WWII Q&A thread: Ask us anything!

[Jeff 'Robotnik' W.]

Hello everyone.

I decided to make this thread to make it easier to ask and get questions on World War II answered. I decided to make this thread after seeing many small history related questions scattered throughout the fourm, so why not make a thread to all of those little questions people have.

While im certainly not an expert, i and anyone else willing to contribute will try to answer questions as best as possible. They can be anything as long as its related to world war II, including things such as politics during the war, life during the war, weaponry and technology (both are my favorite!).

Right now there are no rules to asking questions right now (other than them being WWII related). so feel free to ask, and anyone who feels like they know the answer to a question is free to share their answers as well.

[MonolithicBacon]

Well, I may as well contribute, because this question has been burning at me for a while!

I've heard stories that the British Sten, while cheap, light and easy to produce, often came across issues due to its magazine, and the fixture into the side of the weapon. Because soldiers used to hold the magazine when firing, rather than the weapon itself, the shock of firing over time could loosen the magazine feed and allow debris to get in, jamming the weapon.

Do you happen to know if there was any way to hold the Sten comfortably without being burnt by the muzzle?

http://www.guns.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/sten_pic1.jpg

In this image, for example, I can see why it would be preferable to hold the weapon by the magazine, as the gap between the trigger guard and the magazine is too small for a hand to fit comfortably, but holding the weapon in front of the magazine looks pretty close to the muzzle...

Any thoughts?

[saprize21]

I got an question, and this is from a forum about another game, but basically my question is: is this guy right or wrong?

http://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/showthread.php?t=7019

[Jeff 'Robotnik' W.]

@MonolithicBacon

Yes, if i remember right a leather sleeve guard was sometimes issued to troopes to protect their hands from the hot barrel and was issued after the sten MKII. Im not sure if that would have made it much more comfortable to wield however

The picture you posted is of a sten MKII if i remember correctly, which had a shorter shroud than the MKIII version, which would have provided more protection from the hot barrel. So im guessing that if you had an MKIII or above version of the sten it was more comfortable to wield, or if you had one of those leather sleeve guards.

Though you also have to consider that the Sten was meant for mass production and cheapness, so comfort was not exactly on the top of the list when it was designed

also an interesting fact, the magazine used by the sten was pretty much a copy of the one used on the MP40, and were even interchangeable. Unfortunately, the MP40's magazine was also considered one of its biggest flaws

@saprize21

Im not sure if you wanted me to address the first post or any other details in the thread in the link you posted, so im just going to give an overview of the IS2's strengths and weaknesses, and should answer most questions. If you have any more specific question about what was being discussed in that thread, feel free to ask

I wouldnt go as far as to say it was the best tank of world war II. The IS2 was remarkable in how it was able to pack so much armor and a big gun while still weighing about the same as the panther.  those amazing specifications came at a price, ill list all the pros and cons, since the guy in that post seemed oblivious to the faults of the IS2


the armor
Here are 2 pictures comparing the armor thickness of the tiger and early model IS2



as you can see, the armor protection of the IS2 is equal to or greater than that of the tiger, in addition to being sloped as well. All this while weighing less than the tiger ( the tiger was around 60 tons while the IS2 is around 45 tons). The elimination of the christie suspension (as seen in the T34) in favor of torsion bar suspension also saved a lot of room for more armor

The gun
Its amazing they even got the gun into the turret in the first place, as it was about the same size as the one used in the jagdtiger if i remember right, except slightly smaller. The 122mm gun was also capable of easily penetrating the armor of either the panther or the tiger, and could even blow the turret off of them using just regular HE rounds, as the HE contained enough explosives and were fired at a high enough velocity to simply kill the crew or set off ammo simply due to the shock of the explosion. Even though the numbers at the time pointed out that the IS2 was incapable of penetrating the panther at short range, they never knew about overmatching at the time, where a shell with a greater diameter than the thickness of the armor it is hitting has much greater penetration. It didnt help the panther either that the IS2 used mostly regular AP shells at first, since more blunt projectiles had better performance against heavilly sloped armor. this meant that the IS2 was able to engage the panther at normal combat ranges.

The IS2 also had decent optics, and the whole thing about the soviets having inferior optics is usually a myth, but the germans did have much better rangefinders and guides in their optics which allowed for greater accuracy.


Weaknesses

The soviets did however have to make sacrifices in order to achieve all of this, some of them which didnt make much of a difference, while others were more severe.

1. Elimination of the hull machine gunner: this saved a lot of space in the hull, allowing for a more sloped profile and for more amor to be added. Overall considered a smart move, and it was adopted by other countries after the war. During WWII however, the hull machine gunner position also usually served as a radioman and extra crew member, so it meant more work for the crew

2. If your IS2 was penetrated, good luck getting out. In order to save weight the IS2 was made compact, making for a very cramped interior. this meant that it was harder for the crew to escape if the tank was damaged. This was even worse for the driver though, as he had no escape hatch above him (unlike almost every other tank at the time) and had to crawl all the way back to the turret and out of it to escape.

3. Cramped conditions and no comfort. Unlike the german tanks, with ones such as the tiger meant for taller SS solidiers, the IS2 was designed only for people who were below a certain height. People who were short were usually sent to be tank crews, and even then conditions were extremely cramped. The IS2 also lacked other comforts such as padded or adjustable seats. The interior was also more noisy as well, and if i remember right it was because their was little insulation between the crew compartment and the engine (in not 100% sure on this one)

4. the ammo problem. The consequence of mounting such a huge gun in a small tank meant a lot of problems.
- Seperate loading ammo. unlike most tanks at the time, the ammo was split into to peices: proppellant and shell. both had to be loaded individually. this combined with the heavy weight of the projectile meant that only about 2-3 round per minuite could be fired, in comparison to that of a tiger which could get off as much as 12 with a trained crew. Ammo was also more difficult to re-supply the tank with as well, and many crews loathed the task
-Very few rounds: Because of the size of the ammo and the small size of the turret, the tank could only hold 28 rounds. In comparison, the tiger could hold around 70.

5. The shot trap: there was a design flaw with the IS2 that was never fixed. the curved mantle (the front part of the turret) was what you would call a shot trap, meaning a shell could hit the lower part of the mantle, and because of the curve the shell would angle downward and peirce the thin top armor of the tank, or trap itself between the turret and the hull, making the turret incapable of turning. The panther had the same weakness as well, however later versions of the panther were modified to fix this. Also, the armor of the early models of the IS2 were not as durable as the armor of the M1944 version, which used a much simpler single sloped plate design instead of the stepped plate design of the earlier version.

6. Expensive: the IS2 was more expensive to make than the cheaper T-34 tanks, if i remember right, 4 T34-85's could be produced in place of an IS2

So overall the IS2 was an excellent tank that german heavy tank commanders learned to respect, but as can be seen through most of the war, crew skill is a big player in tank performance, and many early IS2's were lost due to poor crew training. Also needing to be taken into consideration is that both the panther and tiger were deisgned before the IS2, so the IS2 had more advanced technology and used lessons learned from previous battles which, which neither the panther nor tiger were able to take advantage of.

[saprize21]

Thank you for your answer! Apparently the guy in the thread was very optimistic about it being the best haha

I really like your long answers, i really learn much from reading them so again i want to thank you for that!

Another question coming from the same forum,

Well its about a game called Red Orchestra 2 and it takes out in 1942 in Stalingrad and they have discussed about Mkb 42 actually being involved in the combat in 1942 and the reason the developers put that weapon into the game was because they have found evidence of the weapon being in the fight. So is it true the gun actually was involved in 1942 Stalingrad?
Here is the thread:
http://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/showthread.php?t=45638

i found this lurking around in the thread

[Gerrit 'Lord Rommel' G.]

As far as i know there is no record of Mkb 42 in front line service till the march/april 1943.
A high number of Mkb 42 was produced before 1943 for testing propose.
BUT the battle of Stalingrad showed german army that they need a new infantry weapon to fill the gap
between the old Kar98 and the MP 40 sub machine guns.

More detailed information about the german Sturmgewehre (assault rifles) u can find in:
Sturmgewehr from Firepower to Striking Power by Hans-Dieter Handrich.
But it is quiet expensive 

About the "best tank of ww2":
Well... i wont say that this is the IS-2.
Out of my view IS-2 had a number of issues that limited the performance of this tank. E.g. bad optics, slow rate of fire, faulty munition
(a high number of russian tank shells burst/break when they hit enemy's armour - especially the heavy shells) and poor/bad production quality.
BUT i have to say that there is no "best tank of ww2" because during the war technique and warfare and weapons changed so often that
tank warfare had to change so often. AND the military situation was so different for all this countries that there cant be parameters to find one "best tank of
all available ww2 tanks".
The IS-2 was a good heavy tank and an effective answer against the german Tiger I and Panther but is wasnt the best tank.

[Jeff 'Robotnik' W.]

BUT i have to say that there is no "best tank of ww2" because during the war technique and warfare and weapons changed so often that
tank warfare had to change so often. AND the military situation was so different for all this countries that there cant be parameters to find one "best tank of

Couldn't have said it better myself. World War 2 was a like a giant testing ground for tank design, no one knew which design would work best, which is why you see such a wide variety in tank designs in WWII more than in any other period afterwards.

faulty munition (a high number of russian tank shells burst/break when they hit enemy's armour - especially the heavy shells) and poor/bad production quality.

