Dowly, Stug!

[Freiwillige]

Don't know if you have seen this yet but damn sure is a sexy beast!

Starting at 6:30 she rolls!:salute:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lvveoQRVBxY

Sorry!

[Dowly]

Uh.. you forgot a link or something? :O:

[Freiwillige]

Fixed in first post, my bad.

[Herr-Berbunch]

If you go straight to about seven minutes it looks like it's working fine itself! :yeah:

[Platapus]

Serious noob question.

What makes this an Assault Gun as opposed to a Tank or SP arty, or Tank Destroyer?

I never understood the nomenclature.

[Raptor1]

Serious noob question.

What makes this an Assault Gun as opposed to a Tank or SP arty, or Tank Destroyer?

I never understood the nomenclature.

The StuG III was supposed to provide direct support for infantry attacks, much in the same way tanks in World War I were used. Therefore it was pretty much designed as a mobile armoured (direct fire) field gun, hence Assault Gun. It's not a tank, because it has no turret and serves a specialized purpose. It is, in fact, a form of self-propelled artillery, though not all SP Arty pieces are Assault Guns (Most are designed for indirect fire). It's not technically a tank destroyer because of its designed purpose, but later versions with higher velocity guns proved rather effective as tank destroyers, so it usually counts as one.

[Freiwillige]

Well the Sturmgeshutz was allocated to the artillery units only. In its original form it had a short barreled 75mm gun designed for direct fire support, bunker busting.

Later when the T-34 came into Combat it was the easiest vehicle to up gun to the long 75mm anti tank gun but it was still only used by the mobile artillery units. They even had different uniforms then the Panzerwaffe.

The later Stug with the long 75 was technically a tank destroyer and the only unit capable of taking on a T-34.

Stug's had the highest tank kill total of any vehicle ever produced even to this day.

To be classified as a tank it has to have a turret, Mobile artillery was indirect fire, Assault gun's are direct fire, And tank destroyers are essentially assault guns equipped for the anti armor role, at least in the German army.

[Penguin]

Wow, amazing condition! Some years ago tanks were recovered from polish bogs which condition was much worse.


Serious noob question.

What makes this an Assault Gun as opposed to a Tank or SP arty, or Tank Destroyer?

I never understood the nomenclature.

The difference to a tank would be the lack of a turnable turrent, to a tank destroyer my guess would be the armor and the cannon size/armor penetration power.

Historically the Stugs were under command of the artillery, their purpose was however to give infantry support. So I would say that the difference to SP artillery would be their effective range and the ability to fire directly at a target.

[Penguin]

lol, 3 idiots who have the same thoughts at the same time...:D

[Freiwillige]

lol, 3 idiots who have the same thoughts at the same time...:D

I prefer three brilliant historians who all answered correctly!

[Raptor1]

Indeed. :doh:

Oh, do note that some Assault Guns, such as the KV-2 and the Churchill AVRE, did have turrets. Though they still don't really count as tanks because of their low velocity guns and specialized design.

[TLAM Strike]

Oh, do note that some Assault Guns, such as the KV-2 and the Churchill AVRE, did have turrets. Though they still don't really count as tanks because of their low velocity guns and specialized design.

Exactly, its not the equipment so much as the role. Any armored vehicle with a DF heavy gun used to support Infantry could be considered an Assault Gun, turret or no turret.

BTW, the Churchill AVRE didn't technically have a gun during the war, its main weapon was a huge spigot mortar. It got a low velocity gun post war. :03:

[Growler]

Indeed. :doh:

Oh, do note that some Assault Guns, such as the KV-2 and the Churchill AVRE, did have turrets. Though they still don't really count as tanks because of their low velocity guns and specialized design.

That has a lot to do with the designation - a low-velocity primary armament almost immediately defines the vehicle's role as indirect-fire capable infantry support. AT Guns, TDs, and tanks are direct-fire weapons (not saying they can't be used for indirect fire, but that's not their designed intent.)

Assault guns (esp. the short-barrel 75s) can fire both direct and indirect missions using the same primary weapon with little to no change in operation.

[Freiwillige]

Indeed and another example is the M-10 and M-18 hellcat of the us Army, they were tank destroyers but had turrets.

[Growler]

Indeed and another example is the M-10 and M-18 hellcat of the us Army, they were tank destroyers but had turrets.

But because the US Army liked to keep its TD crews cold, wet, miserable, and unprotected, for some absurd reason, they never finished the turret roof, which made these vehicles' crews especially vulnerable to tree-burst artillery and even small arms fire.

[Freiwillige]

But because the US Army liked to keep its TD crews cold, wet, miserable, and unprotected, for some absurd reason, they never finished the turret roof, which made these vehicles' crews especially vulnerable to tree-burst artillery and even small arms fire.

Weight savings I assume. They were designed to shoot and scoot! Low armor and high speed. Although during Korea they added metal flaps that could be folded over the opening to protect from debris.

Back to the Stug video. That thing once hosed off looks like it went into the bog yesterday!:o I cannot believe how well preserved it is!!!

[AVGWarhawk]

Nice find.

[Platapus]

I prefer three brilliant historians who all answered correctly!

I would concur.

Thank you all for explaining it.

[UnderseaLcpl]

I have a somewhat-related question to ask about the StuG for our German-speaking members. How do you pronounce StuG?

I only ask because I've been having a debate over the pronunciation with my father for years. He insists it is pronounced as per English phonetics. I insist that it is a contraction of the word Sturmgeschutz and should be pronounced as "Stoog" - "not "stooge", mind you, that's a hard "G".

[CCIP]

I have a somewhat-related question to ask about the StuG for our German-speaking members. How do you pronounce StuG?

I only ask because I've been having a debate over the pronunciation with my father for years. He insists it is pronounced as per English phonetics. I insist that it is a contraction of the word Sturmgeschutz and should be pronounced as "Stoog" - "not "stooge", mind you, that's a hard "G".

Shtoog or Shtewg is probably closest. The Stu part comes from Sturm, which as most German words that start with an S followed by a consonant, is pronounced with a "sh".

[Alex]

Shtoog or Shtewg is probably closest. The Stu part comes from Sturm, which as most German words that start with an S followed by a consonant, is pronounced with a "sh".

That.

[UnderseaLcpl]

Shtoog or Shtewg is probably closest. The Stu part comes from Sturm, which as most German words that start with an S followed by a consonant, is pronounced with a "sh".

Thanks:up: I usually make the "sh" sound on the s but what we mostly disagreed about was the pronunciation of the "u".

[Freiwillige]

The Stug had a three to one Kill ratio against armor, 15,000+ Stug's = :o

[Raptor1]

The Stug had a three to one Kill ratio against armor, 15,000+ Stug's = :o

Erm, 15,000 StuGs? I don't think you'll get to that number even if you count the StuG IV. The number of StuG IIIs produced was around 9,500, not counting variants like the StuH 42.

[Jimbuna]

A lick of paint and an oil change and she'll be as good as new :03:

[Platapus]

Was it reported about how much damage this guy had from being buried in muck?

And did it sustain battle damage or was it just a stuck in the mud? :)

[Oberon]

Wow, that is one fantastically preserved StuG :rock:

http://www.ww2incolor.com/d/214643-2/obr20

http://files.myopera.com/cachaga/albums/385263/S4.jpg

http://files.myopera.com/cachaga/albums/385263/S3.jpg

http://files.myopera.com/cachaga/albums/385263/S2.jpg

http://www.detektorweb.cz/upload/clanky/2988/obr14.jpg

[Oberon]

Was it reported about how much damage this guy had from being buried in muck?

And did it sustain battle damage or was it just a stuck in the mud? :)

I think there's a bullet hole in the video or some kind of hole in the armour. As for damage from the muck, I think once they cleared it all out I doubt there'd be much corrosion, bogs can sometimes preserve stuff really well. There was a German captured T-34 complete with markings pulled out of a lake/bog the other year.

http://www.crypticcomet.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/allout.jpg

[CCIP]

Haven't heard what happened to that StuG, although I would assume it's in a museum now.

I hope they found her a good home :yep:

[Jimbuna]

I seen better examples but in Bovington Tank Museum tbh :DL

[Freiwillige]

Erm, 15,000 StuGs? I don't think you'll get to that number even if you count the StuG IV. The number of StuG IIIs produced was around 9,500, not counting variants like the StuH 42.

Again, you got me:salute:

I was quoting a show called tanks I just watched which is also where I got the 3 to 1 ratio. It stated that about 15,000 stugs of all types were produced. But some fact checking including the Stug IV and StuH 42 still only puts the total to 12,500. I wonder if converted Panzer 3's made up the rest?

[Freiwillige]

As for how it got into a bog, One theory is that as the Germans ran low on fuel or ammo or parts they would just push these thing into a bog so that the soviets couldn't claim them and use them against the retreating German's.

The Soviets and the Germans would often use captured enemy vehicles.

Its also interesting that tracks with the extended length on them, never seen that before, was that a Northern front modification?

[Raptor1]

As for how it got into a bog, One theory is that as the Germans ran low on fuel or ammo or parts they would just push these thing into a bog so that the soviets couldn't claim them and use them against the retreating German's.

The Soviets and the Germans would often use captured enemy vehicles.

Its also interesting that tracks with the extended length on them, never seen that before, was that a Northern front modification?

As far as I know, those are winter tracks (Winterketten), they were extended tracks introduced in late 1942 to help navigate the snow on the Eastern Front.

[Penguin]

Indeed. :doh:

Oh, do note that some Assault Guns, such as the KV-2 and the Churchill AVRE, did have turrets. Though they still don't really count as tanks because of their low velocity guns and specialized design.

Oh, I didn't know the KV2 was also considered an assault gun. Interesting is that the Germans put captured KV 2's into tank, not arty units.


As for how it got into a bog, One theory is that as the Germans ran low on fuel or ammo or parts they would just push these thing into a bog so that the soviets couldn't claim them and use them against the retreating German's.


Found some stuff:

Here are some pictures of the retrieval:
http://www.detektorweb.cz/index.4me?s=show&i=2988&mm=1&vd=1
According to this website (and google translate), the Stug was captured near Demyansk and the (gun) crew was still inside - so it looks like it was buried unintentionally...
Also the site says that it was sold for a million $ :o

According to this site http://legion-afv.narod.ru/StuG-40_Saratov.html the Stug was found near Pskov, which is further to the West. It also says, that it is today in the museum of Saratov, in the south of Russia.
Check out especially the pictures 6 and 11 on this site, you'll see that they made a 21 out of the 20 painted on it. You can see the same in Oberon's second picture.
http://legion-afv.narod.ru/Germany/SPG_Germany/StuG-40_Saratov/StuG-40_Saratov_006.JPG

[Freiwillige]

Why didn't they do something to preserve it better? The rust looks horrid. It did not have that when pulled from the bog.

[Feuer Frei!]

and the (gun) crew was still inside - so it looks like it was buried unintentionally...
How can that be explained? What can we speculate happened there?
you'll see that they made a 21 out of the 20 painted on it.
What is the significance behind that?
Or the reasoning?

[Feuer Frei!]

There was a German captured T-34 complete with markings pulled out of a lake/bog the other year.

http://www.crypticcomet.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/allout.jpg

You're talking about this:
http://www.mil.hiiumaa.ee/2000_09_14_kurtna_T-34-36/

And here is a link to the restoration of the T-34, video 4 shows them starting up the diesel engine!
http://www.diving.ee/articles/art035.html

[Penguin]

How can that be explained? What can we speculate happened there?


well there has been a massive encirclement battle near Demyansk from the beginning of '42 untill march '43. So a speculation is that the swamp began to defrost, together with a hasty retreat (= no reconaissance) this could have been a fatal accident.



What is the significance behind that?
Or the reasoning?

I really can't say. For a forgery attempt it is much too obvious that the 20 was painted over.
However something really smells fishy about this whole thing.
My guess is that the Stug was recovered by graverobbers. This explains why we have neither an exact location nor names of the dead. Selling stuff from fallen soldiers is a massive business, especially in the East. These people plunder the dead and leave the human remains lieing there. Without the tags, which they also steal, an identification of the fallen will be nearly impossible - if they are found again...

The claim that it was sold for $1000000 also points into this direction, if it was recovered by the authorities, the Stug would belong to the state - and the remains of the dead would be buried.

[Feuer Frei!]

I really can't say. For a forgery attempt it is much too obvious that the 20 was painted over.
However something really smells fishy about this whole thing.
My guess is that the Stug was recovered by graverobbers. This explains why we have neither an exact location nor names of the dead. Selling stuff from fallen soldiers is a massive business, especially in the East. These people plunder the dead and leave the human remains lieing there. Without the tags, which they also steal, an identification of the fallen will be nearly impossible - if they are found again...

The claim that it was sold for $1000000 also points into this direction, if it was recovered by the authorities, the Stug would belong to the state - and the remains of the dead would be buried.

May the robbers, if it was indeed, burn in hell.
:down: Or whoever it was, that did not treat the dead with respect.
Sad, very sad to see that the dead found inside will be nameless forever, and their families will die wondering.

[Penguin]

To be fair, there are also some very honourable people in Russia who search battlefields and work together with organisations who bury the dead (e.g. Deutsche Kriegsgräberfürsorge) - sadly they seem to be the minority.
Nobody gives a damn if people take equipment, but personal items and human remains should be respected. Every dead body, from all sides of this gigantic blodshed, deserves a place to rest and the relatives deserve a clearification of the fate.

[Feuer Frei!]

Apparently the Germans repainted some of their Equipment and that included renumbering as well.
So the renumbering on that found StuG may be authentic.
All the internal equipment and some parts were stolen.
Kubinka tank museum planned to buy it, but the local administration wanted 8000 USD for the StuG and Kubinka didn't have that kind of money.
I wasn't implying ofc that there are not honorable people in Russia, or for that matter anywhere else in the world that do this kind of retrieval work.
I was talking about this particular case.
Still a shameful act. They know who they are, and probably have done this many a time, found bodies and done the same. Hardened crims really.

