Leopold, its obvious you have some good information on the Elefant. Everything I’ve read about (apparently not enough) says that it was easily seperated from the infantry and picked off. Your information proves quite a different story. I just got Dragon’s Elefant and would like to know more about it before I build it. If you have any good books or otherwise to reccomend, I’d appreciate it. [8D]
“It is well that war is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it.”-R.E.Lee
If you really want the low-down on the Elefant/Ferdinand, get ready to drop $102 each for the Combat History of Schwere Panzerjager Abteilung 653 and it’s sister book, 654. These massive books, each with over 600 pages and 700+ photos, 400 of the Elefant alone, are the last word when it comes to these units, their weapons and tactics. They are from the J J Fedorowicz Publishing Company. The book Jagdtiger, the world’s most powerful fighting vehicle of World War II, volume 2, operational history, also has a brief overview of these units, including the use of Elefants, prior to their rearming with Jagdtigers. This book is a bit more modest at $50. I have several others I could recommend if you are interested.
Yikes to that first book. [:0] Any of the Schiffer books any good? There are plenty at my LHS. I’ve heard that the Jadgtiger had some active role in the Battle of the Bulge. Any truth to that? Since not too many were produced, do you have any quick info on them? [:p] Thanks.
“It is well that war is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it.”-R.E.Lee
leopold, I was talking about the weapons like the Morser Karl, the Leopold, and the Dora gun. Pretty much any gun that takes an entire train or more to move is included in my previous statement. These guns were a huge waist of resources.
Just a note about the 88 though: any gun that can be used one minute as an AA weapon, then switched to an antitank role, then used as close infantry support, and then used to fire artillery on enemy positions has got my vote for BEST weapon of WWII. I’m talking about the 88mm pak 36/37. There is a reason the German 88mm was respected so…
Not much in the Schiffer line-up other than; Elefant - Jagdtiger - Sturmtiger - Variations of the Tiger Family. This book is very much like the Squadron “In Action” series, 48 pages, lots of photos with little text. OK if you just want some photos. Concord Publishing has a new book out called; Panzers In Italy 1943-1945 (Concord/T.Cockle). 72 pages, 180B/W photos, 8 color profiles (including an Elefant) for $17. This isn’t going to help you if you are building a Kursk vehicle, since they were refitted after Kursk with a MG 34, new cupola, etc. I don’t have this title yet, but I do have several other Concord books and they are a good value for the money. Squadron’s old Panzerjager in Action has only 4 photos of Elefants, 3 of which are from Aberdeen and one from Italy. Steven Zaloga’s Eastern Front, Armour Camouflage and Markings, 1941 to 1945 has only 1 photo of a knocked-out Elephant, but it is a Kursk one. I sure there are others I’m not remembering at this time. As for Jagdtigers in the Battle of the Buldge, numerous rumors abound, but hear again, popular myth exceeds reality. I will brush aside all hearsay and quote Andrew Devey, author of: Jagdtiger, The Most Powerful Armoured Fighting Vehicle of World War II, volume 2, page 189. "The evidence is conclusive. According to the testimony of surviving members of s.Pz.Jg.Abt 653, Jagdtigers were not used in the “Wacht Am Rhein.” “Recorded evidence states: Only one Jagdtiger had be lost in action prior to 15 March 1945. This was at Rimling (Alsace) on 9 January 1945, an area that remained in German hands until late February. Aditionally all Jagdtigers issued for training and testing during this period are accounted for.” The closest they got was the Eiffel area where they detrained and were driven into the woods, but they did not receive any orders to go into action in the Ardennes. So, sorry guys, no Jagdtigers in your Battle of the Bulge dioramas.
Edog, While railroad guns have gone the way of the typewriter and the dial telephone, in their time, they too were not without their merits. Sure, here again we have the huge material expenditures, manpower, susceptibility to sabotage, air raids, capture, limited target area and need for elaborate preparations for firing, just to name a few problems. But do you know that the US built more railroad guns than the Germans did? In 1944 alone, the US built 450 railroad guns and other than a few practice rounds, I doubt any of them ever fired a shot in anger. Between 1914 and 1945 railroad guns formed a mobile reserve of very heavy artillery for most of the European armies. My moniker “Leopold” and his brother “Robert”, “Shelled the Anzio beachhead unmercifully for weeks, inflicting heavy losses in men and material and it’s hiding place in a railroad tunnel proved an effective and safe cover.” That said, the downside: “Railroad guns never were capable of being used in a strictly tactical sense since they were too large and their design was intended for strategic use. They had only a small role in deciding the outcome of any campaigns or battles even though they were capable of great destruction. Nonetheless, these guns- especially the later advanced types such as the K12 and the K5- were very well thought out designs able to deliver heavy shells accurately over very great distances, which is the primary mission of long range artillery.”-Railroad Guns in Action. So, were railroad guns a huge expenditure of men and materials? Sure. Were they a total waste of time? For the US? Sure, we never used them. For the Germans, probably so, they could have spent their effort on things like more aircraft, tanks, subs, etc.
