Sir John Valentine Carden Survives. Part 2.

IOTL. ITTL the Sherman is a cheap mass produced American tank that is a bit meh compared to the Victor. Kind of tank that used as a chassis for other AFV. And Woolwich wants their gun rather than Vickers
 
IOTL. ITTL the Sherman is a cheap mass produced American tank that is a bit meh compared to the Victor. Kind of tank that used as a chassis for other AFV. And Woolwich wants their gun rather than Vickers
Woolich didn't have a finished gun to test with (IIRC), so Vickers came up with their own. I'm sure a 17-pounder mounting can be developed later on, if it proves necessary.
 

Ramp-Rat

Monthly Donor
The deployment of one or more Woolworth carriers on anti submarine duties to Western Approaches, can not in anyway be compared to the extensive fleet of Fleet carriers deployed by the USN, in support of amphibious landings in the Pacific. Note Western Approaches is both a clearly defined geographical area and a major allied command. Western Approaches Command was based in Liverpool, was a joint command combining the RN and RAF, responsible for all shipping movements into and out of Britain. It also had responsibility for the formation of outbound convoys, and to an extent the operation of numerous ports in the UK. Once Operation Neptune started there was a strict line where control of shipping movements changed from Western Approaches control to Channel Control, which was responsible for all movements in the channel to and from the invasion beaches. When one compares the very complex and sophisticated controls established by the Anglo Americans to support and control the D-Day invasion with the back of a fag packet planning behind Seelowe, it is easy to appreciate just how little chance the Germans had of achieving their goal.

RR.
 
One correction (but it's understandable because that fact is very obscure): the TOG 2 actually carried the 3.7" 28 pounder gun, a gun based on the 17pdr, but rebored to use 3.7" ammo. This has been confirmed by measuring the bore diameter of the gun of the surviving prototype found at Bovington.

Sadly, the museum keeps saying it's a 17pdr as it never bothered to measure the diameter itself.
Here is a video of the caliber being measured
 
Here is a video of the caliber being measured
So firstly, how old was that video? Secondly, how far away from the barrel was that person? Because there should be no reason why he couldn’t grab the tape measure from the other side as well to get an accurate measurement (plus the fact he couldn’t get the tape measure into the muzzle brake on the second trial for several attempts). Thirdly, had that person ever heard of a set of callipers (you know, a tool that is designed to accurately measure the width of something)

Fourthly, that was one fouled barrel.
 
I do wonder what Jerry is up to ITL in response. The success of British Armour in North Africa will have certainly not have gone unnoticed. Of course they are still ,as in OTL , learning some hard lessons about Soviet Tanks. How will the British improvements effect German development? A sane response might be prioritising Stug III development / production earlier. Or perhaps knowing that the Med Shipping isn't a priority you see some of that Fritz X technology going into attempts at anti tank missiles. Can't see it working on smaller bombs given the electronics of the day. Or maybe an always exciting Fuherdirective to prioritise the Maus sooner. The comedy value alone would be worth it. Plenty of room in that Turret Ring.

1680032317744.png
 
I do wonder what Jerry is up to ITL in response. The success of British Armour in North Africa will have certainly not have gone unnoticed. Of course they are still ,as in OTL , learning some hard lessons about Soviet Tanks. How will the British improvements effect German development? A sane response might be prioritising Stug III development / production earlier. Or perhaps knowing that the Med Shipping isn't a priority you see some of that Fritz X technology going into attempts at anti tank missiles. Can't see it working on smaller bombs given the electronics of the day. Or maybe an always exciting Fuherdirective to prioritise the Maus sooner. The comedy value alone would be worth it. Plenty of room in that Turret Ring.
I can imagine.
Hitler: "Finally, we will have a tank (the Panther) that can defeat the British."
sees the Victor, which is almost as good as the Panther, and available sooner
Hitler: "Oh FFS."
 
So firstly, how old was that video? Secondly, how far away from the barrel was that person? Because there should be no reason why he couldn’t grab the tape measure from the other side as well to get an accurate measurement (plus the fact he couldn’t get the tape measure into the muzzle brake on the second trial for several attempts). Thirdly, had that person ever heard of a set of callipers (you know, a tool that is designed to accurately measure the width of something)

Fourthly, that was one fouled barrel.
That was the only video I could find of the actual measuring. And yes it is quite bad. I think the quality is so bad you cant tell much about the dark interior of the barrel. But the actuallly important thing is the bore diameter, which is 94 mm. It is quite odd why The Tank Museum still says it is a 17 pdr gun.

Here is a video about the 230 mm spigot mortar, which is commonly known as the 290 mm spigot mortar
 
The design and production teams had been looking at the problem they’d been given to solve. The new 17-pdr gun being developed was a large beast, but the War Office wanted it mounted in a tank turret. Because Vickers was developing their own High Velocity gun, the turret was to be developed for the next Nuffield designed cruiser tank.
How did the 75mm HV actually compare in performance and technical characteristics to the 17-pdr? There seems to be a dearth of actual hard data at least online about it. Yes the 77mm in the Comet was based on it but was a different beast.
 
How did the 75mm HV actually compare in performance and technical characteristics to the 17-pdr? There seems to be a dearth of actual hard data at least online about it. Yes the 77mm in the Comet was based on it but was a different beast.
The 75mm was a bit less powerful than than the 77mm HV. So it is a step down but is notably more powerful still than the US 75mm/ OQF 75mm.

As far as WW2 tank guns go the 75mm HV / 77mm HV are about all you need. With the improved ammo types developed later on in the war like HVAP and Sabot those guns can take on pretty much anything on the battlefield. Some things have to be fairly close admittedly from some angles but those scenarios should be fairly rare apart from much later on in the war for the WAllies.
 
How did the 75mm HV actually compare in performance and technical characteristics to the 17-pdr? There seems to be a dearth of actual hard data at least online about it. Yes the 77mm in the Comet was based on it but was a different beast.
I think you can get some idea from looking at the Finnish AA gun based on the same weapon which also had an AP round. My recollection from the first thread was 17 pdr is better but you won't absolutely need it unless you are facing Tigers
 
How did the 75mm HV actually compare in performance and technical characteristics to the 17-pdr? There seems to be a dearth of actual hard data at least online about it. Yes the 77mm in the Comet was based on it but was a different beast.
I'd assume it was similar to the Vickers Model 1931.

As for AP, HEAT and HESH will likely be available fairly quickly, along with Sabot, and maybe HVAP.
 
Last edited:
We'll have to see. On other notes, if the British can fit that gun into a turret with a 66" ring, would it help the Americans figure out getting their 76mm into a turret with a 69" ring do you think?
 

marathag

Banned
would it help the Americans figure out getting their 76mm into a turret with a 69" ring do you think?
The Israelis fitted the larger/more powerful CN75mm into the small original M4 Turret by making a box to move the trunnions and the rest of the mount and mantlet forward, something US Tank designers were loathe to do, wanting to keep the trunnions well aft for balance reasons

But it was 'OK' in the TD Branch.
The larger in volume T23/T25/T26 turret, no problem at all
 
The Israelis fitted the larger/more powerful CN75mm into the small original M4 Turret by making a box to move the trunnions and the rest of the mount and mantlet forward, something US Tank designers were loathe to do, wanting to keep the trunnions well aft for balance reasons

But it was 'OK' in the TD Branch.
The larger in volume T23/T25/T26 turret, no problem at all
Counterwise, the British managed to squeeze a 17-pounder in, though the Americans rejected it as unfightable.
 
4 February 1942. Bataan, Philippines.
4 February 1942. Bataan, Philippines.

In order to outflank the American/Philippine defensive line, the Japanese attempted to land behind the line. This had been planned for, and the initial attempts meant that there were pockets of Japanese troops at various places including Lapay-Longoskawayan Quinauan-Aglaloma, Sililam-Anyasan. Although the Japanese had been stopped, 45th Infantry Philippine Scouts had been tasked with clearing these pockets, but it was recognised that the infantry would need tank support.

A platoon of C Company tanks from 192nd Tank Battalion then arrived at Quinauan Point in the early evening of 2 February. The platoon’s commanding officer did a quick reconnaissance of the area, and met with the Philippine Scouts commanding officer. The decision was made to bring the tanks up to the front line and support the infantry with the many machine guns on the tanks. This led to some progress, but the sighting of an enemy anti-tank gun led to a premature withdrawal by the American tanks, leaving the Scouts to dig in for the night.

On the morning of 3 February, after another reconnaissance, during which it was noted that the anti-tank gun had been disabled, the tanks once again re-joined the Scouts and using the cover of the tanks, the infantry followed closely. Progress was steady all day, but there were a couple of problems. Although the M3 Light tanks were fairly manoeuvrable, there was a constant danger from tree trunks, which if the tank went over it could mean it would be stuck. The other problem was coordination with the infantry, as the tanks were fighting battened down, making it dangerous for the Scouts to try to ask the tanks for specific things to be targeted. Once more the decision was to halt for the night, and while the infantry dug in, the tanks withdrew to be refuelled and rearmed.

The morning of 4 February, at 08:45hrs, another five tanks arrived, along with a radio car. Each tank received a walkie-talkie on the same frequency as the infantry and the radio care. For simplicity’s sake the tanks were numbered 1 to 5 so that the tanks would know which one was being called upon by the infantry to go where they were most needed. This made the day’s attack much more successful, with the Japanese being forced back almost to the cliffs. As the day ended, it was clear that the next morning would break the Japanese completely.

The rest of the surviving tanks of 192nd and 194th Tank Battalion were being used in similar ways, at the Big Pocket in I Corps area, as well as the other points where the Japanese had landed. As well as this, the tanks were used to guard airfields from possible parachute landings, guard beaches in case of other amphibious assaults, and as a mobile reserve. The Battalion’s half-tracks were being used to patrol roads in case of enemy infiltration. There was still a belief that help would come in time, though food rationing was becoming a greater problem, meaning that men were often adding anything edible they could catch or kill. The 26th US Cavalry also became as source for horsemeat to supplement the diet.

(This
website was the basis for this update.)
 
Top