Ferdinand Vulnerable Area

[lorrin]

Found an English translation of a Russian Kursk report on the following site:

http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/ferdinand/

Ferdinands fought with open circular hatch in rear superstructure?

[ September 19, 2004, 05:51 PM: Message edited by: lorrin ]

[Grumbling Grognard]

Not conclusive. From what I have read (years ago...) this "hatch" was for loading ammo. So, depending on the AFVs location it would either be "open" or not. Not sure what your point is though... GG

[JasonC]

Actually, the most interesting part of that report is the medium arty triangle. That means 3 towed 122mm howitzers. The "tag", flank shot part of the idea is self explanatory.

It confirms other reports I've seen about Kursk, that the Russians made good use of heavy artillery pieces for direct fire, as a means of dealing with the super heavies. 122mm howitzers, 122mm guns (much higher MV), 152mm gun-howitzers (much more common than the handful of SU-152s available) - all of them could hurt heavy German tanks, and were used to do so.

CM shows German 105mm howitzers on map and 150mm sIG, but no Russian 122s or 152s.

[lorrin]

Originally posted by Grumbling Grognard:

Not conclusive. From what I have read (years ago...) this "hatch" was for loading ammo. So, depending on the AFVs location it would either be "open" or not. Not sure what your point is though... GG

The report suggests that the Ferdinand went into combat with the circular hatch wide open, as does the drawing. This suggests a major vulnerability if Russian infantry got to close quarters.

[MeatEtr]

Originally posted by JasonC:

CM shows German 105mm howitzers on map and 150mm sIG, but no Russian 122s or 152s.

So why is that? Surely they used these guns for direct fire on a regular basis. But not so in CMBB.

[lorrin]

The Ferdinand article is also interesting due to the description of what appears to be SU 152's against Tigers and Ferdinands, where the SU 152's totally demolished the attacking Tigers.

The Lone Sentry index is at:

http://www.lonesentry.com/index.html

[K_Tiger]

A real good site. I learned something new like: " The antitank rifle modified into a grenade discharger."

Prior to the Russian campaign, the Germans had issued a company antitank weapon—the 7.9-mm antitank rifle. But after the Russian campaign had got under way, the Germans began to convert this weapon into a grenade launcher which could fire hollow-charge antitank grenades.

[JasonC]

"So why is that?"

German physics. All kinds of Russian equipment, organizations, doctrines, etc are short changed. Not just in CM, in wargames generally and in western military histories. Regular players of the Russian side in WW II wargames are quite used to it. Badge of honor really.

[Tero]

Originally posted by lorrin:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Grumbling Grognard:

Not conclusive. From what I have read (years ago...) this "hatch" was for loading ammo. So, depending on the AFVs location it would either be "open" or not. Not sure what your point is though... GG

The report suggests that the Ferdinand went into combat with the circular hatch wide open, as does the drawing. This suggests a major vulnerability if Russian infantry got to close quarters. </font>

[Jack Carr]

There were no vulnerable spots on the Ferdinand. The Fuhrer would have never allowed it!

I'm sure the Fuhrer directive stated something to the effect that the tank destroyer be invulnerable.

[Mr. Tittles]

The Ferdinand had weak top armor and was susceptible to top hits.

The driver/codriver were seperated from the rest of the crew by the engune compartment also. A intercomm failure meant no coordination amongst the crew.

[YankeeDog]

Originally posted by JasonC:

"So why is that?"

German physics. All kinds of Russian equipment, organizations, doctrines, etc are short changed. Not just in CM, in wargames generally and in western military histories. Regular players of the Russian side in WW II wargames are quite used to it. Badge of honor really.

Not disputing this. In addition, I think in the specific case of Russian 122mm & 152mm weapons on-map, a more direct cause is that BFC appears to have put a regimental-level cutoff for on-map howitzers and field guns. Guns present at the regimental level in the TOE are available on-map. Usually, artillery pieces organized at the divisional level or higher are not.

Obviously, AT Guns and AA Guns are a different story, since they tend to be organized in independent battalions under divisional or higher control, not as a part of the usual Plt-Bn-Reg/Bde-Div Chain.

The only execption to this that I know of this is the German 105mm, which AFAIK was generally a divisional-level asset. There might be others, though; I certainly don't know every single TOE employed by all the major combatants off the top of my head. . .

Certainly there is plenty of historical evidence that the Russians used their 122m and 152mm howitzers, and occasionally even guns, in direct fire, both against armor and also against softer targets. IMHO, they should have been included as an on-map purchase option.

Cheers,

YD

[wamphyri]

correct me if i'm wrong.. but I went through all the units in cmbb and it didn't show a ferdinand. Was it called the elephant in cmbb?? That's the one tank that looked like what is described here!

[MeatEtr]

Originally posted by YankeeDog:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by JasonC:

"So why is that?"

German physics. All kinds of Russian equipment, organizations, doctrines, etc are short changed. Not just in CM, in wargames generally and in western military histories. Regular players of the Russian side in WW II wargames are quite used to it. Badge of honor really.

Not disputing this. In addition, I think in the specific case of Russian 122mm & 152mm weapons on-map, a more direct cause is that BFC appears to have put a regimental-level cutoff for on-map howitzers and field guns. Guns present at the regimental level in the TOE are available on-map. Usually, artillery pieces organized at the divisional level or higher are not.

Obviously, AT Guns and AA Guns are a different story, since they tend to be organized in independent battalions under divisional or higher control, not as a part of the usual Plt-Bn-Reg/Bde-Div Chain.

The only execption to this that I know of this is the German 105mm, which AFAIK was generally a divisional-level asset. There might be others, though; I certainly don't know every single TOE employed by all the major combatants off the top of my head. . .

Certainly there is plenty of historical evidence that the Russians used their 122m and 152mm howitzers, and occasionally even guns, in direct fire, both against armor and also against softer targets. IMHO, they should have been included as an on-map purchase option.

Cheers,

YD </font>

[MeatEtr]

Thought this was interesting.

Many Ferdinands were destroyed either by their crews after being immobilized (by combat damage or mechanical problem) or by Soviet infantry and artillery as well as by SU-152 "Zwieroboj" heavy mechanised guns. It was recorded that some Ferdinand's crews (ex. Major Noak's crew) used to fire their 7.92mm MG34 machine guns through the barrel of main 88mm gun while others mounted their 7.92mm MG34 underneath the gun, in order to fire at the enemy infantry units.

Got this from the Achtung Panzer site.

[jwxspoon]

The original vehicle was the Ferdinand. It did not have an MG mounted.

After Kursk, the vehicles that had MG's mounted were renamed as Elefants, IIRC.

jw

[MikeyD]

Its unclear which 'open circular hatch' they're talking about. There's of course the big one (the drawing in the pamphlet is of a destroyed Ferdi with the big rear hatch blown clean off!), but in the center of that is the much smaller shell ejection/pistol port hole. Its more likely that an infantryman would find that little hatch left unlocked though it'd be a challenge to stuff a grenade through the hole - that hatch is well about head height!