Can someone help me figure out a good angle (in degres if known) for an 88 off a nashorn that would be firing at targets across a river perhaps almost a mile away, perhaps a artillery expert of sorts? Would the gun even be angled more than “normal”?
It would probably be slightly elevated. I’m not sure of the range of an 88, but I think the shell (HE at least) had a pretty flat trajectory, so you’d need some elevation to get it out to a mile. Probably not too much, though.
Hmmm… as I think about this, I am quibbling a little with my own answer - if it is mounted an a vehicle, it is already elevated. I also don’t thing a mile is extreme range for the 88, so it actually may be pretty flat… So, yeah… slightly elevated would be good…
Sorry for being no help at all…[:I] Let me do a little research and see what I can find for you.
I don’t know the exact firing tables for an 88, but I think it would actually be a high angle shot. 1 mile is actually a pretty short range. The shorter the distance, the higher the barrel has to be to get it in close. Over about 60% in elevation, and the round actually starts coming back toward the gun, this is called high angle fire.
From what I can tell, the Nashorn could reach out and touch targets up to, and perhaps beyond, 2000 meters. I’ve also read that it could utilize indirect fire for artillery support at a range of around 11,000 yds, which would require the gun be at a greater angle. So perhaps it depends on what type of target you’re looking to shoot at. I would think against a tank, the barrel would be at only a slightly elevated position, even at roughly a mile away (could be wrong) But for an artillery support mission, the barrel would be even more elevated, perhaps to its max which was I believe 15 or so degrees.
I’m no expert here so any one correct me if I’m wrong. Just relaying what I can remember from various texts.
Jon
Thanks for the help. I’m planning on depicting it in an artillery support roll, if that’ll help out some more. So 15%, at the max then? (I’ll look for something to check on that if I can find some specs or something) Thanks again
I know this is not a definitive answer to your question, but I am going to agree with Boyd on this one. Being primarily designed as AAA, it was put to use for anti-tank ops due to it flat trajectory that could destroy targets at some distances. What those distances are I do not know, but as stated 1 mile is not very far when the thing could shout 5 miles straight up. What made it useful in the anti-tank role was because the gun could actually be to level. Past level actually.
The Nashorn used the PAK/KwK 43, not the Flak/KwK 36. This gun was designed for direct AT fire, unlike the FLAK/KwK 36 which was originailly desinged as AAA. I am no arty guy, but I would imagine due to the flat trajectory it was designed for it would be fairly close to level at a target within half its’ effective range.
Good thing this is still a fairly early WIP, otherwise this thing could of been glued in at a crazy angle! [:-^]t
Looks like it’s mostly flat/ fairly flat, so that seems good to me! Again, soon as my cameras chargeed I’ll post a new WIP thread.
Speaking of Nashorns take a look at this baby firing in between these buildings, can anyone tell my why the wheel changed racks? [%-)]
Great pics. Where’d ya get 'em.
I think the ‘wheel changed’ because they are different vehicles - in the first pic, there is no balkencruz on the hull, in the second there is…
No I think they are the same vehicle. But the photos were taken at different times. In the top photos the cross is still there under mud, in the lower one, it is very visible. The two buildings look the same. Also the shadows seem to depict different lighting conditions… cloudy vs bright sunlight…
I don’t remember where I found these pics. Stumbled around them in my Nashorn reference folder when I took the kit out. They’re probably on google images, somewhere…
I guess that would make sense LOL! Looks kinda fuzzy though, I couldn’t make out weather it was on there or not.
His buddy wanted to get some rounds in too, told him to: “move out the way!” [:D]
That was my first guess. These’ll get the same difference in answers as my original question!
And I betcha the targets they are engaging are at least a mile out… and look at that elevation!
Nah, sorry, I’m not buying it. If you blow the two pics up, you can even see differences in the camo pattern. It is absolutely the same two buildings. Maybe lead fired and moved on (perhaps they are in the attack) and dash-2 moved up for overwatch… I do see the cross on lead though - under the grime…
In the long run, it doesn’t really matter…
Makes sense to me, for both of your posts. Point taken on the angle of the guns. [:)]
You beat me to it Boyd… same building… differnt camo.
My quote from my fine brother is correct for a howitzer. The 88 was a gun with a flat trajectory and for a 1 mile shot IMHO would most likely use low angle fire. (Meet you in the powder pit Gino [(-D])
If you know the maximum range of the 88 and calculated what percentage the 1 mile is of that range then multipled it time about 50 you would get a close approximation in degrees
Otherwise use about 15 to 20 degrees…who is going to know!!
Rounds Complete!!
As I said, I don’t know much about the Ger. 88. Thats why I stick to US pieces.
Me too! Just guess my age I can stumble through an 88.
OK…you and I both need a good bottle of NATO Green with an OD chaser!! I’m buying!!
Hope these two US redlegs (mine is a little more faded than Gino) have helped you a little!
Rounds Complete!!
a mile is definatly not an extreme range fo an 88, i.e, B-17,s flew at around 25 to 30,000ft, or around six miles high.