# StuG III



## Amsel (Nov 15, 2009)

I have scanned a bunch of photos of the StuG, which happens to be one of my favorite AFV's of the Second World War.


----------



## vikingBerserker (Nov 15, 2009)

Nice! For me it's only 2nd to the Hetzer.


----------



## imalko (Nov 15, 2009)

Yes, Hetzer was formidable (and cheap) tank killer but one should remember it entered service only late in the war, while StuG III was used from beginning to the end of the conflict. StuG was a great concept and it came a long way from infantry supporting vehicle to the tank killer.

Great scans Amsel. Thanks for sharing.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Nov 15, 2009)

> Nice! For me it's only 2nd to the Hetzer.



Hetzer had a good armor-gun package but was really cramped for its crew.

Good topic.

Some more:


----------



## Amsel (Nov 15, 2009)

Great photos. I really like the photo of the StuG on the prime mover. 

Here is what made the StuG so formidable...











Low profile and a 75mm.


----------



## Amsel (Nov 15, 2009)

Here is a great photo of inside a StuG including the scissors telescope.


----------



## Amsel (Nov 15, 2009)

And one of my favorite photos of an early model and mascot.


----------



## Erich (Nov 15, 2009)

Amsel have you tied seeking out several of the German language individual histories on the unit ? yes the Stug Ausf G is my fav German armored crate too. I knew a RK winner in the Pz. Jagd Abt. 1 that commanded one in late 43 till wars end in Ost Preußia. he popped at least 6 T-34's may a dozen while in the Ausf. G machine but received his RK during his separate tank duels just with a Panzerfaust.

hey just for Amsel, the top pic is of him after receiving the RK and commanding his machine in October of 1943


----------



## Amsel (Nov 15, 2009)

Erich said:


> Amsel have you tied seeking out several of the German language individual histories on the unit ? yes the Stug Ausf G is my fav German armored crate too. I knew a RK winner in the Pz. Jagd Abt. 1 that commanded one in late 43 till wars end in Ost Preußia. he popped at least 6 T-34's may a dozen while in the Ausf. G machine but received his RK during his separate tank duels just with a Panzerfaust.
> 
> hey just for Amsel, the top pic is of him after receiving the RK and commanding his machine in October of 1943



I am slowly building a collection of books about the history of Leibstandarte. I am always looking for unit histories and am especially interested in Pz.Jagd Abt. 1 as well as Aufklarungsabteilung 1. 

Great photos, Erich. Were they taken in the Ukraine?


----------



## Erich (Nov 15, 2009)

somewhere in the SAoviet Union before the rush to Hungary and then the defense of Ost Preußia where the Pz jagd 1 destroyed numerous T-34's and KV's plus met up with the JS I.

are you familiar with the incredible German site sturmartilliere ?, man you must see it and book mark it.

E `


----------



## Amsel (Nov 15, 2009)

I just searched for it and can't seem to find it. Would you have a link by chance?


----------



## Erich (Nov 15, 2009)

look up sturmartilliere, it should be the first one listed. now I just had time to check this twice and both times it crashed my PC. it's all in German but well worth getting on to. some interesting book links, one history is being published into English and is for sale along with a DVD of the living members being interviewed


----------



## Lucky13 (Nov 15, 2009)

Who dosen't love the StuG III? I like it just as much as the Tiger and the Panther! F and G are my favorites as well...


----------



## Erich (Nov 15, 2009)

you're avatar is doing weird things man.


----------



## tomo pauk (Nov 16, 2009)

StuG-III was one of greatest assets for German army to have back in WWII. Along with men that manned it that is.


----------



## piet (Nov 16, 2009)

8)


----------



## Marshall_Stack (Nov 16, 2009)

Did the StugIII use the same 75mm cannon as the Panther?


----------



## Amsel (Nov 16, 2009)

Marshall_Stack said:


> Did the StugIII use the same 75mm cannon as the Panther?



No, the main gun was a different model. The Panther used the 7.5 cm KwK 42.

The later StuG variants used the 7.5 cm Sturmkanone (StuK) 40 L/48 and the 7.5 cm Sturmkanone (StuK) 40 L/43.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Nov 16, 2009)

Not only the barrel was shorter, the cartrigde cases were completely different.


----------



## Erich (Nov 16, 2009)

one way to haul bridging materials, Amsel did you access that German sturmartilliere site yet ? it is still throwing me off .....too bad, it's a great deal of needed information. I sent a scan of a deceased gunner from one of the Stug Abteilungs and the German chap never replied to me....about 2 years ago.


----------



## Amsel (Nov 16, 2009)

I have been unable to find it. I found a couple of good sites but I don't think they are the one you're refering to. I'm hoping to stumble upon it eventually.


----------



## davebender (Nov 16, 2009)

Cool picture.


