Military Review

German rocket artillery during the war. 1-Part I

43
German rocket artillery during the war. 1-Part I



Created before the Second World War in Germany, multiple rocket launchers (MLRS) were originally intended for firing projectiles equipped with chemical warfare agents and projectiles with a smoke-forming compound for the installation of smoke screens. However, in fairness it should be noted that the Soviet MLRS BM-13 (the famous "Katyusha") was created with similar goals. This is reflected in the name of the first German serial 150-mm MLRS - Nebelwerfer or “smoke mortar type D”. The literal translation of the name “Nebelwerfer” from German is “Tumanomet”.


15-cm Nebelwerfer 41


During the Second World Germany, yielding to the allies in total stocks of accumulated chemical weapons, had a significant qualitative superiority in this area. The traditionally high level of development of the German chemical industry and the presence of an excellent theoretical base allowed German chemists to make a breakthrough in the field of chemical warfare agents at the end of the 30s. In the course of research on the creation of means for combating insects, the most deadly type of poisonous substances in service was discovered - nerve-paralytic poisons. Initially, a substance was synthesized, which later became known as “Tabun”. Later even more poisonous were created and produced on an industrial scale: “Zarin” and “Soman”.

Fortunately for the Allied armies, the use of poisonous substances against them did not take place. Germany, destined to be defeated in the war by conventional means, did not attempt to change the course of the war in its favor by using the latest chemical weapons. For this reason, the German MLRS used only high-explosive, incendiary, smoke and agitation mines for firing.

The six-barreled 150-mm mortar tests began in the 1937 year. The installation consisted of a package of six tubular guides mounted on a converted 37 mm carriage of 3.7 cm PaK 36 anti-tank guns. Six trunks 1,3 long meters were combined into a block using the front and rear clips. The carriage was equipped with a lifting mechanism with a maximum elevation angle of 45 degrees and a turning mechanism that provided a horizontal angle of fire to 24 degrees.
In a combat position, the wheels hung out, the carriage rested on the bipod of the sliding bed and the folding front stop.



Combat weight in the curb position reached 770 kg, in the stowed position, the figure was equal to 515 kg. For short distances, the installation could roll by the forces of calculation.



150-mm turbojet mines (rockets) were used for firing. The warhead was located in the tail, and in the front - a jet engine, equipped with a perforated bottom with 26 inclined holes (nozzles, inclined at an angle 14 degrees). A ballistic cover was put on the engine. Stabilization of the projectile in the air was due to the obliquely located nozzles, providing rotation at a speed of about 1000 rev / sec.



The main difference between the German missiles from the Soviet was a method of stabilization in flight. Turbojet missiles had a higher accuracy, since this method of stabilization at the same time allowed to compensate for the eccentricity of the engine thrust. In addition, it was possible to use shorter guides, since, unlike the missiles stabilized by the tail, the effectiveness of stabilization did not depend on the initial velocity of the rocket. But due to the fact that part of the energy of the exhaust gases was spent on the unwinding of the projectile, the range of its flight was less than the projectile with feathers.



When loading the rocket mines from the breech, projectiles were fixed by special holders, after which an electric nozzle was inserted into one of the nozzles. After pointing the mortar at the target, the calculation went into cover and, with the help of the launch unit, fired mines at 3 in series. The ignition of the igniter during start-up occurs remotely from the vehicle battery towing the installation. The volley lasted about 10 seconds. Recharge time - up to 1,5 minutes (ready for the next volley).

Initially, black powder compressed under high temperature (at the melting point of sulfur) was used as a jet fuel. The low strength of the powder bar and the presence of a significant number of voids in it led to the formation of cracks, which led to frequent accidents at launch. In addition, the burning of this fuel was accompanied by abundant smoke. The black powder bars in 1940 were replaced with tubular pieces made from smokeless diglecole powder, which had the best energy qualities. As a rule, seven powder pieces were used.

The maximum range of a missile weighing 34,15 kg (smoke - 35,48 kg) missiles was 6700-6800 meters at the highest flight speed 340 m / s. Nebelwerfer had a very good accuracy for the MLRS of the time. At a distance of 6000 m, scattering of shells along the front is 60-90 m, and at a distance of 80-100 m. Scattering of fragmentation of high-explosive mines was 40 meters along the front and 13 meters forward from the point of rupture. In order to achieve the maximum damaging effect, shooting was ordered only by battery or sub-divisional.



The first parts, which were armed with six-barrel mortars, were formed at the beginning of 1940 of the year. For the first time this weapon was used by the Germans during the French campaign. In the 1942 year, after entering the 28 / 32 cm Nebelwerfer 41 MLRS, the installation was renamed 15-cm Nb.W. 41 (15-cm Nebelwerfer 41).

In 1942, three regiments (Nebelwerferregiment) were deployed as part of the German army, as well as nine separate divisions (Nebelwerfeabteilung). The division consisted of three 6 PU, the regiment consisted of three divisions (54 "Nebelverfera"). From 1943 onwards, 150-mm rocket launchers (6 PU) batteries began to be included in the light divisions of artillery regiments of infantry divisions, replacing 105-mm field howitzers in them. As a rule, one division had two MLRS batteries, but in some cases their number was reduced to a three-battery division. In addition to strengthening the artillery of the infantry divisions, the Germans also formed separate parts of the rocket mortars.
In total, the German industry has managed to produce 5283 six-barrel 150-mm installations of Nebelwerfer 41 and 5,5 million missiles to them.

