Lucky13
Forum Mascot
Which was the best piece of artillery during WWII if you look at mobility, accuracy and firepower?
WWII Artillery....
- Thread starter Lucky13
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
syscom3
Pacific Historian
The US 105mm and 155 mm howitzers.
Henk
Master Sergeant
How good were the German 88's?
mkloby
Senior Master Sergeant
I've worked with the US M2 105mm Howitzer. Good piece - after one call next round was "fire for effect." Our the firing position was about 8 clicks away from the target. I always thought the strangest thing was that you can actually see the shell flying through the air...
trackend
Chief Master Sergeant
German 88, British 25pounder, US105
I think it depends on what you want.
The German 88 was very versatile and good at whatever it did. It could be used as a FLAK gun (its original intended purpose) and as a anti tank gun which it was superb possibly the best of the war. It however was not an area artillery piece and could not be used in the same ways as the US 105 or 155mm.
For pure arty I would go with the US 105 and 155 as sys said.
So I say the best depending on what you want are the German 88 and the US 105mm and 155mm.
The German 88 was very versatile and good at whatever it did. It could be used as a FLAK gun (its original intended purpose) and as a anti tank gun which it was superb possibly the best of the war. It however was not an area artillery piece and could not be used in the same ways as the US 105 or 155mm.
For pure arty I would go with the US 105 and 155 as sys said.
So I say the best depending on what you want are the German 88 and the US 105mm and 155mm.
Agreed.
Glider
Captain
British 25pd. It was flexible, light, reliable, had a good rate of fire and a longer range that the US or German 105.
Joe2
Banned
Is the nerblwerfer included in this descussion?
trackend
Chief Master Sergeant
The Nerblwerfer was too slow to reload I'd rather have a 3inch mortar.
Another heavier field piece of that was highly rated was the 5.5 inch which struck a good compromise between caliber and maneuverability
IMO I think the Long Tom was a bit too big at a little over 30,000lbs it made it limited in the terrain it could be towed over.
Another heavier field piece of that was highly rated was the 5.5 inch which struck a good compromise between caliber and maneuverability
IMO I think the Long Tom was a bit too big at a little over 30,000lbs it made it limited in the terrain it could be towed over.
It's my understanding that the 88 was unparalleled in line of sight, flat trajectory engagements because of it's high muzzle velocity but was not very accurate when it came to arching fire.
is that true?
The US exceled in TOT (Time on Target) fire. Several pieces in different locations would hit the target simutaniously.
What about Russian guns?... I know they had longer ranges than American guns
is that true?
The US exceled in TOT (Time on Target) fire. Several pieces in different locations would hit the target simutaniously.
What about Russian guns?... I know they had longer ranges than American guns
Not sure but it would not surprise me. The 88 was built originally as a FLAK gun and served in that purpose the entire war. The other way it was effectively used was as a anti tank gun. It cut through the allied tanks like butter.
I dont believe it was ever used for regular arty.
A favorite tactic in forrested area was to aim at the tops of the trees and let the splinters do the damage..
That I know of, I believe the Germans did that during the Bulge but when I mean regular arty I mean like area shelling and so forth. The gun was not built for that purpose.
Henk
Master Sergeant
I think they did use 88's in the Desert war in North Africa as arty, but not sure.
