Jump to content


Photo

E100 Tank

type of gun

  • Please log in to reply
36 replies to this topic

#1 Puckett

Puckett

    Crunchie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 29 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 19 November 2017 - 1748 PM

hi all, i have a question. the german e100 tank was to have a 15cm on on it. was it going to be the same 15cm gun that was used on the hummel ??? thanks for any info. puckett.



#2 KV7

KV7

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 942 posts

Posted 19 November 2017 - 2336 PM

hi all, i have a question. the german e100 tank was to have a 15cm on on it. was it going to be the same 15cm gun that was used on the hummel ??? thanks for any info. puckett.

No.

Hummel is 15cm sFH 18/1 L30

e100 was meant to get the experimental 15 cm KwK 44 L/38

The 15 cm KwK 44 L/38 was to have a slightly longer barrel and higher muzzle velocity, (740 ms,45 kg @ muzzle) but was never put into production, but it seems they did build a prototype:

https://forum.warthu...5cm-kwk-44l-38/

 


Edited by KV7, 19 November 2017 - 2343 PM.


#3 Inhapi

Inhapi

    Wielder of the Unicorn Hat

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 268 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Belgium
  • Interests:Tanks, warships, polar exploration, ancient history,astronomy and space exploration,Ancient Egypt, harpsichords, Baroque and Classisist music, buying far too many books.

Posted 20 November 2017 - 0657 AM

When i look at the graphs on the link you gave, it would seem that the 128mm had higher armour penetration. I might be mistaken tough in making out the designiations of the guns in the low res scan

 

Inhapi



#4 Mobius

Mobius

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5,165 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Southern California
  • Interests:wargamming
    programming
    ballistics
    3D game development

Posted 20 November 2017 - 0739 AM

 

hi all, i have a question. the german e100 tank was to have a 15cm on on it. was it going to be the same 15cm gun that was used on the hummel ??? thanks for any info. puckett.

No.

Hummel is 15cm sFH 18/1 L30

e100 was meant to get the experimental 15 cm KwK 44 L/38

The 15 cm KwK 44 L/38 was to have a slightly longer barrel and higher muzzle velocity, (740 ms,45 kg @ muzzle) but was never put into production, but it seems they did build a prototype:

https://forum.warthu...5cm-kwk-44l-38/

 

 

The Germans were developing discarding sabot rounds for their large guns.

Instead of sub-caliber tungsten they were going to use 88mm Pzgr 39 sub-shell.

https://ww2aircraft....-pzgr-ts.46597/


Edited by Mobius, 20 November 2017 - 0741 AM.


#5 Gavin-Phillips

Gavin-Phillips

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,336 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:England, UK

Posted 20 November 2017 - 1533 PM

 

hi all, i have a question. the german e100 tank was to have a 15cm on on it. was it going to be the same 15cm gun that was used on the hummel ??? thanks for any info. puckett.

No.

Hummel is 15cm sFH 18/1 L30

e100 was meant to get the experimental 15 cm KwK 44 L/38

The 15 cm KwK 44 L/38 was to have a slightly longer barrel and higher muzzle velocity, (740 ms,45 kg @ muzzle) but was never put into production, but it seems they did build a prototype:

https://forum.warthu...5cm-kwk-44l-38/

 

 

I have read one or two reports that a large caliber cannon barrel was actually near the partially complete E100 but it seems its anyone's guess if it was destined for the E100 or something else entirely.

 

I bet the designers of these vehicles would be amazed at just how many people are still so curious about them.



#6 Paul Lakowski

Paul Lakowski

    Man of the worldly means

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,715 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Armor Tech and silly humor.

Posted 20 November 2017 - 2047 PM

I just don't see the point of such a monster!

 

How many could they build?

 

What would be the role?

 

If I was  going to waste that much resources it would be to build as armored SP Howitzer like the 210mm mortar. But there would be precious little petrol available for its usage.

 

How many Panther Schmalturm could be built instead?



#7 Rickard N

Rickard N

    Swedish ilk

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,278 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sweden
  • Interests:photography, ice hockey, motorcycling

Posted 21 November 2017 - 0411 AM

I just don't see the point of such a monster!

 

How many could they build?

 

What would be the role?

 

If I was  going to waste that much resources it would be to build as armored SP Howitzer like the 210mm mortar. But there would be precious little petrol available for its usage.

 

How many Panther Schmalturm could be built instead?

I think the rationale was "We built the Tiger tank and it was big and it was very best, if we make an even bigger tank it will be bester!!" (read with Tom Lehrer funny German voice)

 

/R



#8 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Welcome to the new world disorder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 41,369 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Looking at Elephants from the wrong end

Posted 21 November 2017 - 0455 AM

Nazi Giantism. It affected everything from the design of Germania, the Reichchancellery, to big guns. As the war went on it crept even into weapons systems, everything they had had to be better than anyone else, even if they couldn't build more than tiny amounts of it. Bigger, better, faster, stronger. It was less a considered strategy than Nazis psychology turned into metal.

 

I dont think Schmallturn was all it was cracked up to be. I seem the last remaining example at Bovington and the thing that struck me was 'small'. I see no way they could have upgunned it. And the small size of it, particularly when you put in a rangefinder, must surely have affected its rate of fire.



#9 DougRichards

DougRichards

    Doug Richards

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 8,988 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Looking at Tamarama Beach, Sydney, Aust
  • Interests:Degree in History and Politics. Interests are Military History, military models,

Posted 21 November 2017 - 0556 AM

According to what is probably some highly dubious 'sources' some other variants were 'planned':

 

0002838_germany-wwii-e-100-super-heavy-p

 

0000173_germany-wwii-e-100-stug-gun_550.



