Rail mounted artillery

dasreich · #1 (**permalink**) July 17th, 2002, 05:02 AM

I just read about "Hitlers Superguns" in a book titled "German weapons of WW2." It talks about these gigantic guns on train tracks. I thought it was interesting, and I was wondering if they were "worth it" to the war effort, if they could have been used better, etc. Any thoughts?

Friedrich · #2 (**permalink**) July 17th, 2002, 05:12 AM

Das Reich. Read the topic "Dora, a gun with real style". It is all about rail-guns and super-guns.

Martin Bull · #3 (**permalink**) July 17th, 2002, 11:52 AM

I think, again in overall terms, that in terms of effort, ingenuity, manufacturing resources, manpower etc that must have been invested in these weapons - they surely cannot have been worthwhile.

To me, these guns are like fabulous dinosaurs. Ultimately a 'blind alley' maybe, but still wonderful to contemplate !

Panzerknacker · #4 (**permalink**) July 17th, 2002, 01:30 PM

The Germans basically just had a hard-on for grossly oversized pieces of artillery. They had helped to crush morale of the French in WW1 through their use of 'Big Bertha'-and it appears obvious to all that they intended to do teh same with their deployment EVERYWHERE-Crimea, Sevastopol, in the Channel-they jsut didn't seem to achieve the desired effect...

CrazyD · #5 (**permalink**) July 17th, 2002, 04:03 PM

The big german guns often remind me of other projects, like the Maus. Big, impressive wastes of time. The railguns were incredible pieces of equipment. but look at the action history of railguns as a whole- very few occasions where the guns contributed. Certainly not enough to warrant the resources and time involved.
Certainly impressive to study though!

Friedrich · #6 (**permalink**) July 17th, 2002, 05:40 PM

As I said in the topic about Dora: they were just German wagnerian obsessions. Perhaps a waste of resources. How many 88s could have been done with the materials of a railgun? Anyway. You could not say that they did not contributed. The Maginot line was smashed by Von Leeb's heavy artillery and Sebastopol was also smashed by Von Manstein's heavy artillery. History had taught the Germans that heavy artillery was the weapon for victory. We won Sedan, Liège, Tannensberg because of it. And again, in WWII heavy artillery had the last word in destroying defensive positions of that strenght. Even our Atlantic wall and Sigfried line had to be taken after heavy bombardments.

CrazyD · #7 (**permalink**) July 17th, 2002, 07:22 PM

Well, Friedrich, first off, by the time the Maginot line was smashed by anything, it was already irrelevant. And none of the bombardments at Normandy or the Siegfried line came from big guns- just regular artillery and air bombardment.
Even at Anzio, where the big guns definetely hurt the American forces, Anzio Annie could only fire a very limited amount of shells, and with questionable accuracy.
IMO, Sevastopol provides the only example of somewhere where one of the big guns actually contributed.
Normal artillery was vital to ww2- I have read from numerous sources that the german 80mm mortar causes more allied casualties that any other single weapon. Point being, the 80 mortar was simple, easy to use, and easy to manufacture, and thus was often used to great effect. The huge guns of the germans in ww2 took days simply to get into firing position, let alone fire any large number of shells. The production, material, and resources that went into these guns, combined with the incredible difficulty involved in actually using one of them, I think rendered them nothing more than future museum pieces.
Definetely some of the most fascinating items around tho!

Martin Bull · #8 (**permalink**) July 17th, 2002, 07:46 PM

I must just 'nip in' here to say a word for naval guns in Normandy - surprisingly effective and demoralising for the Germans. The 15" guns of old battleships like HMS Warspite packed quite a punch !

Overall, though, you're right about the railway guns - too much effort to knock out a few forts which could be neutralised by other means. Like Eben-Emael was, for instance.

Friedrich · #9 (**permalink**) July 17th, 2002, 07:48 PM

Well. You are right about the tremendous cost and low versatility of super guns.

The Atlantic wall was bombarded by big naval guns which count as heavy artillery. The Siegfried line: OK, the heaviest things you used were 155 mm guns and mortars of 200 mm... Right.

But about the Maginot line. The time when it was taken and destroyed was indeed after Dunkirk, when France was already defeated. Unfortunately this takes away the attention of the incredible achievments of Wihelm von Leeb and Army Group C (which by the way was smaller and weaker than the 6. Armee in Stalingrad). France was already defeated, but many, many French good-quality divisions remained in the Maginot Line. They were never transferred elsewhere. Therefore, the Maginot line always had the same "mighty" strenght. All who believed that no-one with all the force of its army and air force will never get throught it were taught a lesson. When Von Leeb attacked, he attacked the Maginot Line wich was at that momment with its 100% of supplies and troops. He did it with only 19 infantry divisions. But Von Leeb, as an artillery commander had studied the defensive tactics. He was one of the master-defensive-minds in Europe. He knew perfectly what he was facing. Then, he used and incredible ammount of heavy artillery (he had asked the railguns, but they were not ready yet), Sturmtruppen with flammethrowers and innovative arms, a lot of engeneers and by mid-July, in two weeks, the most powerful fortress ever made had fallen to an insignificant force of infantry, without much air support and any armoured support... It is an awesome victory. It is not as important but equally incredible than the victory of Army Groups A and B. Guderian's offensive tactics conquested France. Von Leeb's tactics conquested the Maginot line. It is equally incredible both things.

At Sebastopol the artillery (all, not just the "Dora" and "Gustav", but ALL) made the diference.
We agree there.

And at Anzio, let me tell you that "Leopold" was extremely accurate. At least the British veterans swear that "they could hit a single lorry with it..."

Erich · #10 (**permalink**) July 17th, 2002, 09:01 PM

Railway guns......why of course, not the big Dora tweaked types but yes 88, 105 and even single 128mm's were mounted on rail flat cars and transported from city to city to bolster the weak defences at times. It is known that at Berlin and Wien that railway Flak was an integral part of the defensive systems of these major cities.

E

CrazyD · #11 (**permalink**) July 17th, 2002, 09:54 PM

Good points, Friedrich!
I would only throw out one more thing on the Maginot line- I think that the fall of France as a whole seriously affected the status of the Maginot line. The troops stationed there knew that France had already fallen, so one can easily imagine their mindset tending towards surrender. And one crucial point- the France intended the Maginot line to be a sort of "wall"; yet when von Leeb attacked, he attacked from only one side. This meant that the vast majority of the Line's defenses could not be brought to bear on any attackers.
And one factual correction- the K5 railguns did exist when the germans took the Maginot line. Eight of the guns were in service by Feb. 1940.

and Erich- rail mounted FlaK guns are a whole different story! Those were very common and effective weapons. Made it easy to move a city's AA forces to quicklt meet an incoming threat. One of the pieces at Aberdeen is a dual 128mm railcar mounted FlaK gun... wow...

Erich · #12 (**permalink**) July 17th, 2002, 11:20 PM

I don;t know if that is true Crazy ! Rail mounted twin 128mm. These were all designated for the flak towers in Wien, Berlin und Hamburg. Only singles were thus so mounted. Aberdeens is placed on it's tractor mount from pics I have seen. Also may have been atest bed for the proposed monster 150mm.

E

Friedrich · #13 (**permalink**) July 17th, 2002, 11:36 PM

Those are valid points on the morale of the French soldiers at that moment. But just because of that the only thing they could do for their beloved France was to defend their already invaded soil ferouscely and they did. Well, there were obviously quite a lot of heavy artillery available for Army Group C. Army Group A had more armour than the others, Army Group B had more air-support (in the beginning) than the others and army group C had more artillery. What I meant is that the super, super guns: "Dora" and "Gustav" were not ready by 1940, but until 1942! But there were several "low" caliber railguns in 1940.

dasreich · #14 (**permalink**) July 17th, 2002, 11:45 PM

"low" claiber!
Compared to Gustavs 800mm gun though...

CrazyD · #15 (**permalink**) July 18th, 2002, 03:53 PM

Friedrich, sorry to misunderstand. You're right- the Dora and Gustav were not ready until 1941, I believe.
And I really like you're comment about "low" caliber railguns!

Erich-
http://www.ordmusfound.org/flak40.html
If this link dosen't work, just use google to get to the Aberdeen Proving Grounds museum, then check their collection. Trust me, my friend- this was one of the items I took multiple pictures of! From what I have read, a relatively good number of these twin 128s were created and used around the major cities in germany. Funny thing is, from what I have read, despite how menacing the dual 128 looks, the 88s actually performed better as Flak guns.

Erich · #16 (**permalink**) July 18th, 2002, 04:08 PM

Crazy from the references I have only the twin 128's were postioned at the three cities I mentioned. The single 128 was used in the smaller centers and on rail flat cars.

E

CrazyD · #17 (**permalink**) July 18th, 2002, 04:14 PM

Hmmm... Erich, you're probably right. Also just read on the caption for the Aberdeen piece that was designed for stationary emplacement.

I could have sworn I read about the 128s being used on rail mounts- I'll see if I can find the source I got it from...

Friedrich · #18 (**permalink**) July 18th, 2002, 04:17 PM

He, he, he. That is why I used "low" with ""...

Yes, I think that the 88mm gun was better as anti-aircraft because it was easier and faster to posstion and reload. But I think that if that 128mm shell hit an aeroplane, sorry for the aviators...

Martin Bull · #19 (**permalink**) July 18th, 2002, 05:00 PM

The twin 128's were often mounted on those huge flak towers ( like the one that still stands in Hamburg ). I think they were very effective, putting up radar-guided 'box barrages' that were terrifying and lethal.Again, I don't hink the Germans had enough of these guns - maybe someone else knows more ?

Friedrich · #20 (**permalink**) July 18th, 2002, 05:14 PM

Another of those towers is still in Berlin, where the Reichsbank's reserves were kept at the end of the war. But do you mean that there were not enough twin 128s? Or that there were not enough 128 mm Flak cannons? Because there were...

Martin Bull · #21 (**permalink**) July 18th, 2002, 06:05 PM

No, I wasn't sure how many 128's were in existence ; but then I guess if the Germans were starting to fit them to AFV's like the Jagdtiger, there can't have been a shortage ?

( Woops ! Sorry - we're drifting O/T a bit ! )

CrazyD · #22 (**permalink**) July 18th, 2002, 06:12 PM

Martin, I can't imagine us drifting off-topic!

Here's an interesting one on the Jagdtiger/128 connection. Go to Aberdeen (or find good pics- maybe mine?!), and look closely at teh Jagdtiger they have there. Look at the gun- it is not a 128!!! The Jagdtiger at Aberdeen is actually incredibly rare- the first 40-50 Jagdtigers produced mounted 88mm guns! This is one of them- the gun is clearly an 88, not the 128. There was not actually a real shortage of 128s at this point (at least no more shortage that all teh other german material!), but it did take time for the Germans to convert the 128s for mounting in the vehicle. Yet Hitler insisted the Jagdtigers go into action immediately after production. Hence, the germans fitted a small number with 88s.
I actually noticed this after visiting Aberdeen, while looking at some of the pics I took there (about 300!). The I looked into it and got the info...

Sorry-this is certainly off topic. I thought it was pretty interesting tho!