M Hofbauer

Maybe BFC had an incorrect impressuion on the abilities of the SdKfz 251/21. From the usual pictures, you could think that it was only able to fire to the front with its hodge-podge triple 2cm mount. But indeed it was a 360°, fully elevatable mount capable of engaging air targets like, well, like an AA gun - which it was. If it was any help to them, I can offer them a couple good pictures showing the 251/21 with the mount rotated.

Nothing at all like Iosif. Looks a lot more like Kliment Voroshilov, marshall and military leader of the USSR. See: Voroshilov skiing and a few other sites. But as far as I know, he wasn't in Germany at the time thr other phots were taken (and why would he be at an obviously Nazi rally?). The woman looks a bit like his wife, too, BTW. Can you get a high-res image of his shoulder decorations and collar? Make it easier to identify him. Ian </font>

Whew, guess what, I have been here since that, too. I've even been here before the first game came out, years ago when there was still the old white board format. And my member number is lower than yours. And I can pee further than you. And you are a bigger tool

1. It is Puppchen, not Püppchen. 2. It was not as rare as many people again and again claim it to be. 3. The thread I linked was just an EXAMPLE - I specifically stated so. Why do you expect me to do all your work just because you're too plain lazy? But in today's world of people expecting convenience products being fed to them ,here goes (this is a repeat of old posts of mine): -------------------------- quote 1: "The correct name for the Puppchen ("little doll") is "8,8cm Raketenwerfer 43 "Puppchen". The germans built 2,862 in 1943 and 288 in 1944. A second production run of 3,000 was canceled and the partly finished weapons scrapped. Interesting sidenote to the production numbers: the troops received their first 700 weapons in October 1943; however there were problems with the production of the ammunition, the RPzGr. 4312, and consequenlty an ammunition shortage. The first major batch of that ammunition were 19,000 delivered in March 1944. At the time of the german surrender May 1945, a total of 1,649 Puppchen were still in active service with frontline troops. The germans had stopped producing the weapon because they concluded that essentially it had the same performance as the Panzerschreck but was much more cumbersome and required more resources to produce in comparison to the "Panzerschreck" RPzB. 54/1. In CM with it's abstracted infantry model the advantages of a Panzerschreck over the Puppchen don't really become as apparent, but common sonse should make it apparent that a 10kg Panzerschreck launch tube carried around by a sneaky soldier is much more feasible than the unwieldy, cumbersome Puppchen with it's gunpiece-assembly and a total weight of 100kg." ---------------- quote #2: MarkIV, hello again "Shortages of war materials and conflicts for production capacity would also weigh heavily in favor of the Panzerschreck over the Püppchen." agree, but I need to point out that whatever sources you are using are overgermanizing the subject. The correct german name does not use the Umlaut. the word Püppchen means little doll, too, and actually today would much rather be used, but the fact remains that the WW2 weapon we are talking about here was called "Puppchen". I can only suspect that the (american?) sopurces you are using were trying to be smarter / more german than the Heereswaffenamt itself by "correcting" the apparently "missing" Umlaut dots. "John Weeks, sometimes collaborator with Hogg, also says in "Men Against Tanks" that Püppchen was a development of the Panzerschreck (he may be using Hogg as his source, though)." I'm sorry to say that I disagree and that as far as I can see IMHO Mr Weeks is wrong. The Puppchen was an independent construction, however of course it shared many design features with the Panzerschreck since they were comparable weapons, so they were alike just like a Toyota Celica and a Volkswagen Golf are similar in so far as they are cars. "A few were used in France in 1944 where they were not particularly good and it is coubtful if they ever enjoyed the confidence of the German soldier." agree, that concurs with what I have read so far on that weapon. It didn't really earn the confidence of the german troops using it due to the reasons already outlined. In essence, it was like an AT gun but lacking the performance of an AT gun. He also mentions attempts to increase the Panzerschreck's dimensions to 100mm (a failure due to weight and dimension increase), the correct dimensions re. caliber for the projected Panzerschreck 10,5cm were - true to the name - 105mm. It was a bit heavier with it's 13kg but apparently one of the main reasons why it was dropped from further development was due to heavy recoil forces (technically being a recoilless weapon, I am are referring to the kickback of the rocket engine against the protective shield). "and an improved version of the Püppchen called PWK 8 H 63" It amazes me that these two weapons should be related to each other. The PWK 8 H 63 was a totally different weapon design by Rheinmetall, employing the high-low-pressure principle. It used the Wgr.Patr. 4462 ammunition. It was a descendant of the PAW 600, and I am really amazed how it should be related to the Puppchen...? I mean it practically succeeded the Puppchen as the next lightweight, new technology cheap AT piece, but that is how far the relationship goes IMHO. "which showed great promise (good at 600-700m)" Accuracy under firing range test conditions was such that at a range of 750m, 50% of all shots hit within a square of 70cm side length. For comparison, under same conditions the 50% hit group square of the PaK 43 AT gun was 20cm. "but which probably never "knocked out so much as one tank" due to its late introduction." In March 1945 the Panzergrenadier-Regimenter Pz.Gren.Regt.30 and 31 employed a total of 105 Panzerwurfkanonen 8 H 63. I couldn't dig up anything but the fact that these 105 were really in frontline use. yours sincerely, M.Hofbauer (edited to kill the stupid smiley-insertion by the board script) ----------------------------------- Are you a happymeal customer now? I hope you can go use the bathroom yourself - I definitely won't be coming when you're shouting "I'm done!" (LOL, edited again because the board script got me again inserting smileys that I didn't wont - some people never learn) [ February 17, 2003, 03:32 PM: Message edited by: M Hofbauer ]

in the upper lefz corner there is something which is popularly referred to as the SEARCH function. use of it would lead you, for example, to old threads like these: http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=024041#000019

at least worthy of a bump.

The "B" word?

ahwonnapicshure

No that's just a polygon infinitesimally likened to a circle and sold as such.

Interesting. Did you happen to be able to take a look into a crystalball or something? I bet Steve and Charles would just love to know what they will be releasing in the future game engine,and exactly why it willbe considered a failure by some so that they can avert that by doing things differently (but then it wouldn't have been the future which you were seeing -aaarg, paradoxon's striking again). seriously, are you like CDV or saomething? Or is it me who is off - mind you it's been some time since I got involved into dicussions over future CM versions. The big CM rewrite/(new write) hasn't even begun yet, or?

read my post again. sems to be a pre-42 SS-Brigadeführer for what it's worth. which means he is GERMAN (there were few russians serving in the SS at that position), and yes, that's a General-rank.

Exactly. Immediately jumps to the eye doesn't it? That can never be Stalin because a) he doesn't look like Stalin and why should Stalin be wearing what is obviously an SS uniform, probably the two-leaf collar tab of a pre-42 Brigadeführer. MasterGoodale, calm down, keep your head straight and your feet on the ground. Your pictures are interesting and maybe even valuable, at least in a non-financial respect to historians. But it is not like you had the exclusive picture of Bigfoot or Aliens. What you have as far as I can see is a couple of (partly blurry) pictures from Third Reich political figures, apparently mostly pre-WWE, including Schicklgruber himself. But to put things in a perspective, pictures like that are not really rare and can be found quite often in old attics or grampa's collection of memorabilia. Very good quality pictures of all these people already exist in official archives such as Karlsruhe, free for public access. They might have limited value for historians. But they are nowhere as precious as you make them out to be. That is not to say your find is not interesting. But you need to calm down. The biggest value they have IMO is that they are part of your grampa's past and his experiences. That alone is probably the highest value they can ever have. [ January 31, 2003, 07:34 AM: Message edited by: M Hofbauer ]

Opinions are like assholes I guess. Any photograph thats old will lose many of its original properties. Photoshop can return many of those properties to their initial state (the original mint condition photo or negative) reducing the amount of visual anomalies that are inherent with storing photos for long periods of time. Simple exposure to oxygen will cause any old photo paper to turn brownish yellow, a quick fix with the color correction tools of photoshop will solve this. A quick adjustment of contrast and brightness levels (very important for black and white pictures) can reduce many of the imperfections of the original exposure and print. Not to mention the imperfections incurred by a scan of said photo. You're right, <font color=yellow>hogwash</font>. Thats why all my really old photos now look better than the originals, or rather, how the originals initially looked. I guess Adobe can stop making Photoshop now. </font>

Because PanAm was reluctant to fly US tourists to Munich since every time they tried to land at the airport, the local AD would shoot them down, if not they had been shot down before by interceptors. For the same reason lufthansa had given up their transcontinental flights to NY and decided to use their Fw200 Condor to transport bombs instead of tourists. They called it "war. now that makes more sense. Guess he arrived in England in 1943 then went over the channel in 1944 and ended up in Munich in 1945. well, Munich was important in the beginning, but later it was Nuremberg and Berlin that had most of the public goings-on.

"keyholing" yes, but maybe he also thought ahead that i would think that he would think ahead and put another gun behind the first, so he might not do it because the thinks I know it, or maybe he thinks that i would think that he thought that i would think that he would think ahead and put another gun behind the first, so he might not do it because the thinks I know it, or maybe he thinks that .....

"keyholing" yes, but maybe he also thought ahead that i would think that he would think ahead and put another gun behind the first, so he might not do it because the thinks I know it, or maybe he thinks that i would think that he thought that i would think that he would think ahead and put another gun behind the first, so he might not do it because the thinks I know it, or maybe he thinks that .....

or for inevitable death as the enemy infantry comes through the house. any opponent that sends his tanks unescorted into an enemy urban area doesn't deserve better.

or for inevitable death as the enemy infantry comes through the house. any opponent that sends his tanks unescorted into an enemy urban area doesn't deserve better.

hehe, exactly. I was gonna say something about Spiegel being a commie gutter rag, but then I would have been labeled a Stoiber disciple...so yeah, that Focus statement of yours really hits the nail, all too true... but then nothing can really be as poor as Focus... my wife had the Spiegel subscribed years ago (student's subscription price) but I made her cancel that. Augstein is dead. FJS is dead. They are dancing together now.

</font>

MasterGoodale, Nobody here thinks you made the story up. And of course, like Dorosh said, if you wish assistance with IDing the pictures am sure everyone here is gladly willing to help. The "problem" if there is one is not your tale since you honestly said everything you experienced / that has been said to you. The "problem" is the story of your grandfather, with the over 100 pictures on a single fillm, and from different times. Even then, it could be true, or he could remember them a bit wrong. For example, if there were several rolls of film together with the camera, then that would explain both the number of pictures and the various times (each roll could be from a different year / set of years). please do not take the natural quibbling, questioning and nibbling of the Grogs here as a mistruist in *your* story. I think we all very much appreciate your story and feel with you. yours sincerely, M.Hofbauer As regards the legal aspect, Pvt. Ryan: "The original photographer (and copyright holder) is probably long gone. These photos would most likely now be in the public domain" copyright of unpublished pictures ends 50 years (70 years depending on where you live) after the death of the author (photographer). That would require the owner of the camera to die at war's end or soon after. So I think it is safe to assume that the pictures are not public domain yet. lucero1148 : "As far as copyright goes they belong to MG since he has possession of the negs. Simple as that until someone will contest and show proof of ownership." True.

I wouldn't say that. 600 yards is a lot for a weapon with such a low Vo like the KV-2s gun. It has 400somefink m/s (at the muzzle!) which means it will travel one and a half to two seconds, which is an eternity for flat-arc ballistics. I don't know off the back of my head how much better the KV-1s 76mm gun is but even 200 m/s more Vo would make targeting a lot easier. maybe the problem becomes more apparent with something more solid...IIRC there are targets that only the Kv-2 has any chance of killing, and the KV-1 cant, even if he hit better. sorry for being so unspecific and foggy here, I have so far (luckily?) zero experience with the KV-2 in CMBB. Did not encounter it, and never picked it myself so far: all I know is that in reality it sucked bad. And if the turret rotation limitation isn't modeled in CMBB then I am also not really dieing to see this vehicle in my games.

yes, plus how come that one camera (= one film) had 100 pictures (exposures) on it? what kind of camera was that? I am not by any means in the know about cameras, but 100 pics seems unusual.

well to have your infantry supported by the tanks requires the tanks to emerge into view of the AT guns. Which is exactly the problem the original poster describes and tries to avoid. The only part where I agree is to bunch up your tanks. Even if you lose a tank, you still have another one to shoot back with. If you use single tanks they do not give you that opportunity for a return shot. The more, the better. CMBB makes such bunching easy because tanks are not opaque/solid in terms of LOS. Be careful though because if you bunch them real close then that might very well be considered gamey. Of course it is a va-banque tactic - you gotta be careful not to lead your bunched-up gaggle of tanks into a trap, else they are *all* in the wrong spot when the feces hits the air conditioner. [ January 26, 2003, 08:41 PM: Message edited by: M Hofbauer ]

well to have your infantry supported by the tanks requires the tanks to emerge into view of the AT guns. Which is exactly the problem the original poster describes and tries to avoid. The only part where I agree is to bunch up your tanks. Even if you lose a tank, you still have another one to shoot back with. If you use single tanks they do not give you that opportunity for a return shot. The more, the better. CMBB makes such bunching easy because tanks are not opaque/solid in terms of LOS. Be careful though because if you bunch them real close then that might very well be considered gamey. Of course it is a va-banque tactic - you gotta be careful not to lead your bunched-up gaggle of tanks into a trap, else they are *all* in the wrong spot when the feces hits the air conditioner. [ January 26, 2003, 08:41 PM: Message edited by: M Hofbauer ]