Flak 88 Gun Manual (Haynes Manuals): 8.8cm Flugzeugabwehrkanone (Models 18/36/37/41) Hardcover – 22 Feb. 2018

Interesting reading about a weapon that was a legend in its time.

Very good quality close up photos, lots of Good infoVery nice Book

My partner loves this book

A fairly unusual book in this series; you don’t often get monographs on guns apart from in the really specialist press, so this is nice to see.With lots of excellent photographs, including the example at the excellent Muckleburgh museum, this gives nice coverage of the subject in build and in use.In terms of detail for real gun freaks it’s not too bad, but some proper ballistics and pressure information would be really welcome.The only other beef is that it jars all the way through studying the book once the author states quite wrongly that propellant detonates in the breech, an all too common mistake.Still, it’s a good book, well worth its place among forty or so of these manuals on my shelf.

an overview, but by someone with no special 88 skill.I'm an amateur, but in a quick flick thru, I could immediately spot errors. Heres a selection: hes never heard of the SP Vomag 88 gun truck series (p. 25), instead calling it a 1-off improvisation (p.16); claims the VFW 88 flak was a halftrack (p.25 it was a tank); claims a Jagdpanther had an improved HL230 engine compared to the Panther (p. 26, it was the same); claims Jagdpanther had gun traverse of 3° and elevation of 85° (way wrong); claims some Sd.kfz.186 Jagdtiger were built with 88mm guns (there's no evidence any left the factory with 88s); doesnt know the 88 bunkerflak with its different mount when he sees it (p.74); cant tell the difference between an 88 Pak 43 and a Pak 43/41 (p.141); thinks a Flak41 towed by an Sd.kfz.8 is a flak 37 towed by an Sd.kfz,7 (p.130, those guns are very different); and doesn't recognise a rebored Russian 76mm flak (p.162) nor says anything about these 100s of rebored, re purposed, beute 88mm guns.Now to a layman this may all seem petty on my part, but the problem with those silly basic errors (and they are VERY basic) that even I can humbly spot, is that it leads me to think theres no deep research gone into this, just a quick wiki skim, and there are probably many more errors I'm unaware of. How can I trust anything else he states?Why they chose an author who comes from a special forces background, instead of a genuine Artillery historian like Ian Hogg, is strange/wrong, unless it was just to get the McNab brand involved..we do get some ok close ups from preserved guns.Dont buy if u already have a good 88 library, this ain't a bible, sadly.