Sd. Kfz.251/21 questions......

Discussions on the vehicles used by the Axis forces. Hosted by Christian Ankerstjerne
User avatar
Erich
Member
Posts: 2728
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 23:28
Location: OR

Sd. Kfz.251/21 questions......

Post by Erich » 27 Mar 2002 18:06

Guys :

Just checking through some old materials on this late war semi-tracked vehicle with the MG 151/20 Drilling.

1) Anyone have stats on this vehicle, like numbers produced ?

2) What units were equipped, Heer and Waffen SS ?

3) What was the intended purpose of this support weapons system....... infantry support or light fla defence ?

thanks all !! 8)

E

User avatar
Christian Ankerstjerne
Forum Staff
Posts: 13749
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 14:07
Location: Denmark

Post by Christian Ankerstjerne » 27 Mar 2002 19:00

I can't find my encyclopedia (#@%&¤), but it was a FlaK vehicle. it had 700 rpm, and could stowe 2000 rounds. Construction started in August 1944 (see http://www.siemers.com for a little detail, and possibly http://www.achtungpanzer.com)

User avatar
Marcus
Member
Posts: 33963
Joined: 08 Mar 2002 22:35
Location: Europe

Post by Marcus » 27 Mar 2002 19:18

Image

Image

User avatar
Fred
Member
Posts: 335
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 13:13
Location: Sweden

Kfz 251/21 (anti-aircraft vehicle)

Post by Fred » 27 Mar 2002 21:13

Crew: 4/6
Armament: Three 1,5cm MG151/15 or 2cm MG151/20
Ammo: 2000
Rate of fire: 700 rpm
commenced in Aug. 1944

Sorry but that is all info I have :cry:

Fred.

User avatar
Erich
Member
Posts: 2728
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 23:28
Location: OR

Intersting views.

Post by Erich » 27 Mar 2002 22:51

Thanks guys so far. Awfully tight fit and the turning radius does seem to be limited. Wonder though if this vehicle would of been better suited for support work against Allied soft skin vehicles than for air protection. Could try to envision this thing being turned with power operated equipment and the difficulty in tracking a low level target. Have a sequence of three vehicles in a latter Deutschwochenschau film, all three in white wash with the guns elevated to maybe 20 degrees or so. Could the turret guns be lowered to level or was there an elevation bar/brake to only permit so low a level to be achieved ?

still searching......

E

User avatar
Takao
Member
Posts: 3301
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 19:27
Location: Reading, Pa

Post by Takao » 28 Mar 2002 04:12

It was intended to be an anti-aircraft vehicle, but was found to work very well against "soft" ground targets and troops. Power traverse for the turret would have been nice, but it was strictly manual operation. The guns could be lowered to a level position, however I am not sure if the turret could travese level (I think it could). Sorry, I dont have the numbers produced or which units recieved them.

User avatar
Erich
Member
Posts: 2728
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 23:28
Location: OR

Good

Post by Erich » 28 Mar 2002 04:49

information Takao. It does appear from Marcus's photo that there is a support bar of sorts for the MG-kannons but the sides have been dropped or notched to allow for side traverse or level firing. Could imagine what this drilling could of done to motor transports.......

8O

E

User avatar
Takao
Member
Posts: 3301
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 19:27
Location: Reading, Pa

Post by Takao » 28 Mar 2002 05:28

I have a similar picture of the same vehicle with the guns level and pointing directly forward with the all sides up.

I agree, it would be very devastating against an enemy halft track, scout car or truck.

User avatar
Erich
Member
Posts: 2728
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 23:28
Location: OR

Yes,.....

Post by Erich » 28 Mar 2002 05:55

with HE Minen geschloss rounds it would be terrible.

Takao, would you know how many men/crew for the drilling weapons ?

E

User avatar
Takao
Member
Posts: 3301
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 19:27
Location: Reading, Pa

Post by Takao » 28 Mar 2002 07:16

According to Bruce Culver & Uwe Feist's book "Schutzenpanzer", the SdKfz 251/21 had a crew of 4-6 men. Osprey's New Vanguard series on the 251 doesn't list the crew for the vehicle.

User avatar
Erich
Member
Posts: 2728
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 23:28
Location: OR

it looks to me......

Post by Erich » 28 Mar 2002 17:44

that the turret area would not fit more than three occupants.

E

User avatar
Andy H
Forum Staff
Posts: 15315
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 20:51
Location: UK and USA

Post by Andy H » 29 Mar 2002 21:11

Wasn't the 251/21 a replacement for the ineffective 251/17 with it's single 2cm Flak 38?

Hi Ho Silver Away :D

User avatar
Erich
Member
Posts: 2728
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 23:28
Location: OR

Post by Erich » 29 Mar 2002 21:51

CY :

Hmmmmm, can't say for sure, but I do see the need for extra firepower with all the jabo attacks during the fall through spring months of 44-45. Must have been a real bear to try and get this turret turned manually with 3 guns instead of just one.

E

User avatar
Takao
Member
Posts: 3301
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 19:27
Location: Reading, Pa

Post by Takao » 30 Mar 2002 01:10

I don't know either, probably a replacement and improvement of the SdKfz 251/17. The 21 offered more firepower, increased magazine capacity(the 17's 20mm cannon used 20 round magazines), and an easy to use mount(no handwheels such as those needed to operate the 17's 20mm mount/turret.

As for how easy it was to use the mount, I don't know. The USN used pedestal mounts for the single and twin 20mm and they were relatively eas to use. If the mount was properly balanced, it should not have been to hard to operate. And it was probably easier to traverse the mount then it would have been to operate the handwheels of the 17's 20mm. The USN liked the 20mm mounts because they were easy to use, could operate without power, and provided a quick response time. The Kriegsmarine probably liked the "Flakdrilling" for the same reasons.

User avatar
Erich
Member
Posts: 2728
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 23:28
Location: OR

Post by Erich » 30 Mar 2002 01:24

Flak drilling for the Kriegsmarine ? Can't say I have heard of the installation on any German ships. Just twin 2cm and twin 3.7cm plus single 4cm bofors towards the end of the war. would love to see a pic of the drilling on a ship if possible........

E

Return to “The Ron Klages Panzer & other vehicles Section”