MG34 mount

[jarndice]

Painless, Hallo my friend, the mount you display is exactly what I am talking about, take care and have a great weekend although after Labor day you probably don't need any more time off? shaun

[billpe]

I believe it was the other way round - they were added but found to be of little use and removed.

[tanks_for_the_memory]

It's an interesting question I suppose - why did the Americans and Russians go for fixed heavy MG mounts on their tank turrets (the US .50 cal and the Russian DShK) while the Germans used smaller calibre MGs on removable AA mounts and the British (on their own tanks at least) usually none at all?

Perhaps the reason was that the German AA mounts were primarily for anti-aircraft use and they had more faith in their internal MGs for ground targets. As for the Brits, I just don't know (although they obviously used plenty of American tanks).

Just a thought...

[jarndice]

TFTM, Hi, Just a thought about British Tanks, unlike the German and Soviet armour who would often operate apart from other military formations, the British armour usually worked in close proximity to the infantry both foot and wheeled and so self defence did not assume the same importance,after all the British never had the vastness of the Soviet Union to operate in so they were rarely without amongst other things "fire support" as I say it is just a thought, take care and get back to that Tiger we are getting withdrawal symptoms. shaun

[jarndice]

Having given a little more thought to the lack of an AA MG on British tanks I wonder if it was because in North Africa from 1941 onwards the desert air force had air superiority and in northern Europe from 1944 the same circumstance applied, so British Tankers assumed anything in the air would be one of theirs. shaun

[billpe]

I think you have to look at who designed British tanks prior to the Centurion to understand the lack of AA MG or pretty much anything else for that manner which was either practical or what the actual tankers wanted. That said, if you read about actual employment of AA guns on tanks in WW2, most crews found them practically useless and removed them.

Soviet and German armour did work with other formations, it was why they were so effective. The British and French just worked with them differently, like concentration of armour to maintain local superiority wasn't something the British or French did initially. Its why the French were so heavily defeated in the Battle of France, they had more armour and better armour but dispersed it rather than concentrate which is what the Germans did.

[jarndice]

Having viewed the website gracefully offered to us by Billpe and because I have a spare early Tiger 1 cupola I have decided to fit the MG34 mount to my Tunisian campaign Tiger safe in the knowledge that there are so few photographs of "813" except some showing the rear of the Tank, I would be pleased if anyone with evidence to the contrary keeps it to themselves. shaun

[billpe]

You didn't check the Tigers in Focus site then?

[jarndice]

RATS!!!!!!!!!!!! shaun

[ALPHA]

You had to know something was coming Shaun

That was a challenge if I ever saw one

ALPHA