twin 8.35 cm V 22
Re: twin 8.35 cm V 22
Hello Friends
As always it's a joint operation to get this information straight , that is the purpose of this Forum .
Maybe a nice detail , as Dili stated the photo must be taken at the Zmaj renamed in Drache by the Germans
and used in 1942/1943 for trails for the Luftwaffe Flettner Fl 282 Kolibri that is maybe the reason for the
Luftwaffe officer on board that ship ( see photo twin 4 cm gun ) ??
http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/LRG/fl282.html
http://www.aviastar.org/helicopters_eng ... olibri.php
Regards Jos
As always it's a joint operation to get this information straight , that is the purpose of this Forum .
Maybe a nice detail , as Dili stated the photo must be taken at the Zmaj renamed in Drache by the Germans
and used in 1942/1943 for trails for the Luftwaffe Flettner Fl 282 Kolibri that is maybe the reason for the
Luftwaffe officer on board that ship ( see photo twin 4 cm gun ) ??
http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/LRG/fl282.html
http://www.aviastar.org/helicopters_eng ... olibri.php
Regards Jos
Re: twin 8.35 cm V 22
I have been in contact with people at Paluba Forum. One of members there http://www.paluba.info/smf/ratne-mornar ... zaraci/90/ said that Dubrovnik had 37mm AA guns before replaced by Bofors. This 37mm AA might be the Skoda 40mm/67 since Skoda liked to mess researchers job rounding guns calibres , he also posted more 83.5mm photos in Dubrovnik.
Re: twin 8.35 cm V 22
jopaerya do you have any photo that came with supposed 4cm double guns. Even a picture towards the harbour might help to situate.
Re: twin 8.35 cm V 22
No sorry , Dili this is the only one I have found .
Regards Jos
Regards Jos
Re: twin 8.35 cm V 22
Okay i have found a reference to 4cm(which for Skoda might mean 37mm)/67. This the entry for Dubrovnik.
Marine Arsenal:Kriegsmarine in der Adria 1941-1945
Marine Arsenal:Kriegsmarine in der Adria 1941-1945
- Attachments
-
- Clipboard-2.jpg (118.86 KiB) Viewed 1546 times
Last edited by Dili on 03 Sep 2009, 20:36, edited 1 time in total.
Re: twin 8.35 cm V 22
In first text "halbautomatische" semi automatic would fit the gun discription in picture i believe.
- Attachments
-
- Clipboard-3.jpg (55.01 KiB) Viewed 1544 times
Re: twin 8.35 cm V 22
I'm still not convinced that "4cm" means 37mm. From your data, 0.95kg shell weight is rather heavy for 37mm caliber, more like 9.07kg round of two-pounder (40mm). Btw, I found (Czech sources) Vz.36 (A6) 47mm bunker ATG mentioned as "4cm" and 66mm river monitor guns mentioned as "6cm". (Quite opposite to former Austro-Hungarian practise).
Still, 37mm is very likely candidate.
There was one mysterious Skoda gun from this period, "Z1 dual-purpose gun" (I found it defined as both 4cm and 40mm, the later being more common), that looks very similar to this "40/67" naval gun. I found three photos of it, all in SPG variants (see bellow). Czechs tried, but rejected the model (much more capable Bofors 40mm was eventualy adopted as divisional AA gun and licence duly bought).
Still, 37mm is very likely candidate.
There was one mysterious Skoda gun from this period, "Z1 dual-purpose gun" (I found it defined as both 4cm and 40mm, the later being more common), that looks very similar to this "40/67" naval gun. I found three photos of it, all in SPG variants (see bellow). Czechs tried, but rejected the model (much more capable Bofors 40mm was eventualy adopted as divisional AA gun and licence duly bought).
- Attachments
-
- Tankette MU-6 with 40mm Z1 dual purpose gun.jpg (118.17 KiB) Viewed 1528 times
-
- Tankette MU-6 & 40mm Z1 dual purpose gun.jpg (69.3 KiB) Viewed 1528 times
-
- Skoda 6MT & 4cm Z1 dual gun.jpg (19.74 KiB) Viewed 1528 times
Re: twin 8.35 cm V 22
Back to “Dubrovnik”
From your very interesting German data, I found strange that the source bother to place TWO decimal places for 8.35-cm gun (why not simply “8-cm” or “8.4-cm”) and none for 4-cm gun (if it was really 37mm, why not mentioned it as “3.7-cm”)
Also (No2 document) “Dubrovnik” in original state was mentioned with 4cm/67 guns (as captured?). First Italian alternation “Premuda A” has these guns removed and 2-cm Breda guns placed (interestingly, twin 8.35cm gun installation replaced with 12cm howitzer, seen also on numerous other Italian destroyers). Why Italians do that? If the Dubrovnik had Bofors guns, that’s much more firepower that nimble 2cm guns. If Dubrovnik still had inefficient 40/67 guns, that change has all the reasons (incl. logistic one). Btw, note that original 15mm AAMGs were retained!
