Smoke candles

[chuckfourth]

Hello,
I think some german vehicles may be missing their smoke candles.
From http://www.wwiivehicles.com/germany/tanks-medium/pzkpfw-iii-ausf-g.asp "Smoke candles had armor added" in game auf L is the first pz III to get smoke
The quote states that auf g had smoke and infers that auf f had smoke. Auf e and possibly all the way back to auf a for all I know had smoke, pz 3 being the main battle tank and hence needing smoke candles.
Also
http://www.wwiivehicles.com/germany/tanks-medium/pzkpfw-iii-ausf-h.asp if you look at the third picture down you will see a box mounted on the rear of this vehicle with the german cross on it. This is the armoured box around the rear mounted smoke dischargers. On pictures of models earlier than auf G the smoke dischargers are unarmoured and so visible. see
http://www.wwiivehicles.com/germany/tanks-medium/pzkpfw-iii-pzbefwg.asp
shows auf d Panzerbefehlswagen with smoke.
The puma also has smoke, doesnt in the game. see
http://www.wwiivehicles.com/germany/armored-cars/sdKfz-234.asp
some 222 also seem to have had smoke, see
http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/3620/sdkfz222.htm
there they are at the lower front on the second picture down. or
http://www.panzernet.net/panzernet/fotky/obrnenavozidla/222/038.jpg
Best Regards Chuck.

[chuckfourth]

Hi There
I notice that the puma now has smoke candles and quite a few of the pz 3s (auf e onwards), thanks for that but I think that perhaps these got missed out?

584 "PzKw IIIg-3.7cm"
850 "PzKw IIIj"
869 "PzKw IIIj/1"
940 "PzKw IIIh"
941 "PzKw IIIj"
942 "PzKw IIIj/1"
010 "PzKw IIIh"
011 "PzKw IIIj"
and possibly
203 "PzKw III Tauch"

None of these has smoke candles but all should have I think?
Best Regards Chuck.

[blitzkreig]

After going through me sources on this topic the only Pz III models with smoke launchers I've actually seen photographs of are the late production J, L & M models. All picutres being dated 1943.

I have seen pictures of the Puma fitted with smoke candles as well as several pictures of the 7.5cm armed Sdkfz 233 armoured car with smoke launchers fitted, taken in Tunsia sometime in 1943 (the 233 does not curently have smoke launchers fitted in game)

I'd put it out to argument that the introduction of smoke candles to german vechicles began mid war from some time in 1943 as I've yet to see a photograph of pre-1943 vehicles fitted with smoke launchers.

Chucks Sdkfz 222 picutre clearly show smoke launchers but no date to the pictures. I'm afraidd Chuck I'm unable to clearly make out the smoke launchers on the Pz III links you gave. The screen resolution of the pictures wasn't very good on my pc.


My photograph sources:

Source: Standard Catalog of German Military Vechicles by David Doyle
Source: German Tanks of WW2 by DR S Hart & Dr R Hart

[redcoat2]

The Panzer III Ausf. F, G and H carried a rack of five smoke bombs in a box on the back of the vehicle. They could be used to create a smoke screen that the tank could reverse into. Some later versions of the Panzer III had this rack of smoke bombs concealed beneath the engine air-outlet cowling. Other later versions - including the Ausf. M - had smoke dischargers on the side on the turret to lay smoke in front of the tank.

Source: Osprey New Vanguard 27 - Panzerkampfwagen III Medium Tank 1936-44.

[DRG]

The Panzer III Ausf. F, G and H carried a rack of five smoke bombs in a box on the back of the vehicle. They could be used to create a smoke screen that the tank could reverse into. Some later versions of the Panzer III had this rack of smoke bombs concealed beneath the engine air-outlet cowling. Other later versions - including the Ausf. M - had smoke dischargers on the side on the turret to lay smoke in front of the tank.

Source: Osprey New Vanguard 27 - Panzerkampfwagen III Medium Tank 1936-44.





That source happen to mention a date this was common practice ?

Don

[Marek_Tucan]

Anyway this is on the same level as smoke created by puping Diesel into the exhaust, used on T-55 and so on - ie not a smoke discharger per se. To simulate that in game it would be correct to have a puff of smoke created in the same hex as the vehicle is and then you'd have to reverse to get into cover.

[redcoat2]

The Panzer III Ausf. F, G and H carried a rack of five smoke bombs in a box on the back of the vehicle. They could be used to create a smoke screen that the tank could reverse into. Some later versions of the Panzer III had this rack of smoke bombs concealed beneath the engine air-outlet cowling. Other later versions - including the Ausf. M - had smoke dischargers on the side on the turret to lay smoke in front of the tank.

Source: Osprey New Vanguard 27 - Panzerkampfwagen III Medium Tank 1936-44.

That source happen to mention a date this was common practice ?

Don

Not specifically. The book first mentions the smoke bombs in the first chapter about the development of the Panzer III.

On Page 8 it says “The Ausf. H began entering service at the end of 1940 … Like the Ausf. F and G it carried a rack of smoke bombs in a prominent box at the rear, the operation of which is described below.”

On the next page it says, “The Ausfuhrung M appeared in 1942 … Two batteries of three smoke bomb dischargers were fitted to the turret sides, arranged so as to drop a pattern ahead of the tank if fired simultaneously.”

Most of the information about the Panzer III’s smoke bombs is in a paragraph in the next chapter (on Page 17):

http://img411.imageshack.us/img411/792/pziiismokemg5.gif

[chuckfourth]

Heres an interesting quote from
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=43178

The entire article is well worth a read.

"The Pz.IV Ausf.A/B/C/D and the StuG III Ausf.A in France in 1940 could fire a smoke shell with the 7.5cm L/24. The German tanks were not equipped with smoke dischargers prior to 1941. The use of smoke dischargers was more generalized in the following battles in Russia and North Africa. They were mounted on the rear portions of the mudguards, facing forwards, or on the sides of the turret. For instance, on a Pz38(t), they would mount a 1/2 cylindrical shaped cylinder propped up by a piece of steel that would contain 3 smoke projectiles per side.
Nevertheless, beside the smoke shells fired by the artillery or by the Pz.IV or StuG III, the Germans modified several tanks by mounting a kind of smoke dispenser on the rear of the tank. It was a rack with German infantry smoke candles ("Nebelkerzen"). These candles just "burned" and made smoke on the rear of the tank instead of real smoke dischargers making a smoke screen in front of the tank. It is not sure that there was a triggering system from inside the tank. This system was already used in Poland in 1939."

Points I found interesting,
38t had smoke candles doesnt have any in-game.
I think in my travels Ive seen pictures of pz 2 with the smoke candles mounted on the mudgards firing forward not quite sure about it though Ill check.
AS I read it smoke candles enter service in 41. prior to this date the vehicles in question used the 'Nebelkerzen'

I can't imagine that they didnt have a triggering system from inside, stopping the tank and jumping out to light them seems impracticle.

203 "PzKw III Tauch" is pz 3 auf e so may have had them if they could survive a dunking

Not sure about the 222 some had the Nebelkerzen some didnt, as one can find a picture of pretty much any vehicle that has smoke candles without them fitted, maybe the 222 should get candles also.

My apologies in the origional post the picture of the pz 3 with armoured Nebelkerzen is the 5th picture down not the 3rd.

[DRG]

the Germans modified several tanks by mounting a kind of smoke dispenser on the rear of the tank.



"Several" tanks ??

Do you seriously think we should add a smoke dispenser to some of these models becasue the Germans modified "several" of them?

I will consider the 1941 date for actual smoke dischargers

Don

[Mobhack]

And this rack of smoke bombs is not a smoke discharger in SP game terms. S/D project bombs forward, immediately hiding the screened vehicle by breaking LOS.