Well I hope you didn’t get me wrong leopold. While the German RR guns of WWII were truly awesome, my point was that they did not help the Germans in any tactical sense. A RR gun could get off a couple of shots before having to retreat back into a tunnel for fear of an Allied air assault. They inflicted very few casualties for all the manpower they demanded, and they were very expensive to produce. Imagine if all those resources had been poured into making the Me 262!!
LOL, I think leopold likes to argue, seems like he has been playing devils advocate[}:)] for this whole thread. Or perhaps educating us would be a better way to put it.[;)]
Edog, Most of the German RR guns were designed to shell major fortifications like the Maginot Line. Most were not completed in time to do so. When the Fallschirmjagers landed behind the Maginot and the panzers drove around it, the poor little RR guns were left with little to do. Yes, they were dinosaurs and doomed to extinction. They are more of a weapons oddity than anything else. But, like I said, RR guns served in most major European armies from 1914 to 1945, and even in the US. So, a whole lot of generals and politicians from a whole lot of different countries were convinced of a need of these type of weapons, including ours. Are you saying that your judgment of the need for these weapons is superior to all of theirs? Think about it, not from today’s perspective, but from then. Certainly Germany could have better spent their time and money building other weapons, but at the time when these weapons were designed and production started, there was a PERCEIVED need for them. Weren’t we even more stupid for building hundreds of RR guns, wasting our resources, manpower and time for weapons we never used? It’s easy to sit back today and armchair QB the “What ifs” of 60 years ago. Hindsight IS 20/20. I’m not saying the Germans didn’t make stupid decisions with their armaments, the record is full of them, but guns like Karl and Dora were designed for a specific job. It’s not their fault that by the time they were built, they weren’t needed. Do I like to argue? Maybe. Does someone need to play devil’s advocate? Yes, just to keep people on their toes. Educating people, I don’t know. I hope to shine some light into dark places were people might not see to well. Is this thread going off into the deep end from it’s original topic? Certainly.
Well, once again leopold[}:)], I agree with you on all accounts. I will state however, Hitler and his generals fascination with excessively big guns was a huge waste of much needed resources. Yes, the RR gun was a dinosaur thought up by generals who predicted that the next war would be much like the last one, a trench war. Surprisingly enough, the Germans wrote the doctrine on modern, high speed, tank warfare. Why then did they bother with huge mammoths that could not be mobilized quickly?!?!?!?! BECAUSE THEY WERE COOL LOOKING. Yes, Hitler and some of his upper echelon thought that RR guns were cool. How else could you explain a weapon that had little place in a Blitzkrieg style of warfare??
The deep end, certainly….
Oh, would I have known better at the time?? No, probably not, but unlike Hitler, I would have listened to my career generals, and not some dip stick that was promoted because of his party affiliation and his willingness to kiss my… !
OK, There is no doubt that by the end of the war, Hitler was possessed by a facination with super-heavy and “miracle” weapons. Late war developments like the Maus, the Jagdtiger, the Sturmtiger, the V-1 and V-2 and others. But the design and development of weapons like Karl and Dora predate this period of hallucination and were ordered by the OKH, not Hitler. “Because they looked cool”? Come on, show me that in print somewhere. To quote German Heavy Mortars by Joachim Engelmann; “Requested by the OKH in 1937 to be used against heavily armored installations, the “Karl” became available to troops in 1939. Initial operations were against Brest-litovsk in 1941, then Sevastopol in 1942 and 1944 in Warsaw.” As for Dora; “In 1935 the Oberkommando Heer (OKH), conducted tests to determine which calibers of artillery would be effective against the Maginot Line.”-German Railroad guns in Action. Come on, don’t just talk off the cuff, you need to quote someone other than yourself. Opinions are a dime a dozen if you don’t have any references to back them up. I don’t claim to be an expert on everything, but I can and do back-up my statements with verifiable references. If you guys want to play this game, you need to start backing your speculations with something more substantial than your opinion.