Second Italian modification “Premuda B” had 12-cm howitzer removed and 37/54 guns added. Again, this make all the sense, since 37/54s were standard Italian model with performance close to Bofors gun on Allied ships (also better than 40mm Pom-Poms).
I know you found 3.7-cm caliber and Bofors gun modifiacation info from Yugoslav side (“PALUBA”), but this is the source I’m not much relying on (if not backed up with actual photos). From the Bofors Factory records (see: http://www.network54.com/Forum/330333/m ... 430/Part+4 ) Yugoslavia bought 40mm guns enough only to equip three “Beograd” class destroyers (six twin-gun installations) and eight big Lürssen-type MTBs (single installations). So, Yugoslavia was very short of Bofors guns.
(I still have to find the source of 40mm Bofors guns on river monitors, installed 1939-40 (one twin and two singles); Poland is most probable one, explaining why only a small number of guns eventually reached Yugoslavia. Other option is Hungary, but I don’t know did they produced naval-type mounts.)
From your very interesting German data, I found strange that the source bother to place TWO decimal places for 8.35-cm gun (why not simply “8-cm” or “8.4-cm”) and none for 4-cm gun (if it was really 37mm, why not mentioned it as “3.7-cm”)
Also (No2 document) “Dubrovnik” in original state was mentioned with 4cm/67 guns (as captured?). First Italian alternation “Premuda A” has these guns removed and 2-cm Breda guns placed (interestingly, twin 8.35cm gun installation replaced with 12cm howitzer, seen also on numerous other Italian destroyers). Why Italians do that? If the Dubrovnik had Bofors guns, that’s much more firepower that nimble 2cm guns. If Dubrovnik still had inefficient 40/67 guns, that change has all the reasons (incl. logistic one). Btw, note that original 15mm AAMGs were retained!
Second Italian modification “Premuda B” had 12-cm howitzer removed and 37/54 guns added. Again, this make all the sense, since 37/54s were standard Italian model with performance close to Bofors gun on Allied ships (also better than 40mm Pom-Poms).
I know you found 3.7-cm caliber and Bofors gun modifiacation info from Yugoslav side (“PALUBA”), but this is the source I’m not much relying on (if not backed up with actual photos). From the Bofors Factory records (see: http://www.network54.com/Forum/330333/m ... 430/Part+4 ) Yugoslavia bought 40mm guns enough only to equip three “Beograd” class destroyers (six twin-gun installations) and eight big Lürssen-type MTBs (single installations). So, Yugoslavia was very short of Bofors guns.
(I still have to find the source of 40mm Bofors guns on river monitors, installed 1939-40 (one twin and two singles); Poland is most probable one, explaining why only a small number of guns eventually reached Yugoslavia. Other option is Hungary, but I don’t know did they produced naval-type mounts.)
Re: twin 8.35 cm V 22
Hello Antic
The 3 photo's of the Z1 duel gun are basic the same as the twin gun ,
the great retriever , the tip of the barrel I think we have a winner .
Compliment Antic you found the gun , but as this gun was single load ,
the Royal Yugoslav Navy prefered a autoloader like the 4 cm Bofor and
in the midd "30 the guns were switched .
I can not speak for the Adriatic part , but in Southeren France and Italy
every gun that was avalible was used on ships and in coast defence .
Regards Jos
The 3 photo's of the Z1 duel gun are basic the same as the twin gun ,
the great retriever , the tip of the barrel I think we have a winner .
Compliment Antic you found the gun , but as this gun was single load ,
the Royal Yugoslav Navy prefered a autoloader like the 4 cm Bofor and
in the midd "30 the guns were switched .
I can not speak for the Adriatic part , but in Southeren France and Italy
every gun that was avalible was used on ships and in coast defence .
Regards Jos
Re: twin 8.35 cm V 22
More on Skoda Z1 - http://www.palba.cz/viewtopic.php?t=2493 (better photos too! )
Most interesting data:
Barrel length: L/71 (could be 40/67 "in Italian" )
HE round weight: .95kg
Shell Vo is 900-1000m/s
Cyclic rate: 40 rpm! ( )
So, 40mm is the actual caliber. Case closed!
Most interesting data:
Barrel length: L/71 (could be 40/67 "in Italian" )
HE round weight: .95kg
Shell Vo is 900-1000m/s
Cyclic rate: 40 rpm! ( )
So, 40mm is the actual caliber. Case closed!
Re: twin 8.35 cm V 22
Question for Dili:
If you remember our "88/35" discussion, there was one Italian link with list of various captured guns you bring up (lot of them fortress/naval types). Could you post it again? (I tried to find it in my documents and failed miserably )
Needless to say, I'm eager to find what "40/43" or "40/39" stands for.
If you remember our "88/35" discussion, there was one Italian link with list of various captured guns you bring up (lot of them fortress/naval types). Could you post it again? (I tried to find it in my documents and failed miserably )
Needless to say, I'm eager to find what "40/43" or "40/39" stands for.
