Sir John Valentine Carden Survives. Part 2.
- Thread starter allanpcameron
- Start date
Yes. 2pr Case Shot was supposed to be produced in Australia, I don't know if that ever actually occurred or not, and as an interim Australia loaded the 37mm canister projectile into a 2pr cartridge which worked well enough.
Reportedly there wasn't much difference between the effectiveness of the 2 pounder and the 3 inch howitzer armed tanks. I don't fully believe that, I think that assessment may well depend on what was being shot at, but also if that is what the people on the ground say then there must be some validity to it.
Total BS unfortunately, unless all combat is happening at point blank range
. The 3 inch Howitzer was a very low velocity lobber, hitting a moving target at range was challenging to say the least. Now effectiveness if it hit was unaffected by range and against lightly armoured AFV's could be, in practical terms, more effective than the 2 pdr (bashed in with a big boom rather than a small hole due to overpenetration, it's the reason why Sherman crews used HE rather than AP in many cases in the Pacific).As I said, I have perhaps some reservations about it being applicable generally, but if that is the assessment of the men using the equipment in actual combat (within the context of the question and scenario as asked by Triune Kingdom) then I'm perfectly prepared to accept that evalution at that time as believeable if not completely correct. What I'm not going to do is toss it out as total BS on account of some preconceived notion or a simplistic feeling that 3" > 40mm therfore better.Total BS unfortunately, unless all combat is happening at point blank range
Have you seen the 3" shell? Compared to every other, its virtually all warhead with a very small cartridge. It was very inaccurate, short ranged and, unless you are firing it at Japanese AFV's with paper thin armour, utterly useless as an AP weapon. You, if you check, will find the positive responses are all vs the Japanese in very short ranged engagements (many of which were versus tanks that could not penetrate a Matilda's armour so were fought literally point blank), not the Germans in Europe.
Well, 3in howitzer is there primarily to lob smoke and HE shells at enemy positions, infantry, soft skin vehicles etc. If a CS tank runs into enemy armour, I do believe that some 2pdr tanks are likely to be around, since there is more of them then CS tanks. And while we should take what is written on Wiki with a grain of salt, it says that 3in howitzer had a range from 1,800 to 2,300 meters, which is not bad at all, even if in operational use engagement ranges were shorter.
And they are in the jungle, close engagement ranges are to be expected.
Though, does anyone know how much filling did the 3in CS shell have?
It does seem to have roughly the same MV and range as the 3" mortar
As for the shell, its 2nd right (2nd left is a 2pdr), image via axishistory.com forum
37mm HE started production in Feb 42 and Cannister in April 42 - as far as I am aware due to the experiences in the Philippines
2 pounder HE was started in 1942 but as far as I can tell never officially issued to tanks
So unless there is a driver earlier than Dec 7th its unlikely that 2 pounder production of 'other' ammo types is going to happen any earlier than it did
My mistake then, I thought Canister was availlable earlier.
Done a quick search, 2pdr HE only started being availlable Late 1942 and by then 2pdr was starting to be replaced by 6pdr.
So, we wait for either Australians or New Zealanders to fit 40mm Bofors or 37mm M3 HE shell to 2pdr case? I am really unsure when (Late '42?) exactly they were availlable and in what numbers, not to mention the fact that it probably does not matter in the grand scheme of things.
Yes, of course I've seen a 3" shell, although I fear I don't see the relevance of that fact since we're not basing anything here off my personal experience. Triune's question was about 2 pounder canister for use in places like Burma, not Germans in Europe, to bring it up to the 3" level. I pointed out there is some evidence that in '44-'45 in SE Asia the 2pdr and the 3" tanks were already considered about equal, but I also tried to cautioned against taking that fact and applying it more generally to as you are trying to, to the Germans in Europe, which unless I missed it somehow Triune wasn't asking about.
3" tank howitzer HE shell filling is 1lb 5oz 6dr, or about 606g, of either amatol or TNT.
I have mentioned before that the Australian Army adopted a 2 Pdr HE round in 1944. It was base fuzed and tested in late 1943 against Japanese log bunkers. During the trials it was tried against the nose fused British HE round which was found to be wanting in performance being designed for use against materiale.
Hopefully, someone will have an answer. On the face of it, the 3.7" is a more useful gun. According to https://nigelef.tripod.com/37inchowsheet.htm had a two pound HE charge and later in the war had a HEAT round as well.