Soviet M1938 120mm mortar.
- Thread starter davebender
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
- Thread starter
- #22
davebender
1st Lieutenant
Only if equipped with proper sights for indirect fire, which I doubt for a recoilless rifle or any other direct fire infantry gun.
Shortround6
Major General
The German recoil-less rifles make good sense as specialized support guns for certain types of infantry like mountain and airborne. They don't make much sense as general issue direct fire guns. The regular German infantry guns could fire direct but were often used for indirect fire. Which is why they had zone charges. Recoil-less rifles used in the direct fire mode don't last very long unless they use their light weight to move early and often. This means frequent interruptions in their ability to provide support. Recoiless rifles have a very large firing signature and are hard to hide. They also cannot be used from bunkers or inside buildings. The German recoil-less guns also had a rather low muzzle velocity which, hollow charge shells and all, made them a bit short ranged for good anti-tank work, especially considering they weren't going to get many repeat shots.
The Russians were able to use large mortars and get away with it for a number of reasons. Also remember the qualifier "get away with it".
The Russian use of large mortars AS substitute artillery came about for a number of reasons. Lack of real artillery being one. Mortars being cheap is another. But you have to look at other things going on. Russian tactics were often simple. Russian communications between units was not good, shortage of radios, field phones and phone wire. Russian unit sizes were often smaller than German units of the same "name". A German Regiment could be much larger than a Russian Regiment and so on. The Russians also had artillery battalions, regiments and divisions that were not ALL integrated into parent units like most western armies. A Russian Brigade or Division could seem to lacking much artillery on it's "paper" TOE but could have separate artillery units attached to it an a temporary basis or in some cases not "attached" to it but firing in support of it at the direction of higher command. The Russians even organized (later in the war) artillery corp and perhaps an artillery army or two (?) to support certain operations or offensives.
What this means is that while the Russians may have used 12cm mortars as regimental or divisional artillery they were still building, issuing, and using conventional howitzers and guns in large numbers to support them.
The Russians were able to use large mortars and get away with it for a number of reasons. Also remember the qualifier "get away with it".
The Russian use of large mortars AS substitute artillery came about for a number of reasons. Lack of real artillery being one. Mortars being cheap is another. But you have to look at other things going on. Russian tactics were often simple. Russian communications between units was not good, shortage of radios, field phones and phone wire. Russian unit sizes were often smaller than German units of the same "name". A German Regiment could be much larger than a Russian Regiment and so on. The Russians also had artillery battalions, regiments and divisions that were not ALL integrated into parent units like most western armies. A Russian Brigade or Division could seem to lacking much artillery on it's "paper" TOE but could have separate artillery units attached to it an a temporary basis or in some cases not "attached" to it but firing in support of it at the direction of higher command. The Russians even organized (later in the war) artillery corp and perhaps an artillery army or two (?) to support certain operations or offensives.
What this means is that while the Russians may have used 12cm mortars as regimental or divisional artillery they were still building, issuing, and using conventional howitzers and guns in large numbers to support them.
- Thread starter
- #25
davebender
1st Lieutenant
1935 Germany had the same issues only worse. They had to equip 36 army divisions almost from scratch. OHL would have known about French and Finnish 120mm mortars so they must have considered a 120mm mortar of their own.
Shortround6
Major General
The Difference is that the Soviets didn't intend for the mortars to be a total substitute for regular artillery. A German division was expected to operate more on it's own and require less support from Corp or Army. The Russian units were not expected to either cover the frontage as the German units and were given more high level support.
Equipping Divisions in peace time with substandard weapons leaves you nowhere to go when the war breaks out. The 120mm mortar is not a substitute for the 105 howitzer.
Equipping Divisions in peace time with substandard weapons leaves you nowhere to go when the war breaks out. The 120mm mortar is not a substitute for the 105 howitzer.
- Thread starter
- #27
davebender
1st Lieutenant
I agree but 120mm mortars available within 6 months are better then 105mm howitzers available three years from now. Nor would heavy mortars become useless when howitzers finally arrive. They could be grouped into heavy mortar battalions which provide additional punch for offensive operations.
