# German Super Weapons



## fly boy (May 5, 2009)

i just picked up this book called my tank is fight and one of the things they made scare me 

The landkreuzer p.1500 monster a massive 800mm gunned tank thing if i had a pic of it i would show it to you but if you have anything on it.


----------



## RabidAlien (May 5, 2009)

"My Tank Is Fight"....? If I'm not mistaken, that's classified under the "comedy" or "fiction" sections. I wouldn't use that for a serious reference.


----------



## comiso90 (May 5, 2009)

fly boy.. how about taking 2 seconds and doing a quick Google search?

Posting a photo will actually contribute to the forum and help identify what ur referring too.

I found this pic in 2 seconds... 

Your question is valid and it's an interesting subject.... Please help by doing some nominal research first.. it helps others.

.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 5, 2009)

Your P.1500 was never built. It never left the drawing board and was canceled in 1943.

Why?

Because it would have been worthless. Something that big, would have been too slow and too easy of a target for aircraft. Besides it would have sank in the damn mud, it was so damn heavy!


----------



## Colin1 (May 5, 2009)

Assuming it did
surely the mother of all anti-tank mines would render it extremely difficult to repair and reasonably easy to finish off with fighter bombers and probably even strategic bombing - it's certainly big enough.

What were they thinking of powering it with? Did Maybach have something on the drawing board too?


----------



## RabidAlien (May 5, 2009)

Colin1 said:


> What were they thinking of powering it with? Did Maybach have something on the drawing board too?



Probably use the same engine running Hitler's flying saucer...


----------



## Colin1 (May 5, 2009)

RabidAlien said:


> Probably use the same engine running Hitler's flying saucer...


It looks like a slightly more mobile Maginot Line - until it hits the mother of all anti-tank mines of course, then it's just a Maginot Line


----------



## RabidAlien (May 5, 2009)




----------



## comiso90 (May 5, 2009)

A lot of subs could be built for the price of one p.1500

They coulda just put treads on a destroyer...

I would love to see one hit by a Tallboy bomb!


----------



## Doughboy (May 5, 2009)

Here is a superweapon.






Here is the german railway gun Dora.


----------



## RabidAlien (May 5, 2009)

That Dora is one huge gun!!! Same caliber as "Anzio Annie", I presume?


----------



## Soren (May 7, 2009)

Just to give an idea of how big the 800mm projectiles the Dora fired really are:


----------



## GrauGeist (May 7, 2009)

If I remember right, the K5e peices (Leopold aka Anzio Annie) were 28cm (280mm) and the Schwerer Gustov was 80cm (800mm)


----------



## RabidAlien (May 7, 2009)

Sounds about right. I knew Annie's were in the 200mm range. Didn't the US bring one back to the states (a Leopold) for testing/training? My braincell is wanting to say its on display at some academy right now....?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 7, 2009)

Soren, what museum is that pictures from?


----------



## GrauGeist (May 7, 2009)

RabidAlien said:


> Sounds about right. I knew Annie's were in the 200mm range. Didn't the US bring one back to the states (a Leopold) for testing/training? My braincell is wanting to say its on display at some academy right now....?


They brought back a couple K5E guns for testing. The only one left is Leopold, on static at Aberdeen.


----------



## CharlesBronson (May 7, 2009)

Nice video showing the manufacture of the K-5 280 railway "supergun".
388 tons of hard german steel.

Note in the minute 2:20 the huge copper case used to cointain the powder silk bags. Even in large caliber like the 420 and 800mm the germans still used a metallic case instead loose powder bags.



_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gaBREJbcOPg_


----------



## Soren (May 8, 2009)

The Dora Heavy Gustav were both 800mm guns. The Gustav was used at Sevastapol and the Dora at Stalingrad.


----------



## Soren (May 8, 2009)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Soren, what museum is that pictures from?



The Imperial War Museum in London, there's a Jagdpanther there as-well, very close to the T-34. Great place, you should go there some time.


----------



## starling (May 8, 2009)

yes,jerry designers certainly had some silly,stupid ideas.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 8, 2009)

Soren said:


> The Imperial War Museum in London, there's a Jagdpanther there as-well, very close to the T-34. Great place, you should go there some time.




I will go there. Me and my wife are flying to London for a week next month. Going to check out that museum.


----------



## Soren (May 8, 2009)

It's a great place Adler, very modern if one can say that considering all the old equipment it contains  But no it's very well set up, with many of the tanks having been very skillfully cut up on their sides, allowing a great view of the interior. Really gives you a good feel of how it must have been working in one of those steel boxes. But tanks are far from the only things they've got there, it's pretty much everything, from uniforms, smallarms, cars, airplanes, tanks to artillery pieces, the lot.

