Com-Central.net

more photos from bovington

cheers dennis

community.webshots.com...wbridge555

Dennis

Thanks for the new photos. Excellent as always.

On the StuG, an interesting detail, is the deflection plate for the Drivers vision port. I had never noticed the before.

Of the two StuGs and one StuH42 here at the Patton, that deflection plate (bracket) is not present.

Would that have been a localized application to protect the driver ?

Interesting,
Don

Don,
I think that modification to the driver's visor is something that was done by the Finns to all of the StuG's that were supplied to them.

Dennis, ditto thanks for the pics.

Hey Don, Gary,
This Type 69 seems to have similar "plumbing" to the Patton Museum's T-72? Remind me what that was for?



community.webshots.com...611PnqHDx#

Neil

Calvin & Hobbs fan here



community.webshots.com...611KYjoMT#

Neil

- Neil_Baumgardner

Dennis, ditto thanks for the pics.

Hey Don, Gary,
This Type 69 seems to have similar "plumbing" to the Patton Museum's T-72? Remind me what that was for?



community.webshots.com...611PnqHDx#

Neil

I believe I read it was vented from the exhaust to stir up dust, creating a natural smoke screen. I don't know if it was more successful when the vehicle was retreating in reverse.

It was infact a field fabrication for screening (blowing up sand in front of the vehicle) and it helped 'de-thermalize' the tanks image.

The hot exhaust would alter the thermal image of the vehicle. A desperate attempt at survival, but actually quite ingenious.

...back in the day, ... I used to fire all my gunneries using both sights. Not common amoung tank gunners, but I was shown how to do it by one of my NCO's. It allowed me to see both images and to instantly aquire/fire with the better sight picture.

The so called 'super-imposing' technique was misapplied by many of my peers and caused negative results. One had to remember that the technique was 'super-imposed & reticle off set'.

I had to shoot a number of gunneries in exterme heat/ dusty conditions with range fires, so the application of both sights enabled me to aquire and engage targets quickly under unusual conditions.

Don

That's it. Much better explanation. I wonder how well it worked in practice. Don, do you know of any ODS vets that engaged such equiped tanks? Did the thermal image created by the dust completely mask the tank or would there be a hotter spot where the tank is? It would seem that seeing a thermal dust blob approaching, the gunner would fire at the center of the mass thus hitting the target.

In the early 90's Iraqi doctrine was severaly limited in there battle manuever when fighting from the defense.

The 'mobile defense' was a series of shoot and withdrawls (from unprepared positions) followed by a 'die-in-place' position.

The 'Static Defense' was dig deep, camoflauge, and 'die-in-place'. (no withdrawl or independant survival action.

Deviating from these was (supposedly) a penality of death for the crew.

The exhaust modifications would not be too practical in an offensive engagement. (Tank crew can't see where the hell their going, and the gunner damn sure can't see through the cloud infront of his sights...)

I would believe that this was strictly a defensive survival modification, or perhaps to add in screening the vehicle as it withdrawls ( ala 'mobile defense').

So, with the perspective of a tank crewman, and with a bit of understanding of the Iraqi battle tactics, it would only be for defense.

I may be flawed in my understanding of the modification, but after seeing it first hand, its my best guess...

As for ODS vets,....nothing. Of all the firsthand accounts, I've never heard of this 'variant' ever being engaged. Its possible some may have been, but I haven't heard of any.

Remember,...If it is intact,....then it was captured abandoned.

All opposition was shot up during the advance by air or ground forces.

Sorry for drudging on....
Don

- Dontos

Dennis

Thanks for the new photos. Excellent as always.

On the StuG, an interesting detail, is the deflection plate for the Drivers vision port. I had never noticed the before.

Of the two StuGs and one StuH42 here at the Patton, that deflection plate (bracket) is not present.

Would that have been a localized application to protect the driver ?

Interesting,
Don

Don,

Check this link for pictures of a Finnish StuG with all the wartime modifications:

www.andreaslarka.net/p...31033.html

The rest of the site is well worth checking out as well, excellent run down of the StuG in Finn service.