Yes, quality of steel was a factor that definitely played part during the war, and i think every country had trouble with it at least once during the warw. One example is the germans use of foreign labor led to poor quality and sabotaged metal, and it certainly wasnt helped by the constant bombing of factories and shortness of supplies. Same can be said for the soviets as well when they were in the process of moving all of their factories to the urals

[Sommarkatze]

Did the soviet RPD lightmachinegun see any action during ww2? I have been wondering about this for years since I found it it was made as early in 1944. Sure it didnt enter service until like 1952 but still? Did it even see any testing action during the war?

The same about the SKS1945 rifle.

Would it be possible that any of this two guns made it to the Manchurian campaigne?

[Jeff 'Robotnik' W.]

For the RPD, apparently just enough were made so that some saw service during the last stages of the war.  It is unknown how many were given though, as large scale production of the RPD to replace the DT LMG didnt start until afterwards, and details are not that clear or available. Also if i remember right, there are details of the RPD located in german papers on observations of captured enemy equipment.

The SKS is pretty much certain that it saw service in the end of WWII. there are examples in russian museums which are dated in 1945, but they were in 7.62x54r caliber, had a muzzle break type like a SVS 1936, no bayonet and a magazine that carried I think five rounds, and that a preproduction SKS run was completed in the spring of 1944

as to where it was used, the only info i could find was that it was tested by the First Byelorussian Front Army used it during their entrance into eastern germany.

[neosdark]

For the RPD, apparently just enough were made so that some saw service during the last stages of the war.  It is unknown how many were given though, as large scale production of the RPD to replace the DT LMG didnt start until afterwards, and details are not that clear or available. Also if i remember right, there are details of the RPD located in german papers on observations of captured enemy equipment.

The SKS is pretty much certain that it saw service in the end of WWII. there are examples in russian museums which are dated in 1945, but they were in 7.62x54r caliber, had a muzzle break type like a SVS 1936, no bayonet and a magazine that carried I think five rounds, and that a preproduction SKS run was completed in the spring of 1944

as to where it was used, the only info i could find was that it was tested by the First Byelorussian Front Army used it during their entrance into eastern germany.

The SKS was given for testing to a paratrooper unit of the First Byelorussia Front, but from my knowledge it wasn't chambered in 7.62x54R, but a 7.62x42 caliber, an accepted intermediate cartridge which used a lead core projectile (rather than the later steel cored 7.62x39 caliber)

As for the RPD, I've been to one of the State Record Buildings in Moscow, the "curator" gent there actually let us into a record room. Me and my friend found a piece on testing the RPD during WWII. However the curator pointed out some flaws with it and came to the conclusion that it was either propaganda or a fabrication (for whatever reason). SO I'm not too sure whether the RPD served in WWII. Although I would love to be proven wrong

[saprize21]

Anyone that can add some more to my second question about mp44?

[Gerrit 'Lord Rommel' G.]

Thought i already answered to this question.
There is no record of a Mkb 42 in front line services before march/april 1943.
By this data combat service in Stalingrad is impossible.
And keep something in mind; German troops were encircled in late 1942 in Stalingrad. They needed other materials than a new weapon.

[saprize21]

Hmm well the Tripwire crew who made Red Orchestra 2 said they had a source that the weapon existed in Stalingrad I will see if i can found out what their source was

[Sommarkatze]

Thanks for the ansvers guys! The one about RPD is really intresting. I mean compared to other LMGs of that time that thing would have rocked the battlefield!
The one about Tripwire and the Mkb42. IMO I think they went ahead and put it in the game because they wanted a cool unique gun as a reward weapon. Kind of sad that they did that because there were tons of other more correct weapons they could have choosed XD


Another question! This time about protective gear!

The russian body armour . That big steel plate over your torso. Did it work? I read about a german who shoot him with his pistol and he survived but bigger calibres? When did these things hit the scene?
Were they good? If they were did Germans capture them / tried to make their own counterpart?


I seen action figures portraying German flamethrower troops. This guy had an glass shield on his helmet like these riot helmets use to have. Did these exist? Bulletproof glas or just pure glas for fire protection.

And one last. Silencers. I now that perhaps SAS and commandos or such used them. But did anybody else? Brandenburgers? Any frontline units?

Thanks!

[Jeff 'Robotnik' W.]

Yeah, the body armor was effective against 9mm pistol rounds, such as those fired by the MP-40 from a distance of 10m or greater, and could protect againt the G41 at 200m or greater. rifles and machine guns would shoot right through it. They hit the scene around 1942, and were given to assault engineers and tank-riders

Their usefullness depended on the situation however, with the armor being most useful in cities and close quarters combat, and least useful in fields or the open, when it was a burden to carry around for long distances.

When the germans came accross then, they did end up using them just like they did with most enemy equipment they came across. They ended up making a limited amount of copies of them during the war as well for parts of the SS, but they were only available in limited quantities.


As for your question on the helmets with the glass, i have not heard of those before so im not sure if they exist or not

As for suppressors, luckily i had a list lying around saying which weapons of each country had suppressors

Australia:
-silenced Austen Mk1: Austen Mk1 submachinegun equipped with a silencer and a new folding stock

Czechoslovakia:
- CZ 1927 pistol with silencer; not sure if this silenced version was used by the Germans after occupation; according to Fritz Hahn´s book "weapons and secret weapons of the German army 1933-1945" the suppressor was quite effective; one source claims the use of silenced (?) CZ 1927 by the Westgerman intelligence agency BND (BundesNachrichtenDienst) after the war, I don´t believe this source because officially BND agents aren´t allowed to carry any weapons

Finland
- Mosin & Nagant m/91-30 with silencer: captured Russian S-40 and its Finnish copies were attached to Finnish Nagant rifles; very rare use

France
- silenced Erma EMP: built by the Germans for the special police of Vichy; not used by the Germans

Germany
- P-08 pistol with silencer;some pictures prove that it existed;unfortunately no more information
- Walther PPK with silencer (caliber 5.6mm);some pictures prove that it existed;unfortunately no more information
- Revolver 612(r) [Nagant 1885]: a silencer was developed by the "SS-Waffenakademie"; prototype only (?)
- Steyr M12/M16 machine pistol with silencer (thx varjag); used by the Brandenburger
- silenced Erma EMP: not used by the Germans (see France)
- silenced Mp-40:prototype only
- Mp 751(e) [Sten Mk2(s)] said to be the most used silenced weapon by the Germans; Otto Skorzeny was said to have a Mp 751(e) as his personal weapon; some sources claim the Mp751e) wasused during the operation "Greif" in 1944
- G43: all G43 from the mid-1944 to 1945 production were able to use a suppressor, but these silencers seem to be very rare
- K98K: some K98K got a German rebuilt of the Soviet S-40 silencer; no other information
- Kommando-Karabiner: special rifle with the silencer of the Mp 751(e); only four Karabiner were built
- Stg-44: several sources claim that some silencers for the Stg-44 and its versions (Mp-42 etc.) existed and were used by the Brandenburger

Italy
- Beretta 1934 pistol with silencer; this suppressor was also quite effective removing 80% of the noise of the shot according to "Infantriewaffen Gestern" by Reiner Lidschun and Gunter Wollert;this gun was used by the fascist special police OVRA; (also see UK)

Russia
- Nagant 1885 revolver with silencer; said to be used by the NKWD partisans and special troops; I´ve seen two versions of the gun: one with integrated suppressor and one with a removeable suppressor
- Nagant 91/30 rifle with S-40 silencer; used by special troops and partisans
- Tokarev TT-33 with silencer; used by SMERSCH

UK
- silenced Welrod Mk.1 pistol used by SOE (also see USA)
- silenced Sleeve pistol used by SOE
- .22 caliber Winchester M74 rifle with silencer tested by the British home guard in 1940; the guns didn´t prove to be a success, becaus under croud conditions the scope was prone to be damaged (also see USA)
- silenced De Lisle carbine used by commandos in Northern France and South-East Asia; according to some information the folding stock version was just a prototype, other articles claim it was the only version used in South-East Asia; said to be the most quiet rifle ever built
- silenced Sten Mk2(S) smg;said to be the most used silenced weapon of WW2; issued mainly to commandos and partisans (also see Germany)
-silenced Sten Mk6(S) smg; used by commandos(?)
- Webley & Scott .25 pistol with silencer; used by the SOE in France
- silenced Wel-Wand .25 rifle; one shot silenced rifle; special design for undercover operations; prototype only (?)
- Beretta 1934 with silencer; according to "Der perfekte Spion - Die Welt der Geheimdienste" Berettas 1934 with silencers were used by hunting teams of the SAS to assassinate murderers of SAS/SOE-agents after the war


USA
- silenced Welrod Mk2 pistol ; used by OSS; also used by the CIA after the war
- silenced High Standard H-D pistols; some sources claim the High Standard to be the most used silenced weapon of the OSS; also used after the war (e.g. Garry Power had one as he was captured by the soviets)
- Thompson M1 with silencer; I saw a picture of it, I have no other information
- silenced M3 submachinegun; used by the OSS(?);versions with an US-produced silencer and with the silencer of the Sten Mk2(S) exist; the gun wasn´t a great success, because the US-produced suppressor wasn´t very effective
- Winchester M74 with silencer; the rifles of the British homeguard are said to be issued to the OSS later in the war