How was the 128mm AT gun used historically??

[Little Pete]

now i know that these guns are generally very limited in use for CM games (lots of points and HUGE sound contact) and i've only really had any success on very specific maps (long range,open,no mortars).

I suppose they weren't too common historically either but i was wondering how they might have been used.Was it just a case of using them in very tough bunkers or were they used in the field.

Thanks guys

[Joachim]

Originally posted by Little Pete:

now i know that these guns are generally very limited in use for CM games (lots of points and HUGE sound contact) and i've only really had any success on very specific maps (long range,open,no mortars).

I suppose they weren't too common historically either but i was wondering how they might have been used.Was it just a case of using them in very tough bunkers or were they used in the field.

Thanks guys

I once saw a picture of an 88 in Italy on a hilltop. Long range to a valley entrance. Probably beyond retaliation range. Let loose a few shots, then run away. If this works vs the US with fast response arty, I guess it works even better vs the Soviets..

As the tanks are heavier, you need a bigger gun. Terrain where you can see for miles. Probably sited well behind the friendly lines. Maybe even out of light/medium mortar range. Prepared positions with lots of TRPs.

So exactly on those maps you mentioned. Imagine "CMBB: Hornissennest" with 2 trenches, 10 TRPs and 2 of these guns. Impose a limit on the range of 82mm FOs - they can only hit the eastern 1.5 km of the map. Allow for a German infantry outpost line 1 - 1.5 km ahead of the ATG to watch out for on board mortars.

Usual disclaimer: This is the ideal position. But no plan survives contact with reality. And if in need, it will be used like a normal ATG.

Gruß

Joachim

[Little Pete]

That makes sense.I suppose using these on the normal CM map size is a little out of sorts with the likely historical use (at least the rarity points make sense in this case).

[JasonC]

The Germans had a lot of 128mm guns, but they weren't PAK, they were FLAK. How'd they use those? They set them up around cities and fired up at airplanes. There were around 8 times as many of these as of the field cannon aka PAK, which was only out late in the war. Some sources say they were produced but never reached the front. Around 150 were built. They were meant to be useful for indirect fire with HE in addition to direct fire with AP, and that is probably what they were mostly used for, if they were used at all before the war ended.

[Warmaker]

The previous posters have got it but one thing to really remember is that this 128mm PaK has an atrocious traversing speed. It's even more imperative to engage targets at long range because of this. That and the gun's friggin' huge! It's like hiding an elephant in your bathtub.

[Sergei]

The problem with stuff that heavy is that while it is nice for long range sniping, once the battle actually begins they can't establish a visual connection to what is going on in the front, thanks to all the smoke and dust in a battlefield. A clever opponent would attack at night anyway. So the responsibility of defeating the tanks would quickly fall back to the close defence men and medium ATG's. If things really got nasty, the gun would have to be evacuated in good time before the enemy might plunge through to rear. Considering that the Pak40 is quite enough to repel all Allied tanks or in the special cases the 88mm Pak, I see no purpose to use the 128mm Pak.

If I were Germans, I would have taken that gun and put it into a turretless Königstiger chassis. Silly Germans.

[Joachim]

Originally posted by Sergei:

The problem with stuff that heavy is that while it is nice for long range sniping, once the battle actually begins they can't establish a visual connection to what is going on in the front, thanks to all the smoke and dust in a battlefield. A clever opponent would attack at night anyway. So the responsibility of defeating the tanks would quickly fall back to the close defence men and medium ATG's. If things really got nasty, the gun would have to be evacuated in good time before the enemy might plunge through to rear. Considering that the Pak40 is quite enough to repel all Allied tanks or in the special cases the 88mm Pak, I see no purpose to use the 128mm Pak.

If I were Germans, I would have taken that gun and put it into a turretless Königstiger chassis. Silly Germans.

Can't see the benefit. Evacuating that chassis is nearly impossible. Stupid Finns.

Yet Sergei shows the obvious use for this weapon: Soviets attack. Gun fires. Soviets postpone attack to night, reducing the effectiveness of tanks. A perfect weapon for delaying actions of otherwise ill-equipped infantry.

Gruß

Joachim

[Denwad]

Sergei, Joachim, it was already done

It's called the JagdTiger

[Grapeshot]

If I remember right, the 128 flaks were in the flak bunkers in Berlin. There were one on each corner of the bunker. There were also many 88s on the platform lower as well as numerous 40mm. The 128s were used in direct fire modes but I think they were directed at infantry concentrations in the battles outside of Berlin. When I get home I may check up on it in a few books.

[Sergei]

Originally posted by Denwad:

Sergei, Joachim, it was already done

It's called the JagdTiger

No ****.

[Joachim]

Originally posted by Sergei:

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

Sergei, Joachim, it was already done

It's called the JagdTiger

No ****. </font>

[JasonC]

As a pure PAK, this weapon made no sense. It also didn't make sense to put one on a Tiger chassis. The Jagdtigers were a failure. They maybe got half their own number, and some bunkers in Alsace. Turreted King Tigers were much more effective. 128mm or long 88mm, the target was just as hit and just as dead. But the 88L71 also had rate of fire.

The Germans made 3500 of the long 88s towed, and 900 of them in AFVs, as an entirely sensible result. The 128 was a "mine goes to 11" boondoogle as a pure PAK. There is a military use for higher caliber instead of just muzzle velocity, but it is delivering HE or duel purpose use as an indirect artillery piece, not antitank work.

[Abteilung]

The 128mm is useful when the 88mm is overmatched wrt the T/D ratio, especially against well sloped plates. IMO, it should only see great usefulness in late-war scenarios vs rare Soviet heavy armor (T-44, IS-x, etc). It's abysmal rof combined with a large silouhette, firing signature, and immobility in battle mandate use of trenches, light aa (37mm is best), and TRP's to make the most of its abilities. Versus Western armor, it almost garauntees 1 shot brew-ups. This may be usefull in an operation where the excellent logistical tail of the U.S. armored forces tends to efficiently recover vehicles which are not write-offs.

[Bone_Vulture]

Originally posted by Abteilung:

The 128mm is useful when the 88mm is overmatched wrt the T/D ratio, especially against well sloped plates. IMO, it should only see great usefulness in late-war scenarios vs rare Soviet heavy armor (T-44, IS-x, etc).

Apart from the IS-3, even the German 75/L46 Pak can demolish the IS series tanks from close ranges, and the heavier 88's can dispatch them at almost any range.

[Abteilung]

Originally posted by Bone_Vulture:

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

The 128mm is useful when the 88mm is overmatched wrt the T/D ratio, especially against well sloped plates. IMO, it should only see great usefulness in late-war scenarios vs rare Soviet heavy armor (T-44, IS-x, etc).

Apart from the IS-3, even the German 75/L46 Pak can demolish the IS series tanks from close ranges, and the heavier 88's can dispatch them at almost any range. </font>

[GoofyStance]

Originally posted by Grapeshot:

If I remember right, the 128 flaks were in the flak bunkers in Berlin. There were one on each corner of the bunker. There were also many 88s on the platform lower as well as numerous 40mm. The 128s were used in direct fire modes but I think they were directed at infantry concentrations in the battles outside of Berlin. When I get home I may check up on it in a few books.

Are you talking about the concrete flak towers that withstood many hits, both from aircraft and artillery? I believe one of them stood on the grounds of the Berlin Zoo. Ah, to have my books on hand ... I think it's mentioned in A. Beevor's "Fall of Berlin, 1945."

[Bone_Vulture]

Originally posted by GoofyStance:

Are you talking about the concrete flak towers that withstood many hits, both from aircraft and artillery? I believe one of them stood on the grounds of the Berlin Zoo. Ah, to have my books on hand ... I think it's mentioned in A. Beevor's "Fall of Berlin, 1945."

I've read that book... Weren't the few of the last remaining defenders of Berlin holed up in one of those towers?

[JasonC]

"the excellent logistical tail of the U.S. armored forces tends to efficiently recover vehicles"

Actually, this didn't much matter in the real deal. Yes the US was good at it. But the US had tanks coming out of its ears. Losses were very low, a handful of thousands in the whole course of the ETO campaign, vs. an order of magnitude more Shermans than that made.

The limit on Shermans in the field in the ETO was not recoveries, it was trained crews. There was no shortage of tanks; if they had a crew they could get a tank. Recent heavy action would drive a unit well below TOE, but any significant period off the line would allow a fresh tank for any crews available.

[Grapeshot]

Yea, I was talking about the flak towers. Here is a site with some good pictures of at least the Zoo tower

http://www.geocities.com/lupinpooter/berlin.htm

The four corners held 128mm flak guns that were used on ground targets approaching the city. These served as grouping points for the hitler youths and last defenders of the city. They did withstand alot of punishment but had to be destroyed after the war as be considered offensive weapons.

[Abteilung]

I was referring to ingame operations, Jason. There, the U.S. tends to recover its losses more efficiently if the recovery settings are left to default. Thanks for the info, tho!

=]

[pawter]

in/out of CM range & ideal conditions Otto said it all ...

[Captain_Thunder]

The 128mm AT was never developed beyond the prototype stage. According to the info I have it was never deployed in battle. It was built by Krupp, IIRC.

The peformance data on the Krupp PaK 44 is:

Model 44, 128mm, 22,500 operational weight (lbs), 6.20 shell weight (lbs), 3,200 muzzle velocity (feet per second), 230mm @ 1000m armor penetration.

For Comparison, the standard 88mm PaK 43 peformance data is:

Model 43, 88mm, 8,150 lbs, 16.0 lbs tungsten cored shell, 3,700 f.p.s MV, 274mm @ 500m

The war ended before the PaK 44 could go into production.