Relatively light, having high firepower of the MLRS Nebelwerfer performed well during the landing on Crete (Operation Mercury). On the Eastern Front, they were in service with the 4 th Special Purpose Chemical Regiment and from the first hours of the war were used to bombard the Brest Fortress, firing high-explosive mines over 2880.

Due to the characteristic sound of flying shells, the Nebelwerfer 41 received the nickname “Ishak” from Soviet soldiers. Another colloquial name is “Vanyusha” (by analogy with “Katyusha”).



A big drawback of the German 150-mm six-barreled mortar was a characteristic, well-marked smoke trail when fired, serving as an excellent reference for enemy artillery. Given the low mobility of the Nebelwerfer 41, this flaw often became fatal.



In order to increase the mobility and security of the calculation, a self-propelled 1942cm MLRS Panzerwerfer 15 Auf.Sf or Sd.Kfz.42 / 4 with a combat weight of 1 tons was created on the basis of the semi-tracked Opel Maultier truck. The launcher consisted of ten trunks arranged in two rows, connected in one block by two clips and a casing.


15cm Panzerwerfer 42 Auf.Sf


The Panzerwerfer 42 was protected by 6-8-mm splinter armor. For self-defense and firing at anti-aircraft targets above the driver's cabin there is a bracket for mounting the X-NUMX-mm MG-7,92 machine gun. The crew consisted of four people: the commander of the car (he is also a radio operator), gunner, loader and driver.



During serial production in 1943 — 1944, 296 combat vehicles were produced, as well as a 251 carrier for ammunition on the same base. Panzerwerfer were actively used by German troops until the end of the war.



In addition to the Opel chassis, the self-propelled version of the MLRS was produced on the basis of a standard 3-ton army tractor (3-ton schwerer Wehrmachtschlepper), a semi-tracked armored personnel carrier used by the troops to transport ammunition. Serial production has been carried out since 1944 by Bussing-NAG and Tatra. It continued until the very end of the war. The machine, protected by 15-mm armor, turned out to be poorly maneuverable and slow-moving, since the combat mass reached 14 tons.



150-mm self-propelled MLRS was also produced on the basis of the captured half-crawler tractor SOMUA MCG / MCL.

In order to increase the destructive effect of rockets in 1941, a six-barreled 28 / 32 cm Nebelwerfer 41 was adopted. On the wheeled carriage, with a fixed frame frame, was attached a two-tier trunnion farm. Guides fit into both 280-mm high-explosive and 320-mm incendiary missiles. The mass of the unmounted unit reached the entire 500 kg (the guides had a non-tubular, but a lattice design), which allowed it to freely roll it onto the battlefield by the forces of calculation. The combat weight of the system: 1630 kg in mortar equipped with 280-mm ammunition, 1600 kg - 320-mm. The horizontal fire sector was 22 degrees, the elevation angle was 45 degrees. A volley of 6 missiles took 10 seconds, reloading was done within 2 and a half minutes.


28 / 32 cm Nebelwerfer 41


When building 280-mm and 320-mm missiles, a well-developed engine from 158-mm 15cm Wurfgrante missiles was used. Since the mass and frontal resistance of the new missiles were much larger, the firing range decreased by about three times and was 1950-2200 meters at a maximum speed of 149-153 m / s. Such a range allowed firing only at targets on the line of combat contact and in the immediate rear of the enemy.



280-mm high-explosive missile loaded with 45,4 kg of explosives. With a direct hit of ammunition in a brick building, it was completely destroyed.



The warhead of an incendiary 320-mm incendiary missile was filled with an incendiary 50 (crude oil) and had a bursting explosive charge of 1 kg.

During the war, the Germans withdrew 320-caliber incendiary missiles due to their lack of effectiveness. In addition, thin-walled 320-mm incendiary projectiles were not very reliable, they often leaked fire mixture and burst on start-up.



280-mm and 320-mm missiles could be used without launchers. For this it was necessary to dig up the starting position. The mines in the boxes along the 1-4 pieces were located on leveled sloping soil over wooden decking. The rockets of the first issues at the start often did not come out of cappings and were fired along with them. Since the wooden boxes greatly increased aerodynamic resistance, the range of fire was significantly reduced and there was a danger of destruction of their parts.



Frames located in stationary positions were soon replaced by “heavy throwing instruments” (schweres Wurfgerat). The capping guides (four pieces each) were installed on a light metal frame or wooden machine, folding like a stepladder. The frame could be located at different angles, which made it possible to give PU elevation angles from 5 to 42 degrees. The combat weight of the wooden sWG 40 loaded with 280-mm rockets was 500 kg, with 320-mm ammunition 488 kg. For steel sWG 41, these characteristics were 558 and 548 kg, respectively.

The volley was made within 6 seconds, the recharge rate is about 2,5 minutes. Sights were very primitive and included only the usual protractor. Permanent calculations for the maintenance of these simple installations were not distinguished: any infantryman could fire from sWG 40 / 41.



The first mass use of 28 / 32 launchers, see Nebelwerfer 41, took place on the Eastern Front during the German summer offensive in 1942. They were especially widely used during the siege of Sevastopol.

There was also a “self-propelled” version of the 28 / 32, see Nebelwerfer 41. Sd.Kfz.251.1 Auf.D was mounted on the sides of the tracked armored personnel carrier to hang all three wooden launch frames for containers (three on each side, two for commanders).



