Why didn't the allies reverse-engineer the German 88 mm gun?

Question

If the allies feared the 88, wouldn't it make sense to copy a captured example and then deploy it against the Germans?

Answer 1

The German 88mm proved so devastating to Allied tanks that there was indeed debate at the time about reverse-engineering it. The reasons why that never happened seem to boil down to: -

[a] The 88mm (at least in its early versions) wasn't actually as good an AA gun than the British 3.7inch AA, nor than the American 90mm. Moreover, on the few occasions when they were employed in a ground-to-ground role, including AT fire against Panzers, those guns proved very effective indeed.

[b] So, from an artillery engineering perspective, the German 88mm really wasn't enything special, and certainly did not warrant the disruption to Allied manufacturing production lines that would have been involved in producing copies of it.

In reality, the 88mm got its well-deserved reputation as an AT super-gun ... not because it was so very much better than anything that the Allies had ... but because the Wehrmacht USED it so much more intelligently.

As early as 1941, in the Western Desert, British tank men began crying out for the deployment of heavy AT guns in the same way as the Afrika Korps was using the 88mm. They even got the ear of Winston Churchill himself. In October 1941, Churchill stated that Auchinleck's 8th Army hoped "'to deploy .. over 100 heavy mobile anti - aircraft guns, exclusive of those in Tobruk"; and he wrote a memo to his generals saying "every .. mobile AA gun should carry a plentiful supply of solid armour - piercing tracer shot" suggesting that they use the 3.7" in the same way that the Germans used the 88mm.

All to no avail. The horrible truth is that the German army was much more adept at tactical combined arms integration than the Allies. Rommel (and others) understood very well how to coordinate mobile Panzers with much-less-mobile AT guns. Allied generals (OK, just possibly excepting Patton) did not manage to do that effectively. Even if the Allies had exact copies of the 88mm, they would probably have failed to use it effectively.

For more on this topic, I commend the following websites and forums.

Answer 2

Good question. I guess I can't answer that since I've never heard one way or the other. The Allies certainly could have reverse, or re-engineered the 88 because our first ones to be captured were in 1942 in north Africa. Obviously, no one felt there was a need, and our 75s, 105s, and 150s were adequate, although they couldn't replicate firing like a rifle as with the 88. After all that, I have to say, I don't know.

Answer 3

German 88

Answer 4

My Gun is Bigger than Your Gun!! Once the allies were aware there were many reasons to admire the 88mm Gun they began to devise an even better bigger gun, specifically the 105 MM L7 cannon.... No it never makes sense to copy an enemies gun it makes sense to improve upon it.
Size isn't everything - - - performance and efficiency are the true potenency of a gun - - - what impressed the Brits was how well the 88 worked and its versatility, its agility.

Oddly enough many technologies do 'work' when reengineered by experts. The German Stuka led to the American Corsair. American made Ford and Dodge trucks were favored by the Germans and copied. The Germans benefitted by absorbing the amrs industry of the Czeck Republic and the Dutch Fokker works.

Peace--------------

ck this out
http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-weapons/303.htm

http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-weapons/allied_ww2-d.htm
(great picture )

Answer 5

What is there to reverse engineer?

It was a gun, shot a projectile that was 88mm in diameter.

The velocities and pressure would be pretty much calculable by any ballistics expert.

What's new?

We didn't "have" any was the problem. Our munitions industry had standardized on a different caliber. It was too late to simply ask Washington to send a different gun for the tank.

We learned from it.





g-day!

Answer 6

there is no doubt that the Germans had superior, if somewhat complicated technology. but their forces relied more on quality rather than quantity.
the Panthers, Tigers, and even the first assault rifles were amazing and deadly achievements, but there was not enough of them; and the two panzer's were loved, but were notorious for breaking down
but to answer your question;
it comes down to two things: politics and money
it was cheaper to make a lot of simple and effective equipment that could be easily replaced, while at the same time making our home grown companies richer and better so that they can provide jobs. and...
happy rich companies = funding for politics

Answer 7

They didn't need to. There was a nice 90mm gun that worked quite well, but doctrinal differences limited its use.

Answer 8

For the best answers, search on this site https://shorturl.im/7rpsb

No, by trying to murder him, he was justified in killing them. War is something that the normal rules do not apply. You should be proud of your Dad.