You've probably already seen some parts of the museum from Discovery channel, they had a series of programmes with a lot of footage from inside the museum, but still far from all the places were shown and only a handful of the machines. So you're in for a great treat no doubt, but you might as-well expect to be there for a minimal of 2 hours or more, so I hope your wife likes history as much as you do


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 10, 2009)

Soren said:


> It's a great place Adler, very modern if one can say that considering all the old equipment it contains  But no it's very well set up, with many of the tanks having been very skillfully cut up on their sides, allowing a great view of the interior. Really gives you a good feel of how it must have been working in one of those steel boxes. But tanks are far from the only things they've got there, it's pretty much everything, from uniforms, smallarms, cars, airplanes, tanks to artillery pieces, the lot.
> 
> You've probably already seen some parts of the museum from Discovery channel, they had a series of programmes with a lot of footage from inside the museum, but still far from all the places were shown and only a handful of the machines. So you're in for a great treat no doubt, but you might as-well expect to be there for a minimal of 2 hours or more, so I hope your wife likes history as much as you do



I am looking forward to it. I have been to London 2 times already, and have never made it to this museum. It is in our itinerary this time however!


----------



## bigZ (May 11, 2009)

Anybody have more info on the V3 superguns?

http://www.vanderweel.info/atlantikwall/pictures/uk036b.jpg

The Germans knew how to waste money and resources better than any other nation during WWII.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 11, 2009)

bigZ said:


> The Germans knew how to waste money and resources better than any other nation during WWII.



I will certainly agree with you on that. While some of these "super" weapons may have been innovative or ahead of there time, I really feel that too many resources were wasted on these weapons that had no chance of changing the outcome of the war.


----------



## Soren (May 12, 2009)

Well it's typical German; Perfectionists experimentalists beyond reason. That coupled with the Nazi ideology which emphasized a constant seek for grandeur, and you get 800mm railway guns!


----------



## Colin1 (May 12, 2009)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> I will certainly agree with you on that. While some of these "super" weapons may have been innovative or ahead of there time, I really feel that too many resources were wasted on these weapons that had no chance of changing the outcome of the war.


Well
I wasn't going to comment but I really do agree
railway guns can't have been terribly decisive and certainly not very versatile - if you as the enemy have an idea where they're going to be needed and deployed then you almost certainly know how they're going to get there! A quick word to the local resistance and one massive track demolition upstream of the gun and a similar one downstream and it's pretty much fighter-bomber fodder.

I think these weapons of grandeur may have had their day in WWI


----------



## Stitch (May 16, 2009)

Colin1 said:


> Assuming it did
> surely the mother of all anti-tank mines would render it extremely difficult to repair and reasonably easy to finish off with fighter bombers and probably even strategic bombing - it's certainly big enough.
> 
> What were they thinking of powering it with? Did Maybach have something on the drawing board too?



They were planning on using two (2) U-Boot motors to power the thing; however, it still would have been extremely slow.


----------



## GrauGeist (May 16, 2009)

The Gustov was a good example of the ideas the German leadership had, versus the reality of current events.

The Gustov was conceived as a means to assault the maginot line, but Hitler grew impatient and went around the line by invading France's neighbors. Interesting to think of how history may have been affected if the Gustov had been finished in time for the assault on France. Perhaps Belgium and the other contries would have been left out of the conquest?


----------



## imalko (May 17, 2009)

Soren said:


> The Dora Heavy Gustav were both 800mm guns. The Gustav was used at Sevastapol and the Dora at Stalingrad.



Soren, are you sure that Dora was used at Stalingrad? I must say this is the first time I hear something like that. I thought that this kind of gun was used only at Sevastopol.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 17, 2009)

Dora was set up to be used against Stalingrad but she never fired any rounds on the city and was withdrawn with the German retreat.

Schwerer Gustav was used in the siege of Sevastapol


----------



## GrauGeist (May 17, 2009)

Imalko, Dora was brought up to about 9 miles from Stalingrad in August of 1942, and was ready by September. It had to be withdrawn shortly after that though, because of the Soviet's move to encircle the city.

Gustav was deployed in several actions in the Crimea, being used to attack a number of Soviet forts and pounding Sevastopol. It was then deployed to Leningrad, but never used.


----------



## imalko (May 17, 2009)

Thanks for the info guys! As I wrote, never heard about intended use of Dora at Stalingrad before. Well, this is great place to learn new things.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 17, 2009)

GrauGeist said:


> Imalko, Dora was brought up to about 9 miles from Stalingrad in August of 1942, and was ready by September. It had to be withdrawn shortly after that though, because of the Soviet's move to encircle the city.
> 
> Gustav was deployed in several actions in the Crimea, being used to attack a number of Soviet forts and pounding Sevastopol. It was then deployed to Leningrad, but never used.



You are correct. Like I said, Dora was never actually used at Stalingrad. 

Being ready for use and being used are two different things.


----------



## imalko (May 17, 2009)

Thats probably the reason why I never heard or read about it before....


----------



## Soren (May 17, 2009)

I can't remember wether it was actually fired at Stalingrad or not, but it was certainly there. It was however hastily disassembled in fear of it being captured by the Russians in 42.


----------

