So on a late model Tiger in Normandy...what would the AA machine gun on the cupola be..a 34 or 42 or either?

What about the ammo..would it be a "drum" or an ammo bag?

Thank you in advance,
Eric

Tigers and Panthers and for that matter,PzIV s were not issued more than 2 machine guns. One for the hull /radio op. position and one for the main gun/coax position. If you see the rare pic with one mounted on the cupola,it would be the one from the hull(much easier to remove) and it would be the armoured barrel type made for that position. The ammo would more than likely be fed from the bags of the type carried within the tank because at that point in the war the drums were not seen nearly as much.
I would never use museum examples for anything as they are historically inaccurate way more than they are correct.
Now,of course,as with anything involving this topic,there are anomalies.
And...in the end,this is your model! Have fun.
J

Tigers and Panthers and for that matter,PzIV s were not issued more than 2 machine guns. One for the hull /radio op. position and one for the main gun/coax position. If you see the rare pic with one mounted on the cupola,it would be the one from the hull(much easier to remove) and it would be the armoured barrel type made for that position. The ammo would more than likely be fed from the bags of the type carried within the tank because at that point in the war the drums were not seen nearly as much.
I would never use museum examples for anything as they are historically inaccurate way more than they are correct.
Now,of course,as with anything involving this topic,there are anomalies.
And...in the end,this is your model! Have fun.
J

I've got another source to second what Dennis has told


" TARGET="_blank">

Well,there ya go. I had the 2 MGs mixed up and the turret one was the one more easily removed.
J


More here and here

Quoted Text

---

Tigers and Panthers and for that matter,PzIV s were not issued more than 2 machine guns. One for the hull /radio op. position and one for the main gun/coax position. If you see the rare pic with one mounted on the cupola,it would be the one from the hull(much easier to remove) and it would be the armoured barrel type made for that position. The ammo would more than likely be fed from the bags of the type carried within the tank because at that point in the war the drums were not seen nearly as much.
I would never use museum examples for anything as they are historically inaccurate way more than they are correct.
Now,of course,as with anything involving this topic,there are anomalies.
And...in the end,this is your model! Have fun.
J

---

Ahem... I asked my Mom's Onkel Ludwig, who served in Pz.IVs in France about AA weapons on German Tanks during WWII, (along with a MULTITUDE of other questions), when he visited us in the US back in the 1970s- His answer, loosely translated was,

"If one were STUPID or CRAZY enough to want to shoot back at an American or British JABO with only a light AA Machine Gun, then GOOD NIGHT!!! In our unit, WE didn't carry them. THAT'S what our FLAK was for... Our Infantry wanted all of the automatic weapons that they could lay their hands on. That's the way it was..."

Hope this helps to answer any questions about German Tankers' feelings about "AA Weapons" mounted up on the Commanders' Cupolas...

If anything, German Tankers wanted to maintain "a low profile" when there were US and British Fighter-Bombers in their vicinity; why stick your head in a beehive..?

I'm not saying that AA MG mounts on Tigers or Panthers didn't happen, but ponder this:

Think about your chances of survival against a P-47 or a Typhoon bearing down on you with eight .50s or four 20mms blazing at you, and you popping back at them with an MG.34 or an MG.42... Not ME, my Friends...

Wow always amazes me the knowledge and experience I find on these forum boards.

So what I understand from the comments is that it was rare to see the AA machine gun, but if it was mounted on the cupola, you would not have one in the bow gunners position.

Thank you for your replies.

In my opinion, using the "late Tiger" is not so correct because the Tiger I during the D-Day can be manufactured any time from 1943 to that time. Well, if we using the norm of a late Tiger I with the Tiger II road wheels and different turret roof layout.

Back to the subject, the with the low profile commander cupola The rail is intended for mounting a machine gun, the MG34. Though, I never see any scan document telling that it is intended as an anti-air craft weapon, an anti-infantry weapon or a tool of terror to fear off civilians.

Let's look at it: The German didn't use any kind of roof mounting machine gun on tank until then (1ate 1943). The German are more than capable to understand that small arms are incapable to fight against aircraft. Not even their aircraft used the small arm cartridges by that time anymore, the 13mmm MG131 was the smallest machine gun for aircraft. I highly suspect that they wanted it to serve a different purpose than to protect vs aircraft.

From Mr.Byrden's website (please forgive me if I misinterpreted), the Tiger I have a spare MG in the fighting compartment to replace the one of the other MG and also spare parts to make it a portable MG, thus mounted on the roof is a possibility. (http://tiger1.info/EN/MG-toolboxes.html)

I have no doubt that the spare MG was given to the infantry considering German was in shortage later in the war.