----------



## Soren (Nov 16, 2009)

Marshall_Stack said:


> Did the StugIII use the same 75mm cannon as the Panther?



You can see the exact differences here: 
http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/ww2-general/updated-tank-gun-comparison-19257.html

The StuGIV mounted the KwK40, while the Panther mounted the KwK42.


----------



## Amsel (Nov 16, 2009)

Good info, Soren. 

What percentage of the Werhmachts' AFV's were Sturmgeschutz's; do you know?


----------



## Soren (Nov 16, 2009)

Don't know the exact percentage, but it was pretty high compared to most other tanks.


----------



## davebender (Nov 16, 2009)

German armored fighting vehicle production during World War II - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
3,215 x StuG III StuH 42.
30 x StuG IV

~1,000 x Marder SP AT guns.
345 x Hornisse SP AT guns.

77 x Panzer Mk II.
377 x Panzer Mk III.
3,013 x Panzer Mk IV
1,848 x Panzer Mk V (Panther)
650 x Panzer Mk VI (Tiger)


----------



## Soren (Nov 16, 2009)

Yeah, close to 20% of the total (Keeping in mind the rest not listed). That's a lot.


----------



## m kenny (Nov 16, 2009)

Amsel said:


> What percentage of the Werhmachts' AFV's were Sturmgeschutz's; do you know?



Stug became more numerous as the war progressed.


----------



## Erich (Nov 16, 2009)

here is the site:

Index

many of the German Panzer divisions during late 44 replaced their II. Abteilung or at least their Pz. IV Abt with Stug III's in the Panzer regiment. Of course the regular Stug Abteilung still existed as well as replacement if possible of the 7.5cm Pak 40's by Stugs in the Panzerjagd Abteilung


----------



## GrauGeist (Nov 16, 2009)

I visited the site last night, Erich...worked fine for me.

Real nice setup they have there!


----------



## Amsel (Nov 16, 2009)

Erich said:


> here is the site:
> 
> Index
> 
> many of the German Panzer divisions during late 44 replaced their II. Abteilung or at least their Pz. IV Abt with Stug III's in the Panzer regiment. Of course the regular Stug Abteilung still existed as well as replacement if possible of the 7.5cm Pak 40's by Stugs in the Panzerjagd Abteilung


A great site. Many thanks for pointing it out.


----------



## Amsel (Nov 17, 2009)

Here is a StuG that was captured and crewed by Americans.


----------



## Marshall_Stack (Nov 17, 2009)

Interesting picture Amsel. I have never heard or seen the US using enemy tanks.


----------



## Soren (Nov 17, 2009)

Check this out then Marshall


----------



## CharlesBronson (Nov 17, 2009)

That captured one is using the aditional concrete layer over the frontal armor.

Talking about guns, this is an Sturmhaubitze 42 reloading, note the 105mm projectiles, the propellant cases were stored separately up to 1944 when a "fixed" ammunition was introduced.


----------



## Erich (Nov 17, 2009)

but used in a different form of defense that one of artillery when and if needed, not AT unless provoked


----------



## CharlesBronson (Nov 17, 2009)

Of course. it was a direct fire howitzer on tracks. However some armor piercing discarding sabot ammo was developed very late in the war, to use that the Stug42 loose the muzzle brake wich wasnt compatible with saboted projectiles.


----------



## davebender (Nov 17, 2009)

The German StuG series performed the same infantry support mission as the Soviet Su-76 and American M4(105) Sherman. They should be considered artillery rather then anti-tank weapons.


----------



## Erich (Nov 17, 2009)

that would be a nope Dave, as I said in an earlier posting the Stug III replaced the Pz IV in the Panzer regiment.

as from a couple of German sources over 10,000 Allied/Soviet vehicles were popped out by the Stug's, believe what you want as fact but they were a tremendous impression on non Axis forces, low down, strung out and effective offering the punch that was often times lacking in 1945. also check out the site I listed, whether a person understands Deutsch or not, it's a keeper.

I have a copy of a German Panzer-jagd Abteilung make-up in front of me that I just pulled out; the Pz-Jagd Kompanie comprised some 8 -10 Stug III's accompanied by a Stab of 2-4 Stug III's. a II. Kompanie was also supplied within the Abteilung and the 3rd Kompanie was useually a towed Pak 40 unit but also it could be replaced by Stug III's: this was changed if applicable and available in late 1944 to Pz-jagd IV (Jagdpanzer IV) which seemed to be a rareity even in spring of 45.


----------



## davebender (Nov 17, 2009)

What time frame are you referring to? 

The Pz IV Auf A through Auf E produced during 1939 to 1942 had a 7.5cm/24 howitzer mounted in the turret. They were infantry support vehicles. So it makes sense the StuG would take their place when the Pz IV was up-gunned to become a main battle tank.


----------



## m kenny (Nov 17, 2009)

davebender said:


> What time frame are you referring to?



Stug. were used in place of tanks because there was a shortage of tanks. It was not a deliberate decision because of any inherent superiority of the Stug. Thet were making the best of what was available.


----------



## davebender (Nov 18, 2009)

> Stug. were used in place of tanks because there was a shortage of tanks. It was not a deliberate decision because of any inherent superiority of the Stug. Thet were making the best of what was available.


I don't doubt that. It's the same reason WWII Germany produced the Marder series of SP AT guns using whatever tracked vehicle chassis were available. It's also why hundreds of captured Soviet T-34s were modified to German standards and then issued to both Heer and Waffen SS units.


----------



## Erich (Nov 18, 2009)

Dave the time frame is 1944, I thought this was somewhat clear, obviously not ..........


----------



## Vincenzo (Nov 18, 2009)

davebender said:


> What time frame are you referring to?
> 
> The Pz IV Auf A through Auf E produced during 1939 to 1942 had a 7.5cm/24 howitzer mounted in the turret. They were infantry support vehicles. So it makes sense the StuG would take their place when the Pz IV was up-gunned to become a main battle tank.



The PZ IV was not infantry support vehicles were tanks like others panzer, was not issued a special units, the 75 short gun had best penetration of 37 (with AP) with newest HEAT ammo also best of 50/42


----------



## Lucky13 (Nov 18, 2009)

Any ideas why the Allies didn't adopt the StuG concept?


----------



## davebender (Nov 18, 2009)

The Sherman tank served the same purpose and the western allies had plenty of them.


----------



## tomo pauk (Nov 18, 2009)

They did.
French had Char B, USA had M3 medium (Grant/Lee in UK service), Russkies developed SU-85, -100, 122 -152, and ISU-122 152.
Brits also had many CS (= close support) versions of their tanks, with hull mounted 3in howitzer.

Dave just beat me for another reason


----------



## Erich (Nov 18, 2009)

the purpose of the Stug III in later marks changed from support vehicle to active panzer replacement and if need be AT

pick up a copy of one of the Stug unit histories or Sturmgeschütze vor


----------



## tomo pauk (Nov 18, 2009)

Pz-III hull and Pak-40 combo was just so balanced, both were masterpieces of German industry.


----------



## Erich (Nov 18, 2009)

a chap I was in contact briefly before his demise 

World War 2 Awards.com - SPRANZ, Bodo


----------



## CharlesBronson (Nov 18, 2009)

> The German StuG series performed the same infantry support mission as the Soviet Su-76 and American M4(105) Sherman. They should be considered artillery rather then anti-tank weapons.



That was the intention in the early short L24 armed Stugs, however since the days formulation of the concept for the employment of this armored vehicle there was some space for the antitank role, Von Manstein was the creator of the concept and wrote this:


----------



## Juha (Nov 18, 2009)

Hello Tomo
British CS tanks usually had their main weapon, early on 3.7in howitzer, then 3in howitzer and later, from Churchill V/Cromwell VI onwards, 95mm howitzer, in their turret, only one early Churchill Mk had the 3in howitzer in the hull and then there was Churchill 3in Gun Carrier in which turret was replaced with 3in cannon in an armoured box, but that was IIRC only a proto or limited production vehicle. British CS tanks were not infantry support vehicles, their function was to give smoke and HE support to gun tanks, which had 2pdr or 6pdr guns which had no or poor HE ammo. Later they just have more effective HE/smoke ammo than gun tanks with 75mm gun.

But British had whole class of tanks specially designed for infantry support, from Matilda I to Churchill Mk VIII, the infantry tanks. In essence heavily armoured but slowly moving mg-nets before they got US 75mm gun with good HE capacity, but lost some anti-armour power, 2pdr was excellent A/T gun up and incl 1940 and 6pdr has good A/T power during 42-43 but was inadequate against front armour of Pz V or VI.

Juha


----------



## Juha (Nov 18, 2009)

Hello CB
most of Sturmartillery fell under artillery branch, those which were organic in Panzerdivs, at least those in Pz regiments in early 43 when they were used as substitudes to non-exist panzers, belonged to armoured troops. Those which were ad-hoc uattached to panzer divs remained in artillery branch. I cannot recall the status of organic sturmartillery battalions of Panzergrenadierdivs.

Juha


----------



## CharlesBronson (Nov 18, 2009)

Well, the Stug replacing frontline tanks in german panzer Div indicates two things:

a) the good and reliable design that the Stug was with a lot of room for upgunning and improving.

b) The bad state of the german tank planification and manufacturing in late war.

*Ausf F/8*


----------



## davebender (Nov 18, 2009)

> b) The bad state of the german tank planification and manufacturing in late war


The StuG series were excellent inexpensive infantry support vehicles. However they cannot compare with the Panther G, which is what all German armored battalions would have had if enough were available during 1944.


----------

