THE RED GAMBIT SERIES

I'm still catching up in the series, do I don't know all the changes in ordnance being used.  One piece in particular that never got enough use in the war was the 90mm gun.  We had them in 1944, but they were mostly unused because of the kinetic operations on the western front.  Most of their prime movers were hijacked in order to transport troops and other materiel, with the guns themselves mostly being left all over France.  It makes sense in the larger scope of things, although they would have helped us out a lot in the Ardennes.

Any thoughts on employing these in wargame scenarios?

Hi. In Impasse, the 90mm is used in a ground combat role. The issue was that it needed a mount modification before it could be so employed. Obviously, this gun formed the basis of the 90mm's used in vehicles such as the Jackson and Pershing. In real terms, the weapon was quite potent and could take on most vehicles in the Axis arsenal at decent battle ranges.

In a wargame scenario, as a static defence piece, the 90mm would prove effective enough, with the codecils of size and the inherent ability to hide. I seem to remember that it stands quite tall, even though it could be deployed without its wheels, which would inhibit its capability as an AT gun on a WW2 battlefield methinks. Drop the wheels and drop the profile obviously, but then lose mobility. Generally speaking, the larger the weapon, the more stopping power you have, traded for lower concealment and mobility.

The problem with that theory is the German 88mm, which exhibits the same size and deployment characteristics as the 90mm, and yet was hugely successful in both roles.

Clearly, one issue for deploying such weapons is terrain and the ability to hide and reach out at range.

However, perhaps the answer lies in need? The Luftwaffe was a waning force by the time the Allies landed in Normandy. Post Normandy [The Bulge aside], German armour was not as frequent on the battlefiled as before, and certainly not in numbers. Both would make the need for a heavy AA/AT gun low by comparison with the German's requirement for something potent across the spectrum of defence. I wasn't aware that 90mm's were being left all over France but, if you throw in the mobility issues as well, perhaps it is not surprising.

As a wargamer, my gut feeling would be to take a Pak40 or 17 pdr in defence, rather than an 88mm Flak or 90mm AA, depending on what the enemy brings to the party of course. Mind you, sit me behind a 128mm Pak44 and I will kill you long before you see the whites of my eyes :-)

Good question :-)

gee_colin@yahoo.co.uk at January 10, 2014 at 1:05 PM

Hi. In Impasse, the 90mm is used in a ground combat role. The issue was that it needed a mount modification before it could be so employed. Obviously, this gun formed the basis of the 90mm's used in vehicles such as the Jackson and Pershing. In real terms, the weapon was quite potent and could take on most vehicles in the Axis arsenal at decent battle ranges.

In a wargame scenario, as a static defence piece, the 90mm would prove effective enough, with the codecils of size and the inherent ability to hide. I seem to remember that it stands quite tall, even though it could be deployed without its wheels, which would inhibit its capability as an AT gun on a WW2 battlefield methinks. Drop the wheels and drop the profile obviously, but then lose mobility. Generally speaking, the larger the weapon, the more stopping power you have, traded for lower concealment and mobility.

The problem with that theory is the German 88mm, which exhibits the same size and deployment characteristics as the 90mm, and yet was hugely successful in both roles.

Clearly, one issue for deploying such weapons is terrain and the ability to hide and reach out at range.

However, perhaps the answer lies in need? The Luftwaffe was a waning force by the time the Allies landed in Normandy. Post Normandy [The Bulge aside], German armour was not as frequent on the battlefiled as before, and certainly not in numbers. Both would make the need for a heavy AA/AT gun low by comparison with the German's requirement for something potent across the spectrum of defence. I wasn't aware that 90mm's were being left all over France but, if you throw in the mobility issues as well, perhaps it is not surprising.

As a wargamer, my gut feeling would be to take a Pak40 or 17 pdr in defence, rather than an 88mm Flak or 90mm AA, depending on what the enemy brings to the party of course. Mind you, sit me behind a 128mm Pak44 and I will kill you long before you see the whites of my eyes :-)

Good question :-)

The Pak44 sounds like a really cool weapon.

Very meaty piece of kit, with penetration figures to scare the most protected tankers. However, big lump of metal to drag around, although it had a cruciform mount and could get quite low. Its been in action in RG.

gee_colin@yahoo.co.uk at January 12, 2014 at 7:16 AM

Very meaty piece of kit, with penetration figures to scare the most protected tankers. However, big lump of metal to drag around, although it had a cruciform mount and could get quite low. Its been in action in RG.

It could probably do some damage even on modern MBTs.

If it had the AP44 style shell, I rather suspect it would penetrate a number of modern MBT's. However, a 37mm PaK could knock a track off an Challenger in the right circumstances :-)