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

Discussions on the vehicles used by the Axis forces. Hosted by Christian Ankerstjerne
User avatar
admfisher
Member
Posts: 645
Joined: 30 Mar 2002 01:38
Location: Toronto

Flakdrilling

Post by admfisher » 30 Mar 2002 01:51

The Flakdrilling mount was a modified naval mount, the choice of of the 15mm MG 151 was due to the fact that the airforce was starting to use heavier and better hitting weapons, one was the 3.cm cannon.

With the air force upgunning there were plenty of the MG 151 to be found.

As a answer to the question of wether or not there was a 2 cm gun mount according to Osprey there were.

They also say that the irony behind this mount is that most of them were knocked out my allied air power as they became a prime target.

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

Post by Erich » 30 Mar 2002 02:33

Admfisher :

You've got me confused on you're last two statements....... 2cm weapons mount no doubt, as it is mentioned in many texts, and with photogrphic proof. As to you last sentance that I cannot understand......

E

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

Post by Takao » 30 Mar 2002 03:52

The complete quote is:

"Perhaps the greatest irony in the development of self-propelled AA gun mounts is that such vehicles usually lightly armoured, became the prime targets for enemy fighter-bombers, and the majority of SdKfz 251/21 vehicles lost on the Western Front were destroyed by Allied air attacks. As spare parts and fuel became harder to obtain, many were abandoned and captured virtually intact."

The irony would be that the hunter became the hunted.

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

Post by Erich » 30 Mar 2002 04:05

Interesting, as I would think it would be very hard for a jabo pilot to single out an AA vehicle amidst other MT. Can only assume that this vehicle was not by itself and had to have been destroyed with other transport during strafing runs.

E

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

Post by Takao » 30 Mar 2002 05:03

I would think it would be easy to localize, especially if it was shooting back and using tracers. As the usual procedure was to have several aircraft attacking together, while the first plane might not notice the AA vehicle in time, the chances would improve for the aircraft coming in behind the lead plane.

Nothing worse then sitting ducks that shoot back.

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

Post by Erich » 30 Mar 2002 05:38

Takao :

thanks for your further input. Must have been terrible to experience the wumpf of several rockets fired by the RAF's Typhoon's........

E

User avatar
admfisher
Member
Posts: 645
Joined: 30 Mar 2002 01:38
Location: Toronto

Picking them out

Post by admfisher » 30 Mar 2002 07:33

Right now when a airforce goes after a target one of the first things that has to go is the AA.
With the Drilling pumping out a high amount of fire power and probable one of the only crewed vehicles still manned one plane would go in to draw the enemy fire, "Drawing them out".
Then once identified the other planes would work on the aa till it was safe to take the rest of the target with out worrying about what was going to be coming up.

The Sdkfz 251-17 was a luftwaffe creation that had the 2cm Flak 38 in a semi enclosed turret. This track was difficult to manufacture so there were only a few made. The big difference with this one over the drilling is that the sides folded down.

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

Post by Erich » 30 Mar 2002 15:35

Since we are talking about air attacks, I am wondering if anyone knows the armor thickness around this turret ? Proably wouldn't be mutch but would think it could withstand ground arms fire if the unit was used in the anti-transport role.

8)

E

User avatar
admfisher
Member
Posts: 645
Joined: 30 Mar 2002 01:38
Location: Toronto

Turret armor

Post by admfisher » 30 Mar 2002 22:54

With most of the light armored vehicles, the turret would most likely be able to with stand light AP Machine Gun fire. The origanal tanks were armored to withstand only HMG Ap rounds.

The weight factor would of garanteed the turret was lightly armored.

Iam sorry to say I have no backup info on this but check the Sdkfz251 site for more info.

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

Post by Erich » 30 Mar 2002 22:59

thanks, but sorry to say I cannot find anything there.....

E

User avatar
admfisher
Member
Posts: 645
Joined: 30 Mar 2002 01:38
Location: Toronto

Armor thickness

Post by admfisher » 30 Mar 2002 23:16

Then the best guess would probably be that they were armored for only light MG-AP ammunitions, say rifle size wich would fall under the british .303 mg, the american .30 cal, and even the the MG34 and MG42.
The Americans kind of showed the upper hand here with the .50 cal MG.
These were the basically the same in size as the 12.7mm Soviet MG, the armor piercing ability was probably able to punch through any of the light armor you would find on the Drilling AA mount.
About the only armored part on the Sdkfz 251 was the nose plate everything else was lighter armored.

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

Post by Erich » 30 Mar 2002 23:49

Would agree that the front plate would be the only area armored. .50's may bounce off but 20mm's wouldn't. Besides if this turret is manually driven the extra armor on the sides and rear would make it a bear to traverse.

E

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

Post by Fred » 31 Mar 2002 00:45

armour mm/angle superstructure: Front: 10/33* Side:8/35* Rear:8/33*.

Fred.

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

Post by Erich » 31 Mar 2002 00:51

:)

Fred :

Now the info you gave, are the first figures for mm ? second for slope angle ? Where did you find this if I may ask please ? .......

danke

E

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

Post by Fred » 31 Mar 2002 00:59

Yes it´s in mm.


...and the info???Well I have a friend that is a living encyclopedia ( of german tanks).

Fred.
Last edited by Fred on 31 Mar 2002 23:21, edited 1 time in total.

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