Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

1.) Artillery unit crews

a.) Unit 232 (10cm NbW Grp) has a crew of 7. According to Mobhack manual, recommended crew size for this type of unit is 8.

b.) Unit 413 (10 cm K18 Btr) has a crew of 99. This is quite high compared to other German Off Map Heavy Artillery batteries, which typically have crew of 36 or 48.

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

a.) is a GUIDLINE written to give OOB designers a decade and a half ago a number to use when actual data could not be found .It's NOT meant to been the 10 commandments. In this case that mortar----"Each mortar squad consisted of a squad leader, three gunners and three ammunition bearers".....that's 7 which ,since that unit represents two mortar should be 14

b. ) Ancient typo should be 32. Likely copied originally from a naval gun unit

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

Thanks for the info! I must admit that I had never seen an organisational chart for this weapon, so that is why I chose to give the Mobhack recommendation as a point of comparison - in any case the listed crew of 7 seemed quite low.

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

2.) Volksgrenadier unit organisation

a.) Formation 480 (VGren Btln HQ) contains an engineer platoon. However, it seems to me that Volksgrenadier battalions did not contain engineering assets, though Volksgrenadier regiment HQs contained an engineer platoon.

b.) Formation 255 (VGren Zug) has currently three 12 man squads plus two AT teams, for a strenght of at least 40 men. For comparison, the historical TOE strenght seems to have been 33 men, including a medic and two cart/wagon drivers. Maybe a better presentation would be e.g. three squads of 9 men plus one AT team?


For references I used this pretty well-researched website:

http://www.bayonetstrength.150m.com/...0to%201945.htm

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

9 men seems closer and notice they claim the Vgren coy HQ included a sniper group of six men.

I've put this on the list for later.... not now, I'll wait to see who else chimes in as that organization has been 12 men for ages without anyone commenting but I will change it if changing better represents the organization, That said this change is much more involved than simply changing 12 men to 9

I can, however , happily live with the engineers in that HQ----- "close enough"---- note also the authours comment....

Don

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

Yes, I have been pondering for a while about how that would have worked in practice.

Especially interesting is the idea that they were to be armed with semi-automatic G43 rifles (with telescopic scopes), rather than bolt action sniper rifles. There certainly was quite a number of G43 with telescopic sights produced historically - though I am left wondering what was the level of marksmanship achieved by the men they were issued to.

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

There are various ways to handle that. I think assigning two snipers per platoon serves the purpose and with a 9 man squad that gets a platoon to 33 men

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

They would have picked the best shots in the Coy but at that stage of the war "best" is not what best was in 1939. Semi-auto rifle with a scope they'd fire until something dropped and with the semi auto there was more of a chance of staying generally on target than with a bolt action rifle......those you'd give to guys who really knew what they were doing These are not trained snipers as we know them now but with the telecopic sight they'd do better from further away than the guy with his Iron sighted MP44

What you'd be trying to do with these troops is make as big a nuisance of themselves as they could with their abbreviated training. These are not the troops that marched to Moscow

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

3.) Ost Kav Sqdn (formation 415) and Ost Kav Trp (formation 416) have experience modifier of 15 and morale modifier of 0. This sounds rather generous compared to Ost Inf formations, which typically have experience modifier of -5 and morale modifier of -5.

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

Ost Kav = Cossacks (Kosaken)
hence the experience increase

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

If they are Cossacks, then I can understand them being more motivated than your average former Red Army PoW that got volunteered to fight for Germans, and better riders than your average German cavalryman. That said, +15 to experience still sound quite a lot (it is what Brandenburgers tend to get).

Then again, considering the hazards that mounted cavalrymen face on a WWII battlefield, those brave Cossacks probably need every imaginable in-game advantage they can get if they are to survive for more than a couple of turns after making contact with the enemy.

I don't think people are exactly fielding these in droves when playing Germans. I am quite sure that I have never fielded them myself, though I have some gaming experience with certain other cavalry units. Maybe I should actually try fielding them in a game some day.

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

They have been the way they are now for well over a decade and I have no intention of making changes.......... if you're not happy with exp +15 there's MOBhack ........feel free to make your own changes.

