±Recent Visitors

Recent Visitors to Com-Central!

±User Info-big


Welcome Anonymous

Nickname
Password

Membership:
Latest: cgsimpson
New Today: 0
New Yesterday: 0
Overall: 6645

People Online:
Members: 0
Visitors: 572
Total: 572
Who Is Where:
 Visitors:
01: Community Forums
02: Your Account
03: Member Screenshots
04: Community Forums
05: Community Forums
06: Community Forums
07: Downloads
08: Photo Gallery
09: Photo Gallery
10: Community Forums
11: Community Forums
12: Community Forums
13: Community Forums
14: Photo Gallery
15: Community Forums
16: Community Forums
17: Community Forums
18: Downloads
19: Community Forums
20: Photo Gallery
21: Your Account
22: Community Forums
23: Community Forums
24: Community Forums
25: Photo Gallery
26: Home
27: Community Forums
28: Photo Gallery
29: Downloads
30: Community Forums
31: Downloads
32: Community Forums
33: Community Forums
34: Community Forums
35: Community Forums
36: Community Forums
37: Statistics
38: Photo Gallery
39: CPGlang
40: Community Forums
41: Photo Gallery
42: Photo Gallery
43: Home
44: Photo Gallery
45: Community Forums
46: Home
47: Community Forums
48: Downloads
49: Community Forums
50: Community Forums
51: Photo Gallery
52: Community Forums
53: Community Forums
54: Home
55: Community Forums
56: Community Forums
57: Community Forums
58: Your Account
59: CPGlang
60: Photo Gallery
61: Photo Gallery
62: Community Forums
63: Home
64: Your Account
65: Community Forums
66: Community Forums
67: CPGlang
68: Community Forums
69: Home
70: Photo Gallery
71: Home
72: Community Forums
73: Photo Gallery
74: Community Forums
75: Home
76: Community Forums
77: Community Forums
78: Community Forums
79: Your Account
80: Downloads
81: Community Forums
82: Home
83: Photo Gallery
84: Community Forums
85: Community Forums
86: Home
87: Photo Gallery
88: Home
89: Community Forums
90: Home
91: Community Forums
92: Community Forums
93: Home
94: Member Screenshots
95: Community Forums
96: Community Forums
97: Community Forums
98: Community Forums
99: Community Forums
100: Community Forums
101: Community Forums
102: Photo Gallery
103: Community Forums
104: Photo Gallery
105: Photo Gallery
106: Community Forums
107: Downloads
108: Community Forums
109: Community Forums
110: Community Forums
111: Community Forums
112: Community Forums
113: Community Forums
114: Community Forums
115: Community Forums
116: Community Forums
117: Photo Gallery
118: Community Forums
119: News Archive
120: Community Forums
121: Downloads
122: Community Forums
123: Photo Gallery
124: Community Forums
125: Photo Gallery
126: Community Forums
127: Photo Gallery
128: Home
129: Community Forums
130: Community Forums
131: Community Forums
132: Community Forums
133: Community Forums
134: Community Forums
135: Home
136: Community Forums
137: Home
138: Photo Gallery
139: Photo Gallery
140: Photo Gallery
141: Community Forums
142: Home
143: Community Forums
144: Photo Gallery
145: Home
146: Downloads
147: Community Forums
148: Community Forums
149: Community Forums
150: Photo Gallery
151: Home
152: Community Forums
153: Community Forums
154: CPGlang
155: Community Forums
156: Photo Gallery
157: Community Forums
158: Home
159: Photo Gallery
160: Photo Gallery
161: Community Forums
162: Community Forums
163: Community Forums
164: Photo Gallery
165: Photo Gallery
166: Photo Gallery
167: Community Forums
168: Community Forums
169: Community Forums
170: Community Forums
171: Community Forums
172: Community Forums
173: Community Forums
174: Community Forums
175: Community Forums
176: Photo Gallery
177: Community Forums
178: Community Forums
179: Community Forums
180: Photo Gallery
181: Community Forums
182: News Archive
183: Photo Gallery
184: Community Forums
185: Photo Gallery
186: Community Forums
187: Community Forums
188: Community Forums
