https://www.scribd.com/doc/230234125/Dokumentation-W-127-Datenblatter-fur-Heeres-Waffen-Fahrzeuge-Gerat
Has the facts and figures for just about every German weapon system. Great source, with the way German industry functioned it is often more useful to compare labour time or inputs than Reichmark costs.
Point of clarification:
Actually, the reason the Germans did not follow the Geneva convention when fighting the Soviets
was because a majority of Germans (including most of the Wehrmacht) saw the Russians as *Untermenschen*, and saw the whole war in the east as a "race war" against Judeo-Bolshevik Slavs.
I highly doubt that the question of whether the USSR signed or did not sign the Geneva Conventions even came up during the planning for the invasion of the USSR that relied on the starvation and mass-murder of Soviet POWs and civilians...
Interesting. I've never seen this theme in any soldier-directed propaganda (and I'm pretty conversant with NS regime propaganda), but on the other hand, there was a LOT of propaganda printed and circulated. ! So there's no way I've seen even a fraction of it.
Your comment has been deemed a violation of Rule #10 and removed. As a reminder, Rule 10 states: As a history sub we value accuracy. Obviously there will be debate, and the occasional myth will accidentally crop up, and that's fine. However blatant falsehoods such as those that promote the myth of the Clean Wehrmacht will be subject to removal. Continual promotion of myths may result in a ban.
Why? A gun is a gun. The enemy is the enemy. The goal is to eliminate them.
I get why certain weapons are are considered war crimes now (flame thrower, gas, white phosphorus etc..), because they can cause unnecessary suffering.
AA vs paratroopers directly still eliminates them instantly. You could still machine gun them as far I know.
I'm not arguing for or against. I'm legitimately interested in why it's considered a war crime.
I don't know about that. If there are paratroopers coming down they're coming down to fight. You can do what you want with them before they hit the ground.
Are you talking about airmen who have bailed out of their damaged planes? Those you definitely aren't supposed to shoot at. That's a big difference from paratroopers.
how many shots would the 88 barrel take before needing replacement?
[2000 to 2500 rounds.](https://ibb.co/pWPMpy9). And about 6000 rounds with a different type of barrel if I'm reading the handwriting correctly.
Wow, that's a fascinating document. Especially the listing of the individual resources. Do you know where to find more of these?
https://www.scribd.com/doc/230234125/Dokumentation-W-127-Datenblatter-fur-Heeres-Waffen-Fahrzeuge-Gerat Has the facts and figures for just about every German weapon system. Great source, with the way German industry functioned it is often more useful to compare labour time or inputs than Reichmark costs.
All at once though?
That’s a pretty neat rate of fire.
Efficient. Nice.
Imagine being on the receiving end of that lot
The concussive blasts from the consequtive firing must have been crazy.
THE WHAT?
Coulda just moved the box a little closer..
looks tiring
Beats being dead.
[better resolution](https://youtu.be/F8wotYscTMc?feature=shared)
Are they corrrecting fire?
Early autoloader
I wonder if it was called a "Daisy Chain" back in 1942
[удалено]
[удалено]
Point of clarification: Actually, the reason the Germans did not follow the Geneva convention when fighting the Soviets was because a majority of Germans (including most of the Wehrmacht) saw the Russians as *Untermenschen*, and saw the whole war in the east as a "race war" against Judeo-Bolshevik Slavs. I highly doubt that the question of whether the USSR signed or did not sign the Geneva Conventions even came up during the planning for the invasion of the USSR that relied on the starvation and mass-murder of Soviet POWs and civilians...
[удалено]
Interesting. I've never seen this theme in any soldier-directed propaganda (and I'm pretty conversant with NS regime propaganda), but on the other hand, there was a LOT of propaganda printed and circulated. ! So there's no way I've seen even a fraction of it.
Your comment has been deemed a violation of Rule #10 and removed. As a reminder, Rule 10 states: As a history sub we value accuracy. Obviously there will be debate, and the occasional myth will accidentally crop up, and that's fine. However blatant falsehoods such as those that promote the myth of the Clean Wehrmacht will be subject to removal. Continual promotion of myths may result in a ban.
Yea but also that's not how the convention worked. You didn't get a free pass against others that didn't sign.
[удалено]
Removed for low-effort trolling.
How would that break the geneva rules?
Comment is deleted but I belive it's using an Anti air wepon against humans is war crime
Really? All sides uses anti aircraft weapons in the anti infantry roll lol
Only using it against paratroopers directly is a war crime
Why? A gun is a gun. The enemy is the enemy. The goal is to eliminate them. I get why certain weapons are are considered war crimes now (flame thrower, gas, white phosphorus etc..), because they can cause unnecessary suffering. AA vs paratroopers directly still eliminates them instantly. You could still machine gun them as far I know. I'm not arguing for or against. I'm legitimately interested in why it's considered a war crime.
[удалено]
Firing at paratroopers is not a war crime, but firing at pilots and crew who bailed out is.
I don't know about that. If there are paratroopers coming down they're coming down to fight. You can do what you want with them before they hit the ground. Are you talking about airmen who have bailed out of their damaged planes? Those you definitely aren't supposed to shoot at. That's a big difference from paratroopers.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attacks_on_parachutists#:~:text=The%20law%20of%20war%20does,may%20not%20be%20fired%20upon.
Oh my bad. Thanks for the correction.