On one-to-one basis, 120mm mortar is indeed not an substitute for the 105mm howitzer, ww2 time frame. Substituting 1 howitzer with 3 mortars maybe works better? Or the Germans should went for something in 14-16 mm calibre, to substitute both 105mm how and 15cm sig?
It is rather significant, though, that Germans copied Soviet mortar and issued it to their units - a signal that it was providing them with one or more features that were absent from their weapons. The absence of recoil system might be the one, allowing the operation when General Winter took charge?
The 120mm mortars and heavier were considered as artillery weapons in ex-Yu army, while 82mm and lighter were considered as infantry weapons. Perhaps based on Soviet doctrine, ex-Yu army being influenced in many things by Soviet army?
It is rather significant, though, that Germans copied Soviet mortar and issued it to their units - a signal that it was providing them with one or more features that were absent from their weapons. The absence of recoil system might be the one, allowing the operation when General Winter took charge?
The 120mm mortars and heavier were considered as artillery weapons in ex-Yu army, while 82mm and lighter were considered as infantry weapons. Perhaps based on Soviet doctrine, ex-Yu army being influenced in many things by Soviet army?
- Thread starter
- #29
davebender
1st Lieutenant
The German Army was still absent a whole lot of stuff as of June 1941. It's possible 120mm mortars were already on the procurement wish list along with 105mm SP howitzers, 17cm long range heavy artillery, towing tractors, 4WD Opel Blitz trucks, a 32 ton MBT, enough Sd.Kfz.251 to completely equip all armored and mechanized infantry divisions, a new infantry rifle chambered for the 7.92 x 33mm cartridge adopted during 1940 etc.
I was reading Hogg and another source and they pointed out that Recoilless rifles were a dead end for germany because they consummed far too much propellant, which was needed for larger amounts of heavy artillery. This is why they went to the 'High Low pressure gun' at the end of the war, because it was more in line with the amount of artillery consumption of propellant.
One of the main reasons germans went to mortars over Infantry guns later in the war, was the fact that most artillery that was lost was left behind and mortars would be much easier to transport as organic units of war.....that and the fact they were alot cheaper and easiler to mass produce.
One of the main reasons germans went to mortars over Infantry guns later in the war, was the fact that most artillery that was lost was left behind and mortars would be much easier to transport as organic units of war.....that and the fact they were alot cheaper and easiler to mass produce.
Last edited:
Shortround6
Major General
For an exercise try drawing out on a piece of paper a deployment for the guns. The 105s had traverse of 60 degrees, draw to scale and put the guns 6-8000meters behind the lines and play with spacing. 3000 or 6000 meters apart. See the overlap on the front line and support it can provide without moving in the advance and how far into enemy territory it can shoot hit enemy mortars and artillery.
Now try siting mortars with 6000meters range. See how much smaller the area they can cover or how many more you need.
For an Idea of what the Germans tried to achieve with the 120mm mortars see.
http://www.wwiivehicles.com/germany...tion-and-equipment/1939-infantry-division.png
http://www.wwiivehicles.com/germany...tion-and-equipment/1944-infantry-division.png
See the levels at which the 120mm mortars were attached (in the inf battalion), and see the reduction in numbers. 1944 Division was about 2/3 the size of the 1939 Division.
Find TOEs for soviet units and see where and how they used 120mm mortars.
- Thread starter
- #32
davebender
1st Lieutenant
I've read that opinion also but I don't believe it.
Inexpensive LAWs have largely replaced recoilless rifles in most armies. 1943 Germany was at the forefront of that shift with the Panzerfaust. Without the Panzerfaust (and Panzerschreck) I think the Heer would have continued to develop and procure recoilless rifles. Eventually they would end up with something similiar to the Carl Gustav which historically entered Swedish service during 1948.
- Thread starter
- #33
davebender
1st Lieutenant
I doubt 1935 Germany had enough offensive capability to advance into Luxemboug.
If Germany procures mortars during the mid 1930s they would be strictly for defensive firepower to stop a French or Polish invasion.
If Germany procures mortars during the mid 1930s they would be strictly for defensive firepower to stop a French or Polish invasion.
Shortround6
Major General
You are assuming that a 1931-33 mortar has the same performance as a 1940-42 mortar.
You are assuming that the Germans were defensive minded in 1935.
You are assuming you can train for offensive maneuvers using defensive weapons.
