Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

The Nebelwerfer 41

Discussion in 'Artillery' started by Martin Bull, Jul 17, 2008.

  1. Martin Bull

    Martin Bull Acting Wg. Cdr

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    13,478
    Likes Received:
    1,385
    Location:
    London, England.
  2. TA152

    TA152 Ace

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2002
    Messages:
    3,423
    Likes Received:
    120
  3. Za Rodinu

    Za Rodinu Aquila non capit muscas

    Joined:
    May 12, 2003
    Messages:
    8,809
    Likes Received:
    371
    Location:
    Portugal
  4. TA152

    TA152 Ace

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2002
    Messages:
    3,423
    Likes Received:
    120
    The combat art looks good but his Stuka drawings don't look correct and they don't match well with rainbows. :rolleyes:
     
  5. Martin Bull

    Martin Bull Acting Wg. Cdr

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    13,478
    Likes Received:
    1,385
    Location:
    London, England.
    I just find it interesting that such a -relatively - simple and unsophisticated weapon can develop such a fearsome reputation - I remember the Nebelwerfer being mentioned in the 'Most feared weapon...' thread....
     
  6. Lt. Pineapple

    Lt. Pineapple Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2008
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    1
    Indeed, from what I know the Neberlwerfer was feared very much, probaly because the devastating effect in such a short time.
     
  7. Miguel B.

    Miguel B. Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2008
    Messages:
    956
    Likes Received:
    67
    Yup. Nothing beats a good'ol rocket salvo :D the Russians also liked the effect of rockets going *phew phew* everywhere...



    Cheers...
     
  8. Za Rodinu

    Za Rodinu Aquila non capit muscas

    Joined:
    May 12, 2003
    Messages:
    8,809
    Likes Received:
    371
    Location:
    Portugal
  9. Miguel B.

    Miguel B. Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2008
    Messages:
    956
    Likes Received:
    67
    Ah yes the problem of the German over engeniered weapons... In tanks it was understandable in rockets, not so much. The increase in precision is set of by the disparity of numbers... Overall I believe the Katiushka to be a superior weapon (still used nowadays and in the last Lebanon-Israel war, a small number of merkavas were disabled by this bad fellows...).




    Cheers...
     
  10. Za Rodinu

    Za Rodinu Aquila non capit muscas

    Joined:
    May 12, 2003
    Messages:
    8,809
    Likes Received:
    371
    Location:
    Portugal
    It ought to have been a veeeeery tiny number of Merkavas, but... :rolleyes:

    What is interesting was that the Jerries were convinced they had a big deal with 6 missiles per system (10 on the Maultier launcher), 15cm or 21cm, depending, while the Katiusha launchers carried 14 to 48 missiles, again depending.

    Nebelwerfer means that initially this was a smoke screen generating weapon.
     
  11. Miguel B.

    Miguel B. Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2008
    Messages:
    956
    Likes Received:
    67
    Not really small. And I said disabled wich goes to anything from broken tracks to tower jams and so not destroyed :p And the heavier rockets pack quite a punch. That is the other problem of the Nbwf. 6 rockets per launcher
    gives a very tiny brrage. Sure the size of the things managed to compensate for a little of it but not enough. Also, the Katiushka was an lmost perfect combination of mobility nd firepower. Better than anything the germans had (sp wise). Tough the Stuka zu Füss
    had quite a punch :)


    Cheers...
     
  12. Za Rodinu

    Za Rodinu Aquila non capit muscas

    Joined:
    May 12, 2003
    Messages:
    8,809
    Likes Received:
    371
    Location:
    Portugal
    Stuka zu Fuss, no Umlaut there ;) Assuming it could hit anything, with the iffy elevation system, traverse being provided by pointing the actual vehicle.

    How many systems were made and how long did it last operationally? After 41 photos are of hen's teeth rarity, so sanity must have prevailed...

    Holy sheeet!
    [​IMG]
     
  13. T. A. Gardner

    T. A. Gardner Genuine Chief

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2003
    Messages:
    5,945
    Likes Received:
    760
    Location:
    Phoenix Arizona
    On the other hand, it is somewhat overrated. The small explosive charge limited its damage as did the fact that the explosive casing was relatively thin. The design had the explosive carried in the tail of the rocket with the motor exhausting around it. This meant that almost always the explosive charge went off before actually burying itself in the ground.
    While this feature is really useful for smoke rounds, it is not for high explosive ones. Nebelwerfers had little, if any penetrating power making them nearly useless against well dug in troops.
    The heavier rounds like the ones shown on the model above generally came with either high explosive nose detonating fuze or a napalm-like filling model. These were very short ranged but useful particularly in urban fighting where they could easily demolish buildings or set a fairly large area on fire.
     