The armament of the BTR - two 7,92-mm machine guns (aft on the anti-aircraft turret) - was fully preserved. Next to the machine gun on the rod was attached primitive sight for coarse guidance. Such "self-propelled" MLRS arrived mainly in the SS troops.

Capping with large-caliber missiles were installed on other chassis. Thus, in the 1943, a few dozen double-armored Renault Ue armored vehicles captured by the Germans as trophies in the 1940 year were converted into self-propelled MLRS.



In the stern of the vehicle, guides for containers with jet mines were mounted, and in front of the frontal sheet, on the bar bore forward, was attached a primitive sight for coarse pick-up of weapons. Missile launch could be carried out from inside the tractor. Crew - two people. The speed of the tractor dropped to 22 km / h, but on the whole the car turned out to be quite reliable and unpretentious. The whole complex was named 28 / 32 cm Wurfrahmen 40 (Sf) auf Infanterieschlepper Ue 630.




Also, launch frames with 280/320 mm missiles were mounted on captured French Tanks Hotchkiss H39.

During the war, the warring parties repeatedly copied from each other individual samples of equipment and weapons.

At the beginning of 1942, in the blockade Leningrad, the production of reactive mines was set up, repeating in their design the German 28 cm Wurfkorper Spreng and 32 cm Wurfkorper Flam. The high-explosive combat units that could not be better suited for the conditions of the "trench warfare" of the Leningrad front of projectiles were equipped with a surrogate explosive based on ammonium nitrate. Incendiary mines were filled with petroleum wastes, the igniter of the combustible mixture was a small explosive charge placed in a glass of white phosphorus. But incendiary 320-mm reactive mines were produced several times less than high explosive 280-mm.


Reactive mine M-28


In total, more than 10000 280-mm reactive mines were produced. As the brainchild of the blockade, M-28 mine ended its existence with a blockade.

Based on:
http://forum.guns.ru/forummessage/42/73.html
http://ussrlife.blogspot.ru/2012/10/blog-post_3526.html
http://fs.nashaucheba.ru/docs/270/index-1543563.html
http://strangernn.livejournal.com/892595.html
Author:
Articles from this series:
German rocket artillery during the war. 1-Part I
German rocket artillery during the war. 2-Part I
43 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. kirpich
    kirpich April 11 2014 08: 23
    +12
    Excellent article. It echoes the article about our rocket artillery. The RA of the warring parties can already be compared. I look forward to continuing.
  2. Bongo
    April 11 2014 08: 49
    +14
    After the end of the war, the USSR received a large number of 15-cm Nebelwerfer 41s as trophies. These six-barreled mortars were supplied to Korean and Chinese units during the Korean War. Participating in hostilities against the "UN troops" they did not show themselves very badly. With American air superiority in the air, they were much easier to camouflage than the Soviet Katyushas. And it was possible to transport it off-road with the help of draft animals. In the DPRK, during the war, they even established the release of ammunition.
  3. Basilevs
    Basilevs April 11 2014 08: 58
    0
    "... The warhead was located in tail section, And in front - a jet engine equipped with a perforated bottom with 26 inclined holes (nozzles inclined at an angle of 14 degrees). .. "

    What is this, a joke?
    1. Bongo
      April 11 2014 09: 06
      +13
      No, not a joke ... Those on whom such things fell were clearly not laughing.
      1. Mister X
        Mister X April 12 2014 18: 05
        +4
        Sergei!
        I am pleased to read your article and look forward to the sequel.
        As always in detail, intelligibly and competently.
        I admit, I did not even suspect that the Germans were in service with the MLRS.
        hi

        I will make a small contribution





        1. Bongo
          April 13 2014 13: 56
          +3
          Thank you Michael! hi The continuation was supposed to be on the 12th - last Saturday, the 2nd part has been "hanging" in my profile for several days already, not published
    2. avt
      avt April 11 2014 09: 13
      +5
      Quote: Basilevs
      What is this, a joke?

      And how are you going to untwist this disc for stabilization ??
      1. igordok
        igordok April 11 2014 10: 17
        +6
        Quote: avt
        And how are you going to untwist this disc for stabilization ??

        Jet engine nozzles at a slight angle.
  4. avt
    avt April 11 2014 09: 11
    -1
    good “Because of the characteristic sound of flying shells, Nebelwerfer 41 was nicknamed" donkey "from Soviet soldiers. Another colloquial name is "Vanyusha" (by analogy with "Katyusha"). "------ I heard another nickname from the veteran -" Luka Mudishchev ". He said that it was extremely unpleasant under fire. They also had incendiary options, but few, the mixture was based on oil, and they saved fuel - I read from Muller Hildebrant.
    1. Nayhas
      Nayhas April 11 2014 09: 33
      +12
      Quote: avt
      I heard another nickname from the veteran - "Luka Mudishchev"

      I met that Luke was called our M-30 for its frankly phallic appearance.
      1. creak
        creak April 11 2014 13: 05
        +4
        It was our M-30 MLRS that was called Luka, and not German.
  5. Aleksandr12
    Aleksandr12 April 11 2014 09: 29
    +1
    German reactive systems are not bad, ours are better)))
    1. Nayhas
      Nayhas April 11 2014 09: 34
      +4
      Quote: Aleksandr12
      German reactive systems are not bad, ours are better)))

