That makes sense. In that case, there's always the solution I usually propose for ISOTs/SIs in the pre-WWI era- to simply invent sabots for artillery. Then field gun shells can be fired out of the howitzers, and because they're lighter than howitzer shells their muzzle velocity will be higher to approximate the trajectory of the field gun. The only disadvantage of this is that field howitzers tend to fire slower than field guns (they usually had separate loading charges and shells, and they were bigger and heavier), but for heavier guns/howitzers this shouldn't be the case.thnks for the link.
I was making two points, one on the Gun/Howitzer and there is nothing in the article about that. The basic issue is that for a QF gun you can accept a recoil of around 1m on the barrel before going back into battery. For a howitzer its about half that. A gun firing on a generally flat trajectory has to have higher barrel pressure than a howitzer lobbing stuff. Trying to make a gun howitzer is feasible but its harder than making a gun and a howitzer as separate items especially if one type is intended to be firing DF all the time. The 25lb benefits from WW1 experience and is really a light howitzer that can do gun like things sometimes and it has radios to the FOO.
Either way, most artillery fit into a simple table from about 1900 until today. This example from another of my posts shows the German artillery in 1914:
Gun size | Gun (high velocity, light shell, long range, low elevation) | Howitzer (lower velocity, heavy shell, shorter range, high elevation) |
---|---|---|
Mountain | 7.5 cm Gebirgskanone L/17 M 08 | |
Light field | 7.7 Feldkanone 96 n.A. (445 m/s, 1020 kg) | 10.5 cm FH 98/09 (302 m/s, 1145 kg) |
Heavy field | 10 cm Kanone 04 (551 m/s, 2428 kg) | 15 cm sFH 02 (325 m/s, 2035 kg) |
Heavy/siege | 13.5 cm Kanone 09 (695 m/s, 6730 kg) | 21 cm Mörser 10 (335 m/s, 7029 kg) |
By 1918, Britain's table would look like this:
Gun size | Gun (high velocity, light shell, long range, low elevation) | Howitzer (lower velocity, heavy shell, shorter range, high elevation) |
---|---|---|
Mountain | QF 3.7-inch (297 m/s, 730 kg) | |
Light field | QF 18-pounder (492 m/s, 1281 kg) | QF 4.5-inch (310 m/s, 1370 kg) |
Heavy field | BL 60-pounder (650 m/s, 4471 kg) | BL 6-inch 26 cwt (430 m/s, 3693 kg) |
Heavy/siege | BL 6-inch Mk XIX (720 m/s, 10340 kg) | BL 8-inch Mk VIII (460 m/s, 8740 kg) |
Siege | BL 9.2-inch Mk II (490 m/s, 16460 kg+9-11 tons of earthen bedding) | |
Heavy siege | BL 12-inch | |
Super-heavy siege | BL 15-inch |
But in 1914, the table looked like this:
Gun size | Gun (high velocity, light shell, long range, low elevation) | Howitzer (lower velocity, heavy shell, shorter range, high elevation) |
---|---|---|
Mountain | QF 2.95-inch (393, 586 kg) | |
Light field | QF 18-pounder (492 m/s, 1281 kg)+ QF 13-pounder* (511 m/s, 1014 kg) | QF 4.5-inch (310 m/s, 1370 kg) |
Heavy field | BL 60-pounder (650 m/s, 4471 kg) | BL 6-inch 30 cwt (237 m/s, 3507 kg)- though obsolete |
Heavy/siege | ||
Siege | BL 9.2-inch Mk I (362 m/s, 13577 kg+9-11 tons of earthen bedding) |
So adopting a sabot to fire gun shells out of howitzers would allow Britain to get rid of most of the "Gun" column and just use howitzers, except for light field guns. That would allow them to build a modern 6-inch howitzer instead of the 60-pounder, and possibly get rid of the QF 18-pounder (in favor of the 4.5-inch howitzer) while using just the 13-pounder for any field gun use. The extra resources for that gun could then go into designing a modern 8-inch howitzer which could also do the role of a 6-inch gun with sabots, providing every capability on the table for Britain in 1914.