189: Community Forums
190: Search
191: Home
192: Community Forums
193: Community Forums
194: Community Forums
195: Community Forums
196: Home
197: Community Forums
198: Photo Gallery
199: Community Forums
200: Community Forums
201: Downloads
202: Community Forums
203: Community Forums
204: Community Forums
205: Home
206: Community Forums
207: Community Forums
208: Community Forums
209: Community Forums
210: Community Forums
211: Community Forums
212: Photo Gallery
213: Photo Gallery
214: Community Forums
215: Your Account
216: Home
217: Photo Gallery
218: Community Forums
219: Photo Gallery
220: Community Forums
221: Community Forums
222: Photo Gallery
223: Community Forums
224: Community Forums
225: Downloads
226: Home
227: Photo Gallery
228: CPGlang
229: Community Forums
230: Photo Gallery
231: Community Forums
232: Downloads
233: Community Forums
234: Photo Gallery
235: CPGlang
236: Community Forums
237: Community Forums
238: Photo Gallery
239: Community Forums
240: Community Forums
241: Community Forums
242: Community Forums
243: Community Forums
244: Community Forums
245: Community Forums
246: Community Forums
247: Photo Gallery
248: Community Forums
249: Community Forums
250: Community Forums
251: Community Forums
252: Community Forums
253: Community Forums
254: Community Forums
255: Photo Gallery
256: Downloads
257: Community Forums
258: Community Forums
259: Community Forums
260: Community Forums
261: Community Forums
262: Statistics
263: Member Screenshots
264: Home
265: Community Forums
266: Your Account
267: Community Forums
268: Community Forums
269: Home
270: Home
271: Photo Gallery
272: Home
273: Community Forums
274: Home
275: Community Forums
276: Community Forums
277: Community Forums
278: Downloads
279: Community Forums
280: Community Forums
281: Downloads
282: Photo Gallery
283: Community Forums
284: Home
285: Community Forums
286: Community Forums
287: Community Forums
288: Photo Gallery
289: Community Forums
290: Community Forums
291: Photo Gallery
292: Community Forums
293: Community Forums
294: Community Forums
295: Community Forums
296: Community Forums
297: Member Screenshots
298: Community Forums
299: Community Forums
300: Community Forums
301: Home
302: Community Forums
303: Community Forums
304: Community Forums
305: Community Forums
306: Your Account
307: Community Forums
308: Community Forums
309: Community Forums
310: Community Forums
311: Community Forums
312: Community Forums
313: CPGlang
314: Community Forums
315: Community Forums
316: Community Forums
317: Photo Gallery
318: Home
319: Photo Gallery
320: Community Forums
321: Community Forums
322: Photo Gallery
323: Downloads
324: Community Forums
325: News Archive
326: Home
327: Community Forums
328: Community Forums
329: Community Forums
330: Community Forums
331: Community Forums
332: CPGlang
333: Photo Gallery
334: Your Account
335: Community Forums
336: Downloads
337: Photo Gallery
338: Member Screenshots
339: Community Forums
340: Community Forums
341: Photo Gallery
342: Photo Gallery
343: Community Forums
344: Home
345: Community Forums
346: Downloads
347: Your Account
348: Photo Gallery
349: Community Forums
350: Community Forums
351: Community Forums
352: Community Forums
353: Community Forums
354: CPGlang
355: Community Forums
356: Community Forums
357: Community Forums
358: Home
359: Photo Gallery
360: CPGlang
361: Community Forums
362: Photo Gallery
363: Community Forums
364: Community Forums
365: Community Forums
366: Photo Gallery
367: Community Forums
368: Home
369: Home
370: Community Forums
371: Community Forums
372: Community Forums
373: Community Forums
374: Community Forums
375: Home
376: Community Forums
377: CPGlang
378: Statistics
379: Community Forums
380: Community Forums
381: Community Forums
382: Community Forums
