What was the point of these yuge flak towers the Germans built in Berlin, Hamburg and Vienna? Why concentrate all the guns and many civilians in one place? Most of the guns were light flak useless against strategic bombers anyway. They're impressive but are they just another example of German size-autism?
Soft thing gets put inside the hard thing to protect it. To protect it against more tactical strikes lighter and quicker responding guns cover the heavy guns that ward off heavier strikes from hurting the Squishies inside
yeah
Like most megaprojects in late war Germany, it was make-work to keep engineers away from the front lines. If the US had you bumrushing Mexicans with an empty M14 you'd be coming up with looney tunes projects to stay employed too.
it put the guns higher up so they could hit the bombers easilier
There are some merits to this setup. Higher than all the buildings around for better angles, protected from shrapnel and bombs hitting beside but below it. Needs direct hits to disable which until very late in the war would have been hard to do
If you make it taller you can achieve a smaller footprint>smaller target for bombardments
Primarily big ass air raid shelters with guns.
IIRC the had 8 Flak 40 guns which could shoot down bombers.
The ones in Berlin formed a triangle the the firing arcs covered most of the city IIRC.
Also they served as strongholds.
Pretty sure the Germans never envisioned battling the Red Army in the streets of Berlin when these were built.
I mean apparently they did slow the reds down significantly.
The allies also had problems getting rid of them in Berlin. Took multiple attempts to blow them up and half of one is still standing today. They didn't even try with the ones in Hamburg.
somebody in another thread said building up a fortress is easier than tunneling down a fortress idk tho
The goal was to make the battery you put on top more effective.
By elevating it you guarantee that your batteries line of fire is always clear.
You can integrate radar control and other fancy stuff like ammo elevators.
Your battery is completely safe from anything from a direct hit.
you also give a very visible symbol of you trying to keep the people in the city safe because you build a massive reinforced AA tower that also serves as a air raid shelter.
the germans build both dug in shelters and surface bunkers for shelters.
in part because when you have ton of concrete, a organization devoted to building bunkers and lots of slave labor. Those bunkers are very easy and relatively fast to build.
if you want to dig a shelter you also have take into account the soil you are digging in.
Berlin is mostly sandy soils and would take concrete bracing anyway.
the real autism is them building smoker compartments in their shelters because god forbid you get some second hand smoke while your cities is being flattened
>What was the point of these yuge flak towers the Germans built in Berlin, Hamburg and Vienna?
To shoot Flak
>Why concentrate all the guns and many civilians in one place?
They didnt, multiple towers and shelters. But the flaktowers were resistant to any bombs dropped, and there were a lot of bombs being dropped. Plus better elevation and angles of fire.
It was probably easier to build the fortress than it was to level it, i bet the cost in shells to destroy it was more than the cost to build it, its just a star fort, armies (used to) throw those up all the time. With that amount of ordnance it probably doesnt matter what was there or not there, but if you're going to fight you may as well have a properly built fortification, if the presence of a fortification attracts fire then that too has served a purpose, and lessened fire on the trenches.
oh my gyatt deadass unguided drones were so extra
They built a luxury apartment on top of this one near where i live. Actually pretty neat
is that one of the radar centers?
the one problem with your reasoning is that those where only build inside Germany and annexed Austria.
If they where meant to be a instrument of subjugation they'd have build one right in the Jardin du Luxembourg behind the french senate.
The captured capitals in western europe got bombed regularly because they where rail hubs.
They placed high-priority on building them in major German cities first. You have to keep in mind that you have to placate/subjugate even the German population to remain in power. Berlin was being bombed as early as 1940.
>problem with your reasoning
It's a matter of record. Look up 'Festung Europa plans', they were quite explicit.
Correct, One of the interesting things about the Nazi regime was that it planned to implement the same strict controls over all Germans as well as non-Germans. Aliens would be second-class citizens to the Germans, of course, but the Germans would not be first-class citizens in their own country, they would all be slaves of the state before all else.
Most conquering civilizations don't do that, they conquer and subjugate so their own people can go buck wild and live it up, but not so the Nazis.
It's one of the enduring fascinations to the regime.
neat,brutalism,metal as frick,kinda depressing and built to last forever. I wonder what the layout looks like on the inside.
Reminds me of a co-op building/condo here in montreal called habitat 67 that was built for the worlds fair in well 1967... I've been inside two of these. Its cool basically you "buy" these cubes to live in it can be one or like 6 cubes. They're really cheap to buy too, however oh my frick the co-op fees dude the cheapest is like I think 35k a year...... But its a world famous building and it has a bunch of shit inside it. Also every co-op has space outside to grow shit. It also looks absolutely fricking bonkers in person shits huge. Its really comfy on the inside from the places I've been in, its technically not in montreal but slightly off the island across from old montreal/downtown there is a bridge you can walk/cycle across the canal along with 2 for cars a tad more off there is also a bus. But the land near it isn't really built up its just condo parasites that built near the building for the view of habitat 67 and looking at downtown from the river.
You can legit buy a cube for as low as 100k but once again the condo fees are insane. But I mean it is a co-op you're buying into way more than just a condo theres gaurds 247 staff for everything power/plumbing/etc people for all the plants&trees there is a corner store and some other stuff, I think it also has a daycare which is also "free"(like most daycares in Quebec)
I would so love to live here but frick those fees are insane. Since its a co-op you cant like drop 100k on shit and claim its worth 2m more now. People also move in an end up hating it reselling, then you have families that have lived there since the 70's the grandchildren have taken over the place. The fees are lower for the longer you have lived their.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habitat_67?useskin=vector
It also has a huge ass lego set that like several hundred dollars
Part of the German military planning was for a territorial state in a perpetual of battle-readiness, mobilized at all times. Fortifications were constructed with the same basic thinking as medieval castles- put one everywhere you think you might want one, over-build it, and move on to the next.
Nazi Germany's first end goal was all of Europe totally subjugated under armed control of the military in all places at once in a strictly regulated and consistent manner that allowed for maximum efficiency and centralized visibility and control/ They were quite serious about the totalitarian state and thought it was a very fine idea.
>tl;dr Fortress Europa was a real thing that almost happened
Would those things work in the modern day and age?
Maybe against drone spam?
Modern US air power would evaporate them, but anything less they would have a good niche as a strong point to take shelter from drone spam and ground attack alike.
I could see a country like Pakistan, Taiwan, or Vietnam wanting a structure like that.
I think against a shithole like Russia that relies on massive artillery spam and can't into precision weapons they would be very powerful.
Vuhledar and Avdiivka have been such meatgrinders because Ukrainians hold positions that are elevated and can't be easily destroyed that allow them to see attacks coming and direct artillerry on to them from distance.
Ringing a city like Bakhmut with a dozen of these would probably render it untakeable by Russia.
Against a NATO state, you wouldn't even get your radio set up before a PGM flew through your window.
That was not Nazi Germany's end goal.
It was. They said it themselves, at the the time. Did you think they were going conquer an entire landmass and then be like "lol ok have fun byebye"
>from anime
No, I read the plans for Festung Europa written by the actual Nazis during the actual war
this is complete bullshit, where did you get this from? anime?
You have to be 18+ to be here kid
Four twin 12,8cm Flak 40s (8 guns in total) per tower is not to scoff at and most importantly (only one Anon mentioned itso far) was the capability of the towers to act as a fire control center.
To be fair, the fire control / targeting systems were housed in seperate towers near the main tower.
Eight guns when the RAF could put a thousand bombers into one raid ain't much.
>could
key word there anon. They were not meant to be the only batteries, there were numerous other batteries in around any other kraut city. The zwilling 12.8 cm guns fired ridiculously fast too. max of a round every three seconds per barrel I believe
They were huge wastes of resources and not particularly effective. The main German counter to bombers were fighters their AAA was never very good
AA guns are the fleet in being of air defense. They didn't score many kills compared to the planes that could go up to where the bombers were, but their presence forced the bombers to fly higher which results in less accuracy or put themselves at greater risk to hit a precise target.
>They didn't score many kills compared to the planes that could go up to where the bombers were
flak scored more kills than fighters overall, though
I stand corrected then, but the rest of my point also stands. However, I assume you're including Allie flak in that which had substantial advantages over German stuff, as well as getting to slap relatively untrained nips and huns since they flew their aces to death instead of rotating them to training duties.
>However, I assume you're including Allie flak in that which had substantial advantages over German stuff
most allies losses over germany were mostly to flak as well
losses to fighters were only higher than flak in 1943, they equalized in 1944, then dropped after mid-1944 when the germans ran out of fighters
>ran out of fighters
ran out of trained pilots. They had thousands of brand-new planes in storage.
>They had thousands of brand-new planes in storage.
most german airplanes were used to replace the ones that were shot down
and they were only able to make those by not producing any aircraft with more than 2 engines
they were absolutely running out of both planes and pilots
At the end of the war the allies found literally thousands of factory-fresh aircraft of all types dispersed around the country. Aircraft production was not the bottleneck the allies planners thought it was, it was synthetic fuel production. Without it the new German pilots with a few dozen hours of flight-time under their belts stood little chance against US rookie pilots with a thousand hours of flight time in the Midwest.
>At the end of the war the allies found literally thousands of factory-fresh aircraft of all types dispersed around the country.
and millions of soldiers surrendered at the end of the war fighting over the country
and yet manpower was considered a chronic issue
germany losing planes was an actual problem, they just chose to vastly reduce the number of flights each plane had to fly to preserve the new planes they had
> Without it the new German pilots with a few dozen hours of flight-time under their belts stood little chance against US rookie pilots with a thousand hours of flight time in the Midwest.
>Aircraft production was not the bottleneck the allies planners thought it was
aircraft turnover was high enough that the germans admitted is was an issue
>Without it the new German pilots with a few dozen hours of flight-time under their belts stood little chance against US rookie pilots with a thousand hours of flight time in the Midwest.
the germans were having shortages of everything, of which aircraft was one of them
And manpower was the chronic issue for the Luftwaffe, too. No trained pilots. No fuel to train the pilots with. Thousands of brand new, pristine planes sitting around, unuseable.
>they just chose to vastly reduce the number of flights each plane had to fly
They "chose" that because they didn't have the fuel and pilots to let them fly more.
>eight (8) 12.8cm guns vs. mass bomber formations
>no HE-VT equivalent ammunition
If it isn't USN-tier AA, good luck.
>12,8cm
Pathetic
Is that a 15 cm dual drum autoloader?
Propaganda
Don't mind me, just posting a picture of trees.
What place?
town called photoshop
It's in Heiligengeistfeld, Hamburg, and the same Flakturm as in
The retrofit was to turn it into a hotel.
Because bombing cities is a Norm in those days.
They are hardpoints for defence against Air and Land.
Also house shelters for the population.
Wait a sec, I always thought that giant flak towers from MoH Airborne weren't real...
What are the scaffolds under the catwalk emplacements for?
Being raised up off the ground like that protects them from near misses. You need to land a bomb right on top if you actually want to take out the guns which is far easier said than done with WW2 era accuracy.
Far more Allied planes were shot down by flak than by fighter planes.
The accuracy and effectiveness of FLAK or anti-aircraft artillery fire was derided at the start of the war but it gained a healthy respect as the war dragged on. By 1942 15,000 88mm ( 3.46 in ) guns formed the bulk of heavy flak defenses for Germany. Large numbers of 37mm ( 1.47 in ) and 20mm ( 0.79 in ) guns filled the skies with shells during every air raid. Often arrayed in "belts" around a city or target 88s could fire 22 lb ( 10 kg ) shells up to 35,000 ft ( 10,600 m ) at a rate of 15 - 20 rounds per minute. The excellent 88mm ( 3.46 in ) gun proved very effective especially when radar was used to help with aiming. The shells exploding at a preset altitude sending metal splinters flying in all directions. Later groups of up to 40 heavy flak guns Grossbatterien fired rectangular patterns of shellbursts known as box barrages that proved very deadly to enemy bombers.
In 1944 Flak accounted for 3,501 American planes destroyed, enemy fighters shot down about 600 less in the same time period. More flak guns gradually appeared, mainly the 128mm ( 5 in ) German Flak accounted for 50 of the 72 RAF bombers lost over Berlin on the night of March 24th, 1944. An incredible 56 bombers were destroyed or crippled by flak during a B-17 raid on Merseburg in November of 1944."
Whatever the effectiveness of the expenditure of resources, the German Flak proved to be nightmare for Allied bomber crews. Bomber raids were tightly packed and pilots could not maneuver independently least they crash into other bombers in the formation. Some bombers simply disappeared in a massive fireball and huge cloud of smoke. This was relatively rare, but countless bombers were damaged and air crews killed or wounded by the resulting shrapnel.
>the shells exploding at a preset altitude sending metal splinters flying in all directions
late war they found out just having impact fuzes was more effective because the timed shells had to bad quality controll/ to high tolerances
Adding to the talking points of others, there's an economic angle to it. Making steel and cement is a more energy efficient use of coal than coal liquefaction into oil. Germany had an excess of coal and a shortage of oil.
Would be nice to own one. A modern castle.
>What was the point of these yuge flak towers the Germans built in Berlin, Hamburg and Vienna
to be an excellent platform for building condos on top of
Are there apartments in the actual flak tower?
They are amazingly sturdy. The Russians tried to blow them up during and after the battle of Berlin. They were forced to grind their way around them instead, while eating heavy artillery fire from them all the while. These "symbols of western degeneracy" withstood every attempt at demolition. Whether that was just the poor quality of communist demolitions is hard to tell.
I think you replied to the wrong post
Erm, it was the Brits that tried to demolish the Tiergarten tower after the war and had a ludicrously hard time of it.
Like, their final attempt that collapsed only half of it consisted of them spending 10 weeks drilling holes into structural walls and pillars and placing some 40 tons of explosives throughout the whole thing.
Chad German Nazi block vs virgin commie blocks.
I like germans a tad bit more now after seeing this pic.
'BACK-FACTORY'....
Is that a gym?
Back means baking in german
And 'factory' means what in german?
That's not flesh nor bone - it makes no sense!
Just denglisch, mixing of english words into german. they call cellphones "handys"
These were built to protect German cities from soviet low altitude bombers based in the islands off the coast of Lithuania and Lativa. They weren't expecting the baltics to fall as fast as they did historically.
Idk but the MoH Airborne mission where you jump onto one is pretty ludokino
which one is that?
Which mission? Very last one
I love airborne, despite being super arcade even compared to other MoH games. The flak tower in that game has to be like triple the size of a real one.
that game was bretty fun and looked nice for its age. having to hold sprint while aiming to walk and not being able to take off upgrades was pretty annoying tho. Oh and frick the snipers in Varsity
the flak tower was so much bigger than actual one though
To their credit, the Flak Towers actually worked in sheltering their civilian population from bomber attacks. Even modern ground attack aircraft have a hard time assaulting skyscrapers, let alone something purpose-built to be a fortress like the flaks.
I see the towers are still dealing with flak so many years later.
They just don't build them like they used to.
The world needs more flak towers.
Just imagine one of these things with modern AA and countermeasures.
>inb4 muh low footprint
You don't need it when you can withstand at least a hit or two. Worst case scenario, you build it (or a mock) and make the enemy waste a million dollar guided munition on an empty tower.
They were actually pretty good at deterring bombers and even kept the Red Army at bay. Until the Allies just went around them.
Their population centers were getting fired bombed, it made sense to have a bomb shelter and elevated turrets flak was one of their best anti-air defenses. Doing that sort of thing with fire bombs these days would be considered nearly unquestionably not justified. A lot of the damage done in the pacific theater was the results of firebombs and their structures being more vulnerable to fire.
The majority of the towers got tore down after the war, not many got destroyed during it. They were obviously effective enough for the most part especially compared to other defensive structures like the Maginot line.
The flak towers were built in the early war after pinprick raids on Berlin by the RAF, no-one envisaged the fire-storms to come.
>The majority of the towers got tore down after the war, not many got destroyed during it.
Why did they demolish them instead of repurposing them?
Because they're giant, ugly, concrete eyesores, it's that simple.
For the same reason you find almost no bunkers of the atlantic wall in Germany, but plenty in Denmark, France and so on, the Allies demolished most of them, being autistic enough to even do it with concrete one-man air raid shelters.
Goal was to remove military installations from Germany, btw. Which is why i say removing those one man things was autistic, how dangerous can they be?
>how dangerous can they be?
Anon
WTF was the point of this? So one random guy can survive a bombing raid?
>ground level battery with revetments
Larger footprint with ammo stores, crewed area, etc. Vulnerable to nearby hits through fragmentation, blast damage, flying debris. Line of fire can be obstructed by trees, buildings, equipment.
>elevated battery of reinforced concrete
Ammunition and crew can be below the battery, giving it a smaller footprint, making it a harder targer. Guns are invulnerable to anything but a direct hit and harder to hit because the bomb has to land directly on them, any horizontal displacement will have the bomb hitting the side of the tower. Almost no risk of fragmentation or debris damage, less risk of blast damage from ground hits. Line of fire is always clear.