Fahrschulwanne Pz I mit Zwillings-MG 42

[WayOfTheWolk 1,573]

Fahrschulwanne Pz I mit Zwillings-MG 42

Introduction: 

Spoiler

At the beginning of World War 2 the German Army requested specific vehicles needed to train future tank drivers however there was a massive petrol shortage. In response German engineers came up with two solutions, one that burnt wood and produced combustible gas for propulsion and another that had compressed gas bottles using natural gas to drive a motor. The vehicles themselves were called "Fahrschulwanne" by their operators which loosely translates to "driving bathtubs" in English. This name was given due to the apparent hollow construction of the vehicles which was done for training purposes. The first of these were converted from Panzer I Ausf. A hulls which still used their original petrol engines in the early years of the war. As the conflict went on and petrol became scarce the engines were swapped out for the Holzgas wood burners or Stadtgas high-pressure bottle motors. By the end of the war the allied air threat was also becoming very apparent and the Luftwaffe required increased AA defenses at their airfields. At some point it appears a unit of German soldiers took it upon themselves to install Zwillingssockel 36 mounted MG 42s atop on a Fahrschulwanne Panzer I. Not much else is known about their whereabouts. In War Thunder I believe this vehicle would make a great new reserve SPAA for Germany. It would be very similar to the GAZ-AAA (4M) in the Soviet tech tree with slightly enhanced firepower. 

Technical Data: 

Spoiler

Specifications (Fahrschulwanne Pz I):

Dimensions: ( 4.02 m x 2.6 m x 1.0 m)

Weight: at least 3 tonnes 

Transmission: 5 spd manual

Propulsion: Krupp M 305 4-cyl engine, 59 hp 

Speed: 37.5 km/h on road

Crew: 2 men (Driver, Gunner)

Armament ( 2 x MG 42 machine guns):

Traverse: 360° 

Elevation: -15°, +90°

Max range : 3500m

RoF : 1200-1500 rpm

Ammo count: unknown

Sources:

Spoiler

• https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/germany/panzer_i.php
• https://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=47&t=251970&start=30
• https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/nazi_germany/gas-powered-fahrschulwanne-tanks.php
• https://ww2.ru/shop/germaniya/militariya-germanii/optika-pribory-chasy/30814-ustanovka-dlya-odnovremennoy-strelby-iz-dvukh-pulemetov-mg-34-zwillingssockel-36-germaniya.html

 

[leroyonly 4,310]

Open for discussion. 

[Cpt_Jack_Irons 464]

-1 The Flakpanzer I already has the role as a Rank 1 SPAA this thing would be pointless

[ponnes 473]

100% useless tank that nobody would play anyway.

[eleks12 1,079]

+1 

 

I think this vehicle will be the perfect 1.0 SPAA. If not a good SPAA for a potential WW1/Early Interwar line.

[Ghostmaxi 872]

-1

No armor, slow, only 2 7.92mm mgs and there allready is the Flakpanzer I

Pretty useless and as the name sayes a training vehicle, not intended for the front

[TheNexonRegime 429]

+1 This is a very unique vehicle and should be represented, the MG42s are decent and it appears to be quick.

Edited February 2, 2021 by TheNexonRegime
grammer

[Milocat 4,848]

+1 from me, yes it would be useless against tanks but we have the GAZ potato truck and the Vickers AA tank and I love those vehicles.  This one would fit right in a similar niche.  Plus, it'd be another Panzer I chassis in the game and who doesn't want that?

[PrussianOwl 438]

I think it goes without saying I'd support this, +1. Might be better as a high Rank 0 but I support it regardless

[Chomusuke1 1,217]

-1000. Should have no place in this game. How about this instead?:

 

[Ghostmaxi 872]

5 hours ago, Chomusuke1 said:

-1000. Should have no place in this game. How about this instead?:

 

isnt that an MG FF?

[Solarmod 1,203]

+1 personally, I think the Flakpanzer I is honestly a bit op at 1.7 (As an arcade player, 20mm cannons are the bane of my existence when playing low tier) and I think it could do with a bump to 2.0, and this could make a decent 1.3 replacement, but it's not exactly NEEDED, but it would be nice to have something to replace it, when/if the Flakpanzer 1 gets bumped.

[PrussianOwl 438]

22 hours ago, Chomusuke1 said:

-1000. Should have no place in this game. How about this instead?:

 

Well why not both?

[Chomusuke1 1,217]

20 hours ago, Ghostmaxi said:

isnt that an MG FF?

Yes

[stuka2689 314]

Panzer 1 with faster firerate and more elevation but no armor...Hmm...

[Xenecrite 899]

I say yes +1

because already this machine gun is a monster nicknamed by the allies "Hitler's buzzsaw" especially the speed of the bursts fired by this weapon

 

[Wolf_89 2,524]

A single MG 42?

No thanks. Had it been 3 or 4 of them.

At least then it would be useful. But with only 1?

It will be useless.

[eleks12 1,079]

1 hour ago, Wolf_89 said:

A single MG 42?

No thanks. Had it been 3 or 4 of them.

At least then it would be useful. But with only 1?

It will be useless.

 

It uses 2x MG-42 and i personally think it would be as effective as GAZ-AAA (4M) or the Light AA Mk 1. But both vehicles ingame is imo at best reserve tier.

So for me it's still a +1

[WayOfTheWolk 1,573]

1 hour ago, Wolf_89 said:

A single MG 42?

No thanks. Had it been 3 or 4 of them.

At least then it would be useful. But with only 1?

It will be useless.

If you look closely you can see a second barrel on the right hand side. You clearly did not read the full suggestion Wolf.

[Cpt_Jack_Irons 464]

11 minutes ago, WayOfTheWolk said:

If you look closely you can see a second barrel on the right hand side. You clearly did not read the full suggestion Wolf.

True but the point still stands we have the Flakpanzer I already and that's a Strong AA at Rank 1 so this thing would still be useless and besides Germany does not need 3 Rank 1 SPAA's
 

30 minutes ago, eleks12 said:

i personally think it would be as effective as GAZ-AAA (4M) or the Light AA Mk 1. But both vehicles ingame is imo at best reserve tier.

USSR has the GAZ-AAA (4M) and (DShK) because their next SPAA sits at BR 2.3 so there is two of them to compensate
Britain got the Light AA Mk.I because the T17E1 has been sitting at BR 1.7 all this time so Gaijin decided to add a Low BR SPAA for Britain 

[eleks12 1,079]

46 minutes ago, Cpt_Jack_Irons said:

USSR has the GAZ-AAA (4M) and (DShK) because their next SPAA sits at BR 2.3 so there is two of them to compensate
Britain got the Light AA Mk.I because the T17E1 has been sitting at BR 1.7 all this time so Gaijin decided to add a Low BR SPAA for Britain 

 

True. But then i can't really understand why Gaijoobles haven't added the GAZ AAA with the 3x DShk. Since i think that would be perfect around 1.7/2.0

Also If armor was a concern there is the T-60 SZU and many more that are identical to it.

T-60 SZU, Armored russian low rank SPAA - USSR - War Thunder - Official Forum

 

And im sure if abselutly needed. Britain can get Copy Pasta M16 AA if there is a great need for a reserve 12.7mm Spaa

M16 Multiple Gun Motor Carriage - Wikipedia

 

[Billygoatunicorn 178]

Everyone answering -1 to this. Why do you care about how "useful" or "effective" or "needed" this vehicle is? Why must everything focus around the meta, and not the actual fun of the game with a cool new funky vehicle? Why must everything you want added to the game be practical? It'd be a nice, fun, moderate vehicle that doesn't need to change the entire meta to be seen as a valued addition?

+1 from me. It'd be neat and not a negitive addition

[Ghostmaxi 872]

3 hours ago, Billygoatunicorn said:

Everyone answering -1 to this. Why do you care about how "useful" or "effective" or "needed" this vehicle is? Why must everything focus around the meta, and not the actual fun of the game with a cool new funky vehicle? Why must everything you want added to the game be practical? It'd be a nice, fun, moderate vehicle that doesn't need to change the entire meta to be seen as a valued addition?

+1 from me. It'd be neat and not a negitive addition

Because its a Pz I Ausf. A (not even B) with no superstructure and only 2 Mg 42 so its even worse than the Italian Rank I Car AA.

Its slow, no armor, no firepower (only against planes).

[WayOfTheWolk 1,573]

1 hour ago, Ghostmaxi said:

Because its a Pz I Ausf. A (not even B) with no superstructure and only 2 Mg 42 so its even worse than the Italian Rank I Car AA.

Its slow, no armor, no firepower (only against planes).

So you're mad because I suggested an SPAA that isn't actually meant to engage armored targets? I consider 2 MG-42s to be superior to 4 Maxims and the fahrschulwanne has decent mobility for a tracked vehicle. 

[Ghostmaxi 872]

6 minutes ago, WayOfTheWolk said:

So you're mad because I suggested an SPAA that isn't actually meant to engage armored targets? I consider 2 MG-42s to be superior to 4 Maxims and the fahrschulwanne has decent mobility for a tracked vehicle. 

no, my post was just for the post of Billygoatunicorn