It's more like a smoke candle/pot or diesel-injection smoke system, and those are not modelled in the game (WW2 or MBT) as not worth the coding for the negligible usefulness. As someone pointed out, you would have to reverse into or behind the smoke to screen yourself even if you had the MP left to do so, or be in retreat mode.

The only S/D that I would be interested in hearing about for the Nazis would be the projector type as used in the game. Those seem to be rare until 43 or so from the look of things.

Cheers
Andy

[blitzkreig]

Mobhack & DRG

I can see your point. Seems daft to alter the oobs for things that may have been. I've still yet to see any photographic eviednece that smoke launchers were fitted to any German vehcile before late 1943. What I'm curious about is the smoke dispensers shown on chucks Sdkfz 222 pics and the ones I've seen on sdkfz 233 in Tunisa 1943 which look the same type, though these were mounted in two sets of three on the front of the armoured cars front mud guards.

These smoke laucnhers are very different in appearance to the ones fitted to the German tanks. Does any one know if these are smoke launchers as modeled in the game mechanics or the "smoke candles" Chuck has talked about.

Any ideas?

[redcoat2]

And this rack of smoke bombs is not a smoke discharger in SP game terms. S/D project bombs forward, immediately hiding the screened vehicle by breaking LOS.


Yup. I suspected that the early ‘smoke candle discharger’ would not be a smoke discharger in game terms when I added my info from the Osprey guide.

The same stern-based dischargers (armoured or unarmoured) were of course also fitted to early Sturmgeschutz.

[blitzkreig]

Mobhack & DRG

I've still yet to see any photographic eviednece that smoke launchers were fitted to any German vehcile before late 1943.?


typo chaps, I meant to say early 1943!

[chuckfourth]

Hi Don
I would read it as several tank "types" but it may indeed be just a few tanks. Having read the rest of the post it seems to me the posters first language isnt English.

[chuckfourth]

Well there does seem to be some confusion here, firstly as for rarity all the pz 3 from auf f had 5 of these these "smoke bombs" fitted as standard. the minimum introduction date for the smoke bomb thus becomes 07/40, according to the game, but these sites
http://www.wwiivehicles.com/germany/tanks-medium/pzkpfw-iii-ausf-f.asp
"-auf f- Were issued to the Panzer divisions starting in late 1939"
and
http://www.achtungpanzer.com/panzerkampfwagen-iii.htm
""In September of 1939, another new variant - Ausf F (5-serie) entered production""
Seems the current in-game introduction date for unit 583 pz 3 auf f is about a year too late. 07/40 is the date that they began upgunning auf f to 50mm

that aside,

Auchtung panzer also has this to say regarding pz 3 auf f and smoke bombs.
"Ausf F vehicles were fitted with a hull rear mounted rack of five smoke generators remotely released from the turret"
note the use of the word release rather than fire or ignite. ie they are dropped on the ground.
comparing the employment of these smoke bombs to a diesel-injection smoke system thus becomes a nonsense. The injection system stays with the tank whereas the smoke candles/bombs are dropped on the ground allowing the tank to then reverse behind it. Or it can just turn away and drop them as it turns which probably gets the smoke between it and the AT gun even quicker.
esp as pz 3 can spin the tracks in opposite directions. ie turn on a dime.

OK then, the tank drops the smoke can and reverses over it to get out of sight.
Currently the game models the smoke bomb dropper the same as the smoke bomb discharger whats the downside not much, How long would that take to get behind the smoke, 10 seconds maybe 20 how long are the turns 3 minutes or more? Just pretend the game turn time to 3 minutes and 10 seconds. The game certainly has some other similar compromises. For example a landing craft can move its full movement points then the discharged vehicle can also moves its full movement points thats a 3 minute turn stretched into a 6 minute turn.

If the early panzer III's have their smoke bombs removed/ignored then AT guns can keep shooting at them for turn after turn, thats as many shots as they have ammunition. Whereas in reality they would get off only one or two shots before the tank would have reversed out of sight behind the smoke.
ie The pz 3 has to stand up to possibly hundreds of AT rounds when in reality it should only have to face up to one or two.
On the other hand,
Model the smoke bomb dropper the same as the smoke bomb discharger (as is currently the case in-game) and the AT gun will get only one shot at the pz3 rather than the -maybe- 2 it would have in reality.
ie the AT gun is only slightly disadvantaged, or not disadvantaged at all, depending on how long it takes a pz 3 to get behind its dropped smoke compared to the guns Rate of fire.

My Question is this, which is closer to reality?

Best Regards Chuck

[redcoat2]

The only S/D that I would be interested in hearing about for the Nazis would be the projector type as used in the game. Those seem to be rare until 43 or so from the look of things.


I’ve seen several pictures of the Flamingo – which was used during Operation Barbarossa in 1941 - which seem to show what may be three forward-projecting smoke dischargers. Here is one of them:

http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/4479/flamingohf9.jpg

Source: Concord’s Armor Battles on the Eastern Front, Vol. 1.

There are a few more pictures/photos in this thread in the WW2inColor forum:

http://www.ww2incolor.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3832

[thatguy96]

Discharger types were very common for flame tanks as one of the accepted tactics (at least according to Osprey's Flammpanzer book) was to cover targets in flame fuel, without igniting it, and then launch a smoke grenade at it to ignite the entire area.

[redcoat2]

Discharger types were very common for flame tanks as one of the accepted tactics (at least according to Osprey's Flammpanzer book) was to cover targets in flame fuel, without igniting it, and then launch a smoke grenade at it to ignite the entire area.

Hmmmm. Maybe they were used for that purpose rather than for self-protection? Or … perhaps they could be used for either purpose?

[Mobhack]

Discharger types were very common for flame tanks as one of the accepted tactics (at least according to Osprey's Flammpanzer book) was to cover targets in flame fuel, without igniting it, and then launch a smoke grenade at it to ignite the entire area.

Hmmmm. Maybe they were used for that purpose rather than for self-protection? Or … perhaps they could be used for either purpose?

Smoke and para-illuminating rounds are usually pyrotechnic devices of some sort.

for example, on a recruits course we had the 2 inch mortars taken out of storage (they were armoury queens, only ever seen at the recruit course really).

The 2 inch smoke round had little holes at the base of the body, and when ignited these operated to spray fire and smoke out like a big firework.

The rounds went into the Barry Buddon turf, and likely were buried at the point that the stream of fireworks were at grass level. Result was a platoon of recruits were pulled off the rifle range nearby to help our class beat out grass fires that had started in the turf. We then had to fill up a couple of water trailers and tow these behind land rovers to soak the area in order to get the pockets of smouldering embers deep in the turf. In subsequent recruit courses, they simply fired off a few illuminating rounds in daytime since those were burned out above ground.

Same happened when on the ranges at Vogelsang in the hot summer a year or 2 later (76?) - but it was either tracers or the falling stream of hot cartridges from some Westland Scout helicopters firing GPMGs. Same drill of a platoon of guys with beater poles for a couple of hours, then towed water trailers to soak off the smouldering turf.

Cheers
Andy

[Marek_Tucan]

How long would that take to get behind the smoke, 10 seconds maybe 20 how long are the turns 3 minutes or more?