      Look at the photo of the M-13 launch, RS fly at different angles, the accuracy is very low. Thanks to stabilization, the German flew more precisely.
      1. Aleksandr12
        Aleksandr12 April 11 2014 14: 08
        0
        Yes, but ours flew on. And they carried out the modernization of missiles, like the German they twisted in flight, which allowed to reduce the dispersal during firing.
        1. sss5.papu
          sss5.papu April 11 2014 15: 38
          +3
          The quality of the Soviet MLRS was in their quantity.
          1. Aleksandr12
            Aleksandr12 April 11 2014 16: 40
            +4
            I cannot agree with you. Yes, the accuracy was not so hot, but in terms of areas (cover the place of deployment of the division or bomb the station in one volley) there was no better missile defense system in the world. this is what the wiki says: "Unlike the German Nebelwerfer, it is a low-precision arena weapon with a large spread of shells in the area. As a result, accurate strikes, like the Nebelwerfer, were pointless to strike. When the explosive charge was half that of the Nebelwerfer rocket, the impact on unarmored vehicles and manpower was much stronger than that of the Nebelwerfer. This was achieved by increasing the gas pressure of the explosion due to the oncoming movement of detonation. Explosion was carried out from two sides (the detonator was only slightly shorter than the length of the cavity for the explosive) and when two detonation waves met, the gas pressure of the explosion at the meeting point increased sharply, as a result of which shell fragments had much greater acceleration, heated to 600 - 800 ° C and had a good incendiary effect. In addition to the hull, a part of the rocket chamber bursting hot from the powder that was burning inside was also bursting, this increased the fragmentation effect by 1,5 - 2 times in comparison with artillery shells of a similar caliber. That is why the legend of the "termite charge" in the Katyusha ammunition arose. A “termite” charge was tested in Leningrad in the spring of 1942, but it turned out to be unnecessary - after a volley “Katyusha” and so it all burned. (from the collection "Katyusha Guard" "). The combined use of dozens of missiles at the same time also created the interference of blast waves, which further enhanced the damaging effect.".
            And the number of German RZSO was a lot. Already for 7 thousand pieces of 150 mm installations
            1. Nayhas
              Nayhas April 11 2014 20: 52
              -4
              Quote: Aleksandr12
              I can not agree with you. Yes, the accuracy was not so hot, but in terms of area (covering the location of the division or bombing the station with one salvo), there was no better RZSO in the world.

              Shooting squares is a waste of ammunition. The effectiveness of such shooting is low, the ammunition should destroy the enemy, and not scare.
              Here it is necessary to remember that the main task of the BM-13 was "disruption of mobilization." What is a mobilization failure. In case of a rapid offensive, it is important not to allow the enemy to mobilize the conscripts; for this, the settlements are subjected to shelling / bombing so that the male population could not gather at the mobilization points, but was busy putting out fires, eliminating the consequences of the raid, and transporting families to safe places. However, in the war, BM-13 had to solve tasks unusual for it, the destruction of enemy troops on the defense lines. This was due to the catastrophic losses of artillery in the initial period of the war. The production of RS and BM was several times cheaper and easier than guns and howitzers. It's like anti-tank guns. We lost all anti-tank artillery and replaced it with pukalki, which were easier to manufacture.
              1. Fedya
                Fedya April 11 2014 21: 27
                0
                Well, in Damansky, such a shooting completely paid off!
                1. Nayhas
                  Nayhas April 12 2014 06: 46
                  0
                  Quote: Fedya
                  Well, in Damansky, such a shooting completely paid off!

                  Get well. It has an effect against unprotected infantry on the march, in the sense not in the trenches. And the BM-21 to the M-13 has nothing to do with it, its accuracy is an order of magnitude higher.
                2. Beck
                  Beck April 12 2014 07: 20
                  +2
                  Quote: Fedya
                  Well, in Damansky, such a shooting completely paid off!


                  Actually not justified.

                  Two volleys of "Grad" along the Chinese coast, where the hungweipings and zaofani dug in, were outwardly spectacular, the snow "burned". But when our infantry went on the attack, they were greeted with powerful small arms fire.
                3. Stas57
                  Stas57 April 12 2014 16: 18
                  +1
                  Quote: Fedya
                  Well, in Damansky, such a shooting completely paid off!

                  it is nothing more than a legend
                  1. Fedya
                    Fedya April 14 2014 22: 42
                    0
                    And what do they write about this conflict on this site? Love at your leisure!
                    1. The comment was deleted.
              2. Predator
                Predator April 11 2014 22: 06
                +1
                Well, here I do not agree! Shooting on the area during massaging MLRS is very effective! In the area of ​​Dukhovschina (Smolensk region), he himself considered what was left of the defense, everything along the front 2 km and 1 km deep was burnt and dug up. Besides charred, twisted no debris and parts of iron!
                1. Nayhas
                  Nayhas April 12 2014 06: 52
                  0
                  Quote: Predator
                  In the Dukhovschina region (Smolensk region) he himself considered what was left of the defense, everything along the front 2 km and 1 km deep was burnt and dug up.

                  Confused by the fact that 20 RS fell a kilometer behind the trenches and plowed the field no, the infantry in the trenches will wait out such shelling in the dugouts without loss. Yes, effective, a lot of noise, clods of earth to the sky .... but not effective. Talk to the artillerymen, they are not in vain "Gods of War", it is the artillery that makes the infantry leave the trenches with precise strikes, destroys the firing points ... And BM-13 with its "accuracy" only burn cities, on the contrary, accuracy is not needed there.
                  1. anomalocaris
                    anomalocaris April 12 2014 06: 55
                    +1
                    Yah? I wonder what dugouts will remain after the MLRS division is fired at the dowel point?
              3. SLX
                SLX April 12 2014 15: 23
                +3
                Quote: Nayhas
                Shooting squares is a waste of ammunition.


