I was in the process of looking on ebay for a flak gun when i came upon the perfect model. It is the tamiya 1/35 th scale German 88mm Gun Flak model, kit number 35017, super kit version (which just means it come with a loading crew, trailer and Zundapp. However the item description is not the best and the seller is not able to answer my question, does anyone out there know if it is possible to pose the kit in an anti-aircraft position, instead of the box art which is an anti-tank position.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Tamiya-Kit-Lot-Panther-King-Tiger-V2-88-Flak-1-35_W0QQitemZ6063514573QQihZ009QQcategoryZ2588QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
The kit is the very last on in the picture!!

Puzzled......

John

Simply put, yes it is possible to pose the gun in the AA position.

Mike

This kit has parts options to build either AA or anti-tank.

Hey Don and John: The parts for the model are for either a 8.8cm Flak 36 or an 8.8cm Flak 37.

One of the things the directions would have you believe is that the Flak 36 was only used for AA while the Flak 37 was only used for anti-tank. That's all rubbish. All of the German wartime 8.8cm flak guns were multi-role usable -- anti aircraft, ground support, indirect fire.

If you want something with some more finesse (but a more complex build), then try one of the excellent DML 88mm flak guns, John. Regardless, don't pay more than $15 for the Tamiya kit. I guarantee you, if you post on armorama's buy/sell forum and say $15 to the first person who offers me a Tamiya 88 flak gun, you'll be innundated.

Lots of modellers are dumping their Tamiya 88s in exchange for the newer DML ones. Whichever you choose, enjoy the build!!

Thanks alot guys, ill definetly look into the DML kit.

Cheers
John

the DML kit is beautifull, i have one in my stash to build when i get a few more out of the way ;p

hello,
iam just finishing up my Tamiya "88".instruction clear show that it can be built as a Flak 36 ,(which was what i went and built),or the Flak 37.Instructions show that the Flak 36 ,was anti -tank,and the Flak 37 is anti-aircraft ,they maybe be able to use them in a reverse roll,but this is the way they where built.ive be collecting military items from WWI&WWII ,for 25 years and i have the ultimate field manuel,dated Mar. 1 ,1945 ,
Handbook of the German Forces ,highly classified (at the time).just about every type of german piece of equipment ,is stated ,and its use and how to use them ,even field equipment ,and all of the radio's in use.
the manuel clearly states the Flak 36 ,was anti-tank ,the Flak 37 ,anti-aircraft ,manuel also defines the differances between the Flak 36 and the Flak 18 .Flak 40 ,was designed to be fired from its traveling dolly's ,where the Flak 36/37,could but shouldn't (very unstable).
i haven't seen the DML kit,but I had alot of fun building Tamiya's "88"(i picked mine up on ebay,for $12.50+ 5.00 shp),quite impressive behind the 8-ton semi-track.
joe

Tamiya's Flak is a Flak 36. Due to the (simplified) bogies it can only be built as a '36. It can't be built as an '18 or a '37. In the case of the latter, the shield was NORMALLY different (more enclosed). In the case of the Flak 18, the bogies were more 'flattened'.

Here's what I mean by the gun shield shape:

Hey Flakgunner, Roy here: the info in the 1945 manual is incorrect. This is probably where Tamiya got their incorrect information.

Like I said in my post above, each of the 8.8cm Flak weapons used by the Germans was fully capable in various roles.

Anti Aircraft (they were FLAK guns 1st and foremost)
Ground Support (or anti-armor)
Indirect fire (artillery)

And were equipped as such. The idea that the FLAK 36 was only an anti-tank gun is baloney. Note the shell charging unit on the left side (to ready the rounds to burst at set altitudes) and the lighted aiming system (those round caged items on the left side) which allowed the Flak 36 to be linked to a central fire & command center so they could have concerted battery fire with other Flak guns.

The Flak 18, Flak 36 and Flak 37 were capable of firing against ground targets still hitched to their trailers. Photos clearly show this. Emergency situations or remaining quickly mobile would effect this. Although it would only take about 10 minutes to set up the gun on the ground according to the manual.

The primary difference between the Flak 36 and the Flak 37 was that the Flak 37 had an updated aiming system. No longer using the caged lights, it used a clock face aiming indicator.

Jim Rae:
Some of your information is a bit off, too. The Flak 36 and Flak 37 used the same SdAnh 202 trailers. The Tamiya kit therefore allows one to build a relatively accurate Flak 37. This was unchanged. Both the DML Flak 36 and Flak 37 share the same sprues for the nice trailers.

You're correct in that the Tamiya kit CANNOT be built as a Flak 18 (get the AFV Club kit) which had many differences with the Flak 36 and Flak 37.

In regards to the gun shields, later in the war, indeed a rounded, more enclosed shield was developed for the Flak 36 or Flak 37 (the DML Flak 37 kit includes this option). The fact is that it could be fitted to both. And the Flak 37 also is seen using the more flattened one. The shield isn't an indicator of whether the gun is a Flak 36 or a Flak 37. Frankly if you look at one from the left side, you CAN'T tell at all, Only seeing the clock-face vs. caged light aiming indicators will tell you the difference.

(as a side, the barrels were updated but since they were interchangable between the Flak 18, 36 and 37, this is also an unreliable source of differentiating between the types)

Finally, the overhead picture you show with the artillery piece beside the Pz III on SdAnh 116 trailer isn't right for this discussion as the artillery piece is the 8.8cm PAK 43 (see the Verlinden or Azimut kits). This weapon's gun sheild can't be compared to any of those used on the Flak 18/36/37 series. Hope this helps, Roy

I wouldn't pay too much money for a Tamiya 88mm flak kit. As stated, the Dragon and AFV Club flak guns are of similar/same subject and the quality is really good.

I was lucky enough to score the AFV Club Flak 18 for $8 (yes, eight dollars) at my local IPMS club annual auction. I promptly traded away my Tamiya Flak 36/37 after getting that kit.

Having made both the Tamiya version & the Dragon, I'd have to say the Dragon is immeasurably better. But so it should be nearly 30 years down the line! In it's day the Tamiya kit was ground breaking, I remember, I was there! So if you're on a budget, don't be too dissatisfied if the Tam one is all you can afford!
As others have mentioned here, there's some confusion about versions. Tamiya incorrectly stated that the Flak 36 was a ground weapon, the Flak 37 an AA gun (they had me convinced for years, totally against logic!). What they should have said was the AA aiming system was improved on the Flak 37. Both kits have the dial sight mounted on the barrel for firing "over open sights", at least I assume that's what it's for. The Dragon kit includes a Flak 18 barrel, this was a one piece barrel, the later ones are composite "built up" ones, which allowed the wearing portions to be replaced. However all barrels fitted all weapons, so there was plenty of interchanging. Interestingly, the one piece & composite barrels wear in different places! The bogies on the Flak 18 are completely different to the Flak 36/37. It's not unusual for Flak weapons to have no shield @ all BTW. I've seen photos of SS Flak Abt 9 weapons without shields, but it's not beyond the bounds of possibility that these were used in a ground role also. The Pak43 is basically the same ordnance, but the mounting is completely different being much lower. This piece is NOT dual purpose, as there is no ability for high elevation. The carriage is also different again.

Just a thought, having seen photo's of 88's with and without shields, and considering the range of the 88, would the shield be of great use? I mean the range puts it beyond small arms fire range, and I don't think the shield would be very effective against HE or AP shot. Removal of the shield makes deployment easier (well, that's what I would think, I never deployed one myself.. ) as well as facilitating deployment when still mounted on the bogies. IIRC a lot of pictures from North Afrika (where firing on the bogies was practised a lot) shows the shield removed?

Cheers
Henk

Hi Henk: the inclusion of the shields wouldn't make a difference as far as deploying the gun or putting it up on its bogies. It was all done with chains and hooks at the ends of the gun base arms.

The usefulness for the shields would be schrapnel protection. While not withstanding an AP round, the Flak gun crew could be subjected to indirect or direct HE shot from opposition. Return MG fire from enemy vehicles and small arms from nearer infantry couldn't be bad either.

Hi Roy, Fair comments, I suppose they did not always enjoy the safety of working at their maximum range..




I make that a Pzr IV F2/G, note the barrel sleeve and longer barrel. Also the 50 mm barrel of the Pzr III had more of a tapper (for want of a better description ) to it. And the prominent air intakes ( the grills of which should be noticable from this angle) are not there either.

Cheers
Henk

Hold on, I didn't twig then for a mo... If that's a Pak 43, than that's not in the Dessert... why did I think it was in the dessert??
Closer examination shows what looks like a single commandes hatch, and what could possibly be a mount for the turret shurzen to the right of it.. that would make it an Ausf. H or J.
Cheers
Henk

HEY! This is an artillery discussion. No permission to talk about the fine details of German Medium tanks allowed! LOL

You're correct -- I just glanced and I thought it was a Mark III. Still interesting to see an SdAnh 116 trailer.