Forgetting the time needed to spot danger and to react. And, if the tank is moving, to stop it and go to reverse or "dime turn" - try doing that at full speed and you'd throw the track. I suspect first crew reaction would not be dropping smoke but trying to suppress the AT gun or "sprint" to cover. Kinda like that famous Polish "cavalry charge against tanks" - it was not a charge, but a retreat, the Poles knew well that they have to get ASAP into forest and shortest route went through the Panzers. They knew if they tried to turn back (away from the tanks) they'd get slaughtered doing so as they'd have to slow and begin turning in full view of the enemy.
Same applies for tanks, turning on dime is nice but it still shows nicely thin side armour (in fact with later PzIII's the thinnest place).
As for the smoke itself, would be pretty limited and might even be more detrimental to the tank than to the enemy, after all the ATG crew may fire blindly through, if they're quick enough the tank is still somewhere there and the ATG position is fixed, whereas tank crew loses any clue on enemy position the moment it backs into the smoke.
By the way, try not to exaggerate, I have yet to see a tank in SP having to withstand "hundreds" of AT gun rounds. That is if you do not leave Tiger sitting with disabled weapons in front of company of 37mm popguns. If your tanks have to suffer hundreds of rounds fired at them, there is some serious flaw in your setup and no amount of smoke dischargers will mend it ;)

[chuckfourth]

How long would that take to get behind the smoke, 10 seconds maybe 20 how long are the turns 3 minutes or more?

Forgetting the time needed to spot danger and to react.
The time needed to spot danger and to react is the same irrespective of wether the tank has forward firing smoke dischargers or rear mounted smoke droppers so this time can be safely ignored. Im talking about the extra time it takes the Pz 3 to get behind the smoke compared to tanks with forward firing smoke dispensers, once the -decision- to create a smoke screen has been made.

And, if the tank is moving, to stop it and go to reverse or "dime turn" - try doing that at full speed and you'd throw the track.
I mention dime turns to point out that the pz 3 has some extra manouverability compared to the run of the mill tank that could be considered as offsetting dropping the smoke at the rear as opposed to firing it out the front. Im not suggesting that the tank driver doesnt know how to drive. In any case I would imagine that if there is the chance of AT guns being around the tanks are moving somewhat more cautously than full speed.
I suspect first crew reaction would not be dropping smoke but trying to suppress the AT gun

Not if you havn't identified the whereabouts of the AT gun, the tanks usual problem.

or "sprint" to cover.

Not in the desert or flat russians steppes me-thinks.

Kinda like that famous Polish "cavalry charge against tanks" - it was not a charge, but a retreat, the Poles knew well that they have to get ASAP into forest and shortest route went through the Panzers. They knew if they tried to turn back (away from the tanks) they'd get slaughtered doing so as they'd have to slow and begin turning in full view of the enemy.
Same applies for tanks, turning on dime is nice but it still shows nicely thin side armour (in fact with later PzIII's the thinnest place).

reverse or turn, depends on the situation.

As for the smoke itself, would be pretty limited
Why?
and might even be more detrimental to the tank than to the enemy, after all the ATG crew may fire blindly through, if they're quick enough the tank is still somewhere there and the ATG position is fixed, whereas tank crew loses any clue on enemy position the moment it backs into the smoke.
This applies equally to tanks with forward firing and rearwards dropping smoke.
By the way, try not to exaggerate, I have yet to see a tank in SP having to withstand "hundreds" of AT gun rounds. That is if you do not leave Tiger sitting with disabled weapons in front of company of 37mm popguns. If your tanks have to suffer hundreds of rounds fired at them, there is some serious flaw in your setup and no amount of smoke dischargers will mend it ;)

You inference is that I am suggesting the inclusion of pz3 etc smoke to pander to my own style of playing, this is wrong. I think the Pz 3 should get smoke because they had smoke. They used it for the very same purpose as forward firing dischargers, to screen the tank. Removing the smoke from the tank on a technicality seems wrong to me. The game glosses over any number of other similar 'technicalities' in other areas simply because it is a simulation, not reality.

By the way what if the wind is blowing from behind the tanK? no difference whatsoever.

of interest from Lone sentry.
http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/smokeshelltactics/index.html

"Smoke shells are not fired by the Pz. Kpfw. II [2] or the Pz. Kpfw. III [3], both of which are equipped to discharge "smoke pots" with a range of approximately 50 yards. These pots are released electrically, and are employed chiefly to permit the tank to escape when caught by antitank fire."