                For some reason, the combat regulations of artillery and the instructions for managing ground artillery fire are not considered so. And shooting at squares is recognized by them in the same expedient way (of course, under certain conditions), like direct fire or shooting at a point target.

                Moreover, in artillery armaments a whole group of artillery systems, called mortars, is intended for firing at squares.

                Quote: Nayhas
                However, in the war BM-13 had to solve unusual tasks, the destruction of enemy troops at the defense lines. This was due to the catastrophic loss of artillery in the initial period of the war.


                This is due to your ignorance of the subject of discussion. In any major offensive, counter battles and offensive actions of the enemy occur. And some part of the advancing artillery regularly has to "defend" in the offensive. Therefore, the destruction of reserves suitable from the rear, disruption of the deployment into battle formations, the setting of an NZO or PZO, etc. artillery missions have always been "regular", incl. and reactive.

                Quote: Nayhas
                Making RS and BM was many times cheaper and easier than guns and howitzers.


                The cost of artillery systems of ground artillery, as a rule, is nothing compared to the cost of ammunition (and their logistics), which these artillery systems spend for their resource. And the use of rocket artillery rests not only on the price of RS (which is comparable or, as a rule, more than the price of shells of a similar caliber), but also on the wild consumption of gunpowder. And precisely this consumption of gunpowder was one of the fundamental problems of both the Soviet and German rocket artillery in the Second World War.
          2. Denis
            Denis April 11 2014 19: 12
            +2
            Quote: sss5.papu
            The quality of Soviet MLRS was in their quantity

            And high mobility!
            Almost everything on a self-propelled, mainly automotive, chassis
  6. Kovrovsky
    Kovrovsky April 11 2014 09: 36
    +8
    Good informative article, a lot of photo material, thanks to the author.
  7. aleks 62
    aleks 62 April 11 2014 10: 07
    +2
    .... I don’t understand one thing, why these devices did not impress our designers of rocket artillery .... After all, undoubtedly, rotation stabilization is better than wing stabilization, and the launcher would be simpler and easier ... Oh, I would have crossed their turreted projectiles at that time "Katyusha" - "Grad" turned out b 20 years earlier ...
    1. abc_alex
      abc_alex April 11 2014 12: 05
      +9
      But we must take into account the difference in approaches and technological potential. I believe it is easier to make stabilizers from 4 pieces of metal than to hold a deflection angle in two and a half dozen nozzles per projectile in a series. In addition, the flow rate of gases in smoky and smokeless gunpowders is somewhat different :)
      Yes, and hit accuracy was not critical for MLRS. For aimed shooting, barrel artillery was used.
    2. Nayhas
      Nayhas April 11 2014 12: 21
      +4
      Quote: aleks 62
      I don’t understand one thing, why these devices did not impress our reactive artillery designers .... Indeed, stabilization by rotation is indisputably better than wing stabilization, and PU would be simpler and easier ...

      Duc after the war, development in this direction and led. M-14-OF (which is BM-14), nee TRS-140 descended from the German 158,5mm. turbojet projectile, and 9M22 (which is BM-21 Grad) comes from the German TRS Typhoon-R.
      1. SLX
        SLX April 12 2014 15: 00
        +3
        Judging by the above, you have little idea of ​​how the post-war Russian MLRSs were actually developed. Therefore, it is better to read something serious on this topic than to write all sorts of nonsense.

        What could you take there if, for example, gunpowder and the technology for making powder bombs were different? Accordingly, business is "nothing at all" - to start and finish, ie. to develop RS and PU anew. For example, to re-create an engine for your own gunpowder and for your own technologies for producing gunpowder bombs, and even not for German requirements, but for Soviet ones - for example, from -40 to +50 or requirements for fragmentation with the participation of all metal, incl. metal case RS. Etc.

        But the principles of constructing RS, various stabilization options, or the peculiarities of German gunpowder in the USSR before the war were no worse known than to the Germans themselves. Tyrnet is full of pre-war books and articles, both open then and closed, so that the level of knowledge of the Soviet developers of the MLRS can be quite accurately. And in their memoirs problems are shown in detail, most of which are still not even understood in wide circles.
    3. anomalocaris
      anomalocaris April 11 2014 23: 04
      +3
      Why not impressed? Very impressed. And we have developed systems with turbojet shells.
      Why is a turbojet projectile "indisputably" better than a projectile with aerodynamic stabilization? Justify this statement.
  8. igordok
    igordok April 11 2014 10: 28
    +1
    Based on the nebelwerfer trophy in besieged Leningrad, Soviet turbojet shells M-28 (MTV-280) and M-32 (MTV-320) were manufactured. The abbreviated name "MTV" (heavy rotating mine) was used on the Leningrad Front.

    At the end of 1941, the command of the Leningrad Front, in preparation for breaking the blockade of Leningrad surrounded by German troops, instructed the engineers of the Leningrad artillery range S. M. Serebryakov and M. N. Aleshkov to develop heavy high-explosive and incendiary rocket mines. The need for such mines arose due to the fact that in the presence of a significant number of guns for the destruction of enemy defenses, the Leningrad Front did not have enough ammunition for them. The task assigned to the engineers was greatly facilitated by the fact that in mid-March the Soviet troops operating in the Volkhov area seized the German ammunition depot in the village of Konduya, which also contained 28Wurkor-per Spr turbojet shells. (280-mm high-explosive mine) and 32 Wurkurper M.F1.50 (320-mm incendiary mine). Their design was taken as the basis for the creation of the Soviet turbojet shells M-28 (MTV-280) and M-32 (MTV-320). The abbreviated name "MTV" (heavy rotating mine) was used on the Leningrad Front.


    http://modern.sawame.ru/puskovie-ustanovki/puskovie-ustanovki-m-28-mtv-280-m-32-
    mtv-xnumx
  9. aleks 62
    aleks 62 April 11 2014 10: 36
    +1
    Quote: Dr.Faust.Patron
    there was also a Luftwaffe variation for FW190, Bf.109 and 110. From the wiki:
    In 1943, the rocket launcher was specially converted for use in the Luftwaffe. The shells used in the shooting were called Wfr. Gr. 21 (Wurframmen Granate 21) or BR 21 (Bordrakete 21) [4].

    Focke-Wulf Fw 190 fighters, which were most often armed with such missile launchers, were designed to counter the Allied strategic bombing: direct striking at bombers or distracting them with missile salvos, thereby opening up the possibilities for attacks by other Luftwaffe fighters. Single installations were placed on Messerschmitt Bf.109 and Focke-Wulf Fw 190 fighters, and double installations (one under each wing) on ​​Messerschmitt Bf.110. According to official documents, on July 29, 1943, fighters of the 1st and 11th fighter squadrons entered battle near Kiel and Warnemuende. According to military photographers, the Hungarian pilots at the controls of the Messerschmitt Me.210 also participated in the battle, and under the wings of these heavy fighters there were not two, but three jet mortars [5] [6]. The US military called the 21-cm rockets "flaming baseballs" (flaming baseballs) - at night the rocket resembled a fireball.

    It was expected that these missiles would become the main weapon in the fight against large formations of bombers, however, due to the low accuracy of fire, and hence the low accuracy of hits, Dodel missiles did not play any noticeable role in the fight against bombers.

    Some heavy fighters like Messerschmitt Me.410 were also equipped with four Wfr rocket launchers. Gr. 21 modeled after Messerschmitt Bf. 110, [7]. And one of them was equipped with six mortars, two of which were placed under the nose of the aircraft. Barrels directed at an angle of 15 ° could rotate, and rockets were fired so as not to damage the propeller of the aircraft. [8]. The test flight took place on February 3, 1944, but the plane exploded in the air as a result of a shot attempt [9].
    A similar attempt to install a jet mortar on the Heinkel He 177 bomber (it was planned to install 33 guides at a 60 ° angle) was also unsuccessful - only once, from a distance of two kilometers, he unsuccessfully attacked US bombers, and cover fighters completely shot him down.

    .... Me-410 quite successfully used 21cm shells against amer bombers ... In general, there are interesting shots of their use in the American documentary film "Warbirds" ....
  10. Gray 43
    Gray 43 April 11 2014 10: 45
    +5
    Interesting article, thanks!
  11. Bayonet
    Bayonet April 11 2014 10: 49
    +1
    Forgot to mention - 38 cm RW61 auf Sturmmörser Tiger, a German self-propelled launcher of the period of the Second World War, a class of assault guns, heavy in mass. It was created in 1943 on the chassis of the heavy tank "Tiger" and was intended to destroy enemy fortifications and battles in urban conditions. In total, from 1943-1945, 18 Sturmtigers, including the prototype, were converted from linear tanks. The rocket launcher fired high-explosive rockets at a range of 4600 to 6000 meters.
    1. Bongo
      April 11 2014 12: 39
      +3
      No, I didn’t forget, it will be in the 2 part
      1. creak
        creak April 11 2014 13: 10
        +3
        The first part is clearly a success, I hope that the second will also be at the level ...
      2. The comment was deleted.
    2. Ivan Tarasov
      Ivan Tarasov April 11 2014 22: 06
      0
      Sturmtiger is a fairly well-known system, it is much more interesting to learn about the system on the basis of which it was created: 380 mm RSL.
  12. Bayonet
    Bayonet April 11 2014 10: 55
    +5
    Tank Museum in Kubinka 38 cm RW61 auf Sturmmörser Tiger
    1. Turik
      Turik April 11 2014 13: 02
      0
      Evil machine, you will not say anything. But they printed a little - pieces 16-18.
  13. rezident
    rezident April 11 2014 15: 09
    0
    I read that their missiles had an interesting feature. After hitting the ground, a small pyro cartridge fired, which threw a mine back into the air and after that the main charge was detonated. So the area of ​​destruction by fragments was larger.
    1. Ivan Tarasov
      Ivan Tarasov April 12 2014 11: 26
      0
      This method was used only in 81 mm bouncing mortar mine.
  14. gregor6549
    gregor6549 April 11 2014 15: 24
    +4
    It should be noted that the "vicious" method of stabilizing a rocket in flight due to its rotation was gladly adopted by Soviet designers of the post-war generations of multiple launch rocket systems (MLRS) and tactical missiles. The evidence is on display at the Museum of Artillery and Missile Forces in St. Petersburg. Everything else (the number of missiles in a salvo, the choice of chassis for transportation, etc. is not important. And in the Red Army and in the Wehrmacht they were not placed on anything, as soon as they realized the certain usefulness of using MLRS not only for "chemistry." the question of priority here is very controversial. Intelligence on both sides worked in the sweat of his brow and Stalin did not shy away from borrowing everything advanced from the bourgeois by all available methods in order to reproduce what was borrowed from himself. At the same time, he often did not allow his designers to modify the original on the basis that best the enemy of the good.
  15. washi
    washi April 11 2014 16: 02
    +3
    We will not go into details, but can not be called the first MLRS system BM-13.
    Again, unfortunately, the Germans are ahead.
    1. Ivan Tarasov
      Ivan Tarasov April 11 2014 22: 02
      +2
      Quote: Vasya
      We will not go into details, but can not be called the first MLRS system BM-13.
      Again, unfortunately, the Germans are ahead.

      The first were the Chinese ...
  16. Ivan Tarasov
    Ivan Tarasov April 11 2014 22: 00
    0
    There were also 15 barrel towed PU 158 mm TRS.
    The photo shows a self-propelled 20 barrel 81 mm mortar on the SOMUA MCG / MCL chassis.
    We are waiting for the continuation of an interesting topic, I would like to get acquainted with the experimental developments of 150 mm RS based on the RS-132, as well as 86 mm TRS, and 380 mm RSL.
  17. Beck
    Beck April 12 2014 01: 35
    0
    Author paragraph:

    "Fortunately for the allied armies, the use of toxic substances against them did not take place. Germany, doomed to defeat in the war by conventional means, did not try to turn the tide of the war in its favor with the help of the latest chemical weapons."

    Somewhat different. The United States and England at the beginning of the war declared to Germany that if it would use OM on the fronts of military operations, then the Allies would have enough industrial capacities to fill the OM throughout Germany. That is why Hitler did not use his strong, but limited OM.

    And the German six-barreled rocket launcher, which also whistled, or howled, or hummed, when launched, was nicknamed "Vanyusha" by our soldiers.
  18. Bongo
    April 12 2014 14: 22
    +3
    Quote: avt
    They had incendiary options, but few, the mixture was based on oil, and they saved fuel

    It’s not a matter of saving, just such shells were ineffective and unreliable, the article says so.
  19. 52
    52 April 12 2014 14: 28
    +3
    Quote: avt
    good “Because of the characteristic sound of flying shells, Nebelwerfer 41 was nicknamed" donkey "from Soviet soldiers. Another colloquial name is "Vanyusha" (by analogy with "Katyusha"). "------ I heard another nickname from the veteran -" Luka Mudishchev ". He said that it was extremely unpleasant under fire. They also had incendiary options, but few, the mixture was based on oil, and they saved fuel - I read from Muller Hildebrant.

    Luke Mudischev was called the M-30. Due to the understandable appearance
  20. SLX
    SLX April 12 2014 14: 33
    0
    The division consisted of three 6 PU each, the regiment consisted of three divisions (54 “Nebelverfer”).


    If there is an opportunity to correct the text of the article from the author or the moderators: skipped "There were three Battery 6 PU, ... "
  21. zyablik.olga
    zyablik.olga April 12 2014 16: 03
    +4
    Excellent article, interesting material, respect to the author. I learned a lot for myself, I'm waiting for the second part.
  22. Stas57
    Stas57 April 12 2014 16: 32
    0
    I don’t know, here everyone argued about the area and efficiency ....
    I read several original reports echoing memoirs about the use of MLRS.
    usually the enthusiasm of the owners of the weapon was not confirmed by the enemy (both sides).
    The bottom line is that the guaranteed effect was achieved only in the case of a special concentration of enemy forces in some area, for example, in a ravine, then yes, it doesn't matter who "Katyusha" or "Ishak" is, but usually both sides did not allow this. And getting into a couple of trucks is certainly bad - it is not a fall of the front.
    and option
    (to cover the location of the division or to bomb the station with one salvo) there was no better RZSO in the world
    he is one in a million, in short, in WWII, the barrel and aviation steered for a number of reasons.
    And one run of the Il2 flight was more expensive for the enemy than the volleys of the Katyushv in the field battalion.

    Regarding the use, let me remind you that "Katyusha" is the RGC, and "Nebel" is the divisional level.
    ps. I have an original photo of the German salvo of the Nebelei battalion in the area, I will say this - I did not cover it weakly, I just cleaned the 800m strip - in short, each has its own specific
    1. SLX
      SLX April 13 2014 12: 09
      +1
      Quote: Stas57
      I read several original reports echoing memoirs about the use of MLRS.
      usually the enthusiasm of the owners of the weapon was not confirmed by the enemy (both sides).


      A few reports on the issue of combat effectiveness in the Second World War do not do weather - not the same level of data. In addition, the combat effectiveness of various MLRSs also varied significantly. So, for example, in the memoirs of the Germans about the same Stalingrad, Soviet shelling of the RS and their low efficiency are regularly mentioned. But this is, firstly, about the actions of single launchers, and not about massive fire, and secondly, not about BM-13, but about BM-8-24 on the chassis of light tanks. And the relatively low efficiency of 82-mm RS was well known, so in the future, 82-mm RS was gradually replaced by larger calibers.

      And the combat effectiveness of MLRS largely depended on their correct use. Therefore, management issues were no less important than the combat capabilities of the materiel. There are a lot of examples when our "valiant" generals (even artillery) set fire missions to MLRS without taking into account the technical and tactical features of MLRS. The system of effective subordination of the GMCh alone was worked out for almost two years ...

      Quote: Stas57
      in short, in the Second World War, receiver and aircraft taxied for a number of reasons. And one run of the Il2 flight was more expensive for the enemy than the volleys of the Katyushv in the field battalion.


      That you got excited. One run of the IL-2 link cost us much more expensive than a Katyusha salvo - aviation is an expensive business. ;) And the combat effectiveness of the Il-2 flight can rarely be compared with the salvo of the BM-13 battalion.

      Quote: Stas57
      Regarding the use, let me remind you that "Katyusha" is the RGC, and "Nebel" is the divisional level.


      So what? For the Germans, this was partly a necessary measure: the Wehrmacht did not have enough 105-mm howitzers, so expensive systems with a higher combat value were replaced in divisions by systems with a lower combat value, but also with a lower cost.

      And the fact that the Soviet GMCs belonged to the RCG did not prevent them from being operatively subordinated to the rifle divisions, tank brigades and corps, and even rifle regiments. But at the same time, belonging to the RGK had a significant advantage - it was possible to quickly and painlessly maneuver parts and formations of the RGK by removing them from some sections of the fronts and transferring them to others where they are needed more.
      1. badger1974
        badger1974 April 14 2014 12: 15
        0
        in other words, Katyushas were brought together into separate units that can be attached to solve any problems and very quickly, in Germany the MLRS was the "fifth wheel in the cart" of infantry units, to which not only attention was not allocated, but was simply a burden
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. Stas57
        Stas57 April 15 2014 12: 19
        0
        A few reports on the issue of combat effectiveness in the Second World War do not do weather - not the same level of data.
        and how else to collect? on wikipedia or what?
        and you’re collecting it here - in Stalingrad, near Moscow, in Kerch or under the Leningrad, from this a more or less successful and real picture grows.

        You got excited. One call of the Il-2 flight cost us much more than a Katyusha salvo - aviation is an expensive business. ;) And the combat effectiveness of the Il-2 flight can rarely be compared with the salvo of the BM-13 battalion.

        I didn’t get excited, I was digging from the fall of 41 to the Kursk Bulge, and a variant of a field strewn with RSKami, you know such roses, they often come across on Shifts, and so you are working on the site, they write, “RA has been struck at the enemy's position, the enemy has heavy losses ", and the enemy did not have any losses declared, nor did they actually have any consequences on the meta. And both sides are so.

        Regarding IL-2, let me remind you that the bulk of the technical training at the positions starting from the end of 43 was beaten out precisely by IL2, and Isaev is and is well described.
        The same German drapermarchs on the roads, the same IL2 (although often PC under the wings) and so on

        about the receiver do you mind?)

        So what? For the Germans, this was partly a necessary measure: the Wehrmacht did not have enough 105-mm howitzers, so expensive systems with a higher combat value were replaced in divisions by systems with a lower combat value, but also with a lower cost.

        Well, something was missing in their life, but they shot at 105, as in all other calibers they had the whole war higher)
        But our objective, of course, IMHO more shot))
        but here, I’ll immediately make a reservation - you need to take data and compare, this is of course a good work on a monograph. The data, that is, for the Germans, is the annual Khan’s consumption in the OKH, monthly. For us, there is already a problem, but again, if you start digging, then everything is there.

        And the fact that the Soviet GMCs belonged to the RCG did not prevent them from being operatively subordinated to the rifle divisions, tank brigades and corps, and even rifle regiments. But at the same time, belonging to the RGK had a significant advantage - it was possible to quickly and painlessly maneuver parts and formations of the RGK by removing them from some sections of the fronts and transferring them to others where they are needed more.


        it’s in the textbook, but in practice-
        -Sorry brother, I won’t give support, the Germans at Pupkinsk went into a breakthrough.
        And the same division-level Germans no longer had to yell into the phone "give fire!"
        BUT! here such a moment is taken into account, and it is important that the RS is not only a car with, but also Ships, planes, and simply wooden boxes from the ground
  23. Rico1977
    Rico1977 April 13 2014 01: 31
    0
    Good material, but I would like in comparison with our and American installations. What is the Germans better in what is worse
    1. Andrey77
      Andrey77 April 15 2014 14: 32
      0
      Comparison is a more complicated article. It is necessary to take into account why these or other countries abandoned the SCE. Financial, organizational, political, etc. This is a candidate for the young historian will be.
  24. badger1974
    badger1974 April 14 2014 11: 50
    0
    Seryoga, how do you know that the 4th chemical battalion fired about 3000 rounds at the Brest Fortress? because they didn’t have a landmine, but the Wehrmacht had over-caliber shells for the 150th infantry
    1. Bongo
      April 14 2014 13: 28
      +2
      Volodya, sources indicated. In addition, A.B.Shirokorada has this in his book about German artillery.
      1. badger1974
        badger1974 April 14 2014 22: 50
        0
        that is, the chemical battalion had nothing to shoot? well, in the course of the really MLRS of germany as "the fifth wheel in the cart"
        1. Bongo
          April 15 2014 09: 21
          +3
          Why nothing? High-explosive fragmentation 150-mm rocket mines were used as far back as the 1940 year in France + smoke.
  25. Andrey77
    Andrey77 April 15 2014 14: 30
    +3
    Great article. Sergey, go on.
  26. The comment was deleted.