: 2551
Joined: 8/13/2002
From: Germany
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Bing
[B]After taking cre of all the enemy armor there was, lacking anything else to shoot at, US tanks were used as indirect artillery fire weapons in the Korean War.

Somewhere I have a picture of Patton tanks lined up on a bulldozed embankment - insufficient elevation on level surfaces - firing away as artillery support. Per postings here, the accuracy was not the best due to lack of true field artillery mechanisms. But it gave them something to do.

Bing [/B][/QUOTE]

Steel Panthers 2 has some footage of that.

_____________________________


(in reply to maniacalmonkey)
Post #: 14
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> 88's indirect fire? Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.017