The WW2 OOB's have gotten to the point all they are doing is generating really annoying nitpicky amounts of work for me with no real gameplay benefit to 99.9% of the players

Don

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

One thing only:
484 SdKfz 8 FlaK 18 were already used during the Polish campaign in 9/39 - seems, that they were delivered in early 1939 (it would demand a change in formations). It had light armour of a cab and gunshield (1 hull front and sides, 1 turret front?). Crew was only 4. There is no clear info on ammunition storage overall, but there is a mention, that there was a case for 18 rounds at the back (the only storage?) [Jentz Panzertracts]

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

...supplement: there was also an ammunition box with 6 rounds on the upper carriage.
"Encyclopedia Of German Tanks Of WWII" by Jentz & Doyle claims, that it carried 40 rounds, but Panzertracts are much more detailed (Encyclopedia also gives a crew of 9, but documents quoted in Panzertracts state it was only 4 - there was 9 in a version towed by an armoured tractor).

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

New Icon for this vehicle in the next release...........

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

I found a random German Vehicle that could be put in the German Overflow list in BLUE

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pz.Sfl._II

Basically, Bussig NAG gets a contract to develop a halftrack with a rear mounted engine specifically designed as a tank destroyer platform. Four prototypes of the HKp 902 halftrack were built.

Of this, two prototypes were armed with the Rheinmetall 7.5 cm L40.8 gun in an open topped turret with 35 rounds on board.

Armor prtoection was:

20mm frontal
14.5mm / 10mm sides
10mm rear
10.5mm roof (except turret)
5.5mm belly

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

I'll consider it. At least the two protos made it to the front

Some photos

https://i.pinimg.com/736x/9e/c3/43/9...810a98a2fd.jpg

https://cdn-live.warthunder.com/uplo...4d444e2346.jpg

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/pr...uM0qV1ImULx5-u

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/attac...1&d=1612646933

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

There were two fully tracked protos as well and those made it to the Eastern Front
https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2-g...panzer-sfl-ic/
https://warspot-asset.s3.amazonaws.c...aaa1889e3c.jpg

Now that one ( Pz.Sfl.Ic ) is very close in concept but it is described as " a fixed open-topped superstructure " mounting a 5 cm Kanone L/60

but as noted in the original post the Pz.Sfl. II had it's 75mm gun " mounted in an open-topped, low-profile turret "

If anyone knows of a source that gives hull length and width It would be helpful but not critical and that example I provided was a WAG for length and width which is probably within a pixel or two of being "close enough" but it would be nice to have actual data
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/attac...1&d=1612712797

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

DRG, I went and looked in Panzer Tracts

Pz.Sfl Ic (5cm Pak 38 auf Pz.Kpfw.II Sonderfahrgestell 901), there's no hard dimensions on it; the cannon was a modified Pak 38 with the breech and mount adapted from a 5 cm KWK gun.

No hard data on ammunition stowage #s; the dimensions given in

https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2-g...panzer-sfl-ic/

Dimensions (L-W-H, based on VK 9.03) 4.24 m x 2.39 m x 2.05 m

Are probably good enough.

But while researching this in Panzer Tracts, I found ANOTHER ONE.


*************

Pz.Sfl Ia (5cm PaK 38 auf gp.Mun.Schlepper)

On 5 July 1940, Wa Pruef was authorized to develop a light Panzerjager for the Luftlandetruppen (Airborne troops). The design chosen was a 5 cm Pak 38 L60 mounted in an armored superstructure on a converted VK 3.02 munitions schlepper chassis designed by Borward.

To save weight, the forward gunshield was to be composed of Schottenpanzer (spaced armor)

2 x 4mm plates (front)
2 x 3mm plates (side)

Frontal/Side Armor was to defeat 7.92mm Steel Core AP bullets.

Mass was 4500 kg, top speed was 30 km/hr.

Crew was 3

Panzerprogramm 41 called for 3,144 of them to be built; but production wasn't scheduled to begin until 1943.

Two trial units were built by 1 July 1942 and sent to the front for troop trials. On 8 Aug 1942, 19 PzDiv reported the serial numbers of the two units back to OKH.

Unfortunately, the experience report from Panzerjager Abteilung 19 on this was lost to history -- we know it was sent to OKH on 18 Sep 1942, but a copy of the report wasn't included/retained in 19 PzDiv's war diary.

https://i.imgur.com/txDdmm3.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/O19ltl7.jpg

************

Also, this rabbit hole was worth it for me as a researcher, because I found out about Panzerprogramm 41; something I did not know about before.

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

After a longer break, I'll write down a limited number of more important or easy to fix things from my notes (which are not very extensive ;) ):

34 Sturmtiger - used from 8/44 in suppressing Warsaw Uprising [now 1/45]

86 8.8cm PaK 43 - photo shows Pak-43/41 on wheeled mounting (unit #205), while this gun was on cross mounting, as the icon shows - could be photo 208.

131 7.5cm Haubitze - FK18 entered service in 1938 only and was very rare gun (only 124 made according to https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/7,5-cm-Feldkanone_18 ) - it is worth to replace it with FK 16nA, used since 1930, and still 298 were in 1939 https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/7,7-cm-Feldkanone_16. There is no early German artillery available otherwise.

The latter one had range 12.3km (now 200, proper for FK18)
The photo could be replaced eg. with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.5_cm...ch%C3%BCtz.jpg
The icon is the same as 10.5cm leFH - could be 2127 for FK18. In case it is changed to FK16, it should be single tail, eg 2112 with appropriate long barrel

155 Kfz 70 Protze - icon is green and with transversal benches, while this is platform truck.
Protze icons are 3038-3040, like unit 453

220 Pueppchen - icon should be single-tail - shape fits to 8017 (possibly it was dedicated one?)

275 FJg LMG Grp - possibly there should be LMG as a weapon instead of MMG?


304 15.5cm Batterie - it is Polish sFH-17(p), same as French 155mm Schneider C17S howitzer sFH-414(f), but the photo shows French heavy 155 mm cannon. I've found C17S in German service: https://forum.axishistory.com/downlo...5411&mode=view and https://forum.axishistory.com/downlo...7327&mode=view from https://forum.axishistory.com/viewto...?f=70&t=135963

387 JPz I - it is available since 1/41, but they entered combat in May 1940 in France (possibly available from 4/40).
Formations start from 4/40, while the earliest unit #480 starts at 6/40.

Most sources use Panzerjager I name (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzerj%C3%A4ger_I , Waffen-Arsenal https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/PANZERJAG...-/142979957157 ) - seems, that Jagdpanzer meant armoured vehicles ("panzers").


388 PzKw II C - photo has markings from 1939 (and shows no additional armour), while the unit is from 1940 and has additional armour - it could be swapped with unit 002


417 Panzerbuechse - photo doesn't seem to be Mauser, rather PzB 39. Maybe previous photo 25583 is better. Same for units 634,643 (sw) Inf Gruppe

420,421 FJg PAW ..cm - the name might better be changed to LG (German designation), not PAW
Better icon is 2107 (for the lighter one at least)
Same for 505,506 GebJg PAW

464 PzKw 38H 735(f) - maybe a better photo is former 27506 with short gun? (photo 828 has long gun)

481 SdKfz 10/5 PaK5 - 5cm Pak was used since the end of 1940 only [now 7/40]


502 MG08 HMG (2) - the picture doesn't look German, nor MG08. 2338 is good

622 PzJ Bren(e) PaK - photo has French 25mm gun, while it is supposed to be 3.7cm Pak
Might be: https://aw.my.games/sites/aw.my.com/...83517/37mm.jpg

733 MG248(p) HMG - caliber of captured Polish Maxims was 7.92 (not 7.62) and they were exactly German MG08. I would say it's useless, but it's one of four MGs used by Ost troops in the game, and they have no MG08 otherwise. Maybe it should be just MG08?
(designation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German...n_World_War_II )

792 MG248(p) HMG - seems completely useless. Same as above, but the picture is on Russian wheeled mount (should be 3884 eventually). Poland indeed converted some Russian Maxims to wz.10/28 model, but they were 7.92 mm, and all were sold to Spain before the war, so they couldn't have been captured. It is used in OrPo units, which have 7 MGs to choose from, including MG08.

734 MG249(p) HMG - a caliber might be added (7.92)


831 SdKfz 221 - photo has early white crosses, more adequate for early unit 67, while it is available from 1942.

902 Me 410A-1/U-4 - a photo with 5cm gun is
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/82/85...a900d4ff69.jpg

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

I thinking that if you will be interested to include period of first german-soviet cooperation in 1929-1933 (blue OOB) and tanks tested in Panzerschule Kama during that time. Meaby that is some period when german Reichswehr tank program and soviet has some mutual development.
Kama Testing ground
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kama_tank_school

and tank in question will be Leichttraktor
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leichttraktor

https://warspot.net/128-krupp-leichttraktor
https://i.redd.it/pf5xrz0uyrb51.jpg


There was also modernised variant with christie suspension meaby close to WW2 when was used as a training tank in Germany
https://i.pinimg.com/564x/62/d3/5d/6...5f31b873f1.jpg


Secound one was Grostraktor
https://pbcdn1.podbean.com/imglogo/e...35/FeIx3F9.jpg


https://weaponsandwarfare.com/2018/0...e-grostraktor/

And soviet-german joint-venture developed by German engineer Tank Grotte

http://aviarmor.net/tww2/photo/ussr/tg/tg_c1.jpg

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

Błażej , I think you have greatly overestimated my desire to add every trivial development in armour and aircraft into the game. Yes I have added a few oddballs in the past. That does not mean I have any plans to expand on that. Things that actually made it into combat maybe but certainly not these

This is what the mods forum is for.

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

Few remaining notes:

9 PzKw III G 5cm - version with applique armour should have also 30+30 armour at the hull rear (the same as later H) [Jentz].

BTW: according to Jentz, "starting late in 1940, some PzKpfw III G" had applique armour - maybe 11/40 would be safer combat entry date [now 10/40]

10,11 PzKw III H, J - I'm not sure if they shouldn't have SD, like other Pz IIIs of that period

584 PzKw IIIG 3.7cm - first were completed in March 1941 [now 7/41] - presumably they were available in May or June (not much improvement over III F anyway, apart from 30mm rear armour).


489 7.5cm Geb IG 18 - picture is ordinary leIG, and mountain variant should have twin tail icon. Photos of mountain variant are rare, possibly only here https://www.quartermastersection.com...mle.Geb.IG%208 However, it's better to replace it with with classic Czech 7.5cm GebK 15 (Skoda M.15), which was basic German mountain gun (eg. from Romanian #132 75mm Mtn Gun).

According to Polish article on German mountain artillery, Geb IG 18 was designed only in 1937 and produced from 1937/1938 (now 1/32). But only 95 were made, and it was rather lousy weapon. On the other hand, a few Skodas were a leftover from WW1, used for training of mountain artillery (from 1/30), and several hundreds were acquired later, starting from Anschluss in 1938 and occupation of Czechia and Yugoslavia. Its range 7 km (or even 8200 m according to other sources) was twice as big, as Geb IG 18 (3300 m). They were also used by paratroops until Crete landing. From 1941 they started to be replaced with 7.5cm GebG 36 (range 9.2 km), but they never were completely replaced.

BTW: I see now, that this gun in Czechoslovak OOB (weapon #33) has much too low range 60, while in Romanian OOB it has 165.
In Slovak oob there is howitzer with weapon #33 with 165 range and #32 75mm vz.15-IG with 60 (is a smaller range of IG justified?).

BTW2: Yugoslavian OOB obviously should not use #322 75mm Geb IG 18 after the war, but popular Skoda instead, either from pre-war stock or Italian variant booties. Yugoslavia also used these guns before the war (captured in 1941 by the Germans as GebK 259 (j)) - maybe it should be added as pre-war pack howitzer as well? (currently there is only #320 65mm pre-war pack howitzer, I don't know if it was used).
Also #321 75mm Mtn Gun would be the captured Italian variant and therefore its weapon should be named 75L13 instead of 75L17 (Italian designation was 75/13).