383: Community Forums
384: Community Forums
385: Home
386: Community Forums
387: Community Forums
388: Community Forums
389: Home
390: Downloads
391: Community Forums
392: Community Forums
393: Community Forums
394: Community Forums
395: Downloads
396: Downloads
397: Community Forums
398: Community Forums
399: Community Forums
400: Community Forums
401: Photo Gallery
402: Photo Gallery
403: Your Account
404: Community Forums
405: Community Forums
406: Community Forums
407: Community Forums
408: Community Forums
409: Community Forums
410: Community Forums
411: Community Forums
412: Community Forums
413: Community Forums
414: Community Forums
415: Community Forums
416: Community Forums
417: Community Forums
418: Photo Gallery
419: Home
420: Community Forums
421: Community Forums
422: Community Forums
423: Statistics
424: Community Forums
425: Community Forums
426: Community Forums
427: Community Forums
428: Community Forums
429: Community Forums
430: Community Forums
431: Community Forums
432: Photo Gallery
433: Community Forums
434: Community Forums
435: Community Forums
436: Community Forums
437: Community Forums
438: Community Forums
439: Photo Gallery
440: Photo Gallery
441: CPGlang
442: Community Forums
443: Photo Gallery
444: Downloads
445: Photo Gallery
446: Community Forums
447: Community Forums
448: Your Account
449: Photo Gallery
450: Community Forums
451: Home
452: Home
453: Community Forums
454: Photo Gallery
455: Photo Gallery
456: Photo Gallery
457: Home
458: Member Screenshots
459: CPGlang
460: Community Forums
461: Downloads
462: Community Forums
463: Community Forums
464: Photo Gallery
465: Downloads
466: Community Forums
467: Community Forums
468: Downloads
469: Community Forums
470: Downloads
471: Member Screenshots
472: Photo Gallery
473: Community Forums
474: Community Forums
475: Community Forums
476: Community Forums
477: Photo Gallery
478: Community Forums
479: Community Forums
480: Photo Gallery
481: Community Forums
482: Photo Gallery
483: Statistics
484: Community Forums
485: Community Forums
486: Community Forums
487: Community Forums
488: Home
489: Search
490: Community Forums
491: Community Forums
492: Community Forums
493: Community Forums
494: Community Forums
495: Community Forums
496: Downloads
497: Photo Gallery
498: Community Forums
499: Community Forums
500: Community Forums
501: Community Forums
502: Photo Gallery
503: Community Forums
504: Your Account
505: Community Forums
506: Community Forums
507: Downloads
508: Community Forums
509: Community Forums
510: Community Forums
511: Community Forums
512: Community Forums
513: Photo Gallery
514: Community Forums
515: Photo Gallery
516: Community Forums
517: Photo Gallery
518: Photo Gallery
519: Photo Gallery
520: Community Forums
521: Your Account
522: Community Forums
523: Community Forums
524: Photo Gallery
525: Community Forums
526: Community Forums
527: Community Forums
528: Your Account
529: Home
530: Community Forums
531: Community Forums
532: Community Forums
533: Home
534: Community Forums
535: Home
536: Community Forums
537: Community Forums
538: Community Forums
539: Community Forums
540: Community Forums
541: Downloads
542: Community Forums
543: Community Forums
544: Community Forums
545: Community Forums
546: Community Forums
547: Community Forums
548: CPGlang
549: Downloads
550: Home
551: Community Forums
552: Community Forums
553: Community Forums
554: Community Forums
555: Photo Gallery
556: Community Forums
557: Community Forums
558: Community Forums
559: Community Forums
560: Community Forums
561: Home
562: Community Forums
563: Community Forums
564: Community Forums
565: Community Forums
566: Community Forums
567: Search
568: Community Forums
569: Community Forums
570: Community Forums
571: Photo Gallery
572: Photo Gallery

Staff Online:

No staff members are online!
Sherman Firefly
The AFV ASSOCIATION was formed in 1964 to support the thoughts and research of all those interested in Armored Fighting Vehicles and related topics, such as AFV drawings. The emphasis has always been on sharing information and communicating with other members of similar interests; e.g. German armor, Japanese AFVs, or whatever.
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Post new topic    Reply to topic    Printer Friendly Page     Forum Index ›  AFV News Discussion Board

View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Michel_Krauss
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Oct 30, 2009
Posts: 953
Location: Zuid-Holland, The Netherlands
PostPosted: Mon Mar 22, 2010 6:34 pm
Post subject: Re: Sherman Firefly

Well there is an big difference in the upgrading of the various weapons used in the different countries between 1942 (Africa landings) and 1944 (D-day)

The Russians upgraded their weapons in the tanks or developed new ones to defeat the heavier German armour
The T34/85, ISU-152, ISU-122, IS-2, etc where all developed mainly in response to the German Tiger

The Germans mainly upgraded their weapons in the tanks or developed new ones to defeat the heavier Russian armour to expected to appear
They had already some nasty suprises in the past, with Russian armour

The British, they did not realy standarised
However they dropped the ones that became obselete, like the Valentine and the Crusader, and replaced it with others
The upgrading of the weapons was not an real succes, except for the 17pdr on the Sherman

The US army had the know-how and the capable weapons available to defeat German armour
The 3in or 76mm AA gun, on which the 76mm tank gun was based, was capable with the MV it had to defeat German armour
The breech was modified to fit inside an tank, that made sense
However the barrel was made shorter because it was sticking out to far Shocked
With reducing the barrel length, the profit of the high MV was lost

The upgrade of the suspension was only something on the side
It did not improve the performance of the gun

When you build in an WW2 76mm Sherman gun into an modern M1A1 Abrams you still can not defeat the armour of an German Tiger or Panther
The only benefit you will have is mobility and armour protection

Concerning priorities of the several services and theaters
The demands of the different services was in all nations, not an typical problem for the US

About the several theaters
True the US (and UK) also had the pacific to operate in and this was not so for Russia or Germany
However the Japanese tanks where not the problem to defeat, no matter if an 75mm or an 76mm was used

The 76mm was developed to defeat the German armour and it failed in doing so

Michel

_________________
I'm Not Crazy, I'm Just Not You
Back to top
View user's profile
Doug_Kibbey
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 4678
Location: The Great Satan
PostPosted: Mon Mar 22, 2010 7:05 pm
Post subject: Re: Sherman Firefly

- Michel_Krauss

Concerning priorities of the several services and theaters
The demands of the different services was in all nations, not an typical problem for the US

Michel


Sorry to disillusion you, but this is just plain wrong.

I recommend you do some additional reading. Regarding this point above, you might want to start with "Marines Under Armor" by Kenneth W. Estes, COL. (ret.), in particular the relevant chapters concerning the campaign in the Pacific. There was enormous friction between the Army and the USMC regarding the allocation of the limited resource of equipment.
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website Photo Gallery
Michel_Krauss
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Oct 30, 2009
Posts: 953
Location: Zuid-Holland, The Netherlands
PostPosted: Mon Mar 22, 2010 9:51 pm
Post subject: Re: Sherman Firefly

Doug,

sorry if you are disappointed, however it's true

When 2 (or more) different branches have to use, or want to use, the same equipment and have to co-operated with each other:
- they will disagree with each other about allmost everything

Mainly because they have different requirements for the equipment and there are different needs of the amount of equipment

That has been during WW2, has been before WW2 and still is today
And that is not an problem that is typical to the US, because of the marines and the army

Found the book on Google books, will read it
Perhaps I will learm something new Mr. Green

Michel

_________________
I'm Not Crazy, I'm Just Not You
Back to top
View user's profile
bsmart
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 2523
Location: Central Maryland
PostPosted: Tue Mar 23, 2010 2:02 am
Post subject: Re: Sherman Firefly

Michel

As you stated only the U.S. and U.K had to deal with the requirements of a worldwide war. The need to defeat German armor was only part of the tasks that U.S. and U.K. tank designors had to worry about. The users in teh Pacific and Southern Asia saw no need to spend time developing heavier tanks with more powerful guns. If anything they wanted development time spent on ways to transfer tanks from ships to beaches, fight in jungles and cross wide, deep rivers.

On top of that the U.S. was commited to supplying vehicles to many of the allies, some of whom had requirements that differed from the U.S. Army. And it did matter if a 75mm or a 76mm was used. When working in the tight confines of Pacific jungle a long barreled 76mm was not acceptable. Having a short barreled gun that wouldn't get hung up on nearby trees demanded a short barrel weapon.

_________________
Bob Smart ([email protected])
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
Doug_Kibbey
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 4678
Location: The Great Satan
PostPosted: Tue Mar 23, 2010 4:42 am
Post subject: Re: Sherman Firefly

- Michel_Krauss
Doug,

sorry if you are disappointed, however it's true

When 2 (or more) different branches have to use, or want to use, the same equipment and have to co-operated with each other:
- they will disagree with each other about allmost everything

Mainly because they have different requirements for the equipment and there are different needs of the amount of equipment

That has been during WW2, has been before WW2 and still is today
And that is not an problem that is typical to the US, because of the marines and the army

Found the book on Google books, will read it
Perhaps I will learm something new Mr. Green

Michel


Actually, it was precisely typical (and very much so) in it's application to different priorities to the USMC and the Army...from no less a source than Gen. George C. Marshall, the U.S. Army Chief of Staff, who openly wondered (and I paraphrase) if any of the necessary warfighting equipment that was considered necessary to the Army prosecuting the war would even be available, after he had finished supplying the USMC (as they were clearly in the fight in the PTO first and had most immediate needs for that equipment). When the Army CoS wonders if the material he needs will be available to him, you have to accept that this is a problem typical of the U.S. Armed Forces from the outset of the war. Everybody was jockying for weapons systems, means of production, aircraft engines, etc. for the perceived needs of all the services...all the time while trying to meet the needs of our lend-lease partners while trying to keep them afloat. U.S. production means were substantial, but not limitless, and this problem was not solved before the end of the war.
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website Photo Gallery
bialy-r
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: May 06, 2009
Posts: 1233
Location: POLAND
PostPosted: Tue Jul 10, 2012 8:37 am
Post subject: Re: Sherman Firefly

Sherman Hybrid Ic – Monument for the fallen of the 3rd Airborne Artillery Regiment in the 1982 war, Cordoba (Argentina)

carrosdecomb.blogspot....alera.html
Back to top
View user's profile
the_shadock
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: May 27, 2006
Posts: 2865
Location: Normandy, France
PostPosted: Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:48 pm
Post subject: Re: Sherman Firefly

- bialy-r
Sherman Hybrid Ic – Monument for the fallen of the 3rd Airborne Artillery Regiment in the 1982 war, Cordoba (Argentina)

carrosdecomb.blogspot....alera.html


very well spotted, Rafal !!

_________________
soldat_ryan @ hotmail.com

Looking for photos of Sherman manufacturer's plates
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
clausb
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 25, 2006
Posts: 146

PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 7:20 am
Post subject: Re: Sherman Firefly

The problem with poor HE ammunition for the 17-pdr and the 76mm could easily have been solved by developing an HE round with thinner walls, fired at a lower velocity. The Germans did this from day one with the 7,5cm KwK 40 L/43 (later L/48) and that round contained about the same amount of explosive as the Us 75mm HE round. Possibly, a slight modification of the existing 75mm HE might have sufficed.

The British actually developed first a low velocity version of the original 17 pdr HE round and later - possibly post war - developed two different High Capacity rounds with more HE filler than the orginal.

So developing a good 17 pdr or 76mm HE round can hardly have been a significant technical problem, so the reason those two guns did not have a good HE round in WWII must be found elsewhere.
Back to top
View user's profile
Roy_A_Lingle
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 1997
Location: El Paso & Ft Bliss, Texas
PostPosted: Sat Sep 08, 2012 3:02 am
Post subject: Re: WIP wait to look at.

Hi Folks!

Sorry I am so late to join in.

Maybe these photos might help some.

Below is a 1942 issued M2 treadway floating bridge. This bridge was designed to carry the M2 medium tank during the mid 1930s. The M3 Lee and the early M4s pushed the limits of this system. Note how close the outside edges of the M4 is to the edges of the treadways.
Note how the water level is over the top of the pontoons and parts of the saddles are in the water. This was the equipment the Chief of Engineers was concerned about. This was the system his engineers had to work with. Priority for steel for larger saddles and rubber for larger pontoons was low on the totom pole for the engineers.



This is the heavy M2 treadway with larger saddles and pontoons that large quanties only started reaching the ETO in late 1944. The heavier and longer saddles and larger pontoons also required larger and heavier trucks to transport this equipment. All needing room on the available shipping. The treadways have been moved outward, but not by that much. Still a tight fit for the M4E8's.



Below is the problem the Chief of Engineers had with sending the T-26 to the ETO. That bridge has been modified so the tracks would not damage the equipment along the outer edges of the deck. Anyone who has ever driven a tracked vehicle will understand this is just asking for trouble.


Four comments about the 76 gun tanks.
1. On June 6, 1944, there was a large number of 76mm tanks in storage in England. Not one single tank battalion commader wanted to replace his 75 gun tanks with the 76 prior to D-Day. The excuss given later was there wasn't time to retrain on those tanks. After the US Army started running into a larger numbers of Panther tanks than Army level intell expected did those same commanders started asking for those 76 guns tanks setting back in England. By now the fighting is all out in France and those battalion commanders who could not find the time in England found the time to retrain in France after the landings.

2. The proof testing of the 76mm AT ammo was flawed. Ike was told as late as June that the 76 AT ammo would go through the front hull of a Panther tank. It was only after the troops started using it that it was learned it could not do the job per the claims of the ordinance corps.

3. The 76mm HE round. Major case of could have, should have. Facts are the tankers did NOT like the one that was available, therefore, they didn't like the 76. They were not thinking about killing German tanks with their tanks. See comment below on doctrine.

4. Between the breakout and the start of the Battle of the Bulge. General Abrams who is one of the best known US tank battalion commanders in the ETO. His tank, Thunderbolt 6 was a 75mm M4. As a battalion commander he could pick the type of M4 he wanted. His Commanding Officer had to order him to use a 76mm M4 (Thunderbolt 7 a VVSS). My point here is that there was a MAJOR lack of end users asking for better tank guns. See comment below on doctrine.

If you look at the T-26 program, only the final version of the program was equiped with a 90 mm. All the others still had the same 76 the Sheman had. Before the Air Forces gained air superiorty on the battelfield, priorty of 90mm gun barrels went to air defense for the M-1 and M-2 90mm AAA weapon systems.

A study of the deployment of the first 40 T-26s (untested and not approved for issue) to the ETO shows that was the best that could have been done after the problem had been learned the hard way in June of 1944.


A study of the M6 heavy tank will also show the lack of interest in heavier tanks prior to the battles of June 44 in France.

Doctrine, championed by Gen McNair, Commanding Gereral of Army Ground Forces (he answered only to Gen. Marshall), had a MAJOR impact on limiting the upgrading of tanks. As late as D-Day he was still in favor of TOWED anti-tanks guns to deal with German tanks. He reportly said "Give tankers bigger guns and they will go tank hunting". A volition of HIS Tank Destoryers ONLY fight enemy tanks. This doctrine which was drilled into all tankers and tank unit commanders during the war. It was only after the war and the results of lessons learned that the highest levels of the US Army accepted the fact this doctrine was wrong. That acceptance resulted it the disbandment of the Tank Destroyer Command and all that equipment declared obsolete and surplus. This doctrine WAS the NUMBER ONE problem that delayed more fire power and better protection from reaching the field. All the other excuses could have been over come if the WILL was there. The WILL was just NOT THERE in the right places.

There are MANY details that caused the Sherman to be the tank the US fielded. In the end, in the hands of fast learning US and UK tankers, the Sherman was the best tank on the western side of the ETO. I understand that Soviet tankers who had M4A2/76s learned to use they very well also. The history of the Sherman is a major example of a path once chosen, is very hard to change once travel on it has started.

All of this from one who a long time ago and before hanging out here also felt that the Sherman was the worst tank ever.

In the end, the Sherman and the T-34 won WWII with help for all the other AFVs that where fielded, not the Panther and not the Tigers.

Sgt, Scouts out!

_________________
"You can never have too much reconnaissance."
General G.S. Patton Jr.
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
Doug_Kibbey
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 4678
Location: The Great Satan
PostPosted: Sat Sep 08, 2012 4:48 pm
Post subject: Re: Sherman Firefly

Good to hear from you, Roy!

Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website Photo Gallery
Roy_A_Lingle
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 1997
Location: El Paso & Ft Bliss, Texas
PostPosted: Sat Sep 08, 2012 11:21 pm
Post subject: Re: Sherman Firefly

Hi Doug!

Good to hear from you, Love this thread. Reminds me of the way AFV News was a long time ago. We were learning a lot back then.