1940, the Germans redefine modern warfare by going around the Maginot Line and using their panzers in mass. At this time the Dora gun was still in the Krupp workshops at Essen. September 1941, the first test round for the Dora gun was fired! In 1942 unit 672 was formed and despite the little service that the gun saw due to the massive amounts of resources, and men needed, a second Dora was almost completed by the end of the war.
Yes, the K-5 entered service in 1936, but why did it continue to be produced until 1945?? Oh, lets not forget that only 8 of the 25-28 that were finished were produced before the war!!!
As for the Karl Morser, all 6 were delivered before 1942. In May of 1942 new 54cm barrels were ordered as a direct order from Hitler!!
2 K-12s were built by 1941? (not 100% sure about that one), but I do know that they saw little or no service, and were on the move most of the time at a huge expenditure of resources and manpower.
Why were these guns continually produced, or in service until the end of the war?? As far as I understand, it was a direct result of Hitler’s fascination with big guns. Apparently Hitler thought they “looked cool”. Perhaps fascination is a better way of explaining it…
leopold, what are you stating here??? That the RR guns were thought to be useful, and hence the production of them was justified? By 1942 I would say that it was quite obvious that there was little place for such monsters on the battlefield and they did little more than drain much needed resources from the places that they were needed most.
Can you not agree with anything I say???[V]
All I am saying is that the design and development of Karl and Dora started long before Hitler became fascinated with mege-weapons and construction began because of the perceived need to field weapons capable of defeating major fortifications. Since the siege of Sevastopol did not start until May 8th, 1942, you can not say there was no further need for these weapons in 1942. The luftwaffe flew some 23,000 sorties to deliver 20,860 tons of bombs on Sevastopol in three weeks. German artillery fired 562,944 rounds on the besieged port. THIS is a huge expenditure of materials! The fact that Dora fired only 48 rounds at seven targets, in one case passing through the water and 100 feet of rock before detonating the main Russian ammunition magizine at Severnaya Bay, should at least qualify as a small degree of success for this weapon. Granted, after this campaign, the need for these huge weapons had passed and no, I do not think that the continued manufacture of these could be justified. And yes, Hilter continued to lust after these large weapons, long after they were no longer needed and he is responsible for their continued manufacture. All I am saying is that these weapons were designed and manufacture started long before Hitler’s descent into maddness and not because Hitler thought they were “cool”. Just to add some production figures, in 1942, the Germans built 5 RR guns, the US built 50, in 1943, Germany built 4 guns, the US; 130, I don’t have German production figures for 1944, but the US built a stagerring 450 RR guns. So, who was wasting resources, the Germans who actually used their guns or the 630 built by the US, which NEVER FIRED A SINGLE SHOT IN COMBAT?
leopold,
I had a rebuttal typed up, but decided that the madness must stop, and have concluded that you simply do not like my choice of the word “cool”. so, till next time… GG[;)]
Oh, I will say one thing in relation to a statement you made previously though: aren’t opinions what a forum is for?
Hi all!. To all that have criticised the Elefant, shame!! Ferdinand Porsche thought he had the “Tiger” cantract in the bag, and began production without official permission. This wasn’t the case, so the unused hulls were utilised to house the “lang” 88. So the Elefant was born, as a stop gap weapon. With the moulds & cast’s in place it was easier to continue producing the Elefant for a short time rather than cancel the project entire. So, Kursk was a disaster, but would archers attack swordsmen with arrows in hand to hand combat? My Dad Is a Kiwi WW2 vet… His comment on The Elefant in Italy “Glad the Yanks had enough Shermans to run the Bosch out of Ammo, We got destroyed from further than we could spot them” If the topic was mainstream tanks, one vote would go to the KV2, unbalanced, top heavy, short ammo supply, high profile, lack of AP rounds for the How., turret couldnt rotate if tank was on an angle, incredible weight on a smallish engine led to overwhelming mechanical problems… Oh well, thats my vote, cheers, Ian
To add to the RR Gun debate, there is something that has obviously been missed. Weapons on any scale are not necessarily designed based on their effectiveness. One of the key elements is Psychological Impact. Just knowing that there was a weapon capable of the devastation the Karl and Dora were capable of had a huge impact on the Allies tactics. Yes, they may fire off only a couple of rounds before hiding again, but the search for the gun by Allied forces effectively diverted men and aircraft from the front lines, searching for a needle in a haystack, so to speak. Just my HO.
demono69
Thanks Leopold and Edog,
Nothing like a good healthy debate. Best part is all the info that came out of it. I benefited from it.
