Juju Posted August 17, 2002 Share Posted August 17, 2002 Got a rather strange question here. Yesterday I was leafing through one of my WWII books. For some reason it contains an extraordinary number of pictures of dead German tanks. After seeing all these Ko'd tanks I noticed that in many, if not most of these pictures the gun barrels were hanging down at an 'unnatural' angle, just like the Ko'd tanks in CM. I was wondering; why is that? Anybody? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pvt. Ryan Posted August 17, 2002 Share Posted August 17, 2002 They are very sad. Also, that was in the days before Viagra. I'm pretty sure droopy barrels will not be much of a problem in CMBB with the Death Clock and all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juju Posted August 17, 2002 Author Share Posted August 17, 2002 Ryan, not exaactly what I had in mind, but LOL, nevertheless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jwirry Posted August 17, 2002 Share Posted August 17, 2002 Juju, Not sure, but if guns were stabilized in WWII like today it would have been with hydraulics. Thus when the tank brewed up or was Ko'd, the hydraulic fluid would leak from the system. Probably didn't happen with every tank, but there is a good posibility that internal shrapnel would hit a line. Thus the infamous droopy tube. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speedbump Posted August 17, 2002 Share Posted August 17, 2002 Droopy Barrel? Sounds like a personal problem to me...you do know that there is such a thing as too much information? Speedbump Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juju Posted August 17, 2002 Author Share Posted August 17, 2002 Originally posted by Speedbump: you do know that there is such a thing as too much information? SpeedbumpI just know I'm missing something here. :confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lcm1947 Posted August 17, 2002 Share Posted August 17, 2002 Boy it's getting so that a guy can't ask a simple question without a bunch of yahoo's goofing around. I myself know what you mean Juju. I have noticed it myself over the years when seeing knocked out tanks but never really thought about it until you mentioned it. I suppose it has to do with the hydraulic's but really don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruno Weiss Posted August 17, 2002 Share Posted August 17, 2002 Well if you was knocked out, yer barrel would droop too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimthane Posted August 17, 2002 Share Posted August 17, 2002 Just a guess, but wouldn't it be SOP to disable tanks when abandoning? Even if the shrapnel didn't cut a hydraulic line, the crew could certainly do it themselves and that would seem a more plausible explanation of why the droop is so common. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Young Posted August 17, 2002 Share Posted August 17, 2002 It was common practice for German tankers to do something to give a signal to tank recovery crews as to whether the tank was salvageable or not. If the tank crew had time they would elevate the gun before they abandoned it to signal a salvageable tank. If the tank had a significant damage, and the crew had time they would lower the barrel to signify that the tank was beyond repair. I got that out of a US Army publication on German Tank Recovery tactics in World War II. E Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grey Hunter Posted August 17, 2002 Share Posted August 17, 2002 what did they do if they were unsure? leave it on the level? (Retorical Q everone) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruno Weiss Posted August 17, 2002 Share Posted August 17, 2002 Grimthane wrote: Just a guess, but wouldn't it be SOP to disable tanks when abandoning? A snippet from: "Another Day In Normandy" Sarge! We been hit, the left track is out, the driver is dead, what-a-we do... Easy lad, we have to disable the tank before we abandon it. Here, now stick this wad of dynamite in the breech and light the fuze. Say what! Are you nuts... You light the damn fuze, you got the cigar, I'm getting the $%#& outta here. Steady now Corporal, you know the orders son. We must DROOP the barrel before we leave. DROOP the barrel!?! My barrels already drooping like yers is gonna be if you don't get the hell outta that hatch! (Sergeant Snortt and Corporal Smith were later charged with, and demoted for; Failure to Droop the Barrel in the face of the Enemy.) --------------------- Somehow, at least to my thinking, there is a slight difference in what the planners safely back at their Quartermaster desks in the Pentagon might write in theory should take place, and what actually then takes place in practice on the battlefield. [ August 17, 2002, 09:32 AM: Message edited by: Bruno Weiss ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted August 17, 2002 Share Posted August 17, 2002 Originally posted by Eric Young: It was common practice for German tankers to do something to give a signal to tank recovery crews as to whether the tank was salvageable or not. If the tank crew had time they would elevate the gun before they abandoned it to signal a salvageable tank. If the tank had a significant damage, and the crew had time they would lower the barrel to signify that the tank was beyond repair. I got that out of a US Army publication on German Tank Recovery tactics in World War II. EThe best answer so far, thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted August 17, 2002 Share Posted August 17, 2002 Originally posted by Jwirry: Not sure, but if guns were stabilized in WWII like today it would have been with hydraulics.I don't think that's likely. Hydraulics may have driven the turrets on later tanks, but I think that elevation was always via a worm and sector gear arrangement or something similar. Re the original question, we are all assuming, I think, that by "droop" you mean that the barrel is pointing downward, not that it is bent, right? Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auggy Posted August 17, 2002 Share Posted August 17, 2002 King tigers had Hydraulics. Weren't they used to make the turret move faster? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juju Posted August 17, 2002 Author Share Posted August 17, 2002 Originally posted by Michael emrys: Re the original question, we are all assuming, I think, that by "droop" you mean that the barrel is pointing downward, not that it is bent, right? Yup. Um, Michael, have you ever seen a tank with a bent barrel? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted August 17, 2002 Share Posted August 17, 2002 Originally posted by Juju: Um, Michael, have you ever seen a tank with a bent barrel?Yes, as a matter of fact. Otherwise I wouldn't have asked. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juju Posted August 17, 2002 Author Share Posted August 17, 2002 Interesting. Could you post a picture (that is, if you have one), I'd like to see that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted August 17, 2002 Share Posted August 17, 2002 I'd love to, but (A) I don't have a scanner; and ( it would take me at a minimum of tens of hours to go through my books to try to find any, assuming I still have those pics. (I've got a lot of books. Magazines too.) BTW, in addition to bent barrels, I've also seen quite a few that were peeled back from the muzzle like a banana peel. Most often that's due to someone putting a couple blocks of TNT down the barrel, I suspect. I'm not so sure about the origin of the bent barrels, but I'd guess that the tanks burned and the heat distorted them. Or some combination of heat and blast. Michael [ August 17, 2002, 12:43 PM: Message edited by: Michael emrys ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Young Posted August 17, 2002 Share Posted August 17, 2002 Originally posted by Grimthane: [QB]Just a guess, but wouldn't it be SOP to disable tanks when abandoning? Not in the German Army at least early in the war. The German developed a system of tank recovery that was SOP to recover a disabled tank within 24 hours of its loss in the field. This system was adopted in 1941 and was quite effective until around 1944 when the system started breaking down. E [ August 17, 2002, 01:27 PM: Message edited by: Eric Young ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted August 18, 2002 Share Posted August 18, 2002 To state what is perhaps obvious to all, recovery of tanks depends on control of the battlefield. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that once the Germans began to spend a lot of time retreating that their ability to recover damaged vehicles took a hit. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted August 18, 2002 Share Posted August 18, 2002 Double post. [ August 17, 2002, 11:31 PM: Message edited by: Michael emrys ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted August 18, 2002 Share Posted August 18, 2002 But to return to the question that began this thread, I keep having the nagging hunch that the depressed muzzles of abandoned tanks might have something to do with wanting to have the breaches elevated, but I can't recall for the life of me why. If the crew were escaping through a hatch in the floor, the extra clearance might be desireable, but I don't think that's how German tanks were arranged. Or if they were trying to evacuate wounded mates, that might also enter in. But none of these answers really satisfy me. :confused: Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts