Request regarding the pak 36

[Akira Takiguchi]

Dear David, thank you for the great scan (you have to become an association member to be able to post scans by the way).

Now the question is: why it had to be written as <b>Pak 36/37</b>. I had thought that there were two models (or three, 35,36,37), and a slash was used to mean interchangability. But looking at the entry in that Wehrpass, I tend to dream that the official designation was <b>Pak 36</b> and 37 was added to mean 3,7 cm (NO <i>3,7cm Pak 36/37</i> but just <i>Pak 36/37</i> in the book). Of course this does not explain 35/36, I know. What are your other findings Simon?

[Frosch]

Membership postponed?

Hello Akira,

Many thanks for the kind comment. I have paid the $20 for my association membership. How long will it take for this to accepted by the system?

Regards,

David

[Simon O.]

Well Akira i was contacted by someone who has some documents dated to March 1945 listing defensive works and an inventory of heavy weapons around Denmark. He sent me scans of 2 examples of the weapon being called the 3.7cm Pak 36.





Simon

[Akira Takiguchi]

OK, <b>not</b> 3,7cm Pak 36/37. I'll look into this into the future, thank you for giving us this interesting question