Best Regards Chuck

[cbo]

Not that it matters, but the smokecandles mounted on the rear of Panzer III and IV and probably others were introduced in August 1938. It was not considered a succes and was dropped again in February 1942.

The turret-mounted dischargers were introduced on the Panzer IV in February 1943 and dropped again in May 1943 because enemy small arms fire penetrated the dischargers, setting off the smoke, blinding the crew in the tank.

The final smokedevice used by the Germans in their tanks was the bomb-launcer in the turret roof, which was introduced in July 1944.

Incidentally, the British had used a similar device - the 2" bombthrower. Exactly when the British introduced this, I'm not sure, but it appears to have been around since late 1941 and certainly in early 1942 and for the rest of the war. It was also adopted in the Sherman in the summer of 1943 and it was the intention to modify existing tanks to carry it, if they were going overseas from the US.

Claus B

PS: The Panzer III could not spin its tracks in opposite directions, as it had a simple clutch-brake steering system just like the Panzer IV and a lot of other tanks of the period. It could block one track and turn over that track like any other clutch-brake steered tank.

[DRG]

PS: The Panzer III could not spin its tracks in opposite directions, as it had a simple clutch-brake steering system just like the Panzer IV and a lot of other tanks of the period. It could block one track and turn over that track like any other clutch-brake steered tank.


Only the Panther could execute that trick then.

Don

[cbo]

PS: The Panzer III could not spin its tracks in opposite directions, as it had a simple clutch-brake steering system just like the Panzer IV and a lot of other tanks of the period. It could block one track and turn over that track like any other clutch-brake steered tank.

Only the Panther could execute that trick then.

AFAIK, making a turn in place by counterrotating the tracks ("neutral steering") requires two things:

1. A geared steering system of some sort, which allows power to be distributed to both tracks while turning. That rules out clutch-brake systems, as they turn by cutting power to one track to facilitate the turn.

2. A secondary drive from the gearbox to the steering unit to provide power to the tracks when the tank is in neutral.

The Panther had that - and a clutch-brake steering system on top of that for narrow turns. The Tiger did as well (sans the clutch-brake add-on) and so did the variants built on those two platforms. Earlier German tanks were all clutch-brake while the 38t and variants used a geared system without the secondary steering drive.

Most late-war British tanks could neutral steer - Cromwell and variants, Churchill and Comet.

The US tanks stuck with a geared system without steering drive for the duration of the war, IIRC it wasn't until the M26 was rebuilt into the M46 that a US tank got a neutral steer capability.

AFAIK no Soviet tank had a neutral steer capability in WWII, the T34 and KV were clutch-brake affairs while the IS series used a geared system but without the secondary drive and hence had not ability to counterrotate its tracks.

Claus B

[RERomine]

One more thing to consider was even if you could neutral steer the tank, there is the question of whether you should do it.

While not a WWII era tank, we were told NOT to neutral steer our M1 Abrams on anything but hard surfaces, i.e. concrete, paved roads, etc. because it could cause a us to throw a track. This would certainly be a bad thing in battle. As it was, we through enough tracks without throwing in the risk from neutral steering.

[DRG]

Good point

I watched a program called "Tank Overhaul" last week showing two groups working to restore panthers and part of the program explained neutral steer and showed footage of both Abrams and Leo 2 "neutral steering" at a very impressive rate..... but on concrete

Don

[RERomine]

The rubber track pads make it easy to do on hard surfaces, without tearing up them up. In softer surfaces, it's easier for it to grab the track. With the twisting effect of a neutral steer, this could cause the bolts linking the track sections to break. The track pads don't help prevent this either. Those just helped protect the roads. There was a T-72 that was captured during the first Gulf war that was driven to a display location and the need for track pads was evident. The T-72 didn't have them and the road got chewed up pretty good.