View Single Post
  #11  
Old October 3rd, 2013, 06:24 PM

PvtJoker PvtJoker is offline
Corporal
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 144
Thanks: 12
Thanked 22 Times in 16 Posts
PvtJoker is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Minimal range for indirect artillery fire?

Quote:
Originally Posted by cbo View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by gila View Post
Are not the 7.5 IG's for only direct fire infrantry support?
The two German infantry guns - the 15cm and the 7,5cm were used in much the same way as mortars would later be. Their design was based on WWI experience with mortars - "Minenewerfer" - and the two guns were called Minenwerfer early on in their development.
It may be prudent to explain here that the WW1 German Minenwerfer were breech loaded and rifled unlike modern Stokes-Brandt type mortars, which are muzzle loaded, smooth-bore and fire fin-stabilized projectiles. So, while the Germans adopted the 81mm Brandt type mortar (Granatwerfer in 1930s German nomenclature*, meaning grenade thrower), they didn't abandon the Minenwerfer principle completely.

* After WW2 Germans started to call Brandt type weapons Mörser (i.e. mortars), which at one time was reserved for heavier siege artillery pieces. Although by Anglo-Saxon usage most WW1 heavy Mörser such as the famous Big Bertha were actually short-barreled howitzers. Confused yet?
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to PvtJoker For This Useful Post: