@@AgentTasmania No, it's the overall proportions of the thing. Barrel to box ratio in particular. Otherwise any roughly box-shaped gun would read as a bolter, but that's not the case.
You can buy a tank in most countries, just not the gun that goes with it. Without the gun it's just an expensive tractor with 2 inch steel body panels.
tian5huang cheng It's easier to get super rich here than other countries, but it's certainly not a common thing. It's quite literally a one in a million type thing.
Martin McClure Nah man, the only perquisite someone needs is simply being in America. That's why our roughly 330,000,000 population is nothing but strictly millionaires. I bet the douche thinks that everyone who's not rich is that way because they're nothing, but lazy assholes.
People generally don't realize that, aside from a window of time from about 1860-1915, artillery was the dominant weapon on the battlefield and caused the most casualties. I'd love to see the evolution of recoiling gun carriages from 1880 to 1950.
@@Blei1986 a couple times a winter head out back a put a couple shells into the mountainside. A few small avalanches are better than one giant one, eh?
being Scottish i find the people that i like the most in Britain have the same mind set. It's better to have a gun shield and not need it than get shot in the head randomly through a tiny hole
Hmm did you know that south west germany has newrly the same stereotypes to other germans as scotland has to the rest of the uk? XD seems fitting that you guys would think similar on this subject
Hmm im playing online every now and then with all kinds of people including scots, maybe its because im not british and we learned both british and american english in school (that high class accent for british and the kind of accent most news reporters have in the us respectivly) but i usually dont have issues understand scots online, yes they sound different but so do i with my german accent xd
Guns of the 1930s were expected to be towed and manhandled by the crew to a much greater extent than today. Guns then came with ropes and levers as standard and it was common to carry a small gun like this inside a truck, rather than tow it by a vehicle. The use of field guns by the infantry broke the tradition of the artillery being the keepers of all guns in an army's artillery park and allowed the infantry to provide their own fire support.
That breach design is actually genius. It makes it a lot easier and faster to load when it is in high elevation. It's a shame that you weren't able to look into it in more detail, but thanks for digging up that old footage! I wonder why we haven't seen more breeches designed that way...
I would hazard a guess at balancing issues too. With a heavier weapon or a longer barrel it only gets exacerbated; On a small, short-barrelled weapon then when the barrel tilts, it's on a pivot by itself that is NOT the same pivot used for aiming. Now imagine the length is multiplied by three or four times, your barrel-only pivot has to be much further away so that the guy opening the breech doesn't have to be built like the hulk. The other problem with this is it means the angle of rotation to open the breech is decreased, so where on a short barrel howitzer like this you get, say, 20 degrees of free play at high elevation, on a long barrel you'd maybe only get 5 degrees. Plus it's all the other fun stuff like extra maintenance, extra complexity and cost. Mainly though I'd say it's the balance, it's good for something like this, but for anything much bigger you've still got one guy pulling on a lever to move the weight of the entire barrel, which above a certain weight just isn't a winning proposition.
For bigger gun's that might be true, but for such small howitzers, I think that design is genius. And I think you can reduce the weight of the gun by a lot through that mechanism. Because you don't need such a heavy lock to keep the breach block in place. And the lifting mechanism doesn't need to hold all the force that is applied during firing.
On any artillery piece build for indirect fire you have that problem how to reload on high elevation. This is quite a clever solution, on the l.FH (leichte Feldhaubitze) 1898 and 1916 there was a mechanism to uncouple the barrel from the aming mechanism, point it horizontal, reload and then tilt it upwards again to couple it in. That was much more complicated. This gun is in some ways the evolution from the l.MW (leichter Minenwerfer) which was normally a front-loaded mortar, but had some wheels and a box-trail which could be connected to get something similar.
Thanks for the shout-out for Nick Moran! For the audience, he is a Major, Armor, in the California Army National Guard, and a combat veteran. He is The Chieftain with World of Tanks and his UA-cam channel is 'Inside the Chieftain's Hatch' where he reviews and explores armored fighting vehicles. The tilting barrel system looks like it was really useful for high-angle fire, compared to conventional breech systems.
Pete Sheppard the only problems seen with high angle fires with Arty is barrel recoil run out distance, in older guns and howitzers you use to have to dig a high angle pit under the breach
Good point! I was thinking about the ease of loading the cartridge. With a traditional breech, it looks to be a bit awkward to line the round up and shove it in with the gun elevated. I've seen where many guns have to be depressed to a loading position, then re-elevated to fire.
The US had a somewhat similar occurrence in WWII. Crews were timed on loading guns, the engineers took that rate of fire, added more rounds/min until they thought they reached a ROF impossible to achieve, and then designed gun barrels that would survive regular use at that ROF. eventually they discovered that the barrels were quickly wearing out on those guns, and someone had to go observe how they were managing to wear out these barrels. Turns out when you're being shot at you move a lot faster. After that they started specifying "suggested" rates of fire, but provisioned more barrels knowing no one would really follow those.
Yes, no need to get below for the breech and limited recoil means the gun would be lower overall and more concelable. Though being finiky I'd call it more of a Gun/Howitzer hybrid. Also are wheels are quick release and /or the axle travel locks for firing. That's what happens on a lot of guns.
Why call it a gun/howitzer hybrid? Isn't gun just a over category of all things that shoot projectiles through explosive stuff? And isn't it exactly a howitzer, capable of direct and indirect fire?
@@FactoryofRedstone Gun presumably refers to heavy artillery, while howitzer is short barell short range artillery. This would be a light howitzer though.
@@ineednochannelyoutube5384 Like I sad, as far as I know, a howitzer is a artillery piece, that is capable of direct and indirect fire. The other classifications would be a piece that is only capable of direct fire would be a canon and one of only indirect would be a mortar. For example the German Panzerhaubitze 2000 a self-propelled artillery piece, that is classified as a howitzer (Haubitze) has a barrel length of 52 times the caliber. That is considerably longer than the barrel length of the main canon of the m1 abrams with 44.
I remember the PaK 40 from years ago and the story of the hippie woman who sold it to the current owners who restored it to firing condition... I bet she dislikes all of Ian's videos on impulse now.
At least she kept in some condition enough to be restored, otherwise it likely would;ve been scrapped much earlier; not all hippies are liberal or anti-gun (..or a more extreme personna commonly some think of from that 'hippy' trope, within the stereotypical US right-side).
Neurofunke, how many gallons of human blood are you willing to spend to end war? Because the price, is every last drop. For the same reason you just went on that little tangent, humans become hostile to those whose actions and opinions they disagree with, and ultimately there's precisely 2 ways humans can interact, verbal persuasion and physical coercion. And those with irrevocable differences in their customs and beliefs have only one recourse against those who stand at the furthest end of that divide.
The US Army had a very similar 75mm light field howitzer, although it was not considered an infantry gun. It had a normal sliding breech but the barrel had an unusual inverted sled (to describe it one way) on top of the barrel. It also had a split trail and rubber tires, although there were other versions, mainly for airborne use. At some point the carriages were used for a 105mm infantry howitzer and presumably the barrels were used in other applications, such as on light tanks and landing craft.
As many ppl noticed before, these guns mostly used in the infantry gun sections of the german regiments. Originally the gun have a small limber and caisson. Their name was the If.12 and If12/2.(For infantry use)Late in the war any kind of limber vas used, even If.8 infantry cars, foward elements of machine-gun carts, etc. And instead of caissons, so called feldwagens are used(horse wagons, Panjewagen Pleskau for example)Mostly two horse used to tow the gun, but sometimes even six had attached, for example, in case of cavalry units. Motorised units used the Kfz.69 Krupp Protze light truck or 1 ton halftrack, but any light vehicle also usable. Steyr 1,5 ton, Opel Maultier, or even Sd. Kfz 251!Also, grenadier divisions used this gun in the batallion level, four guns per heavy company. Bycicle recon troops also used in the similar manner, but tow it with vehicles. Also, panzer and panzergrenadier units was also used the gun, two guns per platoon, in heavy companies in the recon or the infantry battalions.Late in the war, the new 12cm mortar was the new toy, often using in heavy companies, or in infantry gun companies, together with IG.18.This heavy companies also have own field telephone and radio sections. Mostly feldkabeltrupps 3 and 6, Tornisterfunktrupp and Feldfunk. portable radios. Donkey-ear binoculars, theodolits, optical rangefinders also used, like in "real" arty batteries.
The German infantry liked this gun quite a lot. It was a direct fire support weapon available to junior commanders on the front line and gave a lot of punch on the attack and provided much needed stability to defending infantry units facing attack.
Man, I love the way you describe things, and bring some sense to what would otherwise be a complicated hunk of metal and wood, so as much as I would love to see more small arms, I'd be interested to see more small-ish arms like this thing, as well. Keep up the great work, Ian!
Show any gun no matter how big, small, new, old, wierd, fantastic and that goes for any gun related items and interviews with ppl that have good storys or interviews too.I love watching them all
I was thinking more Imperial Guard, especially with that carriage, but definately has a Heavy Bolter look to it. Given that most early 40k designs are higherly based on WW2, it's no big surprise
The important aspect of this gun is its use in infantry regiments and not in artillery units. A typical German infantry regiment would have 12 companies in its three infantry battalions and the 13th company would be an Infanteriegeschützkompanie with 6 or 8 7.5cm le. IG 18 and 2 or 0 15cm Schweres(Heavy) Infanteriegeschütz 33. They could be kept concentrated, or 1 platoon of 2 guns each could be parcelled out to the 3 infantry battalions. The US Army established cannon companies in their infantry regiment after the war had started. They used the lightened M3 version of the standard M2 artillery howitzers or self-propelled guns on half-tracks(T19 or T30) or light tank chassis(M8 Scott).
The two infantry guns are in fact almost "forgotten weapons" amongst all the hoopla about german ww2 tech, despite their huge importance for every infantry regiment. Anyone interessted in this topic should check out the memoir "At leningrad's gates" of a guy who spent most of his time with infantry guns.
I think each Platoon in the Infanteriegesxhützkompanien has two guns, so they had 4 leIG 18 and two sIG 33. And don't forget the 14th Company with its 12 anti tank guns!
Yes, the platoon had 2 guns, but there were 3 light platoons and one heavy, unless the regiment had 4 light platoons, as was the norm in the 2nd-4th Wave of Infantry Divisions raised. I did forget the 14th while posting, even though I had thought to put it in while writing. Too lazy to go back and edit:)
Fantastic video, it would be great to do more artillery pieces. My dad was with the 111th field artillery in WWII but he never talked about it. He let me fire a 105 howitzer when I was eight, I'll never forget that one.
This version has the wooden spoke wheels used by units that had horse drawn heavy weapons and equipment, the other version had pneumatic rubber wheels for use by motorised units.
They had a forward observer. This guns were used by the 13th Company of each german Infantry Regiment. These units were the artillery of the Regiments CO. Each Infanteriegesxhützkompanie had 3 gun platoons with 2 guns. 2 platoons with the leIG18 and one platoons with the SIG 33 (15cm). They also had a Forward Observer section like an artillery battery.
That was one of the niecest vids you made in the last year or so. Been interested in these "small" artillery style weapons for a while now and there is not too much in form of vids about them on the net.
Great Video Ian! It couldn't hurt to see more large fire arms like motars, artillery, tanks, and what not if its got some military history to it. I had no idea this light artillery piece existed until today! Thanks for the video Gun Jesus
It is so squarish that it looks like 40k's heavy bolter. Quite amazingly, the Death Korps of Krieg (Space Germans) use carriage-mounted heavy bolters which look almost the same as this howitzer.
Ian, an interesting little gun! Yes - Forgotten Weapons should keep on with "support" weapons (like your editions of the M20 Super Bazooka or the recoiless rifle). One can see that this showed Great War experience. "How can we eliminate the machine guns that stop the infantry's advance?" These would have a greater importance in the German Army as the Treaty of Versailles forbade them having tanks (the real answer to the pesky MG nest). The infantry guns were the infantry commanders "personal" artillery. The US Army standard infantry regiment had a Regimental Cannon Company throughout WW2. Originally they had variants of the 75mm pack howitzer, then they used the 105mm M3, a shorter, lighter version of the standard 105mm artillery weapon. The crews were not artillerymen, but were infantry branch. In certain situations the Regimental Cannon Co. might be mechanized (M7 Howitzer Motor Carriages in some instances), but the light 105s were pulled by the Dodge WC62/63 1.5 ton 6X6's. The light guns were no longer needed as 1) communications improved with the artillery, 2) the guns grew heavier due to requirements for increased firepower, and 3) armor support became more readily available (at least for the Allies). Recoiless rifles and later guided missiles filled the role in later years.
William Sager Is the ammo legal in Canada? If so that is some backwards ass gun logic. "No sir I'm sorry no Ak's, but if you're interested I have a couple howitzers in the back with some working shells".
