Name This AE...359

[Brady]

???

[thegreatwent]

You got me. It could be a targeting searchlight that is gas powered but that is just a WAG.

[Footslogger]

Looks like 21 japs playing tug of war [:D]

[Iridium]

Clearly a Japanese Potato Mortar...or Daikon Radish if need be.

[JeffroK]

A big (6"?) gun being pulled into position by 357th japanese motorised transport company.

The barrel goes into slot B

[JWE]

Gun mount. Don't know the mark. Looking at the mount base and equilibrator cylinders, maybe for a Type-4 AA?

[Toddr22_slith]

An iron lung for Dolly Parton. [:D]

[Mynok]

Mount for an 8" CD gun? Tarawa maybe?

[Shark7]

Looks like the mounting for a 12.7cm/40 Type 89 Naval/Dual Purpose gun.

Edit: Also could be a Type 88, which was identical except for the fact that it was only ever used in single mounts. Virtually these were the same guns sans mounting numbers.

[LST Express]

Guessing some kind of gun mount on Saipan, Guam or Tinian. I could make other guesses, but they would probably be just as wrong as those.[:D]

[Local Yokel]

ORIGINAL: Shark7

Looks like the mounting for a 12.7cm/40 Type 89 Naval/Dual Purpose gun.

You could well be right, but this looks to me more like the mount for a 120mm Naval DP Gun Type 10.

[Shark7]

ORIGINAL: Local Yokel

ORIGINAL: Shark7

Looks like the mounting for a 12.7cm/40 Type 89 Naval/Dual Purpose gun.

You could well be right, but this looks to me more like the mount for a 120mm Naval DP Gun Type 10.

You'll also notice I added an edit to my original post, as it is very probably that it is the single mount Type 88 12.7cm/40. The difference between the two being basically how they were mounted.

[Local Yokel]

ORIGINAL: Shark7

ORIGINAL: Local Yokel

ORIGINAL: Shark7

Looks like the mounting for a 12.7cm/40 Type 89 Naval/Dual Purpose gun.

You could well be right, but this looks to me more like the mount for a 120mm Naval DP Gun Type 10.

You'll also notice I added an edit to my original post, as it is very probably that it is the single mount Type 88 12.7cm/40. The difference between the two being basically how they were mounted.

Sorry, hadn't seen your edit by the time I posted.

Haven't been able to lay hands on any illustration of a Type 88 12.7cm piece, but if the main difference between them is Type 88 = single mount, Type 89 = dual, then I still think this may be a 12cm Type 10. I'm going by the equilibrators: on all shots I've seen of the Type 89 the equilibrators have a collar at the front end, whereas the Type 10's simply have domed ends, as on Brady's pic.

[RevRick]

ORIGINAL: Toddr22

An iron lung for Dolly Parton. [:D]

I just baptized my keyboard with coffee, nasally... I'll send you the bill for the cleanup!!!!!!

[Brady]

It has been sugested that this is:

Type 96 24 cm howitzer.

Following Taki two of them were used on Bataan and against Corregidor with the 2nd Independent Heavy Artillery Company.

Something to consider is that these men apear to be IJA troops.

[JWE]

Don't think I agree with that Brady. I may be a very old redleg, but dammit, I know guns. This is Taki's pic of a 24cm, and there ain't no way the breech liner can fit into your pic. The cylinders in your pic are way too small and thin, and there's no recuperator or space for one. No .. I'm probably out to lunch with my Type-4 crap, and so think LocalYokel gets the ring, but that photo is definitely not the shell for a 24 cm howitzer.

[DuckofTindalos]

Gotta go with John on this one. The thing in Brady's pic is far too small to be a 24cm weapon.

[Mynok]

The tubes seem short in the picture for the Type 88 12.7cm/40, but maybe it is just the perspective of the shot.

[Brady]

ORIGINAL: JWE

Don't think I agree with that Brady. I may be a very old redleg, but dammit, I know guns. This is Taki's pic of a 24cm, and there ain't no way the breech liner can fit into your pic. The cylinders in your pic are way too small and thin, and there's no recuperator or space for one. No .. I'm probably out to lunch with my Type-4 crap, and so think LocalYokel gets the ring, but that photo is definitely not the shell for a 24 cm howitzer.

I did not mean to sugest that I argread with it either, which is why I stated it the way I did.

To be honest I am not shure what it is, Image souce states that this is the Philipines in 42, and these are Army troops, so this is likely not a Naval gun.

After going over the likely candates from Takis sight I was left totaly uncertain, my refernace books also left me clueless.

I never run a pic unless I know what it is, but in this case I thought I did, and clearly I am now uncertain.

[Shark7]

ORIGINAL: Brady

ORIGINAL: JWE

Don't think I agree with that Brady. I may be a very old redleg, but dammit, I know guns. This is Taki's pic of a 24cm, and there ain't no way the breech liner can fit into your pic. The cylinders in your pic are way too small and thin, and there's no recuperator or space for one. No .. I'm probably out to lunch with my Type-4 crap, and so think LocalYokel gets the ring, but that photo is definitely not the shell for a 24 cm howitzer.

I did not mean to sugest that I argread with it either, which is why I stated it the way I did.

To be honest I am not shure what it is, Image souce states that this is the Philipines in 42, and these are Army troops, so this is likely not a Naval gun.

After going over the likely candates from Takis sight I was left totaly uncertain, my refernace books also left me clueless.

I never run a pic unless I know what it is, but in this case I thought I did, and clearly I am now uncertain.

The only thing I can really suggest to you to compare it to is this:

Source: NavWeaps http://www.navweaps.com



This is the 12.7cm/40 Type 88/89 mount, which is almost identical to the mount in your picture.