88mm guns in British service

Discussion in 'Weapons, Technology & Equipment' started by Don Juan, Aug 12, 2022.

  1. Don Juan

    Don Juan Well-Known Member

    I was perusing the war diary of the 58th LAA Regiment the other day for reasons I won't go into here, and found some unexpected entries for December 1944:

    88-1.jpg

    88-2.jpg

    There's a few more instances of using the 88mm towards the end of the month, together with lots of engagements with Me 262 jets, so this unit certainly had an interesting time during this period.
     
    Juha, Dave55, von Poop and 1 other person like this.
  2. Andreas

    Andreas Working on two books

    There are pictures of the battery firing the guns as indirect fire artillery/AAA somewhere.

    All the best

    Andreas
     
  3. Chris C

    Chris C Canadian

    Where were they at the time?
     
  4. Don Juan

    Don Juan Well-Known Member

    I don't know. The location just says "Field" and I didn't copy any of the adjacent pages that might have given something more specific. But it's in the Netherlands somewhere.
     
    Chris C likes this.
  5. von Poop

    von Poop Adaministrator Admin

    Nothing unusual about 88mm in British service...

    default.jpg

    Before getting my coat... It has often intrigued me how successful guns often seem to be made in a fairly narrow range of calibres.
    Physics, I suppose, though I've never tried to look into it properly
     
  6. TTH

    TTH Senior Member

    Aside from their use by 58th LAA in Europe (first photo), a few 88s were also used in support of 2nd NZ Div in Tunisia (next two photos). The 58th LAA photo shows 172 Battery firing in support of 3rd Division near Venraij, Dec 28th. 1944.

    58 LAA w 88mm.jpg 88mm Enfidaville w NZ April 43.jpg 88mm w 2 Nz Div Tunisia.jpg





    .
     
    Last edited: Aug 12, 2022
    Juha, Don Juan, Dave55 and 1 other person like this.
  7. TTH

    TTH Senior Member

    If I remember rightly, the army originally considered a Vickers 105mm design like that which Vickers sold to the Spanish, The final caliber of the 25-pdr (87.6mm) was I think determined by the need for something which would fit in the cradle of the 18-pdr Mk IV-V.
     
    Juha and Andreas like this.
  8. Don Juan

    Don Juan Well-Known Member

    The REME were refurbishing captured 88's from the beginning of the Normandy campaign, so some of the guns used by 58 LAA might have been in storage for quite a while.
     
    TTH, Juha, Chris C and 1 other person like this.
  9. Andreas

    Andreas Working on two books

    Not sure I'd go along with that (see also TTH above).

    While there's a lot of love for the 25-pdr, and it was a good gun, pretty much everyone else went with 105mm for a proper field gun in the 1930s (bar the Soviets), and nobody after the war thought 'oh that 25-pdr, it was so great we should all scale back our field guns to 88mm'. It was an oddity for a mid-30s divisional gun design, not to be repeated.

    One reason why the British army could get away with it in my view is that it simply provided 50% more guns per for the divisional artillery (72 vs. 48) and invented a superior gunnery control system to concentrate multiple divisional and corps artillery assets.

    All the best

    Andreas
     
    Chris C likes this.
  10. Andreas

    Andreas Working on two books

    That was the picture I was thinking of.

    All the best

    Andreas
     
  11. von Poop

    von Poop Adaministrator Admin

    Not really the passing point I was lightly making.

    75, 88, 105, 120, 155. There's a universality in the numbers, across companies and nations and before more careful standardisation.
    If anything 88 a bit of a sport in that list.
    Ballistic/physics reasons no doubt.
    Anyway - for another thread maybe.
     
    Chris C and Don Juan like this.
  12. Don Juan

    Don Juan Well-Known Member

    Wonder if these numbers form a Fibonacci sequence....
     
    von Poop likes this.
  13. Listy

    Listy Well-Known Member

    My (albeit limited) understanding is its a combination of factors.
    Generally you want the maximum warhead for a projectile. But equally you want stability in flight, so the Length/Width of the projectile is restricted. Ie go long and thin and the internal ballistics and handling of the projectile would be all over the place, short and fat, can also give bad handling, but the external ballistics are going to suck. I'd also bet, but don't know, that there's stuff to do with wall thickness, and internal forces that effect the calibre, in the desire to get the maximum internal volume.
    So like all things armoured development, you have to balance things against each other, which leads to certain common choices.
     
    Don Juan and von Poop like this.
  14. tmac

    tmac Senior Member

    92nd LAA during the Rhine Crossing bombardment in March 1945: Over the four days from March 23 to 27, the 92nd fired a total of 32,000 rounds. D Troop of 318 also sent across 46 rounds from a captured German 88mm gun. ‘Everything that could fire was fired during that barrage,’ recalled Len Harvey. ‘The only time we stopped was when the gun barrels became red hot and had to be replaced.’

    The attack on Bremen, April 1945: Just before midnight on the 24th, the barrage opened – with the 92nd targeting two stretches of road in the Kattenturm area and the city’s airfield. As well as using its Bofors, the regiment also brought its captured German 88mm gun to bear.
     
    Chris C and TTH like this.
  15. SteveDee

    SteveDee Well-Known Member

    I have a really uncomfortable feeling (and my left eye is twitching) that my next question is a really stupid one...but here goes anyway;
    Why were the guns mentioned in metric sizes?

    Were they adopted from over-seas (export) markets or what?

    The guns my dad used seemed to be good old Imperial sizes; 3", 3.7" & 4.5"
     
    Last edited: Aug 14, 2022
  16. idler

    idler GeneralList

  17. Juha

    Juha Junior Member

    As I recall, when supporting the attack, the British emphasized suppressing and not so much destroying the enemy, which they did not believe that field artillery was really capable of doing. Then the smaller danger zone of the 25-pdr shell was an advantage, the attacking troops could get closer to the target during fire preparation, so the assault part, the most dangerous part of the attack, was shorter. In defence, at least in theory, there was no big difference in the vulnerability of the attacking enemy infantry whether it was hit by the 25-pdr or 105 mm barrage, although I remember reading that the 25-pdr shell fragmented into fragments larger than optimal, and the problem was not solved until very late in the war or only after the war.
     
    Don Juan likes this.
  18. Don Juan

    Don Juan Well-Known Member

    I suspect the production of large fragments was intentional for counter-battery work, i.e. larger fragments tend to do more damage to equipment.
     
  19. Andreas

    Andreas Working on two books

    The 25-pdr wasn't really a counterbattery gun so I doubt that. The CB work was supposed to be done by the mediums.

    The Germans complained that the 10cm (really a 105) K18 did not have the shell-weight and destructive power needed for CB work, even though that was its designated role. Ideally you go for >150mm for that.

    All the best

    Andreas
     
    Don Juan likes this.
  20. Owen

    Owen -- --- -.. MOD

    This 88 is stored at Netheravon.
    Anyone know where it came from ?
     

    Attached Files:

Share This Page