I think that's all this time.

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

You didn't bother to look at what it was being used for. If you had you wouldn't have asked that question. One is being used in an AT role and the other is a DF infantry support gun. Same applies to the Slovak

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

I've seen it before in Czechoslovak oob - but I treated range 60 as incorrect for howitzer/mountain gun use, and I didn't think, that we could create two separate weapons. By the way, I recall I've found usage of this gun as a stop-gap ATG on Czech pages.

Only later I looked at Slovak OOB, which has two weapons, but here the gun with range 60 is IG, not ATG.

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

and 60 is acceptable for a DF infantry gun or a weapon used in an AT role that is intended for direct fire only.

And yes there can be two ( or more ) versions of the same weapon / gun for different purposes. It's done many times in the OOB's. 66, 79 and 80 are all 152mm M-10's in the Russian OOB but we do NOT give direct fire only guns the range indirect fire guns get. That has been true since day one and it's not going to change

In the above example, 66 and 79 are used by two versions of the KV-2. One is the DF tank and the other the indirect fire-capable SP arty unit. 80 is the version used by the regular arty. There is no difference between 79 and 80 except the name because two decades of dealing with nit picking over minutia like this has taught us that using a "FH" version in a tank generates "error" reports.

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

I'm far from suggesting it :) I only explained why I didn't think about AT usage, focussing upon too small howitzer range. And in case of Slovak OOB, the one with smaller range is IG, hence my doubt (very slight, in brackets). I think there's no need to continue, you are obviously right as for AT guns.

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

Any chance of the Me 321 glider in the Blue German OOB overflow section?

Three main reasons:

1.) Ordered for Sea Lion -- can kind of squint and use in a "1941 Sea Lion" scenario.

2.) Deadliest aviation disaster until 1960 -- 4 plane crash killing 129, of which 120 were troops in the Me 321 during testing.

3.) Withdrawn from Eastern Front for use in Operation Herkules, invasion of Malta; but never used when that was cancelled.

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

The 'problem' is aside from a series of planned missions that didn't happen and being involved in the above-mentioned aviation disaster. It was never really used in a capacity related to the scope of this game.

And yes there are aircraft lurking in the game that have similar stories but I have considered and rejected adding this at least once before because to keep it to the scale of the other gliders in the game it would be 160% larger than the Hamilcar which is already verging on being too large for the game map and the encyclopaedia and purchase screens and finally, this thing was not intended to be flown directly into combat unlike the ones in the game now. This is not something anyone would intentionally fly into a "hot LZ"

So..... not really interested even as a "challenge"

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

I wonder: I realize the German oob is already completely full and can't be expanded for technical reasons. Would it be viable to maybe add some "exotic" German gear people might want to use in scenarios to the generic factions (red, green or blue) in some kind of special formation that the AI doesnt pick? Thinking of stuff like this glider, but also things that actually saw use and are not in the normal oob, like the Pak41, for instance.

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

Icon's for Me232 are already done in this set

https://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=51060

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/attac...1&d=1450141171

https://tvd.im/uploads/posts/2020/04...nt-giant_4.jpg

Meaby they are not exactly in scale which will be satisfactory in size to others big gilders like Hamilcar ;) but fit to size of aircraft icons

They were also planed to be used in air landing near Baku to support Caucasus offensive 1942 and to support Stalingrad. Both this operations never happens like this described before.
I think this Big gilder deserve his place meaby in Blue OOB because all this operations were might to be use were cancelled but there was one where they where used in battle
Sea and air landing Operation Beowulf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Beowulf in 1941 on Estonian islands Saaremaa, Hiiumaa and Muhu. There according to book published in 1973 in Polish People Republic "Bitwy Morskie" [Sea Battles] after fall of small island Muhu attack start on biggest island in archipelago Saaremaa there in 13 of September 1941 were two air-landings of German paratroopers in the middle of island to attack defenders of island on eastern beaches from behind. One unit was in power 500 men and second around 100 and this bigger was accompanied by small number of Me 321 gilders which take heavier equipment (probably AT/artillery guns with tractors)

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

This has been an ongoing project for YEARS. There are already a considerable number of German units in the Blue OOB

QUOTE Game Guide

The reason the PaK 41 was never put in was because it was a low production failure with poor barrel life and long-range accuracy and they ran out of tungsten for the ammo. If you want to put one in a scenario buy a Pak 40, rename it and give it more Sabot

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

Fair enough, but note that there are quite a few very low production German units in the regular ToE, including some that did not see combat, like the Maus.

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

Yes and this is the same story we have heard for years.... "But that's in the OOB's why not THIS"

Because when we added "that" we didn't expect to have to justify why years later why "That" is in the OOB but not "This"

.....and since Day ONE we have included MOBHack and all the tools necessary for players to customize their OOB but OVER and OVER we get one version or another of...... " yeah but your put in the Maus......."

We do something 2 decades ago " for fun" to give people a chance to "what if" and two decades later we get it thrown in our faces because we don't have a low-production AT gun or a giant glider that had more missions cancelled or ended in disaster that it ever completed?

SERIOUSLY??!

This is REALLY getting old people. The German OOB in this game has more units that ANY OTHER GAME on the planet and we have put some in the blue OOB as overflow and years after that started being done it is "suggested" we do exactly that...... but that's not enough is it?? If we added even ONE "exotic" unit then we have to add more? NO WE DON'T

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

Absolutely cannot win, can we?

I vaguely recall suggesting the Maus to Don waay back in the "stone age" of the MSDOS version of the game as a "lark" - just as a bit of fun for a giggle. Would never have thought that it would lead to calls for yet more napkinwaffe...

There are nine different Brandenberger units!?! that folks seem to want in the German OOB (UK does fine with just the 2 or so SAS, and units like that are best used as scenario only items which the scenario editor can then edit for the scenario in question).

It is definately getting old!.

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

Not sure why you are so defensive about this? The point of my post was not to "demand" any gun, I just used that as an example from the top of my head. The point was to suggest using the generic oobs for this stuff. I had no idea this was already done, but since it is, let's say players were to actually make some of these units themselves, including the icons in case of tanks. Would it then be possible for you to include them in this "overflow" oob without a lot of logistical headache?

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

Why am I "defensive" ? Well, for one I've heard it too many times to justify one "bright idea" after another.

Players are free to do so in their personal OOB or one for the MOD section.. that's why it's there.

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

I know this is kind of nitpicky, but I came across this while researching my redone 29th Infantry campaign. The Germans have a "Panzerturm PzIV" in their fortifications. The picture used to illustrate this was actually taken on Omaha Beach shortly after D-Day and does not actually show a Panzer IV turret. Instead, that turret was taken from the failed VK30.01 prototype heavy tank. As far as I know it used the same armament as the early Panzer IV, so the only thing that needs changing is the name.

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

Well you are certainly correct with the "nit-picky" part.....:re: but after a quarter century what we are down to is "nitpicky" complaints or " we have it all wrong and it all needs to change ".... I am not saying you have said that but it has been suggested in the past.

The original caption for that photo was "Turret of a German Panzer IV installed in a pillbox at Omaha Beach, June 1944"

It is GOOD ENOUGH for a photo that is 160x80 pixels despite Wikipedia using it in it's VK_30.01 article


https://i.pinimg.com/originals/a7/46...d32c60adc4.jpg

The turret still has more in common with the Pz IV turret than anything else. The unit is now named 75mm Panzerturm. "problem" solved

Re: Germany OOB 16: miscellaneous comments
 

They were more different types of german Beton Panzer's

Pz-II turent with 37mm gun https://www.reddit.com/r/TankPorn/co..._were_rearmed/
https://forum.odkrywca.pl/topic/4209...rturm-zagadka/

And here a short article about usage of them in Berlin with photos
https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/miss...n-t318133.html

Based on this article we can say that first country which used tank towers on static fortifications was France in 1940 on Maginot line with old FT-17 towers. That is where probably Germans learns to build such bunkers.
https://laststandonzombieisland.com/...ortifications/