Still baffled that they never introduced one for 75mm and only for 6 and 17-pound projectiles.
Sir John Valentine Carden Survives. Part 2.
- Thread starter allanpcameron
- Start date
marathag
Banned
There was HVAP T45 for the M3 75mm, but never Standardized for mass production. The French had a Sabot for their Canon de 75mm TAZ mle 1939, so not like a better projectile couldn't had been done, but wasn't
Yes, HVAP/APCR 75mm would have been a nice early-ish fix for tank busting, keeping a decent HE shell for infantry support. Something like the Panzergranate 40. (Was it these shells that were used in M3 guns in North Africa, mated to French(?) cases?)
marathag
Banned
Those were the earlier Panzergranate 39 APCBC from the Kwk.37 L/24.
The early US monoblock AP M79 rounds were trash. Heat treatment issues, and a number of other things.
I have to point out here that at this point in the timeline (Aug 1941), the British in North Africa have run into exactly no German or Italian tank designs that have given them significant problems, even though the much-despised 2pdr is still the only tank/anti-tank gun available. Any sort of 75mm AP round would be more than enough for anything they expect to face except maybe Vichy French Char-B1s (if Vichy still have any). HVAP/APCR/APDS/APBC/whatever would be overkill, unless the panzers are lining up single file. The designers in Chertsey cannot see the future, and no-one has mailed them an advance blueprint for the Tiger. It's much more reasonable for them to be thinking in terms of improved HE capability than a bigger AP upgrade than the 6pdr is already giving them.
Bluntly, until the US is in the war and ramped up, the British Army's ability to do much on continental Europe will be very limited. Which, paradoxically, pushes the British towards the bomber offensive (that most wasteful of campaigns) as the only way to actually strike back at Germany.
The attached graphic contains a typo - the USA built only 1,052 LSTs, not 10,520. Even so it's a measure of the US's industrial muscle - they built over a thousand destroyer-size ships, in three years, just for amphibious landing. Meanwhile, by 1941 the British industrial base is already sufficiently stretched that any diversion of resources to landing ships means cutting back on something else, like tanks or ASW escorts. There isn't going to be a big amphibious force any time soon, which suggests that after North Africa wraps, any further operations in 1942 are likely to be minor, simply for lack of any way to get a substantial force to a suitable objective. Nibbling around at places like Rhodes will be as much as they can do.A few RoRo tank landing ships/craft might be in order. A 5,000t ship is about LST size.
Bluntly, until the US is in the war and ramped up, the British Army's ability to do much on continental Europe will be very limited. Which, paradoxically, pushes the British towards the bomber offensive (that most wasteful of campaigns) as the only way to actually strike back at Germany.
I've read somewhere about HEAT being somewhat usable against bunkers. Is that doable? And if so, might it see a HEAT round developed for the 75mm?
Well with Crete (and maybe eventually Rhodes) in British hands, Britain can now base bombers in the Mediterranean, which means the Germans have to go to the trouble. of basing fighters in Greece and the Balkans, providing yet another drain on their limited capabilities.
Britain doesn't need large LST's able to cross thousands of miles of ocean, it needs LCT's able to cross 150 miles of English Channel in a night. Preferably ones that can be taken apart and shipped to other theatres and reassembled for use there as well.
Or alternatively LSM's which may give more flexibility due to ability to self-deploy to theatres due to improved range and improved sea-keeping?
As an uncomplicated design, is there any reason they couldn't be built in shipyards in Egypt, India and Singapore (not to mention local production in Australia or the DEI)?
To your point, whether LCT or LSM, I think there would be a dependence on the USA for engines through lend-lease. 👍
reciprocating steam engines,Tom Dick and Harry built lots of them in WW2
There won't be any Char B1 in the French colonies, and the colonies won't be fighting the allies unless there's a local disagreement over hot pursuit of retreating axis forces.
More important is that the face hardened German armour has very good resistance to 2pounder AP shot (at least until the plates crack or the bolts fail which takes a few hits). However, ITTL capped rounds were developed early and some 2pounder APC were available for alt-Battleaxe, and limited use before alt-Brevity. APC rounds aren't wonder weapons but make a useful difference, especially against face hardened armour.
The 6pounder will provide a further improvement for both AP and HE capability over this, but it's less pressing than OTL as the DAK is beaten and Libya is nearly taken. This means there's sufficient planning and development capacity available to look to dealing with the next upgrade in axis tank armour with some kind of 75mm/3"/77mm/17 pounder gun.
More important is that the face hardened German armour has very good resistance to 2pounder AP shot (at least until the plates crack or the bolts fail which takes a few hits). However, ITTL capped rounds were developed early and some 2pounder APC were available for alt-Battleaxe, and limited use before alt-Brevity. APC rounds aren't wonder weapons but make a useful difference, especially against face hardened armour.
The 6pounder will provide a further improvement for both AP and HE capability over this, but it's less pressing than OTL as the DAK is beaten and Libya is nearly taken. This means there's sufficient planning and development capacity available to look to dealing with the next upgrade in axis tank armour with some kind of 75mm/3"/77mm/17 pounder gun.
The Mediterranean Fleet does not have the resources to force the Dardanelles, stalemate the Italian Navy, feed Malta and Crete and keep an eye on the Vichy Fleet and even Churchill knows it.
Yep.
Pretty sure Landing craft go better with ICEs than steam-engines.
1) The Arctic Convoys will happen.
2) The Persian Corridor will likely happen.
I think the response would be, "Ah, and aren't we the luckiest Muslims in Ireland now!"
61 were built with reciprocating engines but had to be bigger to accommodate the repurposed corvette/frigate engines and managed possibly /perhaps/maybe 1 to 3 knots faster depending upon who's data you use but then there is only so fast you can push a brick thru the water no mater how much horsepower you use.This is for the LST(3) built in the UK and Canada.The other UK built ones were not so good....makey/learny types.
Last edited:
And here's one.
USS LST-325 | WWII Landing Ship | Evansville, IN
The LST-325—the last fully operational WWII Landing Ship Tank (LST)—is open for tours seasonally throughout the year in her home port of Evansville, Indiana. Her crew of volunteers shares the history of these incredible vessels, the men and women who built them, and those who served on them.
www.lstmemorial.org
If the allies want Turkey on their side this time round, forcing the Dardanelles and threatening to bombard Istanbul might not not be the best way to go about things.
On the other hand, clearing out axis forces from the Eastern Med would probably go down quite well.
Otl Churchill tried paying off the Turks with surplus military equipment such as a couple of dozen or so Fairey Battles and Bristol Blenheims.