Another WWII tank pulled from the mud

September 23, 2006 6:52 AM

WWII STUGNot sure how many people saw the post about the T34 pulled out of a peat bog a couple of weekends ago, but here is another story about German tank this time. Pulled out of the mud in the Czeck Republic. Decent amount of pictures with this one too.
posted by a3matrix (23 comments total)

Technically the StuG III is a tank destroyer, not a tank - note that instaead of a rotating turrent the weapon is fixed in a forwards position. It's come out nice though.
posted by Artw at 7:31 AM on September 23, 2006

How come I never find anything that cool when I'm digging holes in my front yard?
posted by Bageena at 7:46 AM on September 23, 2006

Cool, I love stuff like this. The Czech Republic is filled with leftovers from wars and occupations - not counting the horrible Soviet infrastructure.

My g/f's brother lives in Prague with his family, and one day when we were at their cottage in the countryside they sent me off on a run on a road running northwest of town. It was a dead straight road, literally no kinks at all for miles and miles, through a really dense Hansel and Gretel-type forest with little unexplainable clearings every few kilometres or so with snags of barbed wire every where. Every once in a while there'd be a big concrete bunker-style hut near these clearings. It was creepy as shit. Only when I got back did they tell me that it was an access road for Soviet nuclear missle launch sites, built during the cold war, and that it ran right up to and into what was then East Germany.
posted by jimmythefish at 7:48 AM on September 23, 2006

How come I never find anything that cool when I'm digging holes in my front yard?

I bet it's because nobody ever tried to conquer your front yard. Tell Bush you have some WMD and see what happens.
posted by Dipsomaniac at 7:50 AM on September 23, 2006

I like how the great Gia expulses the poisonous barbs from her skin.
posted by CynicalKnight at 8:05 AM on September 23, 2006

T-34-85 (1943) was a high-end tank very capable, it is still in service in some countries. The StuG III Ausf. G (1942) was an earlier model and fairly simple, a gun mounted on an armored chassis (tank destroyer role, but could shoot anything, was originally infantry support). They were really cheap to make and was the most common tank in the German army. Interesting how small they seem, almost half-scale compared to todays models.
posted by stbalbach at 8:27 AM on September 23, 2006

It's striking that these guys would be crawling all over the thing when I imagine there could still be unexploded ordinance inside that could go off if jostled just right.
posted by sudasana at 8:43 AM on September 23, 2006

According to accompanying text, it was found in Russia, not Czech Republic:

"I don't have much information about this finding, actually almost none. I just know that the finding is from Demyansk. Stug was really well preserved, as you can see yourself. Interesting thing are its wide tracks for driving on a soft terrain. Weapons of the crew were also found inside. And this piece was for a sale. If I have seen well, it was a bargain. Just a million dollars. A classified with a price was at Russian site for about 3 months and then there was just SOLD."

Wikipedia says there were around 100.000 German troops trapped around Demyansk in 1942, with a heavy air supply operation going on (see Demyansk Pocket).
posted by b. at 8:57 AM on September 23, 2006

Technically the StuG III is a tank destroyer, not a tank - note that instaead of a rotating turrent the weapon is fixed in a forwards position.

Ahem, true the StuG III was a Tank Destroyer, but a fixed turret is not the distinguishing characteristic. Perhaps you've never heard of the S-Tank. (more pic goodness)

The S-Tank is quirky enough to deserve a FPP. A turretless tank that featured a fully automated transmission and suspension to turn and tilt the gun, it was one of the first to feature an auto-loader, and it's novel design reduced the traditional need for a crew of four (driver, gunner, crew commander and loader) to a theoretical crew of two (driver/gunner, crew commander) although a crew of three was used, with a second "reverse" driver facing in the rear handling a second set of driving controls in order for the tank to escape without turning while keeping the frontal armour protecting the rear. It also had a secret fence on the front used to defeat HEAT rounds before they struck the hull.

The reason for removing the turret was to keep a low profile. In tanks the two most common defensive positions are hull down (turret sticks over the top of position) and turret down (everything is hidden in the position and the crew commander will peak his head over the top). By removing the turret completely the S-Tank was always turret down. The ,low profile also increases the slope of the armour, which dramatically increases penetration thickness without increasing weight.

Although the S-Tank was never proven in battle, if you read the bottom of the Wikipedia article you'll see that it performed quite well and was well respected besides being the only MBT ever to not feature a turret. The second driver also made jockeying (the act of backing up in a "J" pattern after firing a few rounds) to a new position a lot easier. As for aiming, I can't find a supporting link, but if I remember correctly the S-Tank was able to turn 360 degrees in 3 seconds.
posted by furtive at 9:44 AM on September 23, 2006

Oh, and the S-Tank was used by Sweden up until 1997.
posted by furtive at 9:46 AM on September 23, 2006

It turns out this one is one of the earlier STUG III's the later ones had cast mantlets versus the riveted one here.
posted by mk1gti at 9:48 AM on September 23, 2006

The reason for removing the turret was to keep a low profile.

Mainly it kept the cost and complexity down, they could turn more of them out, it was Germanys most produced tank. If money was not an issue, every tank would have had a turret - a turreted tank can always go HD. Also the STuG was based on a Panzer chassis it was modular - a damaged Panzer could be turned into a STuG.
posted by stbalbach at 10:38 AM on September 23, 2006

Man, MeFi has everything. I was amazed to see the earlier article about the T-34, the tank whose existence means we speak English now. (OK, exaggeration, but still). Now we are getting into German tank destroyers. What's next, a FPP on the Soviets' own NKVD troops laying creeping barrages behind their own troops to make them advance?
posted by Ironmouth at 11:43 AM on September 23, 2006

I always feel dirty, muddy, oily after a good session of tankporn. . .
posted by mk1gti at 12:58 PM on September 23, 2006

stbalbach: I was speaking in the context of the S-Tank, although your points still apply. You can also add weight to the list of advantages.
posted by furtive at 1:37 PM on September 23, 2006

Even more links.

Russian tank museum with relic hunters

Regarding that first thread from a couple of weekends ago I found this youtube video.

An additional youtube video on that T34
posted by a3matrix at 1:54 PM on September 23, 2006

An article from August 2003 about drought conditions in Croatia and relics pulled out as they start to protrude from the surface.
I haven't found any pictures on this yet and finding the original article (not a reprint) has so far proven difficult.
I can't find any associated pictures yet either. Working on it.
posted by a3matrix at 2:22 PM on September 23, 2006

Bill Mauldin depicted the StuG in one of my favorite cartoons ever.
posted by pax digita at 2:48 PM on September 23, 2006

The S Tank's autoloader worked on the fly, too. The one in the T-72 had a bad habit of beating the crap out of the turret crew when ejected shell cases didn't quite make it out the ejection port cleanly - especially a problem with firing on the run -- and rebounded within the turret, which is one reason why you often see images of Soviet Army tankers wearing those padded helmets.
posted by pax digita at 2:53 PM on September 23, 2006

which is one reason why you often see images of Soviet Army tankers wearing those padded helmets

Tanker helmets are worn because you're head is surrounded blunt metal objects, it's a coincidence that the casings flying around in a T-72 also happen to be blunt metal objects.

I remember one exercise we did where they stuck a female clerk in the hatch of an M113 to give her a feel of things. She kept falling asleep and and hitting her head as the vehicle went up and down the hills so as a prank they tied her uniform down to the hatch like you might tie a vehicle down on a flatbed. She said she didn't hit her head again but still managed to get a wicked whiplash.
posted by furtive at 3:38 PM on September 23, 2006

I love some good tank porn myself so don't let me sound like a downer, but just how did they get it so clean so fast and further after 60 years in a peat bog how did it not have a spot of rust on it? Even the paint job looks fresh.
posted by Pollomacho at 4:08 AM on September 24, 2006

Like I said, it's one reason. Ahem.

I wonder if tankers wear elbow caps much? I've noticed the straight-leg guys in the sandbox are wearing elbow and knee protection nowadays, and if I had to ride a track, I'd want to minimize the bruising as long as I wasn't snagging myself on the track's innards.

The lack-of-rust question came up in the T-34 thread, too. There's not much oxygen down there to oxidize things, so rust -- iron oxide -- doesn't form readily. There aren't a lot of aerobic bacteria either, so organic things don't rot fast either.
posted by pax digita at 4:47 AM on September 24, 2006

I wonder if tankers wear elbow caps much? I've noticed the straight-leg guys in the sandbox are wearing elbow and knee protection nowadays, and if I had to ride a track, I'd want to minimize the bruising as long as I wasn't snagging myself on the track's innards.

Nope. Look at the crew suits that tankers wear; there's a reason why you won't find any flaps, loops, strings etc that you find a on a usual uniform. Oh, something you will find on a crew suit that you won't find on a regular uniform (besides the bum flap) are reinforced epaulets so that extracting you through the hatch is an easier task.
posted by furtive at 11:12 AM on September 24, 2006