[Penguin]

Apparently the Germans repainted some of their Equipment and that included renumbering as well.
So the renumbering on that found StuG may be authentic.
All the internal equipment and some parts were stolen.
Kubinka tank museum planned to buy it, but the local administration wanted 8000 USD for the StuG and Kubinka didn't have that kind of money.


Ah, interesting, 8000 sounds a lot more realistic than the 1000000 the other source stated. Do you also have infos if it is true that the Stug is now in Saratov?


I wasn't implying ofc that there are not honorable people in Russia, or for that matter anywhere else in the world that do this kind of retrieval work.
I was talking about this particular case.
Still a shameful act.

No mate, you didn't sound so - I wanted to clearify my post, I thought it sounded like I would lump together all battlefield explorers in Russia.

[Feuer Frei!]

Ah, interesting, 8000 sounds a lot more realistic than the 1000000 the other source stated. Do you also have infos if it is true that the Stug is now in Saratov?
Apparently it is yes.
I'll try to find confirmation of that.
No mate, you didn't sound so - I wanted to clearify my post, I thought it sounded like I would lump together all battlefield explorers in Russia.:salute:

Penguin, this is really interesting, history of this StuG, and what possibly happened:

Early this year the wreck was pointed by 91 yo eye-witness. He claimed in 1945 two StuG's were trying to cross the river. One succeded, the other drowned. Two crewmans died and were found in the river when the spring came. He also said that the rest of the crew came to his home and asked for some water and food - they weren't aggresive. They were completly wet and freezing. Few hours later they were captured by the Russians and shot. Probably beacuse of the black uniforms and sculls on the collars they were taken as SS guys by mistake. They are burried in the near village.

The other story is that the entire crew drowned in the wreck - two were found in the spring (this is the fact), others are probably still there...

We will see which one is true when the hull will be raised from the mud.

According to the uniforms Russians said that they fought on Krim (they had "Krimschilds").

First atempt to pull it had taken place in early 50' - and it failed. During this one polish and russian soldiers were using two T34s and a railroad crane and later were trying to blow it up - probably (and luckilly) they failed to do so.

First attempt nowadays was in August, 29th. It failed too and the search team found only a wheel (some of them were kept on the hull) and some minor parts.

Second try began Septembrer, 28th. Now they had better and more pumps to get rid of water and the entire action had a better plan and organisation.
They succesfully pulled out damaged turret and the gun - it was partially separated from the hull because of the action taken in 50'.
The wreck has tactical number 981. Some guy discovered that probably it belonged to the Brandenburg division, 9th or 10th company from capt. Spielvogel's 3 rd battalion. On Jan 45 they recieved StuG's and were sent back more or less that way to the west.

When the entire StuG will be recovered it will be transferred to military museum in Poznan and its curator, cpt. Ogrodniczuk and his men will try to restore it and maybe repair to running condition. He is a really good mechanic and I mean it - he successfuly repaired Iosif Stalin 2 tank back to running condition.

Hope this short note will give you a better view http://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif And please forgive me all grammar mistakes.That was a post from a member over at this site:
http://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/showthread.php?t=180498

Fascinating read that, it makes a lot of sense, and the poster is from Poland, by the sounds of it this guy had some serious inside info, or he was there!
The 2 story 'what-ifs' make a lot of sense don't they?

Edit:
More digging around now i find this:
The Stug was not abandoned but turned upside down in the swamp after breaking ice during the retreat! Possibly a few crew members escaped before it filled with water, The MP40 was found inside along with an Mg42, ammo and grenades
Matches with the stories above, about the drowning, and a few escaping.

Here are some wonderful pictures of it:
http://dishmodels.ru/wshow.htm?np=2&p=1022

[Penguin]

@ Feuer frei: great pictures of the Stug you found there!

The Stug in Poland seems to be a different one and a type IV, here are some pics of the recovery: http://www.odkrywca.pl/galerie.php?nazwa=348
The condition is far worse, as it wasn't sealed airtight like the one conserved in the bog.

According to this forum: http://militaria-archiv.com/archive/index.php/t-8290.html (german) our STug III was found near Velikiye Luki - this is much closer to Pskov from the above sources. This would also put the possible timeframe again to spring '43. 1945 it was already game over in this area.
Here is a picture which allegedly shows our very same "bog Stug" in operation, found on this site: http://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/showthread.php?t=24153

http://img37.imageshack.us/img37/8239/x44981edf.jpg