Little addition to the mentioned mountain troops: The german "Gebirgstruppe" still has a little group of horses and mules ("Einsatz- und Ausbildungszentrum für Tragtierwesen") in service. A mule is capable of carrying ~150kg. 75kg on the left side and 75kg on the right. ;)
I was half expecting the Cheiftain to walk out the other side of the M3 light tank.. 1 question, what is the thing that looks like a stub axle shaft sticking out of the left side of the trail near the breech block?
M5 Light tank, actually. The M3 had more blocky frontal armor plates rather than that nice slope. As for that stubby rod, I was thinking that it was either the firing trigger or the lever for opening the action, but it seems that both of those levers are on the right side of the gun... After searching for a bit on google, I think that I came across the answer, though. Fro what I can find, that seems to be the mounting point for the sighting apparatus. I assume that the sights aren't mounted there anymore on this gun because the gun has been made inoperable and thus it does not need the sights. See what you think: www.lonesentry.com/manuals/german-infantry-weapons/pics/76-sighting-mechanism-75-mm-inf-how.jpg
The Chieftain did a a video on an M5 tank a5 Rock Island Auction; possibly that particular tank. BTW, fro: reading on the complement of equipment a Wehrmacht company had assigned, the company had multiple carts, t9 carry equipment, ammunition, as well as horses, bicycles, etc. so having that equipment was pretty much normal. In regards to the US, I knew some soldiers in the Pacific Theatre in WWII, several company commanders would tell be their biggest problem was keeping the mules in good shape, so the US wasn’t mechanized as much as we might think.
:32 Both are reconnaissance tanks. On the left is a M5 Stuart, Main armament is a 37mm rifled canon. On the right is a M41 Walker Bulldog with a 76mm high velocity rifled canon.
Oh definitely! Please do more artillery pieces! I'd also be interested in an overview or artillery basics (tactics, munitions, that sort of thing) and of course history: From the first cannons to fast shooting breach loaders and rockets and how they change(d) things. The logistics would also be interesting: How many people/horses/carts/trucks do you need to effectively use this thing? Not just firing, but also carrying the munitions and how would you do carry them? I really enjoyed the logistics around the Armstrong gun more than the piece itself.
I would personally not recommend watching a video and downloading at the same, as it tends to slow them both down, but if you have the bandwidth, go ahead!
Putting it in automotive perspective the gun's transverse is of the rack and pinion type and was very modern for the time. The gun carriage suspension was very similar to a Chevrolet's front suspension in the 1930's when they used "knee action" suspension.
The Treaty of Versailles was most definitely NOT a ceasefire. It may have appeared to be so wth the benefit of hindsight, but it was supposed to be the end of the "war to end all wars". That there were flaws in the arrangement is indisputable and lessons were learned which led to the implementation of the Marshall plan at the end of WW2, but _at the time_ all the parties signed the treaty in good faith.
The allies made the mistake of attempting to destroy the central powers. The treaty most definitely was not signed in good faith. It was a departure from conventional wisdom on ending wars. Historically, following the 30 years war (18th and early 19th century) they were a lot more pragmatic. They realized that, tempting as it may be, destroying the defeated countries would not result in lasting peace. Furthermore, today's enemy may be tomorrows friend and a potentially vital ally against an even greater threat, therefore demands were kept to a minimum. For example: after the Napoleonic Wars, despite the tyrant Napoleon having been the perpetrator and cause of the wars, France's borders were left intact, her internal affairs were not interfered with and the coalition made practically no claims. As a result, France's dignity and standing had been spared, she did not go out seeking revenge. The mistake made after the First World War, was to let revanchism and malice take the upper hand. The French in particular wanted to destroy Germany, believing that by imposing extreme demands on the country they could destroy its potential to ever wage war again. They were wrong. By stripping Germany of her prestige and dignity, by throwing the country into poverty and interfering massively in her internal affairs, they stoked massive resentment and revanchism. While France joined in negotiating her terms after the Napoleonic Wars, the treaties after the first world war were dictated to the Germans without any opportunity at input. They were just invited in later and essentially forced to sign the treaty under duress. The British were unhappy at France's crass demands, believing them to be too extreme and nobody in Germany ever had any intentions of keeping to its demands. Pretty much the moment the treaty was signed the Germans set about revising it and circumventing its terms. The treaty was dead the moment it was signed. There were significant voices all over Europe, that saw it as nothing more than temporary.
The Versailles Treaty was a "peace treaty" in name only... it was, in fact, a "punitive treaty" to loot, and dismember, Imperial Germany, and (supposedly) render her "harmless" (we all know that turned out). That treaty virtually *guaranteed* that Germany would go for "round 2"... see Case Yellow for further details.
The British Commonwealth countries also wanted thier share of the as well, which whilst understandable didn't help. Woodrow Wilsion also had his hand in things, having be made to look a right fool by the German's. There is also the argument that the German's wer enever made to feel militarialy defeated alowing the 'We were not defeated but stabbed in the back by poloticians' attitude to become ingrained. Just like the start the end of the Great War was one unholy screw up of gossip, ego and greed.
There is a fair argument that in many ways the treaties forced onto Germany, Austria, Hungary and Turkey/Ottermans in 1919-21 followed on from the harshness of the Brest-Litovsk treaties Germany forced on Russia in 1918 and even the treaty forced on France after the Franco Prussian war. Both were considered harsh treaties by most contemporaries outside tof the actual treaties.
Some of what you say is true. There was disquiet about the terms of Versailles - notably from Neville Chamberlain who foresaw that it would foster resentment but to say, as Ian contends, it was seen AT THE TIME as nothing more than a "ceasefire" is nonsense. Also, by the end of the Napoleonic wars, the French had been beaten back to their borders of 1792 and were forced to cede territory to Germany, Austria and the Netherlands as well as giving up many colonial assets and paying massive cash reparations to countries like Sweden. There was no compassion from the victors.
I love it, small artillery pieces are extremely interesting. Just a bit sad this one wasn't fully functional anymore always love to see the action of this gun working.
The whole idea of this is that it is better to have a cannon with you, rather than not. And this thing was handy enough to have it where your infantry guys need it.
Because of their little use against armored vehicles, despite the mentioned hollow-charge, 75mm light guns like this one(there are other versions, too) have been nicknamed "Heeres-Anklopfgerät", in English "Infantry's knocking device".
This gun is, if I'm right, seen in the film, "The Pianist", featuring Adrian Brody and in the action scene, the gun is used by simply pointing it directly at a building to blow it open. ideal for urban warfare. A small gun, easily manhandled and the shells are reasonably light enough for carriage by manpower alone.
