| Subject: Early Stug III re-armed with long gun pic? |
 | James McFarlane Jamesite | Location: England - West Midlands, United Kingdom Member Since: December 05, 2006
Posts: 1,880 entire network,
1,829 this site
|  |  |
|
|
| Posted: Sunday, October 11, 2009 - 10:59 PM UTC |
|
Hi there,
Many moons ago on this very site I remember someone posting a pic of an Early Stug III that was photographed later in the war with a long L/43 or L/48 gun and Saukopf (I think) mantlet that had been fitted to it. I'd love to track down this , or other photos of these rare conversions.
Searching the internet reveals the details of two such vehicles but unfortunately no photos, these are:
- Stug III Ausf C armed with 75mm StuK 40 L/48 gun in Saukopf mantlet destroyed at Altdamm, 1945
- Stug III Ausf E armed with 75mm StuK 40 gun destroyed in Berlin, May 1945
Presumably they had been sent back to germany for overhauling and were upgraded then. They may well have been used as a training vehicles (in the way early panzer IV's were upgunned and used to train crews) and then brought into service during the desperate times in 1945.
It's an interesting conversion and i'd love to track down any photos.
I'd appreciate any help you guys may be able to offer.
Cheers,
James |
Bessie Braddock: “Sir, you are drunk.”
Winston Churchill: “Madam, you are ugly. In the morning, I shall be sober.” | | |
|
| HIDE SIGNATURE AREAS |
 |
 | Jeff Stringer PantherF | Location: Indiana, United States Member Since: June 10, 2005
Posts: 1,273 entire network,
1,193 this site
|  |  |
|
|
| Posted: Sunday, October 11, 2009 - 11:14 PM UTC |
|
Are you talking about this tank? http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=370273691900 If so, I haven't seen any REAL pictures of it. - Jeff |
| HIDE SIGNATURE AREAS |
 |
 | Dean gremlinz | Location: Auckland, New Zealand Member Since: February 07, 2009
Posts: 310 entire network,
292 this site
|  |  |
|
|
| Posted: Sunday, October 11, 2009 - 11:37 PM UTC |
|
AFAIK an Ausf E with a Stuk 40/43 is pretty much an Ausf F. I'm pretty sure the external differences were primarily just the gun and changes around where it was fitted in so it should be no problem to retrofit an E with the long gun as you'd just need to make the same relief cuts and you'd effectively have an Ausf F.
Not sure on the Ausf C though, I only found out that about the E and F while researching a build to do a refitted F. |
| HIDE SIGNATURE AREAS |
 |
 | tat baqui tatbaqui | Location: Luzon, Philippines Member Since: May 06, 2007
Posts: 281 entire network,
255 this site
|  |  |
|
|
| Posted: Monday, October 12, 2009 - 02:07 AM UTC |
|
James,
Page 116 of W.J. Spielberger's Sturmgeschutz and its Variants has a pic captioned as "...Ausf C with original superstructure...back-fitted with the long 75mm mounted with a Saukopf mantle." Its just one pic taken in a battle-damaged area. Have you come across that already? Let me know, I can scan and post it for you.
Cheers,
Tat |
| HIDE SIGNATURE AREAS |
 |
 | Bill Plunk wbill76 |  | Location: Texas, United States Member Since: May 02, 2006
Posts: 4,740 entire network,
4,081 this site
|  |  |
|
|
| Posted: Monday, October 12, 2009 - 04:37 AM UTC |
|
The pic Tat is speaking of is the only one I know of for the C retro-fitted with the StuK 40. There were still some short-barrel 7.5cm StuGs kicking around at war's end in training units so not all of the ones in service received the upgrade due to a variety of factors. Standing orders for all tanks/AFVs was that if they were sent back to the factory for major overhaul/repair they were to be upgraded to the extent possible to the latest available standards and then sent out to the combat units. This doesn't seem to have happened very often with the earlier StuGs, my guess is due to the simple fact that unlike tanks for example, the upgrades weren't as simple a process of application due to the casemate and hull modifications that would've been required. That essentially left the gun as the main thing that could be and was upgraded if they underwent the process. |
| ---When it comes to having ham and eggs for breakfast, a chicken is involved but the pig is committed. | |  |
|
| HIDE SIGNATURE AREAS |
 |
 | James McFarlane Jamesite | Location: England - West Midlands, United Kingdom Member Since: December 05, 2006
Posts: 1,880 entire network,
1,829 this site
|  |  |
|
|
| Posted: Monday, October 12, 2009 - 06:54 AM UTC |
|
Many thanks for all the replies. I continued my search and came up trumps with the following: upgunned Ausf C Apparently this was from a training unit that were thrown into combat in 1945 as all possible reserves were mobilized. Jeff, yes I later saw that Dragon do a kit of this, I beleive it is intended to mirror the tank in the photo. Dean, thanks for the info, I haven't found a pic of this Ausf E yet so can't comment. My Stug III knowledge is lacking, I have a couple of books i'll read through (Sturmgeschutz 40 long gun versions and Sturmgeschutz II short gun versions) and get up to scratch. Tat, thankyou very much. I don't have this book but it seems to be the same as the one pictured in the above photo judging by the caption. Is that the case? If not I would be interested in the pic som please drop me a PM. Bill, looks like we are talking about the same pic now as I mentioned to Tat. I have seen several pics of early Stugs with schurzen but we won't get into that! As you say, the work involved was significant and if the gun still worked then perhaps there was no need to change it as a crew could still train with the vehicle. I imagnine a factor would be the type of damage to the AFV and perhaps if it was returned to workshops because of it, or simply withdrawn from service as being obsolete. I beleive a major factor as to why many of these early war vehicles were not returned to active service until the desperate times of 1945 was the inadequate armour protection in the 'post T-34' battlefield. Once again I appreciate you guys helping me out. Cheers, James |
Bessie Braddock: “Sir, you are drunk.”
Winston Churchill: “Madam, you are ugly. In the morning, I shall be sober.” | | |
|
| HIDE SIGNATURE AREAS |
 |
 | tat baqui tatbaqui | Location: Luzon, Philippines Member Since: May 06, 2007
Posts: 281 entire network,
255 this site
|  |  |
|
|
| Posted: Monday, October 12, 2009 - 10:37 PM UTC |
|
James, unfortunately its the same pic you and Bill commented on. Judging by the caption itself, I'd say it came from the same reference material. Good thread -- you got me interested in the search, and am now keen to see one as well. There must still be other pics on the net since you mentioned it being posted a while back. Will keep an eye on it and let you know. Cheers -- Tat |
| HIDE SIGNATURE AREAS |
 |
 | James McFarlane Jamesite | Location: England - West Midlands, United Kingdom Member Since: December 05, 2006
Posts: 1,880 entire network,
1,829 this site
|  |  |
|
|
| Posted: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 - 09:15 PM UTC |
|
Thanks Tat,
likewise if I find anything else i'll let you know.
Think i'm going to model something similar using Tamiya's Ausf B kit and the spares bin!
James |
Bessie Braddock: “Sir, you are drunk.”
Winston Churchill: “Madam, you are ugly. In the morning, I shall be sober.” | | |
|
| HIDE SIGNATURE AREAS |
 |
 | James McFarlane Jamesite | Location: England - West Midlands, United Kingdom Member Since: December 05, 2006
Posts: 1,880 entire network,
1,829 this site
|  |  |
|
|
| Posted: Thursday, October 15, 2009 - 12:25 AM UTC |
|
In addition to my earlier posts, I came across this thread over on ML, regarding early short barrel Stug III's that were used late in the war. Again these seemed to have been training vehicles that received a number of non-standard modifications and were pressed into service in late 1944 and 1945. Does anyone have any more info on such vehicles? Pictures would be great as the one in the thread shows a number of interesting features, and apparently has a later engine deck. These are the types of vehicles I find very interesting but unfortunately my references only cover the standard types! Once again all help is welcomed. James |
Bessie Braddock: “Sir, you are drunk.”
Winston Churchill: “Madam, you are ugly. In the morning, I shall be sober.” | | |
|
| HIDE SIGNATURE AREAS |
 |