Jump to content


Any info on StuG?

StugIII StugIV

  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

TheRFSpark #1 Posted Mar 08 2018 - 08:00

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 15263 battles
  • 70
  • [DINO] DINO
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012
I'm looking for any info on a StuG III or IV that might of had a 88mm or a different gun that was not added to originally but might have been prototype to use or what not. I know it had the 75mm and and 105mm but I'm looking for a special StuG cause I want to write a book and want to have a special StuG in it because it is my favorite tank. Also I know I can just make it in my book but I would like to be as accurate as possible. Any help is nice and sorry for the weird question and request. 

Gravtech #2 Posted Mar 08 2018 - 08:26

    Major

  • Players
  • 28943 battles
  • 4,265
  • [CLAWS] CLAWS
  • Member since:
    09-18-2013

The only instance of a  StuG possibly having an 88mm that I could find, was that in 1944 there was a project by Krupp to modify a StuG III/IV with a 88mm Pak 43/3 L/71 gun. However, this project did not make it to the prototype stage.

 

Source



TheRFSpark #3 Posted Mar 08 2018 - 08:55

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 15263 battles
  • 70
  • [DINO] DINO
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012
Do you think the StuG II/IV could mount the 88mm? I know about Kruppo that is why I am curious.

__SoLoCo__king #4 Posted Mar 08 2018 - 12:10

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 68730 battles
  • 46
  • [ZEUS] ZEUS
  • Member since:
    10-14-2011

search for scorpiany guide to stug, hishave been the best in last few years.

 

★ ★ ★ Scorpion's Den: A Guide to Spotting Mechanics ★...



Worland #5 Posted Mar 08 2018 - 15:43

    Major

  • Players
  • 16765 battles
  • 4,925
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012
The Stug is cramped with the 75mm. I can't imagine having an 88mm in there. Would have zero traverse on the gun and only a handful of rounds. That's assuming it could handle the recoil.

TheRFSpark #6 Posted Mar 08 2018 - 17:40

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 15263 battles
  • 70
  • [DINO] DINO
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012
Hmm it seems information is very little on the subject :/

Lethalhavoc #7 Posted Mar 08 2018 - 18:01

    Major

  • Players
  • 38719 battles
  • 11,572
  • Member since:
    01-18-2013

The guns made the stug's and other TD's front heavy, so mounting an 88mm would have been very difficult.

During the war many of the newer types earned the nickname of Guderian's ducks.



TheRFSpark #8 Posted Mar 08 2018 - 18:07

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 15263 battles
  • 70
  • [DINO] DINO
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012
Very interesting name. I am curios. I mean they fit a 105mm Howitzer in the thing why not a 88mm or similar gun? Or maybe I'm over thinking something.

The_Chieftain #9 Posted Mar 08 2018 - 23:51

    Military Specialist

  • Administrator
  • 10897 battles
  • 9,772
  • [WGA] WGA
  • Member since:
    09-08-2011

The 105mm is a hell of a lot lighter than the 8.8. Probably had less recoil, as well.

 

Further, StuGs are assault guns, not tank destroyers. The 75mm served well enough as an ersatz AT gun if required, but it's not worth gimping the vehicle with a true AT gun.



Legiondude #10 Posted Mar 09 2018 - 03:02

    Major

  • Players
  • 20223 battles
  • 23,126
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    08-22-2011

Once again, Achtungpanzer hides a kernel of truth under mountain of crap

 

Spielberger/Jentz/Doyle in Panzer IV and It's Variants show Krupp's rear mounted design proposal that resembled what we call "Jagdpanther II". Panzer Tracts 20-1 also shows something resembling a Panzer IV/70(A) with an 88mm. Both of these designs were rejected for the strain on the chassis and because the Panzer IV series were to be retired anyways in favor of standardization to Panzer 38d/Panther/Tiger II variants


Edited by Legiondude, Mar 09 2018 - 03:06.


TheRFSpark #11 Posted Mar 09 2018 - 04:24

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 15263 battles
  • 70
  • [DINO] DINO
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012

The 75mm on StuG III how does it compare to a 88mm? the Jagdpanzer IV never had a 88mm gun did it? Also the 105 was a lot lighter than the 88? That seems strange in my mind since you'd think with a bigger round that it would be bulkier, heavier and a lot bigger recoil? Interesting...

 



Lethalhavoc #12 Posted Mar 09 2018 - 04:38

    Major

  • Players
  • 38719 battles
  • 11,572
  • Member since:
    01-18-2013

View PostTheRFSpark, on Mar 08 2018 - 19:24, said:

The 75mm on StuG III how does it compare to a 88mm? the Jagdpanzer IV never had a 88mm gun did it? Also the 105 was a lot lighter than the 88? That seems strange in my mind since you'd think with a bigger round that it would be bulkier, heavier and a lot bigger recoil? Interesting...

 

 

The JP4 had 3 guns, the L/43, L48 and L/70, the first 2 were due to shortages of the L/70.

The reason they were front heavy was the length of the barrel, combined with the frontal armor.

 

Here is a simple demo you can do at home.