That was excellent, cheers. Those fun little cannons I've wondered about are now a good bit better understood. And yes, all this broader range of military kit is most definitely appreciated content.
MORE ARTILLERY! Im honestly surprised Ian has not covered much artillery over the years. The design and ergonomics of crew served weapons are incredibly clever.
More stuff like this is definitely welcomed, and if you can setup a collaboration with Mr. Moran that'd be amazing. I know he's done a few videos on French tanks, but I'd love to see you guys revisit some of them, with his practical experience and historical knowledge on the specific tanks, and with your knowledge on everything French in general, I think those would make some good videos. Or hell, just whatever collaboration you could do. I'd love to see you guys crawl into whatever AFVs you can get a hold of and go over weird minutiae, a ForgottenWeapons episode on Sherman minutiae and the reality of the tank would be amazing.
The Skoda 75/18 of WWI, Austro Hungary, was demontable ( man pack or mule pack) and adopted by Italy's Alpine Artillery..in the 20s ( war booty)and was the fore-runner to the 105MM Pack Howitzer ( same demountable concept) Doc AV
This is a regimental gun. Along with the 15 cm IG, they formed the dedicated artillery support for the regiment. Read 'At Leningrad's Gates' -Lubbeck. great book. Interestingly, they were upgraded to also have 12 cm mortars also. This was when they were designated as a 'Grenadier' division.
I love how it looks like a space cannon yet it has wooden spokes on the wheels. Like the turn of the century and 22nd century combined
That's the Wehrmacht in a nutshell - King Tiger's supported by horse drawn logistics.
“We need a better light infantry gun.”
Straight up a heavy bolter.
Saw the tumbnail and said, heavy bolter?
Vague cosmetic resemblance in being a box. Otherwise not at all
No, that would be the mk19 automatic grenade launcher. Now, _that_ is a heavy bolter.
Give it belt feed and I'm in
@@AgentTasmania No, it's the overall proportions of the thing. Barrel to box ratio in particular. Otherwise any roughly box-shaped gun would read as a bolter, but that's not the case.
You got to envy the people who can just go to an auction house and buy a tank.
If you have the money you can pretty much do whatever you want. Being rich is basically like having super powers.
You can buy a tank in most countries, just not the gun that goes with it. Without the gun it's just an expensive tractor with 2 inch steel body panels.
tian5huang cheng It's easier to get super rich here than other countries, but it's certainly not a common thing. It's quite literally a one in a million type thing.
tian5huang cheng What kind of 50's bullshit is that man?
Martin McClure Nah man, the only perquisite someone needs is simply being in America. That's why our roughly 330,000,000 population is nothing but strictly millionaires. I bet the douche thinks that everyone who's not rich is that way because they're nothing, but lazy assholes.
If someone doesn't make a meme of Ian popping out from behind things excitedly saying "Neat, huh?!", I'll be thoroughly disappointed in the internet.
Micheal Peterson I second this
I third it.
Nick has a two part look at that M5. In the second he said he borrowed "someone" from Rock Island to film it. I wonder if it was Ian?
Micheal Peterson rule 34.
All yours, get to it.
Forgotten weapons not forgotten firearms! BRING ON THE CANNONS
OH GOD YESSS
And the.... swords? Hmmmm..
To you
Until they start firing at you; then they have your UNDIVIDED attention.
Gods damn yes!!!
You know I never really thought about it but Chieftain's (Nick Moran) series is basically the forgotten weapons of tanks
I have often said that Ian does with firearms what I do with tanks.
*suddenly a wild chieftain appears*
Hey, you should do a collab or a chat sometime with Ian just as you have done with military aviation! :D
I want to see their mobile AAA (Universal carrier & a punt gun : )
The_Chieftain i know you have probably heard this a million times but are you born and bred irish or american irish?
Definitely would like to see more of field guns, anti tank guns, mortar, howitzer, etc...
I would love to see more machine cannons like the MK 108s or 103, 151s ect.
People generally don't realize that, aside from a window of time from about 1860-1915, artillery was the dominant weapon on the battlefield and caused the most casualties. I'd love to see the evolution of recoiling gun carriages from 1880 to 1950.
I would too. The channel is called Forgotten Weapons, not Forgotten Small Arms.
@@Blade40688 I can't imagine there are any MK 103 or 108 left in firing condition sadly
Iono Sama Yes more artillery to batter down the Weebs that infected most of us. They are slowly dying which is a good thing
"Honey, i'm back from the war in europe"
"look at the souvenir i got for you"
*"it's a Leichtes Infanteriegeschütz"*
I’m imagining they’re living in the Rockies and use it to minimize avalanches.
@@joshuahadams that would be.... *DOPE*
@@Blei1986 a couple times a winter head out back a put a couple shells into the mountainside. A few small avalanches are better than one giant one, eh?
That articulating gun shield is just so German engineering. "Wouldn't it be great if...?"
Totally agree ..... so absurdly over-engineered to a breath-takingly German standard the planet has come to know and love.
German here, and yes people still think that way here xD 'wouldnt it be great if...' Is still popular as a reasoning
being Scottish i find the people that i like the most in Britain have the same mind set. It's better to have a gun shield and not need it than get shot in the head randomly through a tiny hole
Hmm did you know that south west germany has newrly the same stereotypes to other germans as scotland has to the rest of the uk? XD seems fitting that you guys would think similar on this subject
Hmm im playing online every now and then with all kinds of people including scots, maybe its because im not british and we learned both british and american english in school (that high class accent for british and the kind of accent most news reporters have in the us respectivly) but i usually dont have issues understand scots online, yes they sound different but so do i with my german accent xd
Guns of the 1930s were expected to be towed and manhandled by the crew to a much greater extent than today. Guns then came with ropes and levers as standard and it was common to carry a small gun like this inside a truck, rather than tow it by a vehicle. The use of field guns by the infantry broke the tradition of the artillery being the keepers of all guns in an army's artillery park and allowed the infantry to provide their own fire support.
That breach design is actually genius. It makes it a lot easier and faster to load when it is in high elevation. It's a shame that you weren't able to look into it in more detail, but thanks for digging up that old footage!
I wonder why we haven't seen more breeches designed that way...
ProudToBeNoob Probably because of production costs or times. At least that's usually the reason behind such things if reliability isn't a issue.
I would hazard a guess at balancing issues too. With a heavier weapon or a longer barrel it only gets exacerbated; On a small, short-barrelled weapon then when the barrel tilts, it's on a pivot by itself that is NOT the same pivot used for aiming. Now imagine the length is multiplied by three or four times, your barrel-only pivot has to be much further away so that the guy opening the breech doesn't have to be built like the hulk. The other problem with this is it means the angle of rotation to open the breech is decreased, so where on a short barrel howitzer like this you get, say, 20 degrees of free play at high elevation, on a long barrel you'd maybe only get 5 degrees. Plus it's all the other fun stuff like extra maintenance, extra complexity and cost. Mainly though I'd say it's the balance, it's good for something like this, but for anything much bigger you've still got one guy pulling on a lever to move the weight of the entire barrel, which above a certain weight just isn't a winning proposition.
Chris Rigby Good point.
For bigger gun's that might be true, but for such small howitzers, I think that design is genius. And I think you can reduce the weight of the gun by a lot through that mechanism. Because you don't need such a heavy lock to keep the breach block in place. And the lifting mechanism doesn't need to hold all the force that is applied during firing.
On any artillery piece build for indirect fire you have that problem how to reload on high elevation. This is quite a clever solution, on the l.FH (leichte Feldhaubitze) 1898 and 1916 there was a mechanism to uncouple the barrel from the aming mechanism, point it horizontal, reload and then tilt it upwards again to couple it in. That was much more complicated. This gun is in some ways the evolution from the l.MW (leichter Minenwerfer) which was normally a front-loaded mortar, but had some wheels and a box-trail which could be connected to get something similar.
It looks like a giant glock strapped to a horse carriage.
Thought the same
I thought it was a glock with a shield
LOL
Does it take glock magazines
@@yoda1037 Yes! 7.5cm magazines!
Thanks for the shout-out for Nick Moran! For the audience, he is a Major, Armor, in the California Army National Guard, and a combat veteran. He is The Chieftain with World of Tanks and his UA-cam channel is 'Inside the Chieftain's Hatch' where he reviews and explores armored fighting vehicles.
The tilting barrel system looks like it was really useful for high-angle fire, compared to conventional breech systems.
Pete Sheppard the only problems seen with high angle fires with Arty is barrel recoil run out distance, in older guns and howitzers you use to have to dig a high angle pit under the breach
Good point! I was thinking about the ease of loading the cartridge. With a traditional breech, it looks to be a bit awkward to line the round up and shove it in with the gun elevated. I've seen where many guns have to be depressed to a loading position, then re-elevated to fire.
There's some old german WW2 newsreel movie in which you can see this gun being loaded (very very fast) in combat circumstances.
The US had a somewhat similar occurrence in WWII. Crews were timed on loading guns, the engineers took that rate of fire, added more rounds/min until they thought they reached a ROF impossible to achieve, and then designed gun barrels that would survive regular use at that ROF.
eventually they discovered that the barrels were quickly wearing out on those guns, and someone had to go observe how they were managing to wear out these barrels. Turns out when you're being shot at you move a lot faster. After that they started specifying "suggested" rates of fire, but provisioned more barrels knowing no one would really follow those.
Pete Sheppard IIRC The Chieftain also came from Ireland and was in the Irish army originally.
Nice shout out to the chieftain!
I honestly expected Nick Moran to pop out from behind the M5 Stuart and look surprised when he saw Ian there!
He mentioned the Chieftain...do a darn colab!
Jacob Eberhardt is that the irish guy that does tanks?
john m yes
Alex Ray-Weber oh yeah i seen him in a vid for an is7
I'm still waiting for Ian, Hickock 45, Lindybeige, Bloke, Chieftain etc to get round a table and have a three hour chat ...
they did collabs before
**Ahem** Oil treated surface. Do not touch or climb on.
Ian: "Yeah, I'm going to fondle all the naughty bits..."
I'm pretty sure the locking systems makes it much easier to reload at high angles of aim.
Yes, no need to get below for the breech and limited recoil means the gun would be lower overall and more concelable. Though being finiky I'd call it more of a Gun/Howitzer hybrid. Also are wheels are quick release and /or the axle travel locks for firing. That's what happens on a lot of guns.
Why call it a gun/howitzer hybrid? Isn't gun just a over category of all things that shoot projectiles through explosive stuff?
And isn't it exactly a howitzer, capable of direct and indirect fire?
woke
@@FactoryofRedstone Gun presumably refers to heavy artillery, while howitzer is short barell short range artillery. This would be a light howitzer though.
@@ineednochannelyoutube5384 Like I sad, as far as I know, a howitzer is a artillery piece, that is capable of direct and indirect fire. The other classifications would be a piece that is only capable of direct fire would be a canon and one of only indirect would be a mortar.
For example the German Panzerhaubitze 2000 a self-propelled artillery piece, that is classified as a howitzer (Haubitze) has a barrel length of 52 times the caliber. That is considerably longer than the barrel length of the main canon of the m1 abrams with 44.
I remember the PaK 40 from years ago and the story of the hippie woman who sold it to the current owners who restored it to firing condition... I bet she dislikes all of Ian's videos on impulse now.
Looooool, wut!? Do you have a link to that!?
Such a troll move. XD
i remember that story too. Didnt she use it in her garden and filled it with flowers as a symbol of peace? I am very happy that the gun was restored.
At least she kept in some condition enough to be restored, otherwise it likely would;ve been scrapped much earlier; not all hippies are liberal or anti-gun (..or a more extreme personna commonly some think of from that 'hippy' trope, within the stereotypical US right-side).
Razor 1uk When she sold it, one of her conditions was that the gun never fired again.
Neurofunke, how many gallons of human blood are you willing to spend to end war? Because the price, is every last drop.
For the same reason you just went on that little tangent, humans become hostile to those whose actions and opinions they disagree with, and ultimately there's precisely 2 ways humans can interact, verbal persuasion and physical coercion.
And those with irrevocable differences in their customs and beliefs have only one recourse against those who stand at the furthest end of that divide.
I second the motion for an Ian/Nick video or series of videos.
The US Army had a very similar 75mm light field howitzer, although it was not considered an infantry gun. It had a normal sliding breech but the barrel had an unusual inverted sled (to describe it one way) on top of the barrel. It also had a split trail and rubber tires, although there were other versions, mainly for airborne use. At some point the carriages were used for a 105mm infantry howitzer and presumably the barrels were used in other applications, such as on light tanks and landing craft.
So am I the only one who's first thought seeing that thumbnail was "hay look its a heavy bolter"?
No, Imperial Guard Heavy Bolter for shure ;)
Yup I noticed it too.
Yep, probably Krieg pattern as well.
Also has that familiar grey unpainted color in the thumbnail. For a second I thought Ian is going to bless us with a video on his Guard army.
Wait and Hope.
As many ppl noticed before, these guns mostly used in the infantry gun sections of the german regiments. Originally the gun have a small limber and caisson. Their name was the If.12 and If12/2.(For infantry use)Late in the war any kind of limber vas used, even If.8 infantry cars, foward elements of machine-gun carts, etc. And instead of caissons, so called feldwagens are used(horse wagons, Panjewagen Pleskau for example)Mostly two horse used to tow the gun, but sometimes even six had attached, for example, in case of cavalry units. Motorised units used the Kfz.69 Krupp Protze light truck or 1 ton halftrack, but any light vehicle also usable. Steyr 1,5 ton, Opel Maultier, or even Sd. Kfz 251!Also, grenadier divisions used this gun in the batallion level, four guns per heavy company. Bycicle recon troops also used in the similar manner, but tow it with vehicles. Also, panzer and panzergrenadier units was also used the gun, two guns per platoon, in heavy companies in the recon or the infantry battalions.Late in the war, the new 12cm mortar was the new toy, often using in heavy companies, or in infantry gun companies, together with IG.18.This heavy companies also have own field telephone and radio sections. Mostly feldkabeltrupps 3 and 6, Tornisterfunktrupp and Feldfunk. portable radios. Donkey-ear binoculars, theodolits, optical rangefinders also used, like in "real" arty batteries.
The Chieftain/Forgotten Weapons cinematic universe crossover is getting closer and closer to being a reality!
+1 for more artillery / other large weapon systems. Thank you for the fantastic work, as usual.
🎵The wheels on the gun go round and round 🎵
bluemonday09 this wins 😆
The German infantry liked this gun quite a lot. It was a direct fire support weapon available to junior commanders on the front line and gave a lot of punch on the attack and provided much needed stability to defending infantry units facing attack.
I've been collecting for this gun for a while. This is now the BEST video on the internet for this piece. Congrats!
If it wasn`t for the wooden wheels i would`ve thought its a modern howitzer
The same could be said about you
Man, I love the way you describe things, and bring some sense to what would otherwise be a complicated hunk of metal and wood, so as much as I would love to see more small arms, I'd be interested to see more small-ish arms like this thing, as well. Keep up the great work, Ian!
Show any gun no matter how big, small, new, old, wierd, fantastic and that goes for any gun related items and interviews with ppl that have good storys or interviews too.I love watching them all
Great video Ian, I've always had a soft spot for little guns and these 'door knockers' are quintessential examples.
4:45 Did that guy catch that just fired artillery shell casing with his bare hand...
Schmerz ist Schwäche, die den Körper verlässt...
Only for a moment but on a cold day the gunner may hold it a fraction longer before tossing it aside.
Absolute Madlad.
@@hagergrinkenschmied8019 Hoffe, du hast keine Kinder und wirst keine kriegen.
@@mikem9001 the original hand warmer for winter wars
I have urge to detach that, give it a mag and give it to space marines in the 42th millennium.
Heavy Stubber?
@@Sin526 bolter
It's "42nd", just FYI
I was thinking more Imperial Guard, especially with that carriage, but definately has a Heavy Bolter look to it. Given that most early 40k designs are higherly based on WW2, it's no big surprise
The forty tooth millennium.
The important aspect of this gun is its use in infantry regiments and not in artillery units. A typical German infantry regiment would have 12 companies in its three infantry battalions and the 13th company would be an Infanteriegeschützkompanie with 6 or 8 7.5cm le. IG 18 and 2 or 0 15cm Schweres(Heavy) Infanteriegeschütz 33. They could be kept concentrated, or 1 platoon of 2 guns each could be parcelled out to the 3 infantry battalions. The US Army established cannon companies in their infantry regiment after the war had started. They used the lightened M3 version of the standard M2 artillery howitzers or self-propelled guns on half-tracks(T19 or T30) or light tank chassis(M8 Scott).
The two infantry guns are in fact almost "forgotten weapons" amongst all the hoopla about german ww2 tech, despite their huge importance for every infantry regiment.
Anyone interessted in this topic should check out the memoir "At leningrad's gates" of a guy who spent most of his time with infantry guns.
I think each Platoon in the Infanteriegesxhützkompanien has two guns, so they had 4 leIG 18 and two sIG 33.
And don't forget the 14th Company with its 12 anti tank guns!
Yes, the platoon had 2 guns, but there were 3 light platoons and one heavy, unless the regiment had 4 light platoons, as was the norm in the 2nd-4th Wave of Infantry Divisions raised. I did forget the 14th while posting, even though I had thought to put it in while writing. Too lazy to go back and edit:)
Gustavus Adolphus had regimental guns for his infantry three hundred years earlier.
@@terry7907 Yes, he started the practice that was soon adopted all over Europe.
Fantastic video, it would be great to do more artillery pieces. My dad was with the 111th field artillery in WWII but he never talked about it. He let me fire a 105 howitzer when I was eight, I'll never forget that one.
This version has the wooden spoke wheels used by units that had horse drawn heavy weapons and equipment, the other version had pneumatic rubber wheels for use by motorised units.
2.5 mile range ain't bad.
at that distance you either need a forward observer and radio, or being positioned up on a hill with very good binoculars
They had a forward observer. This guns were used by the 13th Company of each
german Infantry Regiment. These units were the artillery of the Regiments CO. Each Infanteriegesxhützkompanie had 3 gun platoons with 2 guns. 2 platoons with the leIG18 and one platoons with the SIG 33 (15cm). They also had a Forward Observer section like an artillery battery.
Stephan L And drones...sorry...Happy Thanksgiving!
Still only 2/3s of the monarchies mountain gun thatw as basically the same as this. Might have been a mite heavier at 600kg though.
That was one of the niecest vids you made in the last year or so. Been interested in these "small" artillery style weapons for a while now and there is not too much in form of vids about them on the net.
Great Video Ian! It couldn't hurt to see more large fire arms like motars, artillery, tanks, and what not if its got some military history to it. I had no idea this light artillery piece existed until today!
Thanks for the video Gun Jesus
It is so squarish that it looks like 40k's heavy bolter. Quite amazingly, the Death Korps of Krieg (Space Germans) use carriage-mounted heavy bolters which look almost the same as this howitzer.
You just KNOW the guy that buys this will show it off to whatever dates his daughter brings home.
"Boy, I can shoot your house without leaving my lawn. Behave! Cool? Cool!"
Seelenschmiede Then the girl tells him later, "Don't worry, the breach is welded shut."