Sgt, Scouts out!

_________________
"You can never have too much reconnaissance."
General G.S. Patton Jr.
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
bialy-r
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: May 06, 2009
Posts: 1233
Location: POLAND
PostPosted: Wed May 29, 2013 8:05 am
Post subject: Re: Sherman Firefly

Sherman Hybrid Ic ?

in Cordoba (Argentina)

www.network54.com/Foru...+Sherman--
Back to top
View user's profile
piney
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 2330
Location: Republic of Southern New Jersey
PostPosted: Wed May 29, 2013 11:04 am
Post subject: Re: Sherman Firefly

Boy, hadn't noticed this thread, much more like the old days, dueling pistols at twenty paces. OK time for me to get into the line of fire.

A lot of changes had to made to the Sherman to use the 17 pounder
"
It was W.G.K. Kilbourn, a Vickers engineer at the time working for the Department of Tank Design, who transformed the prototype into the tank that would serve the British forces from D-day onwards. The first thing Kilbourn had to fix was the lack of a workable recoil system for the 17-pounder. The 17-pounder travelled 40 in (1.0 m) back as it absorbed the recoil of the blast. This was too long for the Sherman turret. Kilbourn solved this problem by redesigning the recoil system completely rather than modifying it. The recoil cylinders were shortened to allow the turret to take the gun and its recoil, and the new cylinders were placed on both sides of the gun to take advantage of the width of the Sherman's turret rather than be hindered by its height.

The gun breech itself was also rotated 90 degrees to allow for loading from the left rather than from on top. The radio which was mounted in the back of the turret in British tanks had to be moved. An armoured box (a "bustle") was attached to the back of the turret to house the radio. Access was through a large hole cut through the back of the turret.

The next problem encountered by Kilbourn was that the gun cradle, the metal block the gun sits on, had to be shortened to allow the gun to fit into the Firefly, and thus the gun itself was not very stable. Kilbourn had a new barrel designed for the 17-pounder that had a longer untapered section at the base, which helped solve the stability problem. A new mantlet was designed to house the new gun and accept the modified cradle. The modifications were extensive enough to require that 17-pounders intended for the Firefly had to be factory built specifically for it.

Kilbourn had to deal with other problems. On the standard Sherman tank, there was a single hatch in the turret through which the tank commander, gunner and loader entered and left the tank. However the 17-pounder's larger breech and recoil system significantly reduced the ability of the loader to quickly exit from the tank if it was hit. As a result, a new hatch was cut into the top of the turret over the gunner's position. The final major change was the elimination of the hull gunner in favour of space for more 17-pounder ammunition, which was significantly longer than the 75 mm shell and thus took up more room.
"

so it's not just a drop in the new gun and go, and you lose the hull MG that could be vital fighting infantry.

Regarding The Tiger's and Panther's. They were not mechanically reliable enough to meet US standards. Something like 40 % were lost due to breakdown. What good is a superior gun if you can't get it to the fight?

I think the policy of having a less powerful gun, but having it always available makes more sense then not having a gun 40% of the time.
OK open fire

_________________
The only good skwerril is a dead un
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
bialy-r
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: May 06, 2009
Posts: 1233
Location: POLAND
PostPosted: Tue Jun 04, 2013 7:39 am
Post subject: Re: Sherman Firefly

- bialy-r
Sherman Hybrid Ic ?

in Cordoba (Argentina)

www.network54.com/Foru...+Sherman--


Any help ? is that/was a Firefly ?
Back to top
View user's profile
the_shadock
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: May 27, 2006
Posts: 2865
Location: Normandy, France
PostPosted: Tue Jun 04, 2013 10:31 am
Post subject: Re: Sherman Firefly

- bialy-r
Sherman Hybrid Ic ?

in Cordoba (Argentina)

www.network54.com/Foru...+Sherman--


Sherman Ic hull with a normal 75mm turret (doesn't have the British loader's hatch beside the commander's cupola).

P-O

_________________
soldat_ryan @ hotmail.com

Looking for photos of Sherman manufacturer's plates
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    Reply to topic    Printer Friendly Page    Forum Index ›  AFV News Discussion Board
Page 4 of 5
All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next



Jump to:  


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum