A school chum of my mom's lost her husband flying helos, I believe, for the 101st Airborne very early on. Guess I was fortunate in knowing a lot of people superficially who went and came back from Vietnam -- something somewhat more certain for most in the Air Force except aircrew and security police I suppose. There was only one person I knew somewhat at a personal level who I heard was lost later was our neighbor across the hall in housing when we arrived in Germany, who flew C-130s around Europe. He volunteered for Special OPs and went to Thailand, where he flew on 16th Spec Ops AC-130 missions over Laos/Ho Chi Minh Trail/etc. He was the fire control officer on "Thor" when it was shot down over the Trail just before Christmas 72. Two lucky survivors out of a crew of 18 or so IIRC and Bob wasn't one of them.
Mike Lehman
Urbana, IL
A great guy I went to Church with was in the 7th cav and at LZ Xray with LC Hal Moore. He flew choppers and was shot down several times, kept flying. One leg is shorter than the other and he always has a smile. Such a great man.
Richard
Fried on mine in high school, his Dad was a Huey pilot in Vietnam. Last name of Brown, and for real his first name was Charles.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
Frank,
Ouch! Yeah, luck of the draw as far as whether sitting somewhere or flying in and out in a Huey would make your life insurance salesman back home nervous or not -- or the rest of your extended family either. I am an aficianado of Southeast Asia helicopter stories, left over from when I was too young to understand my eyes would disqualify me from such adventures and watching way too much evening news during the 60s I suppose. Glad you made it back.
Your M110 appears to be one of the earlier models without the muzzle brake they had later - then again, it would only be about 3 years old since they went into service in '63.
Yeah, WWI would be the last time large, mostly stationary, weapons would have a decent time of it - once bombing from airplanes was improved, forget it. Anything that huge, or that needed a heavy infrastructure to be able to move, was little more than a sitting duck. Didn't even have to hit the gun, just tear up the tracks and they couldn't even aim it.
Always wanted to drive a tank - not really a 'new' interest, but in between designing my next layout, I play World of Tanks - they have decent models of between wars to just after WWII tanks, SPGs, and TDs to play with. It's not a full simulation, there are clearly arcade elements to it, but they also have done lots of research on the various modifcations and upgrades available to each vehicle. I would love to have an M110 to drop in on those pesky Tigers - after 5 hits in a row from a proper contemporary TD with the words "we didn;t even scratch their armor" it would feel good to drop in a single round that would flatten the thing.
ANd to keep this from going way out of topic - in many of the maps they have railways. The company that developed the game is Russian, and it shows - the maps are set in various palces all over the world but the one place they slipped up is in the railway details. sometimes they get so close, witht he proper North American freight cars and then the train is fronted with a Russian steam loco or diesel that is definitely a US product but built for and styled in a typical Russian fashion. Prettyy sure out of the thousands who play this, I'm probably the only one who noticed the railroad details. Other people just find the trains as obstacles to drive around - you can partially blow the cars up by shooting them. Or knock over signal towers by driving into them.
Mike,
Thanks. But I wasn't a ammo humper. I was HQ'trs Btry, commo, Radioteletype Operator Repairman, team chief. I had to spend a lot of time in Huey Gunships, flying to the firing Btry's to repair their equipment, once fixed....good bye, get outta there...sometimes, it didn't work that way though and had to stay a day or two. One time I just happen to be at the wrong place and got my lifetime gift of Vietnam in Dak To, where C Btry was and spent a month in the hospital in Okinawa. The older I get the stronger the reminder.
A lot of good guy's there though.
Take Care!
Frank
zstripeFour months later, just in time for Christmas, we were in Vietnam.
I feared that was going to be the punch line. From shoot and scoot to shoot and sit on a firebase being a Cong magnet...
Glad you made it back, Frank.
If anyone is interested: The Guns in Vietnam:
http://www.landscaper.net/theguns.htm
Randy yeah that is a bad angle and old, some of it has been cut off, I don't recall why, but the gun going off has a larger plume of smoke and you can see the projo in the sky. They were shooting a light charge. Four months later, just in time for Christmas, we were in Vietnam.
rrinkerRail mounted guns go WAY back, long before WWII. Various types were used in the American Civil War, and there were full armored trains used in the Boer War. Coincidently, Kalmbach just released a new book by Bernie Kempinski on Military Railroads.