Ian, an interesting little gun! Yes - Forgotten Weapons should keep on with "support" weapons (like your editions of the M20 Super Bazooka or the recoiless rifle). One can see that this showed Great War experience. "How can we eliminate the machine guns that stop the infantry's advance?" These would have a greater importance in the German Army as the Treaty of Versailles forbade them having tanks (the real answer to the pesky MG nest). The infantry guns were the infantry commanders "personal" artillery. The US Army standard infantry regiment had a Regimental Cannon Company throughout WW2. Originally they had variants of the 75mm pack howitzer, then they used the 105mm M3, a shorter, lighter version of the standard 105mm artillery weapon. The crews were not artillerymen, but were infantry branch. In certain situations the Regimental Cannon Co. might be mechanized (M7 Howitzer Motor Carriages in some instances), but the light 105s were pulled by the Dodge WC62/63 1.5 ton 6X6's. The light guns were no longer needed as 1) communications improved with the artillery, 2) the guns grew heavier due to requirements for increased firepower, and 3) armor support became more readily available (at least for the Allies). Recoiless rifles and later guided missiles filled the role in later years.
Now that's an upgrade in both content and firepower!
Imho probably one of the most underrated bits of kit of the entire war.
Functional artillery pieces are like the one really cool thing that Canadians can buy that Americans can’t, but everyone keeps welding them shut 😭
misomalu
We can buy Chinese guns, too. :~}
One would think that the cost of buying ammo would be prohibitive enough that there would be no reason to need to weld them shut.
William Sager Is the ammo legal in Canada? If so that is some backwards ass gun logic. "No sir I'm sorry no Ak's, but if you're interested I have a couple howitzers in the back with some working shells".
Would this be re-activatable?
Kevin C I have a MAK90 do you?
Yes, Ian, please do more big guns and cannons. We really enjoy them.
So The Chieftan DID say hi to Jesus lol
I dont know why I love small infantry guns and mountain guns so much.
Love this thing in CoH 2.
I got flashbacks of Men of War AS2....
Call of Hduty :3
I love him absolutely struggling behind the gun to elevate it, giving up halfway through and popping up like nothing happened "neat huh😃"
In the next episode Ian presents B52... Slightly used still capable to deliver a tonnes of freedom and democracy with a style! Great video!
They need a forgotten weapons type channel on all military aircraft, vehicles and ships I’d watch every video
A video on the pak75 would be great
He has a pak 40 75 mm video at a shooting range. Not walkaround though..
I'd really like to see a video on an 1897 french 75mm
@@stevencroat Sorry What I meant was the ww2 M116 75mm pack howitzer.
Little addition to the mentioned mountain troops: The german "Gebirgstruppe" still has a little group of horses and mules ("Einsatz- und Ausbildungszentrum für Tragtierwesen") in service. A mule is capable of carrying ~150kg.
75kg on the left side and 75kg on the right. ;)
I was half expecting the Cheiftain to walk out the other side of the M3 light tank.. 1 question, what is the thing that looks like a stub axle shaft sticking out of the left side of the trail near the breech block?
I suspect that might be where the sight is mounted to look through the little door on the shield beyond it.
M5 Light tank, actually. The M3 had more blocky frontal armor plates rather than that nice slope.
As for that stubby rod, I was thinking that it was either the firing trigger or the lever for opening the action, but it seems that both of those levers are on the right side of the gun...
After searching for a bit on google, I think that I came across the answer, though. Fro what I can find, that seems to be the mounting point for the sighting apparatus. I assume that the sights aren't mounted there anymore on this gun because the gun has been made inoperable and thus it does not need the sights.
See what you think: www.lonesentry.com/manuals/german-infantry-weapons/pics/76-sighting-mechanism-75-mm-inf-how.jpg
The Chieftain did a a video on an M5 tank a5 Rock Island Auction; possibly that particular tank.
BTW, fro: reading on the complement of equipment a Wehrmacht company had assigned, the company had multiple carts, t9 carry equipment, ammunition, as well as horses, bicycles, etc. so having that equipment was pretty much normal.
In regards to the US, I knew some soldiers in the Pacific Theatre in WWII, several company commanders would tell be their biggest problem was keeping the mules in good shape, so the US wasn’t mechanized as much as we might think.
dandel351 m5**
See above I get it.
:32 Both are reconnaissance tanks. On the left is a M5 Stuart, Main armament is a 37mm rifled canon. On the right is a M41 Walker Bulldog with a 76mm high velocity rifled canon.
Oh definitely! Please do more artillery pieces!
I'd also be interested in an overview or artillery basics (tactics, munitions, that sort of thing) and of course history: From the first cannons to fast shooting breach loaders and rockets and how they change(d) things. The logistics would also be interesting: How many people/horses/carts/trucks do you need to effectively use this thing? Not just firing, but also carrying the munitions and how would you do carry them? I really enjoyed the logistics around the Armstrong gun more than the piece itself.
I expected Ian to take a couple of wrenches and do a field strip :( still a really cool unexpected video, you could do some tank crew guns with Nick
I'd be way more interested in seeing how far he'd get with the Universal Disassembly Tool (TM) . . .
Great respect to what you do! Thanks for all the informations you share. Max from France
I absolutely love this UA-cam channel and community.
Would it be possible to remove the welds and re-activate this?
NFA rules apply of course
any things possible dont let your dreams be memes
**not remilling everything you possibly can**
wtf is wrong with you
When I read the title, I first thought "Wait. When did that happen?". Then I noticed it was new 100 years ago.
Ian, when at all possible, please do more on artillery. No one ever goes in-depth into artillery. Please do more!
Ian, PLEASE do more like this!
How convenient that im watching this while downloading wolfenshtein the new order.
lol same. STEAM SALE!
Good game, the sequel... was not so good.
What's stopping me from buying is that it lacks a Linux version :(
I would personally not recommend watching a video and downloading at the same, as it tends to slow them both down, but if you have the bandwidth, go ahead!
UA-cam bandwidth isn't really anything worth writing home about to be honest, an 80MB video isn't going to make much difference for a 50GB download.
Thats one funky, heavy bolter looking field gun.
Ian your channel is hands down the best gun channel
Putting it in automotive perspective the gun's transverse is of the rack and pinion type and was very modern for the time. The gun carriage suspension was very similar to a Chevrolet's front suspension in the 1930's when they used "knee action" suspension.
The Treaty of Versailles was most definitely NOT a ceasefire. It may have appeared to be so wth the benefit of hindsight, but it was supposed to be the end of the "war to end all wars". That there were flaws in the arrangement is indisputable and lessons were learned which led to the implementation of the Marshall plan at the end of WW2, but _at the time_ all the parties signed the treaty in good faith.