Re: twin 8.35 cm V 22
The fate of twin-83.5mm gun from your opening post is still unclear. As we saw from Dili's No2 German text, Italians removed it from "Dubrovnik" promptly. It was a natural thing to do: ammo supply was questionable (although Germans used a lot of guns in this caliber; ammo produced also, but probably not the semi-armour piercing one, anti-ship variant), plus crew training would be unreasonable, since there was only few such guns - it take a lot of training to shot a very fast moving target (airplane) from already moving platform (ship). I think the best idea would be to place it on fixed coastal position and used it in dual role (coast-defense and AA).jopaerya wrote: I can not speak for the Adriatic part , but in Southeren France and Italy
every gun that was avalible was used on ships and in coast defence.
Re: twin 8.35 cm V 22
I agree that seems to be real 40mm instead of 37mm. The most solid evidence is the round weight.
Btw in same book it says Zmaj had the same Skoda 40mm/67 gun also in Dual Mounts(i continue to think the picture from jopaerya is from Zmaj) , and that Beograd was supposed to get a 4,7cm Skoda but got 4cm Bofors.
the edge for Italian captured Artillery http://xoomer.virgilio.it/ramius/Milita ... e_2gm.html after "preda belica"
Concerning 40mm/43 Bofors
Kriegmarine in der Adria doesn't help there, it says Bofors 40mm/39 which is even more wrong from Beograd Destroyer photos.
One question, i can't read Czech from what date this weapon could have been installed in Dubrovnik?
Yep that is why it was crap and probably replaced, but unless Photo evidence i am still not sure it was replaced.Cyclic rate: 40 rpm!
Yes that was one of the reasons. Another is that Fire Control against aircraft was probably at most of dubious capability. heavy AA guns need a good fire control to be effective.It was a natural thing to do: ammo supply was questionable (although Germans used a lot of guns in this caliber; ammo produced also, but probably not the semi-armour piercing one, anti-ship variant), plus crew training would be unreasonable, since there was only few such guns - it take a lot of training to shot a very fast moving target (airplane) from already moving platform (ship). I think the best idea would be to place it on fixed coastal position and used it in dual role (coast-defense and AA).
Btw in same book it says Zmaj had the same Skoda 40mm/67 gun also in Dual Mounts(i continue to think the picture from jopaerya is from Zmaj) , and that Beograd was supposed to get a 4,7cm Skoda but got 4cm Bofors.
the edge for Italian captured Artillery http://xoomer.virgilio.it/ramius/Milita ... e_2gm.html after "preda belica"
Concerning 40mm/43 Bofors
Kriegmarine in der Adria doesn't help there, it says Bofors 40mm/39 which is even more wrong from Beograd Destroyer photos.
One question, i can't read Czech from what date this weapon could have been installed in Dubrovnik?
Re: twin 8.35 cm V 22
I found what I was loking for:
40/56 M 38 e M 39 - cann.mitr.c.a. Bofors
(Here we probably have the reason for mistake - 40mm M39 could became "40/39" )
Since 40mm Bofors were placed amongst "premium" weapons, reason less to remove them from "Dubrovnik"
(maybe for instalation onto a "more valuable" ship ).
40/71 - cann.mitr.c.a. Skoda - Francia
Here is our Skoda gun! (Rightfully placed amongst "second class" wepons)
Only - "mitr" is a very wrong description for such weapon - and "Francia" is obvious mistake.
40/56 M 38 e M 39 - cann.mitr.c.a. Bofors
(Here we probably have the reason for mistake - 40mm M39 could became "40/39" )
Since 40mm Bofors were placed amongst "premium" weapons, reason less to remove them from "Dubrovnik"
(maybe for instalation onto a "more valuable" ship ).
40/71 - cann.mitr.c.a. Skoda - Francia
Here is our Skoda gun! (Rightfully placed amongst "second class" wepons)
Only - "mitr" is a very wrong description for such weapon - and "Francia" is obvious mistake.
Re: twin 8.35 cm V 22
I agree with both... actually, now almost 100% certain for the second.Dili wrote: Fire Control against aircraft was probably at most of dubious capability. heavy AA guns need a good fire control to be effective.
Btw in same book it says Zmaj had the same Skoda 40mm/67 gun also in Dual Mounts (I continue to think the picture from jopaerya is from Zmaj)
Only useful year mentioned is 1934, when that MU-6 dual SPG gun was made. They talk about this gun mainly as an AT weapon and how efficiant it would be against German tanks in 1938 (32mm armor penetration at 2,500m), plus what shasis should be used instead (Skoda or Praga LT tanks). Nobody talks about its original AA role (understandable) and the real purpose of this all-around SPG: both AA & AT protection for mobile divisions (idea probably influenced by British "Birch" universal SPG from 1925-28 http://www.blogcatalog.com/blog/militar ... e50ad80a14 , usefull in al roles: AA, (AT,) and fire-support role).Dili wrote: One question, i can't read Czech from what date this weapon could have been installed in Dubrovnik?