#10 Skywalkre

Skywalkre

    Garry F!@#$%g Owen

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 7,820 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Phoenix, AZ
  • Interests:military history, psychology, gaming (computer, board, simulation, console), sci-fi

Posted 21 November 2017 - 0629 AM

I dont think Schmallturn was all it was cracked up to be. I seem the last remaining example at Bovington and the thing that struck me was 'small'. I see no way they could have upgunned it. And the small size of it, particularly when you put in a rangefinder, must surely have affected its rate of fire.

Speaking of this turret design... what's the story behind it?  The wiki is pretty sparse on it.  Was it something that came out at the very end of the war?  Was it a design that was passed up earlier and in hindsight historians have commented how much better it would have been to use?



#11 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Welcome to the new world disorder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 41,369 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Looking at Elephants from the wrong end

Posted 21 November 2017 - 0630 AM

Oh man, I have to build that. It would look great sat next to the Nazi flying saucer model. :)



#12 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Welcome to the new world disorder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 41,369 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Looking at Elephants from the wrong end

Posted 21 November 2017 - 0637 AM

 

I dont think Schmallturn was all it was cracked up to be. I seem the last remaining example at Bovington and the thing that struck me was 'small'. I see no way they could have upgunned it. And the small size of it, particularly when you put in a rangefinder, must surely have affected its rate of fire.

Speaking of this turret design... what's the story behind it?  The wiki is pretty sparse on it.  Was it something that came out at the very end of the war?  Was it a design that was passed up earlier and in hindsight historians have commented how much better it would have been to use?

 

 

I think it was part of a related serious of programs late in the war where the Germans tried to standardize as many components as possible. I forget the exact details other than there was some pretty good coverage of it in the Jentz Panther book. The basic idea was to built a new turret that used less steel, provided more protection (smaller turret, thicker components) and be possible to upgun to a new gun, AND fit an optical rangefinder in the turret. The result was to be called Panther Ausf F, basically the 1945 model that was never built.

Here, this seems to give a fairly good overview from what I recall from memory (which with me is never a good starting point)

http://www.webring.o...zpanther-F.html

 

I was disappointed when I saw the remnants at Bovington, its tiny. And if the Jentz diagram in his book was any guide, it would be near impossible to upgun because the clearance of the gun from turret edge would mean you would have to elevate the gun to reload, and that it would have hardly any clearance anyway. I think they pretty much got it right with the flat mantlet on the late Panther G.


Edited by Stuart Galbraith, 21 November 2017 - 0638 AM.


#13 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9,838 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belgrade, Serbia
  • Interests:Obscure tanks and guns.
    Obscure facts about well known tanks and guns.
    Obscure historical facts.

Posted 21 November 2017 - 0928 AM

According to what is probably some highly dubious 'sources' some other variants were 'planned':

 

 

....

 

Both are fake, invented by a French modeling magazine in 1990s.



#14 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9,838 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belgrade, Serbia
  • Interests:Obscure tanks and guns.
    Obscure facts about well known tanks and guns.
    Obscure historical facts.

Posted 21 November 2017 - 0931 AM

Wide mantlets sucked from a gun ballance and economy of mass point, hence everyone gave up on them after ww2 at some point (Chieftain and T-64/72/80/90 being extreme example of the idea).


Edited by bojan, 21 November 2017 - 0931 AM.


#15 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Welcome to the new world disorder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 41,369 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Looking at Elephants from the wrong end

Posted 21 November 2017 - 0946 AM

Yes, thats true. I think Schmalturn was taking it a bit far, at least best I could tell from the remnants that are left of it.

 

jzVBiFt.jpg?1



#16 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12,108 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Teutonistan

Posted 21 November 2017 - 1005 AM

"Schmalturm Turret" is a tautology. They better had written "Schmalturm (narrow turret)", because that is what it means literally.

 

The US Army built something along the same lines with the narrow profile of the M47's turret.



#17 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9,838 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belgrade, Serbia
  • Interests:Obscure tanks and guns.
    Obscure facts about well known tanks and guns.
    Obscure historical facts.

Posted 21 November 2017 - 1024 AM

Yes, M26/46 to M47 turret is nice example how much better frontal protection can be gained if you ditch wide mantlet and use side turret walls at extreme angle as a part of the frontal protection.



#18 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Welcome to the new world disorder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 41,369 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Looking at Elephants from the wrong end

Posted 21 November 2017 - 1030 AM

I dunno why, I keep writing schmalturn when it should be schhalturm. Doofus. :)

 

If anyone has not got the Jentz Panther or Tiger books, they are well worth getting. The latter has some interesting drawings of the speculative 105mm armed Tiger2, and the turret with the optical rangefinder. I always thought the installation of that looked very reminicent of the M48/M60 too.



#19 DougRichards

DougRichards

    Doug Richards

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 8,988 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Looking at Tamarama Beach, Sydney, Aust
  • Interests:Degree in History and Politics. Interests are Military History, military models,

Posted 22 November 2017 - 0320 AM

 

According to what is probably some highly dubious 'sources' some other variants were 'planned':

 

 

....

 

Both are fake, invented by a French modeling magazine in 1990s.

 

 

I have no doubt of that



#20 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Welcome to the new world disorder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 41,369 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Looking at Elephants from the wrong end

Posted 22 November 2017 - 0323 AM

You mean, there was no Nazi flying saucer either?

:(






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users