Sir John Valentine Carden Survives. Part 2.

Reader mode

wietze

vizzer said:
However, due to wartime shortages the railway pork pie was found to be an adequate substitute for a cricket ball 😁
Click to expand...
and i assume that any of those pork pies still in existence are still in the same condition as they were produced, and equally edible?
 

sonofpegasus

Regarding getting information on HEAT rounds from the Germans, why? the worlds first operational heat round was the No 68 rifle grenade fielded by the British in 1939/40. The Munro effect was well known in explosive circles well before then
 

MattII

sonofpegasus said:
Regarding getting information on HEAT rounds from the Germans, why? the worlds first operational heat round was the No 68 rifle grenade fielded by the British in 1939/40. The Munro effect was well known in explosive circles well before then
Click to expand...
Because no-one else has built them to be fired out of cannons.
 

duckie

Yes, even the Italians had HEAT rounds,but they where so bad, that they turned into HESH rounds and that got a lot of people take notice.
 

MattII

duckie said:
Yes, even the Italians had HEAT rounds,but they where so bad, that they turned into HESH rounds and that got a lot of people take notice.
Click to expand...
Evidence for this? HESH was developed by Dennistoun Burney in WW2, but I can find no evidence that it was based on faulty Italian HEAT rounds.
 
Last edited:

Ramontxo

Donor
MattII said:
Evidence for this?
Click to expand...
Apparently they had an base fuse and by the point it detonated the thin walled explosive had squeezed itself more or less like a Hesh round

Edited to add an commentary in the ComandoSupremo forum

 
Last edited:

Mark1878

Donor
Ramontxo said:
Apparently they had an base fuse and by the point it detonated the thin walled explosive had squeezed itself more or less like a Hesh round

Edited to add an commentary in the ComandoSupremo forum

Click to expand...
How about making that a link to the page and not to google
 

brazen

sonofpegasus said:
It was actually a APAGW2BCP;- All pork And Gristle With Water Based Crimped Pastry Crust!
Click to expand...

That's a poor substitution for the APDSEHGP round

Armour
Piercing
Discarding
Sabot
Egg
Ham
Gala
Pie

2.7Kg-Pork-Egg-Gala.jpg


The Pastry and the alleged "pork/meat/gristle/testicle" part discards after the pie has left the muzzle leaving the Egg penetrator to carry onto the target, no one knows how the train companies made the egg part harder than Tungsten but they believe it was part of the process to remove all of the flavour that resulted in something that be used to knock out a King tiger*.

* source - British rail catering and it's crimes against Humanity, volume 25 - Authors - C+B Branston + J Colman
 

sonofpegasus

If you want HESH effect nothing beats a British Rail Rock Bun (the older the better) it also had good fragmentation effect.
Source, Catering for War by Gregs and Kippling.
I think that is enough of a derail, yes! Pun intended, I will now shunt myself off.
 

MarcH

MattII said:
Aren't the projectiles like 90% of the functionality of the gun?
Click to expand...
Functionality yes but to use the shell as a guide to how the gun came to be is kind of a stretch, particularly when looking at the 77mm HV. The barrel, Breach and recoil mechanism were all carried over almost entirely unchanged from the 75mm HV.

I will admit it can be a bit murky at times, the QF 75mm being a prime example. Is it as has been often claimed simply a bored out 6 pounder or is it a new build barrel mated to the breach and recoil mechanism of the 6 pounder? How then do you trace the liniage of that gun, is it a modified 6 pounder as often claimed or is it in essence a modified 75mm in British service?
 

MarcH

Bougnas said:
I have talked with some people who confirm the British just wanted the Americans to supply the projectiles directly. The Americans eventually refused to give them that way.

True Anglo power move would have been to put 6pdr HV "Canuck gun" in the M4 and M10 as was considered in the Firefly program when the 17pdr was not ready/deemed able to fit. Pure L63.5 57mm memes with a specialized APCR that didn't have the quirks of 17pdr APDS, plus later on a Canadian-style APDS. (It's worse than 17pdr with the same type of round but way better than everything else, and fairly comfy to fit).

Honestly, Anglo TLs need more of the bespoke guns like 8, 10, 12 pounders and HV 2 and 6 pdr.
Click to expand...
Have you got anywhere you can point to as a source for that or is it just verbal?

Id really like to see something that fills in the last hole in the puzzle for me if you have anything?
 
Julius Vogel

Julius Vogel

brazen said:
That's a poor substitution for the APDSEHGP round

Armour
Piercing
Discarding
Sabot
Egg
Ham
Gala
Pie

2.7Kg-Pork-Egg-Gala.jpg


The Pastry and the alleged "pork/meat/gristle/testicle" part discards after the pie has left the muzzle leaving the Egg penetrator to carry onto the target, no one knows how the train companies made the egg part harder than Tungsten but they believe it was part of the process to remove all of the flavour that resulted in something that be used to knock out a King tiger*.

* source - British rail catering and it's crimes against Humanity, volume 25 - Authors - C+B Branston + J Colman
Click to expand...

This is very educational.

Not quite the punch of the Rocket (Powdered) Gazpacho that the Soviet railway catering service developed but still noteworthy.
 

Mark1878

Donor
MarcH said:
Functionality yes but to use the shell as a guide to how the gun came to be is kind of a stretch, particularly when looking at the 77mm HV. The barrel, Breach and recoil mechanism were all carried over almost entirely unchanged from the 75mm HV.

I will admit it can be a bit murky at times, the QF 75mm being a prime example. Is it as has been often claimed simply a bored out 6 pounder or is it a new build barrel mated to the breach and recoil mechanism of the 6 pounder? How then do you trace the liniage of that gun, is it a modified 6 pounder as often claimed or is it in essence a modified 75mm in British service?
Click to expand...
Add to the fun of 3" guns
I found this in "British Armoured Divisions and their Commanders, 1939-1945" by Richard Doherty - Pen and Sword Military published 2013
(British tank crews also feared the German 76mm PAK36, a weapon captured in some numbers from the Russians and deployed in German service. However, when a captured PAK36 was examined by British artillery officers it was found that it was not Russian in origin, but British, the obsolete British 3-inch anti-aircraft gun, hundreds of which had been given to the Red Army which had adapted it to other uses. In turn the Germans had produced a new carriage for their captured examples which proved second only to the 88 in effectiveness as anti-tank guns. An opportunity to provide the British Army with an excellent anti-tank gun – and tank gun – had been given away when those guns were sent to Russia.)
Click to expand...
I have only ever heard of this in this book, is there any other reference to this

Wikipedia says PAK36 is a 37mm gun but Pak36(r) are modified Russian (F-22) 76.2mm guns but no mention of British derivation
 
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top