schwarzpanzer
Senior Airman
- 662
- Aug 8, 2005
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
JeffK said:However the USA fought an offensive war and needed a weapon to fit its Tanks and Tank Destroyers and Infantry weapons were given a low priority.
PS, A 17pdr weighed 2.5 tons, a bit hard to carry over your shoulder.
It seems the 17 pounder was not just an infantry anti tank gun, but also a tank gun and I think thats what schwarzpanzer meant - the 17 pounder seemed suitable to become the standard allied tank gun
The US had its 76mm (3") AT gun which it thought sufficient. Problems with the ammo fuzes saw it lumped with a bad reputation which wasnt dispelled when the ammo improved. There was also T8-90mm in the sidelines, same as in the M36 M26. I am sure if the USA fought a defensive war it would have made this (and I think a 105mm) available.
there were enough 75mm Shermans to take out any Infantry. It was also used in a "lightened" form as the 77mm in the Comet.
By the time the bigger tanks (Centurion) was available, the 20pdr (84mm) Gun was available.
it wasn't ideal against infantry because the MGs had to be deleted to make room.
it was really only any good in small numbers with the other tanks. Which is exactly what the British did, a single Sherman Firefly would be present in every troop.
you need the 75mm and 76mm armed Shermans to deal with the infantry.
I think you will find that the 17pd was issued in limited numbers simply because it was initially available in limited numbers. As supplies improved the ratio of 17pd to 75mm improved and towards the end of the was it was often closer to 50/50.
The 17pd did fire HE but it was recognised as not being as good a shell as the 75mm.
Small but interesting point, some units preferred to keep their 17pd Firefly together in one platoon to act as an organised unit to tackle the Panthers ect. These were in a minority but it did happen on occasion
PlanD said:It's a waste of a good anti-armour tank to send them in a situation against a heavily infantry bias opponent.
As a matter of interest, the 57mm/6 pdr could penetrate around 85 mm, which explains why it was retained by the British as a tank gun alongside the 75mm. With APDS, penetration of the British guns was considerably increased.
Defective fuzes can certainly hurt the penetration of APHE ammo, if they detonate on impact, before the shell penetrates.
Performance of the 76mm was disappointing, it should have been as least as good as the 77mm but the AP shell was not as good.
The initial problem with the 17 pdr's HE shell was that the chamber pressures for the high-velocity gun were much higher than for the 75mm, so the shell needed thicker walls and could hold less HE. Later, the HE shell was loaded to a much lower velocity than the AP, which enabled a better shell to be used.schwarzpanzer said:That is weird, I didn't know that. Thanks Glider. I'm sure with some work it could have been as good though?
Yes.It suffered from shatter-gap though, but SVDS would probably offset this? BTW The shell 3rd from the left on that pic, is that 6pdr SVDS?
No - as you can see, the cartridge case was shorter and narrower, and held a lot less propellant. It was actually the same cartridge case as was used by the 3" 20cwt AA gun, which was in service from WW1 until after WW2. The 77mm was loaded to a higher pressure though.I know the 77mm shell was less powerful and shorter than the 17pdr's - so it was easier to handle in a turret - but IIRC it was wider?
The shell. Ballistics of the gun were similar to the 77mm.Was it the shell or the gun?