| Somua S35 | 20 Nov 2009 2:34 p.m. PST |
Was wondering if anyone knew of the use of lighter AA guns vs armor or infantry in the early war. Germans or Allies. I don't know if the crews of lighter AA weapons were trained or if light AA were capable of engaging ground targets 1939-1941. With their high rate of fire and the thin armor of most vehicles, thought they might be effective. Any one know of any use of AA against armor/infantry in the early war? |
| Garand | 20 Nov 2009 2:55 p.m. PST |
Well, depending on how you look at it, the KwK 30 and 38 were modified FLAK 30 and 38, so they were already being used in an anti-armor and anti-infantry role right from the beginning (as mounted in the Pz II and SdKfz 222). Damon. |
| anleiher | 20 Nov 2009 2:55 p.m. PST |
The Hotchkiss 13.2 mm lt AA gun would have been rather effective, I should have thought, provided the mounting allowed for sufficient depression. No battle anecdotes though. |
| Griefbringer | 20 Nov 2009 3:07 p.m. PST |
AFAIK most of the light AA-guns of the period would have sufficient depression to be able to engage ground targets. Training should not be an issue either – it is a lot easier to learn to fire AA-gun accurately at ground targets than at air targets. It is also a lot easier to provide practice opportunities for such shooting. Whether the AA-guns were provided with AP shot or not is another issue. In 1941 offensive, Finnish army even used light AA-guns to take out enemy bunkers. |
| Endless Grubs | 20 Nov 2009 4:02 p.m. PST |
For some reason, I recall the early war British did not readily approve of their AA crews engaging ground targets. I'm not suggesting they pulled wounded Germans from the vehicles, apologized, patched the vehicles up, and escorted them back safely to German lines, but doctrinally there may have been a hesitance. Where I heard or read that is anyone's guess. |
| Jeff Ewing | 20 Nov 2009 4:46 p.m. PST |
Most famous is probably the defense of Gumrak station by the majority-female 1077th Antiaircraft Regiment, armed with 37mm flak guns in August, 1942: link |
| badger22 | 20 Nov 2009 5:34 p.m. PST |
I dont have a specific reference of the top of my head, but 20mm flak guns where used in an AT role a lot in North Afrika, |
| damosan | 20 Nov 2009 6:35 p.m. PST |
Somewhere on the 'net I found a WW2 German AA gunners book and there was a passage in there about engaging enemy armor. From memory it said shoot for gear on the tank, driver's hatches, and the turret ring. |
| Andy ONeill | 21 Nov 2009 3:34 a.m. PST |
There's an interview on one of them there discovery channel programmmes which is relevent. British tank commander, 1940, engaged by flakvierling. The germans used their flak very aggressively right from the beginning. Didn't always work and especially in relatively close terrain like BUA
.. and setting up an 88 directly in front of a KV2 just wasn't smart. |
| Martin Rapier | 21 Nov 2009 1:56 p.m. PST |
At Arras, along with the handful of 88s and most of the 7th Panzer Div artillery firing over open sights, 20mm and 37mm Flak were also used to engage 1st Army Tank Brigade. |
| donlowry | 21 Nov 2009 5:45 p.m. PST |
Somewhere I recently read of British using 40mm Bofors AA guns vs. panzers in the NA desert. It was sort of intentional, but not very. The AA was placed to protect some 25-pdrs from air attack but tanks as well, and tanks were what showed up. Can't remember the source. Sorry. |
| Somua S35 | 22 Nov 2009 11:35 a.m. PST |
yes, played in a western desert game years ago and was allowed to use a Bofors against German armor. Caliber was plenty big enough for light German armor and it had an ungodly rate of fire. Whole reason I posted was I had never heard of any AA other than the 88 taking on tanks. |
| badger22 | 22 Nov 2009 12:07 p.m. PST |
I am certain I have read of 40mm bofors in an AT role in North Africa. However, that is my favorite theatre of the war, and I have read a lot of books on it, so dont remember which one it might have been. Bofors should have been deployed far enough forward that they would have had a chance to shoot at tanks regularly. |
| donlowry | 22 Nov 2009 12:21 p.m. PST |
Tracked down the example that I had remembered. It's from Desert Rats at War: North Africa by George Forty, on p. 89, in an extract from the diary of Lt. J. M. McSwiney, commander of a troop of 3 Bofors guns. |
| christot | 22 Nov 2009 1:54 p.m. PST |
Not entirely sure if the German 37mm flak actually had an AP round. Need the books. |
| Martin Rapier | 23 Nov 2009 5:17 a.m. PST |
Yes, Bofors guns were often used against Axis armour in the desert, particularly when the brigade box was being overrun. In AHGCs venerable 'Tobruk', they were the most effective AT weapons in the game as with a ROF of 40, they were virtually guaranteed multiple mobility and firepower kills against anything on the map. A slight design flaw methinks. "Not entirely sure if the German 37mm flak actually had an AP round" From John D Salts exhaustive compilation of AT effectivenes data. 3.7cm Flak 43 with PzGr 18 ammo. 35mm at 100m, 28mm at 500m, 21mm at 1000m, 17mm at 1500m. (from Jentz and Doyle). Interestingly, less effective than a 20mm at close range. |
| Goose666 | 23 Nov 2009 6:02 a.m. PST |
Necessity is the mother of invention.. I read an account of BEF forces in the final days of Dunkirk using anything and everything that could included AA weapons to try and keep the German armour back. In war, you use what you have. It may or may not work, but I am sure there were instances through out WW2 where varying sides used what ever they have to tackle armour, be it AA or underpowered artillery. The fact a tank was taking fire is likely to make the crew think twice about advancing as they never know when the next hit will be the one that kills them. |