Trains.com

classic warbirds attacking trains

21697 views
440 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Monday, January 6, 2020 12:28 PM

Apparently the Russians had 'flak trains' as early as 1941, under the air-defense command (PVO).  By 1943 the German alternative was well-enough known that the report referenced by this article was produced. (Note the distinction between 'ground defense' transported by rail and actual train-borne armament against aircraft.  NB also the nominal prohibition against shooting through energized overhead catenary... one wonders if there were special hurry-up arrangements for this.)

There are other references to light antiaircraft defense on special trains, but I don't think those involve the dedicated high-altitude rifles with timed or proximity explosive shells that characterize actual 'flak' fire.

  • Member since
    April 2007
  • 4,557 posts
Posted by Convicted One on Monday, January 6, 2020 12:48 PM

Murphy Siding
Yes, if the cargo was important enough,

So the thought of a turreted gondola sporting twin 88s to 'give those flyboys something to think about', isn't all that far fetched?  

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Monday, January 6, 2020 12:52 PM

Convicted One
So the thought of a turreted gondola sporting twin 88s to 'give those flyboys something to think about', isn't all that far fetched? 

Not sure about 88s -- the cited 'mobile' armament is 20mm and 37mm cannon.  From what I see, these were 'nested' in a four-sided well of light 'armor' plate, similar to the arrangements on U-boats and perhaps of comparable deadliness to many kinds of prospective attack.  I suspect you'd need or want some kind of recoilless provision for heavy-caliber rifles (note that the muzzle brake is noted as omitted, for 'clearance' reasons) and this would be No Fun fired from inside an enclosure of nearly any kind... Surprise

Note the provision of the 'spare gun' that is only crewed if the train reverses direction.

 
 
  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Monday, January 6, 2020 12:54 PM

.

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Monday, January 6, 2020 1:15 PM

Firing an 88 from a moving train would be a sure-fire derailment. 

  • Member since
    December 2008
  • From: Toronto, Canada
  • 2,560 posts
Posted by 54light15 on Monday, January 6, 2020 1:21 PM

When I was stationed at Norfolk, Va in the 1970s in the Navy there was a small train yard at Gate one of the Navy Operating Base at Hampton Roads. In the train yard were about 20 old navy gray boxcars that didn't go anywhere. We all understood, or assumed that there were anti-aircraft weapons mounted in those cars and in the event they were needed, the sides would drop away and guns would go into action. I imagine it was only a rumour but it was kind of fun to think about Lionel cars in 1 to 1 scale. Lionel did make such an O scale car, didn't they? 

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Monday, January 6, 2020 1:33 PM

Convicted One
 
Murphy Siding
Yes, if the cargo was important enough,

 

So the thought of a turreted gondola sporting twin 88s to 'give those flyboys something to think about', isn't all that far fetched?  

 

I believe I've seen photos of banks of 40 mm guns on railcars. These would be similar to what was used on aircraft carriers. The 88's would be for use against heavy bombers miles up in the air, which to be honest probably weren't a big threat to moving trains. The 40 mm guns would have been more useful against airpower that was currently in your face.

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    April 2007
  • 4,557 posts
Posted by Convicted One on Monday, January 6, 2020 1:34 PM

charlie hebdo
Firing an 88 from a moving train would be a sure-fire derailment. 

The rate of fire would leave a bit to be desired too, but I just thought the concept of "twin 88s" sounded cool. Leaving no room for confusion as to which side might be fielding them. Mischief

  • Member since
    January 2003
  • From: Kenosha, WI
  • 6,567 posts
Posted by zardoz on Monday, January 6, 2020 2:54 PM

charlie hebdo

Firing an 88 from a moving train would be a sure-fire derailment. 

 

As I have no military or weapons training; might I ask, would that be due to recoil?

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Monday, January 6, 2020 3:10 PM

Convicted One
 
charlie hebdo
Firing an 88 from a moving train would be a sure-fire derailment. 

 

The rate of fire would leave a bit to be desired too, but I just thought the concept of "twin 88s" sounded cool. Leaving no room for confusion as to which side might be fielding them. Mischief

 

Whereas reference to "twin 40’" might cause confusion over who was the favorite WWII pinup queen? Devil

 

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    January 2019
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 9,728 posts
Posted by Flintlock76 on Monday, January 6, 2020 3:11 PM

zardoz

 

 
charlie hebdo

Firing an 88 from a moving train would be a sure-fire derailment. 

 

 

 

As I have no military or weapons training; might I ask, would that be due to recoil?

 

 

Absolutely!  The Flak 88 was a BIG gun!  If the recoil didn't cause a derailment chances are it might have shattered the flatcar it was sitting on.  And mind you, the famous 88 wasn't the biggest flak gun the Germans had, they also had a 128mm flak gun as well.

I found a video of a restored Flak 88 being fired.  I've heard about this particular gun, the cartridge auto-eject feature has been deactivated to save wear and tear on the shell casings they've got (Hitler isn't making any more of them) and they're firing the gun with reduced charges for the same reason.  Still, it's enough to give you the idea.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_bGczFQIOc  

Anti-aircraft guns on trains?  Pretty much limited to 20mm and 37mm guns, plus machine guns as needed.  The Germans may have used 40mm guns as well, they bought the Swedish Bofors design like the Brits and Americans did (The Swedes were neutral, they'd sell to anyone) but I'm not sure they mounted any on trains.

  • Member since
    January 2019
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 9,728 posts
Posted by Flintlock76 on Monday, January 6, 2020 3:19 PM

54light15

When I was stationed at Norfolk, Va in the 1970s in the Navy there was a small train yard at Gate one of the Navy Operating Base at Hampton Roads. In the train yard were about 20 old navy gray boxcars that didn't go anywhere. We all understood, or assumed that there were anti-aircraft weapons mounted in those cars and in the event they were needed, the sides would drop away and guns would go into action. I imagine it was only a rumour but it was kind of fun to think about Lionel cars in 1 to 1 scale. Lionel did make such an O scale car, didn't they? 

 

They sure did!  On and off since 1959.  Here's the last version from 2001.

http://www.lionel.com/products/minuteman-car-6-26762/  

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Monday, January 6, 2020 4:02 PM

88s had rates of fire from 15-25 rounds per minute depending on model.  Most did not have muzzle breaks to reduce recoil except some Flk 41s though they did have a good hydro-pneumatic recoil.  But against the typical allied fighter bombers, a 20 or 37mm cannon is plenty.  And you would want its higher rate of fire,  120 rpm or 480 rpm for the quad (Vierling) version. 

  • Member since
    April 2007
  • 4,557 posts
Posted by Convicted One on Monday, January 6, 2020 4:18 PM

Murphy Siding
Whereas reference to "twin 40’" might cause confusion over who was the favorite WWII pinup queen?

 

Just doin' my part to prevent the "train" aspect from being ignored.  Whistling

  • Member since
    January 2019
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 9,728 posts
Posted by Flintlock76 on Monday, January 6, 2020 4:47 PM

Convicted One

 

 
Murphy Siding
Whereas reference to "twin 40’" might cause confusion over who was the favorite WWII pinup queen?

 

 

Just doin' my part to prevent the "train" aspect from being ignored.  Whistling

 

Betty Grable wasn't that  big...

  • Member since
    April 2007
  • 4,557 posts
Posted by Convicted One on Monday, January 6, 2020 5:32 PM

Flintlock76
Betty Grable wasn't that  big...

 

DOH!

Had you not said that, I would have totally missed what he meant. Bow

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,020 posts
Posted by tree68 on Monday, January 6, 2020 5:54 PM

Flintlock76
Betty Grable wasn't that  big...

Her measurements at her prime would have done a 5'10" Amazon justice.  She was all of 5'4"...

I'll bet she travelled by trains, though...

 

LarryWhistling
Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) 
Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you
My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date
Come ride the rails with me!
There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...

  • Member since
    December 2008
  • From: Toronto, Canada
  • 2,560 posts
Posted by 54light15 on Monday, January 6, 2020 6:08 PM

Betty was cute as hell, but Jane Russell is the one for me. For all her hyper-feminine shape, she wasn't a girly-girl. 

Thanks Flintlock- I know they made something like that. And that's what we thought those old boxcars on the base were. At least that was the word we got. We never went near them. There were several piers with rail access and often trains would be run out on them. 

  • Member since
    January 2019
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 9,728 posts
Posted by Flintlock76 on Monday, January 6, 2020 10:09 PM

As long as we've brought up German artillery, how's about a firing demonstration of a German WW2 Pak 40 75mm anti-tank gun, courtesy of the Smithsonian Channel series "The Weapons Hunter."  (The series host goes a bit overboard on the hyperbole, so be prepared.  Whistling)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMm-k26qMaA  

Mind you, firing that thing does NOT look like a pleasant experience!  And considering the "signature" it generates I'd say the gun crew had to have better been "on target,"  'cause their opponents were going to know exactly where they were firing from!  Tankers don't like it when you shoot at 'em, and tend to react negatively!

  • Member since
    April 2007
  • 4,557 posts
Posted by Convicted One on Monday, January 6, 2020 10:30 PM

Flintlock76
As long as we've brought up German artillery,

I've always relished that segment in the movie "Battle of the Bulge" where the German tank (regrettably just a US tank painted to look like a Tiger) awaited that train at the end of the tunnel, firing at the last moment.

I've always wondered how such a tank would have faired with that locomotive, having all that inertia behind it, piling into it at speed?

My guess is, nobody goes home tonight.

  • Member since
    January 2019
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 9,728 posts
Posted by Flintlock76 on Monday, January 6, 2020 10:37 PM

Convicted One

 

 
Flintlock76
As long as we've brought up German artillery,

 

I've always relished that segment in the movie "Battle of the Bulge" where the German tank (regrettably just a US tank painted to look like a Tiger) awaited that train at the end of the tunnel, firing at the last moment.

I've always wondered how such a tank would have faired with that locomotive, having all that inertia behind it, piling into it at speed?

My guess is, nobody goes home tonight.

 

I concur, "...nobody goes home tonight."

That movie could have been a lot better than it was.  As far as I'm concerned it was all downhill after "Panzerlied."  It had it moments, but really didn't do a good job of telling the story of the "Battle of the Bulge." 

  • Member since
    April 2007
  • 4,557 posts
Posted by Convicted One on Monday, January 6, 2020 10:52 PM

Flintlock76
It had it moments, but really didn't do a good job of telling the story of the "Battle of the Bulge." 

Most experts certainly agree with you there. 

I accept it as a drama, as opposed to a documentary, so there is always going to be some license taken in such movies. 

For me it was my first real exposure to Robert Shaw, so that became a benchmark of sorts that I measured him by in his other roles, both before that movie as well as after.  Watching the Bond flick with "Col.  Hessler" in mind was particularly entertaining. 

I still get goose bumps when he orders those two tanks to "get that junk off the bridge"....classic!

  • Member since
    April 2007
  • 4,557 posts
Posted by Convicted One on Monday, January 6, 2020 11:02 PM

Flintlock76
As far as I'm concerned it was all downhill after "Panzerlied." 

I was surprised when I learned that was a real song

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLnv_83cQSw

  • Member since
    January 2019
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 9,728 posts
Posted by Flintlock76 on Tuesday, January 7, 2020 8:44 AM

"Panzerlied" was real all right, there's five verses but only the first one is sung in the movie.  As I understand it the song was recently banned for use in the present-day German army due to it's Nazi-era origin, even though there's no Nazi references in it, however German civilian bands can play it if they want to. 

Robert Shaw was great in that film!  A tough soldier, you couldn't like the character, but you could respect him, until toward the end of the film you (and his orderly played by Hans Christian Blech) find out what a monster he really is. 

Like I said, the movie could have been better, but it does have it's moments.

  • Member since
    April 2007
  • 4,557 posts
Posted by Convicted One on Tuesday, January 7, 2020 9:15 AM

Flintlock76
Like I said, the movie could have been better, but it does have it's moments.

I also found "Kelly's Heroes" to be a good flick. At least they cared enough to try and copy the look of a Tiger I......I believe they were Soviet T-34's under all that make up, but the look was heads above what you get in most  WWII movies.

Karl-Otto Alberty appears in both movies we are discussing, and so many more that I find myself always expecting to see him in any movie casting roles of German soldiers....he shows up in quite a few even uncredited.

  • Member since
    January 2019
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 9,728 posts
Posted by Flintlock76 on Tuesday, January 7, 2020 9:25 AM

"Kelly's Heroes" was fun, and as a service comedy and not a history they could get away with a lot of things you couldn't if you were doing an historic film.

It's also one of the more authentic films I've seen considering the equipment used, such as real Sherman tanks and those T-34/ Tiger 1 replicas.  Very impressive!

By the way, I've never met a veteran of any of the services that didn't love "Kelly's Heroes!"  Isn't that something?  

Oh yeah, and the way Karl-Otto Alberty's eyes widen when they tell him what's in that bank he's guarding!  Priceless!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Csv1wXOr5tY  

  • Member since
    April 2007
  • 4,557 posts
Posted by Convicted One on Tuesday, January 7, 2020 10:11 AM

Flintlock76
d as a service comedy and not a history they could get away with a lot of things you couldn't if you were doing an historic film

One source I have read describes Kelly's Heros as a "historical romance", which I guess in the broadest sense you could also use to excuse Battle of the Bulge's troubling deviations?

  • Member since
    January 2019
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 9,728 posts
Posted by Flintlock76 on Tuesday, January 7, 2020 10:36 AM

Maybe, but I look at it this way, "Kelly's Heroes" is fiction, whereas the "Battle of the Bulge" is a true event.  That being the case they should have tried for the maximum amount of correctness conducive with good storytelling.  It can and has been done. 

The best "Battle of the Bulge" movie, in my opinion anyway, is the 1949 film "Battleground," with Van Johnson, James Whitmore, and others in a great ensemble cast.  It tells the story of the battle through the experiences of a platoon of the 101st Airborne in Bastogne.  The characters are fictional, but the story's well told.

Aside from the beginning of "Battle of the Bulge" where General Kohler gives Colonel Hessler his briefing, which does a pretty good job of explaining what the German attack is all about, the rest of the film is a miss with too many errors and missed opportunities to go into here.  

Entertaining I suppose, if you don't know much about the actual event, but if you do...

American M-47's playing the role of Tigers?  Well I have to overlook that, they had to use something,  and outside of museums there aren't too many Tigers around for film makers to play with.  The M-24's used as the American tanks are correct for the period, more or less, but they only arrived in Europe in the last weeks of the war.  Interestingly, the M-24 was a light tank, it was the replacement for the M-3 and M-5 Stuarts.  No way  would an M-24 be expected to slug it out with a Tiger, or a Panther for that matter.  

  • Member since
    April 2007
  • 4,557 posts
Posted by Convicted One on Tuesday, January 7, 2020 10:45 AM

Flintlock76
Maybe, but I look at it this way, "Kelly's Heroes" is fiction, whereas the "Battle of the Bulge" is a true event.  That being the case they should have tried for the maximum amount of correctness conducive with good storytelling.  It can and has been done. 

Just playing devil's advocate, but you can often talk with people who were party to real events ("in the trenches" you might say) who's narative deviate considerably from the "official record" as well.

Something about the victors getting to record their version of events, is the way I believe it is often described.

But yeah, I heard that even Eisenhower had severe reservtions about BoB.

Kelly's Heroes, btw was loosely based upon real events. Check out the wikipedia entry about the movie for a concise summary.

  • Member since
    January 2019
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 9,728 posts
Posted by Flintlock76 on Tuesday, January 7, 2020 10:52 AM

Very  loosely based.  I've seen the "Wiki" article and if I remember correctly all that larceny going on was after the German surrender and German loot was being found all over the place.  As the old cowboy saying goes "There's bound to be a lot of tore-up ground where a herd's stampeded!" so it's no wonder a lot of GI's of ALL ranks helped themselves to whatever was laying around.  

And not just the Americans either.  Everyone was grabbin' goodies.

Yes, General Eisenhower was still alive when "BOTB" came out and did a rip job on the film.  I can imagine.

I'll tell you what, if you're interested in true tales of WW2 and it's aftermath, such a German treasure caches, gold trains, and post-war confusion and chaos, try this website, Mark Felton Productions.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCfCKvREB11-fxyotS1ONgww  

Man, he has got some GOOD stuff to watch! You'll really get hooked!  Better than a lot of the drivel on TV nowadays.

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy