Black Sabot Posted March 9, 2000 Share Posted March 9, 2000 Greetings all, Don't worry i won't ask for MRLS in CM. I did a search on this topic and came across the post from Steve of BTS saying "NO!" for MRLS. Now with that out of the way, back about 10 years ago i read an obscure war novel called "A bridge too far" (maybe you heard of it). In it i read about the british airborne attack on Arnhem and remembered the germans using a MLRS to turn back the paras outside the city. Now please bear with me as i am going by memory and i could be way off on this. If my recollection is correct the main british force advanced towards the city center while Col. Frost's unit advanced along the river towards the bridge. I remembered a SS unit using a "new" weapon to stop the main force cold. I say "new" because the book mentioned that the weapon was untried in battle and the unit was untrained in using it. Has anyone have any info about this weapon? Something in the back of my mind tells me it was a rocket system. I don't think it was a Nebelwerfer since that system was already in use and the range of the engagement was too short for its use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Username Posted March 9, 2000 Share Posted March 9, 2000 I remember reading something like that also (and I read the book 30 years ago). I just thought it was a 251 1/2track with the 6 rockets on the side. I remember they used napalm type rockets also. Lewis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Posted March 9, 2000 Share Posted March 9, 2000 Ah, this topic again. We just had a big talk about this maybe two weeks ago. Search under "wurf" and that should get you some hits (I forget the correct spelling of the whole word for that type of weapon). Personally, I think they qualify as onboard weapons and when using a slope to compensate for their limited elevation aiming adjustment they could even be used on medium sized maps. It would be real nice if they could be included. If not in CM 1.0, then in the add-on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dschugaschwili Posted March 9, 2000 Share Posted March 9, 2000 Half-track with rockets on the side? Search for "Wurfrahmen", I think that's it. Dschugaschwili Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted March 9, 2000 Share Posted March 9, 2000 the weapon used there wasn't a wurf IIRC. The SS Commander continually refers to it as an "outsize mortar". I've had no luck in finding out exactly what weapons system it was though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ARCHANGEL Posted March 9, 2000 Share Posted March 9, 2000 Lads, I think you will find that the weapon in question was "Nebelwurfer". There used to be one at a store here in the DC area. IT is, in effect, a six barreled electically fired mortar. I don't recall the cal/mm. It was good sized tho. It is mounted on wheels and has six barrels about four feet long. It is loaded then fired from a distance by the crew. I recall that it had quite a backblast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshK Posted March 9, 2000 Share Posted March 9, 2000 I recall that Ryan stated that it was not a Nebelwurfer, but a new weapon. However, as no details were provided. However, I was under the impression from the book that it was supposed to be a more impressive system, either in shear bulk or perhaps in the rocket's diameter. All in all, somewhat of a mystery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ARCHANGEL Posted March 9, 2000 Share Posted March 9, 2000 Whoops! In my haste I missed the last sentence of Black Sabot's post. Well that saves me the time I was just about to spend driving over to where it used to be and asking about it. Meanwhile, I guess someone will have to re-read ABTF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted March 9, 2000 Share Posted March 9, 2000 AFAIK it was a single tube device. Definitely not a Nebelwerfer as the CO of the unit using it survived and denies it was a nebelwerfer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest R Cunningham Posted March 9, 2000 Share Posted March 9, 2000 I looked in my copy of ABTF. Major Sepp Kraft, commander of ths SS Grenadier Training and Reserve Battalion, quartered at Wolfheze when the paras landed had „rocket-propelled mortars.“ In the text it is not further explained what they are or even that they were the magic weapon that stopped the paras. Mortar implies a muzzle loading weapon. Rockets are usually breech-loaded. No idea what it could be other than a Nebelwerfer. There is a reference to „The screeching mortars, exploding in air bursts above their heads, hurled deadly fragments in every direction.“ Mortars don’t screech and Nebelwerfer rockets aren't big fragment producers. There were mortar weapons that were called Nebelwerfer like the 10cm Nebelwerfer 35 that was designed to use smoke and gas rounds and were later used with HE as well. Maybe it was something like that: looks like a mortar but called a nebelwerfer so Cornelius Ryan chooses to call it a rocket-propelled mortar? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Babra Posted March 9, 2000 Share Posted March 9, 2000 Maybe the 30cm Wurfkorper 42? I have no clue what units received that toy. Looks a lot like a Nebelwurfer but BIG. ------------------ It's "BAB-ra!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ARCHANGEL Posted March 10, 2000 Share Posted March 10, 2000 Regarding a track with attacked rockets...I vaugely recall a Tamiya model in 1/32 back in the mid-seventies that fit that description. I haven't the slightest idea what it was other than a 251 with three rocket-type or rocket-looking things on each side. Does anyone have a reference book on German ord ??? How about variations of the 251 ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Sabot Posted March 10, 2000 Author Share Posted March 10, 2000 Thanx to all for the info. I wasn't surprised that i was off on some facts. Too bad that Ryan did not elaborate on the weapon. Anyways, now that i have your attention i would like to float a "What if" question to you. What if the British made it into the city. Could 9,000 British paras hold off 2 SS panzer divisions in the rubble and streets of Arnhem? Would they have been able to capture and hold both sides of the bridge? Don't forget about the Polish reinforcements. Let me know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ARCHANGEL Posted March 10, 2000 Share Posted March 10, 2000 OH boy! This is a tough one. As part of a "battle study" I went over most of the AO where the entire Market-Garden operation took place, (even jumped there) part of it with US vets in the AO in which they actually fought. Later I met two British vets who had been in and around Arnhem during the fight. As a vet myself, I remember thinking to myself that I was glad as hell I wasn't having to fight over that ground. Personally, I think the British COULD have held the area long enough for the tanks to arrive IF the tradegy of errors and bad luck hadn't happened early on...i.e., the DZ being too far away, the motorized recon elements not reaching the bridge, bad commo, the fight for the DZ's, the fog keeping the Polish ABN Bde. out of the fight for a few crucial days...the slowness of the advace over the 101/82d bridges...etc., etc., etc. Fighting an enemy is one thing, fighting terrain and Mother Nature is a big complicating factor. Although the risk/reward factor was deemed appropriate by Ike et al, it looked like SUCH a longshot to me...although I wasn't born until five years after the fight... So, I would say YES !!! They could have done if one or two lesser things had gone the Allies way...(My .25 cents worth. ) (Archangel dons his nomax fire-retardent suit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stoffel Posted March 11, 2000 Share Posted March 11, 2000 I think Archangel is right. It had to be the Wurfkorper Spreng. This rocket knew two versions a high explosive round and an incendiary round. It appeared in 1944 and was an improvement over the original Nebelwerfer munitions. It was a 30cm round and it could be fired by the nebelwerfer or racks that could be hung over a sdkfz251 apc.Anyway it had a greater range (4,5km) but a limited shrapnel effect because its main effort was blast. ------------------ h.s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gen. Sosaboski Posted March 12, 2000 Share Posted March 12, 2000 In reply to Archangel: Same view here! Damn fog! ------------------ Sosabowski, 1st Pol. Abn. Yes, I know my name is spelled wrong as a member! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ol' Blood & Guts Posted March 12, 2000 Share Posted March 12, 2000 I have the "Encyclopedia of German Tanks of World War Two" (late 1999 Edition) by Peter Chamberlain, its got EVERYTHING you ever wanted to know about EVERY German AFV used from 1933-1945. I bought it from Amazon.com for only $20-US. I have looked up both the Munitionskraftwagen fur Nebelwerfer (Sd Kfz 4) and the Sd Kfz 251/1 mittlere Schutzenpanzerwagen (Wurfrahmen 40). I'll paraphrase eaches text here: The Nebelwerfer was simply a MRLS mounted on a Opel Maultier vehicle. The Maultier vehicle gave the system mobility and protection, because when the Nebelwerfer was fired, it left conspicuous smoke trails. One version was the ten-barrelled 15cm Nebelwerfer 42, another was a 24-railed 8cm R-Vielfachwerfer (MRLS) of the Waffen-SS, and yet another was a 15cm Panzerwerfer 42. The Wurfrahmen 40 was obviously a variation of the venerable Sd Kfz 251 halftrack. The Wurfrahmen carried two MG34s or 42s with 6-Wurfrahmen 40s (Wurfrahmen meaning "rocket-launcher frame") including five 28cm Sprengranate (HE round) and one 32cm Flammgranate (incendiary round). The driver could traverse the vehicle to elevations of +5 degrees to +40 degrees for firing. Firing took 10 seconds and gave the 3rd Panzerpionier Zug heavy bombardment capability up to 1.9km for Sprengranate and 2.2km for Flammgranate. The firing "racks" were nothing more than hollow frameworks that would hold the rockets alongside the Sd Kfz 251/1 halftrack. While the Nebelwerfer was actually a rotatable tube/rack turret mounted on a Maultier armoured vehicle which was actually the ammuntion carrier for the MLRS. ------------------------------ So as for which one of these is the one in question in the "Bridge Too Far" book, then your guess is good as mine, but the production dates tend to lean more towards the Wurfrahmen (Sept. '43 to March '45) than the Nebelwerfer (April '43 to March '44). Hope this information helps. ------------------ "Cry Woe...Destruction...Ruin and Decay. The worst is Death...and Death will have His day."--Gen. Chang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted March 12, 2000 Share Posted March 12, 2000 Nah OB&G. Kraft leads one to believe the weapons system is NOT vehicular thus I think it was some sort of man-portable or towed rocket-assisted mortar projectile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Sabot Posted March 12, 2000 Author Share Posted March 12, 2000 Greetings, There may be a way we could find out what weapon system that was, although i must admit this idea is a little off the wall. Does anyone have or can get access to the OOB of the SS units involved at Arnhem during the battle? I Understood the 2 SS pz div were in refit at the time of MarketGarden. Given the German's reputation of meticulous record keeping any "new" weapon would show up. I know that AFV were Documented, were infantry support weapons? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted March 12, 2000 Share Posted March 12, 2000 Well the rocket-mortars weren't part of the 2SS Pz divisions. They were part of an independent SS unit. FWIW they are listed by the unit commander as being 150mm mortars.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JonS Posted March 13, 2000 Share Posted March 13, 2000 The wurframehen racks that were strapped to the side of the 251 in were the racks they were delivered in. These same racks could also be uded to fire the thing free-standing on the ground, forming a rudimentary rocket-mortar. The racks came with two legs which could be folded down to set the elevation, and simple pointing would give the bearing. Accuracy would be abysmal, especially since I don't think the racks could be re-loaded in the field, so each shot was essentially a new guess at the bearing and elevation. However, the large blast radius would have mitigated this to some extent. I don't know if this is the answer to the mystery weapon, but it seems reasonable to me. Regards Jon ------------------ Ubique Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts