Sdkfz 251 with a 120mm mortar...

[Kurfurst]

This is a question that has been going round and round between some pals and I.You guys seem to be the experts...so I hope you can help.

The German WW2 Sdkfz 251/2 is listed as the only mortar carrying vehicle of the series...packing a 8 cm Granatwerfer 34 (Gr.W.34).

The issue comes from a few books(I will have to get the names when I return to the "barn") that mention some field modification being done in army/corps/divisional workshops to mount a 12cm Granatwerfer 42 (Gr.W.42) in its' place...mainly on the eastern front.

I made casual mention of this and got "shouted down" as that would be impossible as the vehicle would collapse under the weight(the weapon only weighs 650 pounds and the vehicle is rated to carry 1.5 tons with axle pressure at max weight being 1.3 tons on the wheels and 7.2 tons on the tracks) and recoil of the mortar.
The second part being that the German "field modifications" never created new non- factory vehicles.
Now I know the Hanomag is is not a panzer but then again it is not made of tissue paper and handled some rather heavy loads and recoil from much larger weapons( Pak 40..and yes I know that it is vertical recoil instead of horizontal recoil).

So the questions...

1-Did the German's make non standard weapons from their workshop systems in the field?

2-Could the Sd 251 carry/mount a Granatewerfer 42 and fire it with out falling apart?

 

[rmgill]

The second part being that the German "field modifications" never created new non- factory vehicles.


Whomever said that needs to look at the vast number of ersatz vehicles that were worked up in field workshops. Whether the maultier or any number of other vehicles. Heck, the Rockets in Crates hung off the side of a 251 was hardly a depot level fab job, let alone a factory designed weapons fit.

If you look at the back pages of Otto Carius' book Tigers in the Mud he cites a serious issue where the Large hanomag halftracks, the 18 ton jobbies were NOT designed to recover and tow tigers and that the only vehicles with the horsepower to do so not in threes and fours (like the 18 ton half track) were other tigers.

As to the core question, I'd check with the guys over at http://www.tankers.net/. Someone there might have more data.

 

[CARNAC]

I have studied German armor and other weapons for over 20 years. I am not saying they didn't but I have never found photographic evidence nor read any official reports stating the 120 was mounted in a 251. I know a lot of early works on German armor had a lot of mistakes and or transposed information and some of this still persists today but this info I haven't heard before.

Reference recoil--Keep in mind the 75mm PaK40 had a recoil system and the forces were toward the rear. For a mortar, they are directed downward onto the suspension. I still don't know if that would make it possible or impossible. I do seem to recall the legs on the 120 were awful wide and even in the 251/2 the forward part of the passenger seats were removed to accomodate the front legs. If done it was something totally local or experimental.

Now to open up a hornets nest... I always thought the Germans missed the mark by not going with the SdKfz38(t) or Katzchen earlier on. The 251 was too maintenance intensive and the 38(t) chassis was a proven/dependable design. Katzchen was experimental but used a lot of parts common to other types. Post war they developed the Marder series that was similar in design to the prototype SdKfz-38(t).
NOTE: SdKfz-38(t) not PzKpfw-38(t).

Want a good debate...debate T34 vs Panther with Dr Atwater of APG Museum.

 

[CARNAC]

Oh and reference question 1. Yes, the workshops did it all the time. Couple of good examples:

Pzkpfw I Ausf B mit 20mm Flak 38
T34 hull with 20mm Flakvierling 38
Panther hull with Pz IV Ausf H turret
SdKfz 301 with 6 barrel Panzerschreck launcher on swing mount
Pzkpfw I with 37mm PaK36

All of these I've seen photographic evidence and were made in local workshops.

A lot of people will point to the numerous French vehicles the Germans modified but in actuality, most of these were sent to Germany and modified by...Alkett if my memory serves me correctly..

 

[norwegianarmour]

Hi

I checked in one of my books, ”Encyclopedia of German tanks of world war two”, The complete illustrated directory of German battle tanks, armoured cars, self-proppeld guns and semi-tracked vehicles 1933-1945, ISBN nr: 1-85409-518-8.

I couldn’t see any modifications of the Sdkfz 251/2 with a Gr.W.42 in that book, I have also tried to search on some hardcore WWII sites, but couldn’t find any there either, since the search brought up to many hits.
But you can take a look, maybe you find some:

http://www.feldgrau.net/phpBB2/index.php

http://www.axishistory.com/

I also came across this site, but German isn’t my strong language, maybe someone in here can help you out?
http://forum.panzer-archiv.de/index.php?sid=f810b4a7fe2b673a5e7b992094edf577

Good luck on your quest for answer.

 

[DDoyle]

I spent over a year researching WWII German fighting vehicles while preparing my book on this subject, including over 110 days of research through archives, and copying thousands of photos and pages of documents.

I attempted to be as thorough as possible, although later editiorial constraints caused some material to be omitted from the final book. The end result of this was a book much more comprehensive and accurate than the volume I'd previosly done on US vehicles.

The point of all this rambling is that in my research I did not come across a single photo or reference to a 120mm mortar in a 251. As others have pointed out, recoil would have been an issue, as would have merely serving the weapon.

HTH,
David Doyle

 

[norwegianarmour]

Hallo David

Can I ask you a question?

One of the authors of the Encyclopedia of German tanks of world war two is Hilary Doyle, the other is Peter Chamberlain.

Is there a relationship?
I noticed that your surname is Doyle.