One war where RR guns enjoyed some minor success was WWI. You know what they say about armies preparing to fight the next war like they fought the last one...
Bernie has been a busy guy. He and the rest of the Alkem Models crew just announced upcoming 100-ton DODX 41000 series flats:
http://www.alkemscalemodels.com/
Nice pics on the Wiki site - wow, the shell for that thing makes a whole T-34 tank look like a toy.
HUGELY impractical - part of the reason Germany lost in the end, they spent way too much effort on impractical 'superweapons' and by the time they settled down on building these fantasy projects, it was too late. Even the good stuff - heck without Hitler's demands that the ME-262 be a fighter-bomber, they would have been in service much earlier, and in larger quantities. And more able to deter bombing attcks on their industrial infrastructure. Not that the Allies didn;t have some pretty dumb ideas too, but it was a lot of bad decisions that gave a huge helping hand to the Allies.
Rail mounted guns go WAY back, long before WWII. Various types were used in the American Civil War, and there were full armored trains used in the Boer War. Coincidently, Kalmbach just released a new book by Bernie Kempinski on Military Railroads.
Being taken from the rear corner like that, the picture doesn't really show just how big an M110 is. Interesting wierd factoid, the barrels of the M110s, once they were taken out of service, were used to make the outer casings for bunker buster bombs. Scary thing, the picture is older than I am - by a few months. Looks like high summer.
LOL, A shoot and scoot: 8'' inch SP Howitzer, Fort Lewis, WA. 1966.
mlehman I think what you're looking at are the tracks used for firing this gun. First, they are on a curve, not a straight piece of track. Why? That's how the aimed it for azimuth, i.e. horizontally. The carriage is fixed -- imagine trying to build something this big that swivels. Because those firing tracks are curved, they are subject to considerable sideways force when the gun is fired. I suspect the rail bracing is intended to keep the recoil from roliing the rail over sideways. I suspect the double-flanged wheels, if that is what we're see, are similarly intended to keep the gun upright on the tracks. That way each wheel has two flanges working together to resist this sideways force. This gun would make an impressive loaded train when moved. I presume each side of the mechanism holding the barrel would breakdown and be moved independently to stay within clearances. I suspect the double side flanges would be lifted and standard ones fitted for transport between firing sites.
I think what you're looking at are the tracks used for firing this gun. First, they are on a curve, not a straight piece of track. Why? That's how the aimed it for azimuth, i.e. horizontally. The carriage is fixed -- imagine trying to build something this big that swivels.
Because those firing tracks are curved, they are subject to considerable sideways force when the gun is fired. I suspect the rail bracing is intended to keep the recoil from roliing the rail over sideways. I suspect the double-flanged wheels, if that is what we're see, are similarly intended to keep the gun upright on the tracks. That way each wheel has two flanges working together to resist this sideways force.
This gun would make an impressive loaded train when moved. I presume each side of the mechanism holding the barrel would breakdown and be moved independently to stay within clearances. I suspect the double side flanges would be lifted and standard ones fitted for transport between firing sites.
Yea, that sounds right about aiming with the curved track. To do so would require the inner carriage to travel less than the outer and so their has to be some kind of compliance built into the frame somehow. And it makes a lot of sense that those sequential boxes, all being on the inside of the curve would be to help lock down the unit for firing. But you would need two locos to move it also in it's side by side configuration.
I knew this guy was really not effective and when you think about it, to aim by moving out in the open leaves it terribly vulnerable for attack. That's one reason the German's went to a bunker style gun for their heavy artillary. And those were vulnerable also. Better to shoot and scoot--lol. The US had some railguns too, but didn't really use them much due to the logistics and vulnerability issues for a given level of asset.
The M777 canon is the latest I think and it's airlifted at times with a chopper.
Guys thanks, I know it was broken down and moved that took several days and a large crew. I haven't seen any photos where two engines were used to move it while it's in a firing mode, or push it for that matter, and the comment that the curved track was used to aim the gun I think is right on, thats how they aimed other somewhat rail guns.
Really good comments and ideas, I'll go back and do more research. I appreciate taking the time to work out a modeling issue but these are very cool tracks.
Terry
Terry,
I don't know if You checked this site out yet. Ton's of info about both gun's, how they were set-up, crew, how many men it took to lay tracks, etc. etc. Also links to more reference info. pic's, You name it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schwerer_Gustav
Fender... the largest gun ever built, the Gustav or "Dora" that was used in France on the Maginot Line.
A couple items...
The design may have been intended for use against the Maginot Line, but Gustav was not test-fired until over a year after the fall of France. The only widely accepted documented action for Gustav was the seige of Sevastopol in 1942. Dora may or may not have existed as a separate weapon, as the name is often considered a nickname for Gustav. There are histories (including Wikipedia) concluding Dora was a copy of Gustav, and/or that one was used at Leningrad, Stalingrad, or Warsaw, but I'm not sure how credible they are.
Rob Spangler
According to Ballantine"s History of WWII, weapons book NO.11, as written Ian V. Hogg, once Master Gunner St. James Park. The top of the gun mounting was indeed removed, and the carriage spli longitudunilly to form two have carriages each meeting standard track guage requirements.
the whole thing had four twin trucks, each of five axels.
Hope this helps.
Dave
So, here's my two cents worth.
1. There are two sets of rails, each on the left oriented side. The cars appear to have the normal European coupling set up and so should have the same gauge from what I can see.
2. There must be two locomotives, one on each side used to transport this in a coordinated fashion to avoid derails and even stress on the frame. Or it could be a locomotive which is combined from two, not sure really. But, those "rails" with sequential boxes next to the normal rails could possibly be for the locos kind of like a geared loco on a steep grade. This would allow for precise coordination of the locos where those boxes, two and two act as kind of like a linear gear. At least that's my best guess. Taking a curve given that width would require some kind of compliance somewhere though.
It has be stumped and I'm not so sure I can reporoduce them with brass rail or styrene? Thanks for your response but the only thing I can think of would be some type of rollers along with the wheels but that doesn't seem to work either. They did a lot with rails in WWII and theres no doubt they're not going to offered by anybody. I think these might be some of the most interesting train track I've ever seen. Terry
Based on the photos I'd say it most definitely is not standard railroad track, but I've never seen it offered by anyone.
It also looks like special wheels with flanges on the outside instead of the inside may have been used.
Hi, can anyone explain what type of tracks were used by Germany near the beginning of the war for the largest gun ever built, the Gustav or "Dora" that was used in France on the Maginot Line. This was a massive artillary weapon that used (2) sets of track due to its enormous weight. This is probably the most complex and biggest build for a modeler and the manufacturer provides 2 sets of regular track with the kit but real photos show tracks that are completely different. Can anybody explain what they are and any recommendations as to how to duplicate them? I'm planning to build a Dora and I would like to see if scratch making them is even practical. Here is the model kit and the track, and you can see the massive scale to this thing and this is in 1/72, they actually make a 1/35 that takes up half a room. I would like to recreate the real track if possible. I hope i'm not straying to far off the mark with my questions but I'm not sure where to go for answers. Many thanks, Terry
Hi, can anyone explain what type of tracks were used by Germany near the beginning of the war for the largest gun ever built, the Gustav or "Dora" that was used in France on the Maginot Line. This was a massive artillary weapon that used (2) sets of track due to its enormous weight.
This is probably the most complex and biggest build for a modeler and the manufacturer provides 2 sets of regular track with the kit but real photos show tracks that are completely different.
Can anybody explain what they are and any recommendations as to how to duplicate them?
I'm planning to build a Dora and I would like to see if scratch making them is even practical.
Here is the model kit and the track, and you can see the massive scale to this thing and this is in 1/72, they actually make a 1/35 that takes up half a room. I would like to recreate the real track if possible. I hope i'm not straying to far off the mark with my questions but I'm not sure where to go for answers. Many thanks, Terry
Here is the model kit and the track, and you can see the massive scale to this thing and this is in 1/72, they actually make a 1/35 that takes up half a room. I would like to recreate the real track if possible.
I hope i'm not straying to far off the mark with my questions but I'm not sure where to go for answers.
Many thanks, Terry