Aacooper Posted April 18, 2000 Share Posted April 18, 2000 When reading first person - or even more serious - accounts of US-German combat, when the GI gets shelled, it's always by the 88. However, whenever I read German TOE's the 88 is outnumbered by 75mm AT guns, and 105 and higher artillery pieces. Obviously the 88's reputation made an impression on US soldiers. My question is, maybe some people have experience with this, why couldn't the GI tell the difference? Is it a common misconception, or do 88's sound like 105's, 75's, 150's, or anything else? Is there a difference in CM? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mch Posted April 18, 2000 Share Posted April 18, 2000 I've read that like the G.I. often attributed ANY high velocity incoming to 88's. The G.I.seemed to have a similar habit of reporting almost every vehicle with tracks as a tiger tank.Mostly a "green" thing,though.They were just pretty scared of the 88. p.s.esp.during the Battle of the Bulge. Lots of green troops!subsequently.... KING TIGERS EVERYWHERE!!!!!!!!!!!! (even though KT's only numbered 22 at start of offensive) ------------------ It is no disgrace to be defeated...It is a disgrace to be surprised. -attr.to Fredrick the Great- [This message has been edited by mch (edited 04-17-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted April 18, 2000 Share Posted April 18, 2000 Supposedly, you cannot hear the 88 coming in, i.e. you see the impact before you hear the shot. But that could also be true maybe of the high velocity 75mm projectiles... maybe that's where the confusion comes from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Scott Clinton Posted April 18, 2000 Share Posted April 18, 2000 The average Joe GI in WW2 every German high velocity gun was an 88, and every tank was a Tiger. It is incredible the number of times that GIs talk about how the lowly Sherman was so out classed by the German armor, because ALL the German tanks had the great 88. Well, I think most of us know that only TWO German tanks and two assault guns carried the 88mm and all of them were pretty scarce compared to MK IVs and Panthers. Hell, I even 'read' (I have it on tape) in Ambrose's "Citizen Soldiers" about how the Panther was so much more superior to the Sherman due to its '88'. And even though we may not see Steven Ambrose's books as a 'hard-core history most of the public does. Just more of that 'Uber Panzer' mythos IMHO. Just like all those scenarios in Squad Leader where side "A" got 6 Shermans and side B got 4 Panthers...Hell if the Jerries had really had odds like this, they would have won the damn war! ------------------ Please note: The above is solely the opinion of 'The Grumbling Grognard' and reflects no one else's views but his own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
109 Gustav Posted April 18, 2000 Share Posted April 18, 2000 Citizen Soldiers was actually a pretty good history of the fighting in Europe. In a later printing, the "Panthers with 88s" error was corrected. Your tape must be off the first version. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Username Posted April 18, 2000 Share Posted April 18, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Moon: Supposedly, you cannot hear the 88 coming in, i.e. you see the impact before you hear the shot. But that could also be true maybe of the high velocity 75mm projectiles... maybe that's where the confusion comes from?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Sometimes called the "Crash-Boom" phenomena. Germans first encountered it when they went up against the Russian high velocity 76.2 mm field guns. You are correct that the detonation of the shell is experienced first before the report of the weapon. So unless you were looking right at it and saw the flash, you wouldnt have time to duck and cover. Panzergrenadiers hated these weapons as much as the panzermen. So the 88mm and most 75mmLongs would all have this effect (Yes for those fans of mine, I was going to put this into my stug argument). Lewis PS Its there with MG fire too. I know cause you hear these cracking noises above your head followed by a distant "boomboomboom" of the MG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JonS Posted April 18, 2000 Share Posted April 18, 2000 uh, its there with anything that travels faster than 330m/s. I'd love to see any design document that specifically describes this to be a specific functional requirement though ... Jon ------------------ Ubique Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted April 18, 2000 Share Posted April 18, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Hell, I even 'read' (I have it on tape) in Ambrose's "Citizen Soldiers" about how the Panther was so much more superior to the Sherman due to its '88'. And even though we may not see Steven Ambrose's books as a 'hard-core history most of the public does.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I probably shouldn't admit this, but I read Citizen Soldiers and wrote a letter to Mr. Ambrose specifically about this very error. He's probably very annoyed by people like me. And a few other errors too. Still a very enjoyable book though. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>In a later printing, the "Panthers with 88s" error was corrected.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Hey, he listened! Charles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bastables Posted April 18, 2000 Share Posted April 18, 2000 It’s a comedy of errors isn’t it Lewis. I mean I hope this ‘crack-boom,’ phenomena are not central to your forthcoming argument. Because the StuK 37 L/24 Sprgr shot out of the barrel at 420m/s, fast enough for what you term ‘crack-boom’ to occur. PaK 40, KwK 40, StuK 40 the Sprgr achieved 550m/s. (PIV and StuG Lang) KwK 40, StuK42 the Sprgr achieved 700m/s. (Panthers also the PIV/70’s) Oh I’ll reiterate that a higher velocity will adversely affect the blast pattern. Again why give artillery men a weapon that trades lesser HE performance for increased AT performance if their main occupations are killing Infantry, pillbox’s and enemy guns. I'll tell you why, their out there to kill Panzers. [This message has been edited by Bastables (edited 04-18-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moriarty Posted April 18, 2000 Share Posted April 18, 2000 Some of the aura of the 88 also stemmed from Rommel's use of antiaircraft guns as antitank weapons. "Hull down" 88s—for lack of a better term—made one hell of a mess of incoming armor and infantry. It didn't take long for word to spread. ------------------ I'm drinkin' wine, I'm eatin' cheese and catching some rays, you know. — Oddball Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Username Posted April 18, 2000 Share Posted April 18, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JonS: uh, its there with anything that travels faster than 330m/s. I'd love to see any design document that specifically describes this to be a specific functional requirement though ... Jon <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well as you probably know, its not that simple. Sound will travel in a strait line between two points (mostly). A projectile will follow a projectile motion (parabola). The speed of sound will more or less stay constant. Projectiles scrub speed in flight (can't really base it on muzzle velocity). The effect, of course, is range dependant. An easy way to understand it is to say: if the average velocity of a projectile along one axis of motion (strait line between weapon and target)is equal to the speed of sound, then the explosion and the report will be simultaneous. If the average speed is greater, than you will have the explosion first. You lose me with the design requirement stuff. Its just a function of a gun that has a high velocity to achieve a desired effect. Usually greater range or armor penetration. It isnt a designed in effect, its something that comes about. But maybe you mean something else?. Lewis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JonS Posted April 18, 2000 Share Posted April 18, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Username: ... "Crash-Boom" ... Yes for those fans of mine, I was going to put this into my stug argument ...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> This is what I was getting at. If crash-boom wasn't a specific design requirement (for example the screamers installed on Stukas) - as opposed to a happy coincidence - then I don't see how it could be germane to your argument. Regards Jon ------------------ Ubique Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanzfeld Posted April 18, 2000 Share Posted April 18, 2000 The speed of sound is dependant on temperature as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark IV Posted April 18, 2000 Share Posted April 18, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>The effect, of course, is range dependant<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Greater range would increase the perceived interval between the two "reports". Provided the passing round was still hypersonic, the downrange observer would hear the supersonic "crack" of the shell before the chemical "boom" of the initial explosion. With a muzzle velocity of 770m/sec (for AP, dunno about HE), it's safe to say an 88mm retains supersonic velocity well downrange. The interval must always increase until it ceases altogether. By definition, the supersonic "crack" of the passing round means it is going faster than sound, so the initial sound of the gun firing (being relatively constant) can never "catch up" to it until the round decelerates BELOW the speed of sound, at which point it stops generating the "crack". The sonic boom effect travels with the round and is continuous as long as it is supersonic, even though momentary to stationary observers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Username Posted April 18, 2000 Share Posted April 18, 2000 Mark IV I think you are getting a little bit astray but you are correct. Its the difference between the detonation of the exploding HE shell and the report of the weapon firing. Not the crack of being supersonic. Technically the projectile can be subsonic when it lands and still have this effect, as long as its average speed along the one axis of travel is greater than the speed of sound. But that really is a moot point. We both agree its range dependant. JonS If some thing comes about by serendipity then it can't be germane to an argument? uhhhh What? God invented lightening and there was a side result of thunder but noone can argue that lightening is loud? (Bastables thats a rhetorical/whimsical question meant to show the silliness of this subject matter, so please don't get tangential on it). Lewis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark IV Posted April 18, 2000 