The tasks of a T-34 crew

[Mr. Tittles]

This about the StuG radios..

Picture 4:

A closer view of the FuG15 on the left side of the hull near the commander's position provides some detail about the radio equipment. The receiver operated in the 23000 to 24950 frequency range and was a handy addition to the other identical receiver in the FuG16 set on the far side of the vehicle. Having two receivers allowed the crew to listen in to two different frequencies at the same time, for instance both their unit commander as well as the battalion command. Notice the headphones hooked in the rear corner next to the rear firewall and the rubber speaking tube funnel for directly communication with the driver located right next to the headset. Also clearly visible here is the commander's scissors periscope SF14Z mentioned in the last picture. The periscope and swivel mount have been folded head down in their stowed position, but you can still see the unique clamp that held the periscope to the support rod as well as the binocular eye pieces.

The StuG crews also had radio communication capability with arty units (reflecting the fact that they themselves were artillerymen).

[ December 26, 2003, 12:41 PM: Message edited by: Mr. Tittles ]

[stikkypixie]

One reason that Western tanks have stuck to the 4 man crew is that the Russian auto-loaders ahve a tendancy to try to load the gunner. Ouch!

Doesn't that new French tanks has a three man crew? They probably fixed that problem.

[Mr. Tittles]

The Stug 4 man crew was much more efficient than the T34/76 4 man crew. The SP fixed gun design was a limitation but a good crew could make up for it in team work.

T34/76 had both a commander/gunner design and a commander/loader design (I believe). The commander loader would probably be better. He could detect targets and then load the appropriate ammo while ordering the driver and gunner about targets.

[Bastables]

Originally posted by Mr. Tittles:

This about the StuG radios..

Picture 4:

A closer view of the FuG15 on the left side of the hull near the commander's position provides some detail about the radio equipment. The receiver operated in the 23000 to 24950 frequency range and was a handy addition to the other identical receiver in the FuG16 set on the far side of the vehicle. Having two receivers allowed the crew to listen in to two different frequencies at the same time, for instance both their unit commander as well as the battalion command. Notice the headphones hooked in the rear corner next to the rear firewall and the rubber speaking tube funnel for directly communication with the driver located right next to the headset. Also clearly visible here is the commander's scissors periscope SF14Z mentioned in the last picture. The periscope and swivel mount have been folded head down in their stowed position, but you can still see the unique clamp that held the periscope to the support rod as well as the binocular eye pieces.

The StuG crews also had radio communication capability with arty units (reflecting the fact that they themselves were artillerymen).

Could you please explain how this is a "better" radio/setup than the FuG5 one transmitter and two receiver setup of the PIII, IV, V and VI?

Since the only difference I see is that the FuG5 setup operates at 27,200 to 33,300-frequency band and the FuG16/15 combo operates at the 23,000 24,950-frequency bands. These perhaps the bands reserved for the different "Corps"

Besides the freq.’s they all operate at 10w power with 2 metre aerials and with the same 4km receive to 2km transmit range. I don't see how one could be judged a more modern or better radio than the other.

[ December 26, 2003, 04:12 PM: Message edited by: Bastables ]

[JonS]

Stop harrassing the tit, and send me my turns.

BTW, did you recieve that scan I sent you?

[Mr. Tittles]

Picture 2:

This is the most common panzer radio set in use by mid-war, the Fu.5. The receiver, Ukw.E.e., is on the left and the transmitter, 10 W.S.c., is on the right, with the power transformers (sometimes called "dynamotors") for each component sitting on top of the cases. The transformers were necessary to convert the vehicle battery voltage to that necessary for the radios. Notice how cables connect the receiver and transmitter together, running from the right side of the receiver to the left side of the transmitter. Typically, if the radio set was mounted on a single shelf and the two cases placed side by side like this, the receiver was placed on the left and the transmitter on the right. As I mentioned earlier, there was a power transformer required for each radio receiver or transmitter, and these transformers were typically mounted below or to the side of the cases, but always very close by. Also in this image you can see on the right, sitting on the table, a black teletype (Morse) key, while in the center on the table is a voice microphone, and on the far left a set of headphones. Each of these transmitters/receivers weighed only around 20lbs, which was a very reasonable weight for a radio at this time.

Did the FU5 have multiple recievers?

[Mr. Tittles]

Picture 3:

Here's the 30 W.S.a. transmitter found in a Fu.8 set, these sets typically mounted in Sturmartillerie vehicles (StuG assault guns, for instance). If you were examining a StuG III with a Fu.8 set, you would expect to find one of these transmitter boxes sitting next to a Mw.E.c. receiver, the second part of the Fu.8 set. The 30 W.S.a. transmitter was also used in commander's tanks and SP antitank gun vehicles, particularly in signal troop units that were required to stay in communication with their infantry assets. Like the Fu.5 sets, the Fu.8 set was capable of transmitting both "Telegraphie" (telegraph key, also known as CW or Morse Code) and "Telefonie" (voice) amplitude-modulated (AM) signals. If these vehicles were stationary and were equipped with a frame roof aerial, the 30 W.S.a. transmitter had a voice range of over 15km. This could be doubled with the use of a big 9-meter winch mast with star aerial on top. The 30 W.S.a. transmitter had 6 tubes inside and was rugged and extremely well constructed.

[Mr. Tittles]

Picture 7:

Here is the radio setup for a platoon or company commander in a Panther A. Look familiar? There is the now familiar Fu.5 set on the bottom shelf, with an additional Ukw.E.e. receiver sitting up on the top, just like we saw in the previous illustration of the Tiger I setup, but with top and bottom shelves reversed. In this illustration the interconnecting wiring between the component boxes has been removed, providing us with a much cleaner looking installation than would normally be the case during actual operation. Most combat tank platoon and company commanders would have a setup in their vehicles like this, regardless of which vehicle it was mounted inside (tank, halftrack, truck, etc.). The Morse key and other accessories would be carried on the empty self up on the right, or in a storage box, and in this same area you can barely make out the lead and connection for the antenna mounted on the roof. This is also a nice photo reference for the hull machine gun ball mount in the Panther A, along with its monocular sight and head pad.

Here it appears that twin recievers were in platoon/coy commander panzers only. They are also next to each other. In other words, the radio operator would have to operate each one himself. The StuG had one reciever by the vehicle commander.

[Bastables]

Originally posted by Mr. Tittles:

Did the FU5 have multiple recievers?

The Pantherfibel (Panther field manual) says it did.

The running Panther A at Saumur France though has two transmitters and one reciver in it's three radio mountings.

[Mr. Tittles]

COMMON RADIO SETS USED IN GERMAN WWII AFVs

Vehicle Radio Set

Unit commander's tank Fu.5 and Fu.8, or Fu.5 and Fu.7

Squad leader and typical tank Fu.5 and Fu.2, or Fu.5 only

Subordinate armor vehicles Fu.2 (receiver only)

Assault guns, armor formations Fu.5 and Fu.4, or Fu.8 and Fu.4 and Fu.Spr.f.

Assault guns artillery Fu.8 and Fu.16 and Fu.15, or Fu.16 and Fu.15, or Fu.16 only

Armored OP artillery vehicles Fu.8 and Fu.4, or Fu.8 and Fu.4 and Fu.Spr.f.

SP antitank guns (light and med) Fu.5 and Fu.8, or Fu.5 only

SP antitank guns (heavy chassis) Fu.5 and Fu.8, or Fu.5 and Fu.7, or Fu.5 and Fu.2

Antitank assault guns Fu.5 and Fu.8, or Fu.5 only

Lynx (recon) Fu.12 and Fu.Spr.f or Fu.Spr.f. only

Antiaircraft tanks (Flakpanzer) Fu.5 or Fu.2

SP heavy infantry gun Fu.16

Wasp and Bumble Bee and Marder Fu.Spr.f.

Armored cars (except 8 wheeled vehicles) and semi-tracked vehicles with armament Fu.Spr.f.

Armored cars Fu.12 and Fu.Spr.f.

8 wheeled armored cars Fu.12 and Fu.Spr.f. or Fu.Spr.f. only

An interesting thing is that Sturmartillerie StuGs used better radios than assault guns used in panzer divisions.

[Bastables]

Originally posted by JonS:

Stop harrassing the tit, and send me my turns.

BTW, did you recieve that scan I sent you?

I can send you the cmbb turns; but in a fit of mania I deleted the CMAK demo when I got the full game. Apparently the CMAK demo and the full game are different versions making the pbem turns incompatible....

[Mr. Tittles]

http://afvinteriors.hobbyvista.com/rads/germrads.html

According to this site, only platoon/company commanders had the extra recievers.

[Mr. Tittles]

Originally posted by Bastables:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Mr. Tittles:

Did the FU5 have multiple recievers?

The Pantherfibel (Panther field manual) says it did.

The running Panther A at Saumur France though has two transmitters and one reciver in it's three radio mountings. </font>

[Bastables]

Originally posted by Mr. Tittles:

[4

4

Here it appears that twin recievers were in platoon/coy commander panzers only. They are also next to each other. In other words, the radio operator would have to operate each one himself. The StuG had one reciever by the vehicle commander.

That's a pretty unusual Befehls-Panther (command/coy/battalion) since the ones manufactured for the purpose mounted an additional FuG8 30watt .83 to 3MHZ or a FuG7 20watt 42.1 to 47.8mhz. The space required for the extra radios and auxiliary generator sets reduced ammo stowage to 64.

Again I ask what makes the FuG16/15 better than the FuG5.

[Mr. Tittles]

It isn't a Befehls-Panther. Not sure why you think it is?

I again repeat, the typical panzer had one reciever. The typical StuG had two.

