previous post next post  

Before and After

Before: This is what a german Flak 37 88mm anti-aircraft/anti-tank gun looks like when it's lovingly cared for, in this case by re-enactors in the United States. This gun was at a display at Fort Knox last year (and I deleted the email, so I can't properly credit whoever sent me the pic...)

Hi-res here.

After: This is what one looks like that was buried by the Germans at Grafenwoehr in 1945 to prevent its capture by US troops. Ha-ha! Got it anyway!

This was dug up recently from under the former Graf Golf Course during construction work on the expansion of Graf.

17 Comments

My Dad rarely talked about his WWII service, but he did tell the story of approaching a German town and having to deal with the 88's. He was part of a Mortar unit (platoon? squad?) with the Third Army, and this would have been after the Battle of the Bulge.
 
dang.... dirt sure does a number on a gun, doesn't it?
 
Now, if only the Italians knew how to take care of Captured War Booty, as the folks in Ft. Knox, life would be much more beautiful.
 
*and a thousand LGAMs unfold their e-tools...*
 
That second pic makes me shudder. If I just remember where I hid the barrel of my Star PD, dammit! I didn't bury it, but this is Florida, and no matter how well-oiled, I can imagine the rust! (I had to leave town for a coupla weeks, didn't trust aged Daddy with firearm, got horribly sick while gone and apparently lost some neurons.)
 
aah, coupla gallons of CLP and a wire brush, and that 88'll be fine...
 
JTG - It will be in the last place you look, you know ... *grin*
 
Would it not just be cool to actually get to shoot an 88? I'll be that sucker had a nice crack to it. And a nice dust cloud too, now that I think of it, especially when fired at ground targets. What I find interesting is that the Germans liked that dual purpose gun thing... ADA/Ground. According to a climb-on/in demo I was given, the Gepard (25mm Twin Oerlikon guns) had a switch in it that would change the system to ground targeting mode. I always figured the Vulcan would have made a nice ground system too, but hey, what do I know...
 
Say, Sanger, I've always wondered how much of the dreaded 88's reputation had to do with its efficiency as a gun, and how much with the doctrine of its tactical employment. I mean, we had some 90mm AA guns at about the same time, which could depress ( Are you reading this, Marvin?) enough to shoot at tanks and things. Oh, and the ammo. Maybe that 88 just shot a better shell than some other guns? I advert to the recent 3"-50 thread, here.
 
Many anti-tank guns started life as AA. Same qualities appreciated in both - very fast bullet with a flat trajectory. Just change the ammo.
 
If I remember my Dad's stories well,I don't think you would have wanted to be on the receiving end of the 88s. His most memorable one concerned a squad of British tanks against a dug in battery. The results weren't pretty.(as in a total wipeout on the Brits)
 
Yeah, I understand, JoA, but why didn't our highers understand that as well as the Germans' did? I mean, a high-velocity gun is a high-velocity gun, y'know? I think I remember reading, on a Nike nostalgia website, that there was a ground-to-ground option for the Nike air-defense missiles. Hey, a weapon is a weapon, if yer enemy is standing where it shoots, shoot 'im!
 
JTG, one of the 'lessons learned' by the Germans during the Spanish Civil War was that a smaller, hardened, shot was a better anti-tank round than the larger HE shell. The development of AT weapons in the newly-armed Third Reich followed this premise... other nations were slower to learn. WWII German AT munitions formed the basis for every development since...
 
I'm not all that knowledgeable about 88s or many other guns, calibers, etc, but from things I've read about the 88 and its use, it was a combination of doctrine and equipment that did the job. I suppose that's true of any weapon system really. For example, the Stuarts in WWII might have been a lot more effective if they had been used solely as scouts, etc, instead of real tanks, but when they went to Africa, the Germans ate their lunch, partially because of better equipment, but also because of better fighting skills too. One thing I do remember reading some time ago was that the 88's ability to quickly swivel on it's pedestal made it easier for the gunners to bring it to bear on new targets after firing. Other AT guns could traverse a bit, but not as quickly. So from what I read, a well trained, soldily emplaced '88 team could plot, resolve, aim, and shoot at more targets more quickly than almost any other gun of its time. When this was combined with overlapping fields of fire and solid defensive positions, they were supposedly nearly untouchable. Not sure how much real truth there is to that, but it's what I think I recall....
 
SangerM wrote: "I always figured the Vulcan would have made a nice ground system too, but hey, what do I know..." Actually, it did. When I was in the 82nd in the late 70's and early 80's, we regularly planned fires from Vulcans on suitable targets. My infantry battalion (3-325th AIR, to be precise,) got to go play with the BAOR up around Hanover during Reforger in 1980. We were part of the "Orange" forces, playing the role of a Russian airborne unit dropped in advance of a Soviet advance to sieze Class 60 bridges over the Hildesheim and Mitteland canals. About day three of the exercise the Brits finally got the situation figured out and put a dismounted company from the Irish Guards across the canal about a mile above where we were holding onto our bridge with teeth and toenails. The Micks came slipping down through the little forested area that ended about 300 meters from the bridge. They stepped out of the treeline in, I swear to God, a classic skirmish line, looked left and right to check their dressing, and started across the field toward us. At which point the haystack next to the bridge rotated 180 degrees and began going "WHIRRPPP! WHIRRPPP! WHIRRPPP!" One of our Vulcan crews had cranked up the landing gear so that the towed Vulcan was sitting on its flat base and then done a bang-up job of camoflage, and they caught our British friends flat-footed. Set the burst selector to 30 rounds, fire, traverse right 5 degrees, fire, traverse right five degrees... ...repeat as required until there aren't any more targets to service. The umpire stationed on the bridge threw his clipboard up into the air and said "Well, there's not much point in even trying to assess this one, is there now? The whole blasted company's out of action." At which point our backup, an infantry company from a Territorial battalion of the Worcester & Sherwood Foresters, showed up and became right put out that we hadn't left them anything to do. So we sent them across the river to play with a mixed gaggle of Chieftans and Scimitars that was being annoying. They all died gloriously, but it was evidently great fun while it lasted.
 
Great story, Blake. It was days like that that made it all worth doing, eh? Re: The 88. What everyone says is correct, I think, in regards to the 88 and it's success... but at it's core lays the performance of the gun/projectile combination...
 
Neff - You hit it right on the head. While the Germans took their que from their AA experiences in Spain. We ignorantly took our que from the Navy. Our thinking was, if a 3"/50 was good enough for a ship at sea, it is good enough for a ship at land. Costly mistake.