Please look at the TOEs again. German divisions shrunk because of manpower shortages and the desire for more if less powerful units. The Germans used the 120mm mortars to beef up the infantry battalion as the Divisional artillery pretty much stayed the same at sixteen 4 gun batteries. Please note that the the number of batteries did not shrink (on paper) and that the 12cm mortars were not supposed to be used in the divisional artillery regiment/battalions. The ratio of artillery and mortar tubes per 100 men increased. Germans used "liberated guns" from Czechoslovakia, Poland, France, England and Russia to equip Divisions with rather than standardize on a cheap mortar despite the simplified logistics the mortar might bring with it. Feeding the guns was a problem in it self. A 1939 German Infantry division carried up to 230 tons of artillery ammo. keeping 4 somewhat centralized battalions supplied is one thing. trying to keep more mortar tubes, spread out in more locations and closer to the front line supplied is another thing.
the 12cm mortar is a good weapon but it is not a 105mm howitzer and all the wishing in the world won't make it one, no matter how cheap it is. having a good mix of expensive capable weapons and less expensive weapons is a good idea, focusing too much on price leads to having too many weapons that don't have the capability to do what needs to be done.
All the countries that built tanks and tankettes by the hundreds in the 30s. Are 100 tankettes worth even twenty 15 ton tanks?
The RAF with those thousands of Blenheims and Battles. A bomber force large in numbers (good for training) but really lacking in the ability to penetrate enemy airspace and carry a worthwhile bomb load. How many Battles equal one Whitley?
The list goes on. Sub chasers that are slower than the subs they are chasing (and have less armament). Most anti-tank rifles, certainly cheap compared to even a 37mm AT gun. but effective after 1939-40? or even in 1940?
You are assuming that the Germans were defensive minded in 1935.
You are assuming you can train for offensive maneuvers using defensive weapons.
Please look at the TOEs again. German divisions shrunk because of manpower shortages and the desire for more if less powerful units. The Germans used the 120mm mortars to beef up the infantry battalion as the Divisional artillery pretty much stayed the same at sixteen 4 gun batteries. Please note that the the number of batteries did not shrink (on paper) and that the 12cm mortars were not supposed to be used in the divisional artillery regiment/battalions. The ratio of artillery and mortar tubes per 100 men increased. Germans used "liberated guns" from Czechoslovakia, Poland, France, England and Russia to equip Divisions with rather than standardize on a cheap mortar despite the simplified logistics the mortar might bring with it. Feeding the guns was a problem in it self. A 1939 German Infantry division carried up to 230 tons of artillery ammo. keeping 4 somewhat centralized battalions supplied is one thing. trying to keep more mortar tubes, spread out in more locations and closer to the front line supplied is another thing.
the 12cm mortar is a good weapon but it is not a 105mm howitzer and all the wishing in the world won't make it one, no matter how cheap it is. having a good mix of expensive capable weapons and less expensive weapons is a good idea, focusing too much on price leads to having too many weapons that don't have the capability to do what needs to be done.
All the countries that built tanks and tankettes by the hundreds in the 30s. Are 100 tankettes worth even twenty 15 ton tanks?
The RAF with those thousands of Blenheims and Battles. A bomber force large in numbers (good for training) but really lacking in the ability to penetrate enemy airspace and carry a worthwhile bomb load. How many Battles equal one Whitley?
The list goes on. Sub chasers that are slower than the subs they are chasing (and have less armament). Most anti-tank rifles, certainly cheap compared to even a 37mm AT gun. but effective after 1939-40? or even in 1940?
Last edited:
Ian Hogg....pp249 "German Artillery of WW-II"
According to the USSBS by 1943/44 , Germany had increasing problems building sufficent ammo due to lack of propellant chemicals factories that were being bombed relentlessly by the allies.
BTW Laws etc are rockets and are launch using a different mechanism.
starling
Airman 1st Class
After all ,it was the Germans who had too many differing weapons,calibres etc,and the Russians must of been doing something right,because they won the war,with some help from their friends.this is a general assumption of course.
starling
Airman 1st Class
But they did,and lost.
- Thread starter
- #39
davebender
1st Lieutenant
Not all of them. The Panzerfaust was a recoilless gun with the black powder propellent burned inside the launch tube.