The panzers had two recievers for platoon commanders. I think the website makes that clear. Panzers may also have had one of the two tanks in the company command two panzer section ALSO having two recievers, the other tank in the two tank company HQ section being a Befehls-Panzer having whatever they had (Perhaps you should read that website?).

[ December 26, 2003, 05:04 PM: Message edited by: Mr. Tittles ]

[Bastables]

Originally posted by Mr. Tittles:

It isn't a Befehls-Panther. Not sure why you think it is?

I again repeat, the typical panzer had one reciever. The typical StuG had two.

The panzers had two recievers for platoon commanders. I think the website makes that clear. Panzers may also have had one of the two tanks in the company command two panzer section ALSO having two recievers, the other tank in the two tank company HQ section being a Befehls-Panzer having whatever they had (Perhaps you should read that website?).

Really? But the Panther field manuals state that the normal Panther had two FuG5 recivers and one FuG5 transmitter.

The "platoon, coy, battalion command" or Panzers attached for use in such positions had a combination of FuG2 and FuG5 radios. So your website seems to protrey a normal radio equiped Panzer that for some reason was used as a command tank sans the FuG2 set.

Although all very intresting how does any of this make the FuG16/15 better radios than the FuG5. Or why as you assert the FuG16/15 were the best or most modern sets in the German army.

Again the only difference between the FuG15/16 and the FuG5 is the freq.’s that they operated at. The Power, ranges and ariels being identical.

As a Ex Royal NZ Signalman I'm very intrested in how you can assert with such similar capabilities one radio is "better" or more "modern" than the other.

[ December 26, 2003, 05:59 PM: Message edited by: Bastables ]

[Mr. Tittles]

Fu.5 10 watt trans. (10 W.S.c.) and Ultra short wave receiver "e" (UKw.E.e) 2 meter rod standard squad leader's tank radio set

An Fu5 is a radio set. It consists of a transmitter and a reciever. all the other cables and stuff too.

[Bastables]

Originally posted by Mr. Tittles:

Fu.5 10 watt trans. (10 W.S.c.) and Ultra short wave receiver "e" (UKw.E.e) 2 meter rod standard squad leader's tank radio set

An Fu5 is a radio set. It consists of a transmitter and a reciever. all the other cables and stuff too.

Again you've missed the question I've been asking with all these digressions.

[Mr. Tittles]

Never said it was more modern. Said it was better.

Dont need to play me your resume.

[Bastables]

Originally posted by Mr. Tittles:

Never said it was more modern. Said it was better.

Dont need to play me your resume.

Again could please explain why it was better.

Because looking at their capabilites they seem pretty much identical

[Redwolf]

Originally posted by Vokes:

And on the theme of crew sizes, most Western armies have standardized on the 4 man crew, and have pooh-poohed the 3 man crew, mainly because there is one less man to do maintenance. But the latest trend towards lighter weapons platforms like the Stryker have gone to auto loaders and smaller crews...so the debate continues...ok...etiquette question...are we supposed to confine ourselves to WW2 stuff?

The biggest disadvantage of the Russian/Chinese autoloaders is the very low rate of fire. It is actually very difficult to build a machine that loads as fast as a trained human if the thing to load is light enough to be handled without exhaustion.

To make things worse, the gun has to be evelavted to the top during reloading, making it obvious to the enemy that you are unable to fire. Question to those in the know: does the coax MG go up as well? Could the MG fire on a ground target while the main gun is elevated for reloading?

The crew injury issue in the Russian tanks seems to be overplayed, to be more a result of the absolute desire to keep the tank small. if it wasn't the autoloader, then the recoiling gun would hurt the crew in these conditions.

These tanks also have seperate ammo, projectile and charge are stored seperately. This, again, seems to be done to keep the tank smaller, with seperate ammo you don't have to dedicate the charges to AP/SABOT, HE or HEAT right away.

The new western autoloader design in the Stryker mobile gun system seems to be interesting but I couldn't track down any information on it yet, in particular I don't know the rate of fire. But these systems are not meant to fight tanks, they fight hard fixed targets. Also, they appaear not to be deployed to Iraq with the Stryker brigade and people are still fiddling to fit it into the C-130, so reports from actual use will have to wait.

[Bastables]

Originally posted by Mr. Tittles:

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

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Mr. Tittles:

Did the FU5 have multiple recievers?

The Pantherfibel (Panther field manual) says it did.

The running Panther A at Saumur France though has two transmitters and one reciver in it's three radio mountings. </font>

[Mr. Tittles]

Subordinate armor vehicles Fu.2 (receiver only)

[Bastables]

Originally posted by Mr. Tittles:

Subordinate armor vehicles Fu.2 (receiver only)

So you prefer to dispute Jentz and field manuals as opposed to ans my question.

[Bastables]

Originally posted by Mr. Tittles:

Never said it was more modern. Said it was better.

Dont need to play me your resume.

You said it was "advanced" That tends to mean modern and better, for example: 'The F-15 is a more advanced fighter than the Spad biplane.'

Modernisation as a progressive force.