Iano - great 2nd hand first person info!
Bing, bing, next round
Maybe this is the one.
http://www.100thww2.org/support/776combat.html
Just scroll down near the bottom of the page.
M-36 it says? (or a Bazooka???)
[;)]
that Jagdtiger has had an inturnal explosion, probably set of by its crew becouse of a breakdown or lack of fuel or a typhoon
i dont think it was the bazooka, they couldnt even knock out a T34 in korea
Hi Cap,
Actually according to that site, it was the Germans who reported that it was hit by a Bazooka. I don’t believe it either.
The Americans credit the kill to an M-36 “Slugger” or “Jackson” which is more credible. Yes, a Typhoon could have done it. But I’ll give it to the M-36.[;)]
About the bazooka:
There were two types deployed in Korea, the M9 (2.36") which was also used in WWII and the newer M20 (3.5").
The M9 has already been proven not effective against German heavies in WWII and “yes” also against the T34’s in Korea. But the US has to use them until the newer m20’s arrive.
The M20’s which replaced them are better and has proven very effective against T34’s.
Just for info.
[:D]
Edog: “leopold, what are you stating here??? That the RR guns were thought to be useful, and hence the production of them was justified?” "Can you not agree with anything I say??? "
Leopold: “So, were railroad guns a huge expenditure of men and materials? Sure. Were they a total waste of time? For the US? Sure, we never used them. For the Germans, probably so, they could have spent their effort on things like more aircraft, tanks, subs, etc.” " “Railroad guns never were capable of being used in a strictly tactical sense since they were too large and their design was intended for strategic use. They had only a small role in deciding the outcome of any campaigns or battles” “after this campaign,(Sevastopol, May 1942) the need for these huge weapons had passed and no, I do not think that the continued manufacture of these could be justified.” Dora’s 48 shots at 7 targets is both a testament to how little she was used, certainly NOT justifing her cost of over 10 million Reichmarks, and to how effective her 7.1 to 10 ton shells were at decimating her targets. They didn’t run out of shells after 48 rounds, they ran out of targets. If Dora HAD been completed in time for the Battle of France and provided with German air superiority, she would have made short work out of the Belgian forts and the Maginot Line and then gone on to Gibraltar and turned it into a lunar landscape as well. Then, and only then, she MIGHT have paid off her debit. Did I say, quoting you; “That the RR guns were thought to be useful” Yes, that is why WE built over 630 of them, let alone the total number built by the Germans, the French, the English, The Soviets and the Italians. And then: “and hence the production of them was justified?” Reread my above quotes. You seem to think that just because my moniker is “Leopold”, that I must be a die-hard, pro-railroad gun fanactic. Sorry, “Probably so” means I’m agreeing with you, Yes, they were a total waste of time, since they were not used for their INTENDED ROLE. Despite the fact that Karl was ready for action by 1939, he was not used (according to my sources)in the Battle of France. Whether this was because of Karl’s disappointingly short firing range (which surely would have made him succeptable to counter-battery fire from the French forts, and the reason all the 600mm mortars were rebored to 540mm and the shell weight cut in half in order to double the range in 1942), or due to the change of tactics used by the Panzerwaffe (most probable) I can not say. Regardless, these two weapons, the “Karl” series of mortars and Dora were specifically designed (before the war) with only one purpose, the reduction of heavily armored fortifications, particularly the Maginot Line. Since neither weapon was used for this purpose, their expenditures in manpower, materials and money, were a complete waste. Subsequent use of Karl at the Battle of Warsaw in the fall of 1944 was indeed a mere propaganda stunt, since the use of such a weapon against a unarmored, nonstrategic target like the city of Warsaw served little use other than it’s propaganda value. The assertion that Krupp would accept such an enormous undertaking as building the world’s largest artillery piece at over 10 million Reichmarks and years of development, simply for the purpose of providing Hitler with a gargantuan toy with which to scare his neighbors and sedate his inferiority complex, is laughable at best. Such folly would require substantial written proof to raise it beyond the level of mere spectulation.