  14. Martin Bull

    Martin Bull Acting Wg. Cdr

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    13,478
    Likes Received:
    1,385
    Location:
    London, England.
    I think that this weapon is over-rated only if compared with artillery - which it obviously was not. It was used tactically as a mortar ; it could not be aimed accurately and the rocket charge could not be varied.

    The explosive section of the projectile is similar to a mortar round ie a light explosive charge contained within a relatively thin, easily fragmented casing ( when compared to an artillery shell ). As with a mortar, the object is to create blast and fragments therefore detonation on impact is required.

    In areas such as Normandy and Arnhem it was used against attacking troops who were relatively lightly dug-in, and by all first-hand accounts, the psychological and blast effect of a number of Nebelwerfer rounds landing in quick succession was undeniably effective.

    The launcher is quite unsophisticated ( only the ignition system appears complex ) and, as the 'rocket-propellant' was in fact black powder, the ammunition was cheap to produce.
     
  15. von Poop

    von Poop Waspish WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2006
    Messages:
    6,148
    Likes Received:
    1,739
    Location:
    Perfidious Albion
    I'm not sure that's right Za, if I recall it was always used as a cover name, and they were originally issued to 'Nebeltruppen' units that subsequently became known as 'Werfer-abteilung' to reflect their new more general role.

    The Wuhrframen frames and Sch. Wurfgerat 40/41 (Stuka zu Fuss) that could be fitted and fired from assorted vehicles, or just propped up in the latter case, perhaps give the lie to any suggestions of over-sophistication. Though interestingly the Waffen SS adopted a copy of a Russian finned type for their field rocket systems, and attempted to get the Army to convert to this style. Near the end of the war it seems the Heer actually conceded that these RS82/M8 Russian types were slightly more straightforward to produce and gave about the same results.

    Cheers,
    Adam.
     
  16. Za Rodinu

    Za Rodinu Aquila non capit muscas

    Joined:
    May 12, 2003
    Messages:
    8,809
    Likes Received:
    371
    Location:
    Portugal
    Adam, the Nw was a 'Aryanization' of the simple concept of the Wurfrahmen (in the usual over-engineering sense that we have already discussed so often). Anyway, I'm far from my books so I am not able to discuss much with a firm basis, so if you say that the moon is made of Limburger I'll have to accept that :D
     
  17. von Poop

    von Poop Waspish WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2006
    Messages:
    6,148
    Likes Received:
    1,739
    Location:
    Perfidious Albion
    Can't really see the aryanisation or usual over-complication here Za, looks like parallel development. I've got the 15 & 28/32 rockets as under development in the 30s and first accepted in 1940. Both could fire direct from their packing crates (which I notice has a separate designation to the hardier reusable frames, the rather prosaic 'packkiste'). Soviet ones all seem to be finned rather than nozzle spun(?). Looks to me like one of those occasions they went for a pretty simple and disposable solution. Regardless of whether they were put onto carriages in 1941 they were always a pretty mobile solution, Gander even states that the wheeled trail versions of the family were unsuitable for armoured divisions as they couldn't be towed fast enough.

    I see Mr Wheatcroft has a frame or two:
    wuhrframen

    And anyway... everyone knows the moon is Cheddar. :D

    Cheers,
    Adam.
     
  18. Martin Bull

    Martin Bull Acting Wg. Cdr

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    13,478
    Likes Received:
    1,385
    Location:
    London, England.
    That man Wheatcroft has got everything - almost as much as The Von Poop Collection....:D
     
  19. von Poop

    von Poop Waspish WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2006
    Messages:
    6,148
    Likes Received:
    1,739
    Location:
    Perfidious Albion
    You wait 'til he sees my Tirpitz restoration & 1:1 scale diorama of the Kummersdorf proving grounds... Green with envy he'll be!
     
  20. uksubs

    uksubs Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2007
    Messages:
    547
    Likes Received:
    36

Share This Page