Little bit bigger.
Panzer IV without muzzle brake and solid Hull Vorpanzer without Hull MG nor Drivers vision port.
2 Likes
Looks like it’s being used as an artillery or some kind of bunker-like thing.
The concept reminds me a bit of the Israeli M4A2 “Meir”. Unfortunately, however, the poster could not help me with a source, so not sure what references there are for this vehicle.
From this Reddit post, but I don’t think it’s referring to the T-34 in the photo.
@KillaKiwi another nice pic of the Pz.Sfl.Ic
Big chunk of interesting pictures
StuG III Serie.0
7,5 cm StuK 37 Traverse
Pz.Bef.Wg.VI (p)
Note: S.m.K. is the standart AP ammo, interestingly, the KwK was also intended as “Überschweres MG” on field mounts
StuG Gunnery Practice
10,5 cm LeFH 18
Pz.Sfl.Ic
HHL 3kg
Pz II Ausf.J
Kübelwagen 2 cm Flak
Pz IV Ausf.E full Vorpanzer
10,5 cm LeFH 16 on Gw.35 (f)
Z.W.40 and Pz IV Ausf.D with 5 cm KwK 39 L/60
Pz III with Lämps
StuG III G 2 cm Flak 38
3 Likes
Nice collection :)
Is anything known of this?
I have not yet come across such, but it could have very well been made. Conciddering that there was the Flakpanzer I Ausf.A, 3,7 cm Flak auf Panzer I Ausf.B, Bergepanzer 38(t) 2 cm Flak, Panzer III 2 cm Flak. So putting a 2 cm Flak on a Panzer II chassis is no problem.
1 Like
Looks like a really cool IFV. Hopefully it would get HVAP so it could do some damage.
How’s the elevation? Could it be used as as SPAA?
Nope, cant be effectively used as a SPAA. because the Baumaffe / Podestial mounting simply doesnt have enove space. Traverse only around +/- 80° elevation would also be around 50-60° (similar to the Sd.Kfz.251/21 or generally the Drilling Ausf.B, with shoulder stab/mount.) It would be a light armored (30mm hull 14,5mm Gunshield). So pretty much a small Automatic AT assault gun. The same mount is also on the Marder III Ausf.M with Mk 103 which also most likely doesnt have enove space for 360° traverse. (Which i am also planning to suggest.)
Pictures:
3 Likes
Cool, then it might get scouting and not relegated to the SPAA role. Would be nice with some more “Light Tanks” in the light tank branch among the SPGs we get there.
1 Like
This is sort of my thinking when it comes to unbalanced SPAAGs. If you add the gun with its full ammunition range as a separate anti-tank type vehicle, then you can remove the unbalanced shells from the AA thus allowing it a proper BR for anti-air again.
In this scenario, the Bergepanzer MK 103 would have HVAP and be balanced solely on its ability to kill tanks, meanwhile both the Zerstorer and Kugelblitz could have said HVAP removed and moved down to where they are at their best.
While having twin or quad 30mms in an anti-tank configuration is cool, I would much prefer to see their original purpose as anti-air be prioritized, with other options using the same armament to allow testing of the weapon’s AT abilities.
2 Likes
Doubt.
Well that’s new. The question lies if the tank is actually functional and not a static defense with the automotive abilities stripped. The Germans are known to have rearmed many tanks with new weaponry specifically to use their turrets as a part of fortifications so there is a possibility.
Whats this? Magrius Deutz, but what gun? My assumtion is a 2 cm Flak in the background, and it has maybe a 4,7 cm Pak Böhler (ö) in some sort of shield?
1 Like
This image has been posted all over the internet suggesting a Kingtiger with the Panther’s KwK 42, but it is not as it seems
I found a neat WT Live post that offers an explanation, a major malfunction in which the breech broke away from the mantlet and slammed into the rear of the turret
Nothing new here, I simply wanted to highlight this interesting misidentification resulting from a relatively rare example of battle damage.
1 Like