Get a hammer and hold it straight out at arms length for 1 minute, then tape that same hammer to the end of a boom (brush side), holding just the handle of the broom, hold it out straight at arms length in front of you for 1 minute.

Gravity, we so often forget it's pull.



TheRFSpark #13 Posted Mar 09 2018 - 04:48

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 15263 battles
  • 70
  • [DINO] DINO
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012
Interesting. From looking at the tank you never could really tell it is already front heavy.

Legiondude #14 Posted Mar 09 2018 - 06:17

    Major

  • Players
  • 20223 battles
  • 23,126
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    08-22-2011

View PostTheRFSpark, on Mar 08 2018 - 22:24, said:

The 75mm on StuG III how does it compare to a 88mm? the Jagdpanzer IV never had a 88mm gun did it? Also the 105 was a lot lighter than the 88? That seems strange in my mind since you'd think with a bigger round that it would be bulkier, heavier and a lot bigger recoil? Interesting...

It takes some squinting but in StuG and It's Variants, the 10.5cm LeFH 18 cross section provided seems to be around 786 kg for just the barrel assembly(It's in German and in small text. Hard to say). That might be a half listing, as there's another number listing around 776 kg. So at most we're looking at something like 1500-ish kg(Within the realm of possibility as Wikipedia lists the weight of a LeFH 18/40 around 1955 kg)

 

Compared to a complete KwK 43(slightly different from a PaK, but mostly the same) which Tigers I and II and their Variants lists at 2265 kg

 

But it's not only total weight that's an issue, but weight distribution as well. The Jagdpanzer IV's that mounted the 75mm L/70 were nicknamed as "Guderian's Ducks" because they had tendency to dip forward into the dirt due to being heavy in the front. The engineering solution Krupp attempted(And can also be seen on WG's Jagdpanzer E-100), as mentioned previously both on the Panzer IV and Panther chassis, with rear mounted armaments utilizing well sloped superstructures. With a rear mounting the weight is distributed across the whole chassis rather than leaving the long gun hanging out the front where it can not only be grounded in the dirt easily but also make maneuvering around obstacles much more difficult(Ironically, WG making the guns "transparent" objects inverted this issue).

 

Add on top of this issue the problem with the Panzer IV's weight distribution, as it's leaf spring suspension bogies were showing strain keeping up with the upgrades on the standard Panzer IV(and limited major upgrades to the design as far back as Stalingrad) with a demonstrable sagging effect on the vehicle's front bogies and stripped at the rubber tires. Along with the need for rubber savings, steel tired roadwheels were added in the front to help fortify the suspension, as can be seen on late model Jagdpanzer IV's to deal with the weight of the 75mm L/70.

 

And then there's the ammunition to deal with. I won't go into that much, but in terms of "bulk", the 88mm PzGr. 43 was a much larger round to deal with


Edited by Legiondude, Mar 09 2018 - 06:19.


TheRFSpark #15 Posted Mar 09 2018 - 08:05

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 15263 battles
  • 70
  • [DINO] DINO
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012
Since I dont really have side by side views of each cannon and each ammo it does make it seem difficult to see. Just find it interesting a cannon that fires a bigger round is lighter than one that shoots a smaller round. I know the LeFH cannon is a 2 part load shell and powder if I'm correct. similar to what the KV-2 does.

M0nkE #16 Posted Mar 09 2018 - 17:16

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 21317 battles
  • 176
  • [NICO] NICO
  • Member since:
    03-12-2011

View PostTheRFSpark, on Mar 09 2018 - 07:05, said:

Since I dont really have side by side views of each cannon and each ammo it does make it seem difficult to see. Just find it interesting a cannon that fires a bigger round is lighter than one that shoots a smaller round. I know the LeFH cannon is a 2 part load shell and powder if I'm correct. similar to what the KV-2 does.

 

Large HE rounds are fired at low velocity, so it doesn't need to be as built up, and the gun can be shorter. It's a bit like comparing a .45 caliber handgun to a .223 caliber M16. The handgun might have a larger diameter, but the M16 is still appreciably bigger.

OttoT #17 Posted Mar 09 2018 - 19:14

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 48890 battles
  • 3,094
  • Member since:
    10-10-2010
The 105 is a smooth bore howitzer, the others are rifled guns. Rifled guns tend to need reinforced barrels because they are shooting higher velocity shells.  Also long guns need a barrel sleeve to keep the barrel from drooping something to do with thermal expansion.  But i don't think the sleeves were around back then...

TheRFSpark #18 Posted Mar 09 2018 - 20:54

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 15263 battles
  • 70
  • [DINO] DINO
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012
Fair enough

Anlushac11 #19 Posted Mar 10 2018 - 17:29

    Major

  • Players
  • 35194 battles
  • 2,226
  • Member since:
    05-25-2013

From what I read Jentz mentioned that Krupp did a design study of a 88MM jagdpanzer. It was never built for reasons listed above.

 

Would have looked like this: http://gulumik.blogspot.com/2011/08/jagdpanzer-iv70-88mm-pak-43-172-tp_02.html







Also tagged with StugIII, StugIV

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users