The allies made the mistake of attempting to destroy the central powers. The treaty most definitely was not signed in good faith. It was a departure from conventional wisdom on ending wars.
Historically, following the 30 years war (18th and early 19th century) they were a lot more pragmatic. They realized that, tempting as it may be, destroying the defeated countries would not result in lasting peace. Furthermore, today's enemy may be tomorrows friend and a potentially vital ally against an even greater threat, therefore demands were kept to a minimum. For example: after the Napoleonic Wars, despite the tyrant Napoleon having been the perpetrator and cause of the wars, France's borders were left intact, her internal affairs were not interfered with and the coalition made practically no claims. As a result, France's dignity and standing had been spared, she did not go out seeking revenge.
The mistake made after the First World War, was to let revanchism and malice take the upper hand. The French in particular wanted to destroy Germany, believing that by imposing extreme demands on the country they could destroy its potential to ever wage war again. They were wrong. By stripping Germany of her prestige and dignity, by throwing the country into poverty and interfering massively in her internal affairs, they stoked massive resentment and revanchism. While France joined in negotiating her terms after the Napoleonic Wars, the treaties after the first world war were dictated to the Germans without any opportunity at input. They were just invited in later and essentially forced to sign the treaty under duress.
The British were unhappy at France's crass demands, believing them to be too extreme and nobody in Germany ever had any intentions of keeping to its demands. Pretty much the moment the treaty was signed the Germans set about revising it and circumventing its terms. The treaty was dead the moment it was signed. There were significant voices all over Europe, that saw it as nothing more than temporary.
The Versailles Treaty was a "peace treaty" in name only... it was, in fact, a "punitive treaty" to loot, and dismember, Imperial Germany, and (supposedly) render her "harmless" (we all know that turned out). That treaty virtually *guaranteed* that Germany would go for "round 2"... see Case Yellow for further details.
The British Commonwealth countries also wanted thier share of the as well, which whilst understandable didn't help. Woodrow Wilsion also had his hand in things, having be made to look a right fool by the German's. There is also the argument that the German's wer enever made to feel militarialy defeated alowing the 'We were not defeated but stabbed in the back by poloticians' attitude to become ingrained. Just like the start the end of the Great War was one unholy screw up of gossip, ego and greed.
There is a fair argument that in many ways the treaties forced onto Germany, Austria, Hungary and Turkey/Ottermans in 1919-21 followed on from the harshness of the Brest-Litovsk treaties Germany forced on Russia in 1918 and even the treaty forced on France after the Franco Prussian war. Both were considered harsh treaties by most contemporaries outside tof the actual treaties.
Some of what you say is true. There was disquiet about the terms of Versailles - notably from Neville Chamberlain who foresaw that it would foster resentment but to say, as Ian contends, it was seen AT THE TIME as nothing more than a "ceasefire" is nonsense. Also, by the end of the Napoleonic wars, the French had been beaten back to their borders of 1792 and were forced to cede territory to Germany, Austria and the Netherlands as well as giving up many colonial assets and paying massive cash reparations to countries like Sweden. There was no compassion from the victors.
Yes, expanding out is a very good choice.
GunJesus is Jesus for all the guns
I love it, small artillery pieces are extremely interesting. Just a bit sad this one wasn't fully functional anymore always love to see the action of this gun working.
fantastic idea Ian. i’m very interested in more military history.
Looks a bit like a boltgun from 40k. *FOR THE EMPORER*
Great wheel suspension,would travel smoothly over any terrain.
Good hat you are expanding the scope of your presentations.
Nice shoutout for the chieftain
The whole idea of this is that it is better to have a cannon with you, rather than not. And this thing was handy enough to have it where your infantry guys need it.
I definetly like the idea. A retired field gun is also a forgotten weapon so thumbs up for more videos like this
I think your idea of expanding is a great one. I’ve learned SO much from you and will continue to do so.
That is the cutest cannon ever built.
Yes! More of these reviews Ian!
Because of their little use against armored vehicles, despite the mentioned hollow-charge, 75mm light guns like this one(there are other versions, too) have been nicknamed "Heeres-Anklopfgerät", in English "Infantry's knocking device".
imagine converting that into an autocannon and strapping it on a truck or half track
This gun is, if I'm right, seen in the film, "The Pianist", featuring Adrian Brody and in the action scene, the gun is used by simply pointing it directly at a building to blow it open. ideal for urban warfare. A small gun, easily manhandled and the shells are reasonably light enough for carriage by manpower alone.
This thing is dangerous to shoot with because if you loaded a shell in it immediately shut like a trap door or equivalent to an M1 Garand.
Thanks Ian.
Elegant, simple design.
That was excellent, cheers. Those fun little cannons I've wondered about are now a good bit better understood. And yes, all this broader range of military kit is most definitely appreciated content.
MORE ARTILLERY! Im honestly surprised Ian has not covered much artillery over the years. The design and ergonomics of crew served weapons are incredibly clever.
I love the heavy guns & cannon videos!!!! Thanks for sharing Ian!!
More stuff like this is definitely welcomed, and if you can setup a collaboration with Mr. Moran that'd be amazing. I know he's done a few videos on French tanks, but I'd love to see you guys revisit some of them, with his practical experience and historical knowledge on the specific tanks, and with your knowledge on everything French in general, I think those would make some good videos.
Or hell, just whatever collaboration you could do. I'd love to see you guys crawl into whatever AFVs you can get a hold of and go over weird minutiae, a ForgottenWeapons episode on Sherman minutiae and the reality of the tank would be amazing.
My answer to the Ians' question 'bout "arty pieces episodes" is YES. It is absolutely good idea.
Bitte mehr Videos dieser art.
Vielen Dank für all die anschaulichen Videos.
Good stuff Ian. More of this please!
The Skoda 75/18 of WWI, Austro Hungary, was demontable ( man pack or mule pack) and adopted by Italy's Alpine Artillery..in the 20s ( war booty)and was the fore-runner to the 105MM Pack Howitzer ( same demountable concept)
Doc AV
This is a regimental gun. Along with the 15 cm IG, they formed the dedicated artillery support for the regiment. Read 'At Leningrad's Gates' -Lubbeck. great book. Interestingly, they were upgraded to also have 12 cm mortars also. This was when they were designated as a 'Grenadier' division.
More artillery please Ian. The mechanics of these is just as interesting as smaller firearms
Fantastic video. Would love more with artillery and vehicles
My bet is that suspension is rubber bushes, they were used in some aircraft suspension until after WW2 and still quite common on trailers today.