Wild_Bill_Kelso
Senior Master Sergeant
- 3,231
- Mar 18, 2022
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
A gun overheating too much from continuous fire is the obvious outcome. That is why we didn't. It was fired in bursts as it
should be. It didn't jam because it was kept in good condition.
I never said they couldn't. 2 pounder was a good AT gun. 6 pounder was even better. It's just damn near suicidal to use a tank against Japanese troops without HE. They got away with it a few times with enough infantry protection around them, but it's not that simple. Infantry can be cleared away with a little light mortar fire. Or a few machine gun bursts. Then the tank is on it's own. Anyway, it's just one of those myths that a ton of British guys believe, just like a lot of American guys think we would have won Vietnam if not for x.y.z...
I do know and I was there.
Some of this thread has devolved to the position that that Japanese were equal or superior to the British in technical matters in the late 30s and early 40s and we have veered off into tank land to try to prove it. In the area of anti-tank guns the Japanese were introducing the 47mm in the Spring of 1942. They had captured a few Russian 45mm AT guns in the late 30s (1939?) and had basically copied them with the change from 45mm to 47mm because the Japanese already had 47mm barrel making and shell/projectile making machinery from old navy guns.
In April of 1942 the British were making 1500 6pdrs a month and increasing production.
In fact the first production 17pdrs were built in April of 1942. but production of carriages was slow.
The 6pdr had been designed in 1938-39 but had to wait for financing and factory space.
I can't seem to find the Japanese superiority.
I don't care.
That never occurred to me.Japanese have seaplane fighters (A6M2-N) which are also (probably) superior to British carrier fighters
We seem to be a little sloppy with both the time line and the actual conditions.But lets take this moment to back up a little and review.
And we need to look at circumstances don't we? How well were the troops in Burma trained and how well were they equipped/supplied, on average. Not to mentioned the appalling lack of air cover in Burma.The Japanese seem to have been well ahead of the British in tank warfare in Malaya, beat the American tanks in the Philippines, and their land army in general owned the British in Burma as well.
By the time and Musashi shows up the Anson and Howe are already in service.Small niggle: if the Japanese have the Yamatos, the Brits would have Howe and PoW as well.
I was trying to remember the names of the other KGVs, besides PoW. All I could remember was Anson and Amnesia.
KGV & PoWI was trying to remember the names of the other KGVs, besides PoW. All I could remember was Anson and Amnesia.
All of the ships took several months to go on first war cruise.KGV & PoW
Duke of York accepted for service 1 Nov 1941
Anson completed June 1942
Howe completed August 1942
Yamato completed Dec 1941
Musashi completed Aug 1942
By the time and Musashi shows up the Anson and Howe are already in service.
In fact with an altered time line and a different construction schedule (less repair/construction of merchant ships and escorts) at least a few months could have been shaved off.
KGV & PoW
Duke of York accepted for service 1 Nov 1941
Anson completed June 1942
Howe completed August 1942
Yamato completed Dec 1941
Musashi completed Aug 1942
After commissioning at the builders yards these ships spent time at Rosyth completing their radar outfits. Note Wiki gives the commissioning dates not completion dates.All of the ships took several months to go on first war cruise.
Other wise all 5 would be repeating the PoW first war cruise (against the Bismarck and we know how that went)