Share Posted April 18, 2000 (sigh) ...astray again. Weren't the cracking noises of the MG rounds above your head the result of supersonic air displacement? Thus, in the 88 example, it is not just crack-boom, but crack-boom-bang where "crack"=supersonic displacement effect of the passing round, "boom"=the gun or the impact, whichever is closer to the observer, and "bang"=the opposite of the "boom" (can't believe I'm posting this). Supersonic "crack" is pronounced. It's why you can't put "silencers" on most high-powered pistols and rifles, Hollywood notwithstanding, because the crack of the bullet generates a noise of its own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BillWood Posted April 19, 2000 Share Posted April 19, 2000 88s everywhere! Tigers everywhere! Hey guys, this is classic American management style. You want those resources, you make damn sure you report that you are getting the worse end of the deal and force the upper level management to send you the best and the most support they can. Better known as "The squeaky wheel gets the grease." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Username Posted April 19, 2000 Share Posted April 19, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mark IV: Weren't the cracking noises of the MG rounds above your head the result of supersonic air displacement? Lewis:Yes Thus, in the 88 example, it is not just crack-boom, but crack-boom-bang where "crack"=supersonic displacement effect of the passing round, "boom"=the gun or the impact, whichever is closer to the observer, and "bang"=the opposite of the "boom" (can't believe I'm posting this). Lewis: If it were a HE shell landing near me, me thinks i would sense the supersonic crack and HE explosion simultaneously. If if goes over my head, then i would look up cause it would sound like a huge bull whip snapping over my head. Its crash-boom. Not crack-boom. crash:HE explosion Boom:report from gun <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Lewis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark IV Posted April 19, 2000 Share Posted April 19, 2000 If I really wanted to pursue this, I would note that not all HE on the battlefield is aimed directly at one, though it may seem that way. So shells passing further to the rear, as many must, would first present the supersonic crack to the observer. Boom:report from gun you(supersonic crack!) crash:HE explosion If you're near the point of impact, then the crack and HE crash would be indistinct, just as to the gunner his boom! and the crack are indistinct. If you are in between there are 3 distinct sounds and the crack of the passing shell must be first; since you introduced the supersonic element to the discussion I thought I would help muddy the waters ...but it's really not worth pursuing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted April 19, 2000 Share Posted April 19, 2000 Uhh... you guys lost me somewhere after the crack... or was it the boom? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Username Posted April 19, 2000 Share Posted April 19, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Moon: Uhh... you guys lost me somewhere after the crack... or was it the boom?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Dont you watch Batman? Its POW! Crack!! OOOOOFFFF!!! Da-da-da-da-Dahhhh BATTTMANNNNNN!!!!!! Lewis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted April 19, 2000 Share Posted April 19, 2000 Batman eh? ZOIG!!! KAPOWZA!! SMASHUMS!!! Holy rusted metal Batman!!! I mean the metal. It's holey. ------------------ Visit my webpage! http://cm4mac.tripod.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Username Posted April 19, 2000 Share Posted April 19, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mark IV: ..introduced the supersonic element to the discussion I thought I would help muddy the waters ...but it's really not worth pursuing.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> LOL Agreed. I was going to go into how it could be used to good effect (anything can, weather, moonlight, smells..you name it) and also how it can work against you. But the Batman song is playing in my head real loud and I cant think strait. Can we agree to just stop and agree? Lewis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark IV Posted April 19, 2000 Share Posted April 19, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Can we agree to just stop and agree?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> A cease-fire request? Never! There'll be no auto-surrender in this little thread. There's too much love on this board, and I say it's crack-crash-boom (unless you're closer to the gun), and that's all there is to it. AGREE, or it's subsonic projectiles at dawn, and choose your second. MGHMOYS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Username Posted April 19, 2000 Share Posted April 19, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mark IV: A cease-fire request? Never! There'll be no auto-surrender in this little thread. There's too much love on this board, and I say it's crack-crash-boom (unless you're closer to the gun), and that's all there is to it. AGREE, or it's subsonic projectiles at dawn, and choose your second. MGHMOYS. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Looks likes its time to break out the dueling pistols... Can you FEEEL the Love? Lewis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts