±Recent Visitors

Recent Visitors to Com-Central!

±User Info-big


Welcome Anonymous

Nickname
Password

Membership:
Latest: HighestAce
New Today: 0
New Yesterday: 0
Overall: 6648

People Online:
Members: 0
Visitors: 590
Total: 590
Who Is Where:
 Visitors:
01: Community Forums
02: Downloads
03: Community Forums
04: Member Screenshots
05: Community Forums
06: Home
07: Community Forums
08: Community Forums
09: Community Forums
10: Photo Gallery
11: Member Screenshots
12: Community Forums
13: Community Forums
14: Community Forums
15: Community Forums
16: Community Forums
17: Home
18: Community Forums
19: Photo Gallery
20: Home
21: Community Forums
22: Photo Gallery
23: Community Forums
24: Home
25: Home
26: Home
27: Home
28: Member Screenshots
29: Home
30: Home
31: Home
32: Home
33: Community Forums
34: Home
35: Home
36: Community Forums
37: Home
38: Home
39: Home
40: Home
41: Home
42: Community Forums
43: Community Forums
44: Home
45: Home
46: Home
47: Home
48: Home
49: Community Forums
50: Home
51: Downloads
52: Community Forums
53: Home
54: Home
55: Community Forums
56: Community Forums
57: Home
58: Home
59: Community Forums
60: Photo Gallery
61: Home
62: Community Forums
63: Home
64: Home
65: Home
66: Home
67: Member Screenshots
68: Home
69: Community Forums
70: Home
71: Community Forums
72: Home
73: Supporters
74: Community Forums
75: Community Forums
76: Downloads
77: Community Forums
78: Photo Gallery
79: Community Forums
80: Home
81: Community Forums
82: Community Forums
83: Home
84: Member Screenshots
85: Community Forums
86: Downloads
87: Community Forums
88: Community Forums
89: Home
90: Photo Gallery
91: Community Forums
92: Community Forums
93: Home
94: Home
95: Community Forums
96: Community Forums
97: Community Forums
98: Community Forums
99: Community Forums
100: Member Screenshots
101: Community Forums
102: Home
103: Community Forums
104: Home
105: Community Forums
106: Photo Gallery
107: Community Forums
108: Home
109: Community Forums
110: Home
111: Community Forums
112: Community Forums
113: Community Forums
114: Community Forums
115: Photo Gallery
116: Home
117: Downloads
118: Home
119: Community Forums
120: Photo Gallery
121: Photo Gallery
122: Community Forums
123: Community Forums
124: Home
125: Statistics
126: Home
127: Community Forums
128: Downloads
129: Member Screenshots
130: Community Forums
131: Community Forums
132: Community Forums
133: Community Forums
134: News Archive
135: Community Forums
136: Photo Gallery
137: Community Forums
138: Community Forums
139: Community Forums
140: Community Forums
141: Member Screenshots
142: Community Forums
143: Community Forums
144: Community Forums
145: Downloads
146: Home
147: Photo Gallery
148: Community Forums
149: News
150: Home
151: Home
152: Home
153: Home
154: Home
155: Home
156: Community Forums
157: Community Forums
158: Home
159: Community Forums
160: Home
161: Downloads
162: Home
163: Home
164: Home
165: Photo Gallery
166: Community Forums
167: Photo Gallery
168: Photo Gallery
169: Home
170: Member Screenshots
171: Home
172: Community Forums
173: Photo Gallery
174: Home
175: Home
176: Member Screenshots
177: Photo Gallery
178: Community Forums
179: Home
180: Community Forums
181: Home
182: Downloads
183: Community Forums
184: Photo Gallery
185: Home
186: Home
187: Community Forums
188: Home
189: Community Forums
190: Community Forums
191: Home
192: Home
193: Community Forums
194: Member Screenshots
195: Home
196: Community Forums
197: Photo Gallery
198: Photo Gallery
199: Home
200: Community Forums
201: News
202: Community Forums
203: Home
204: Member Screenshots
205: Home
206: News Archive
207: Home
208: Community Forums
209: Photo Gallery
210: Member Screenshots
211: Community Forums
212: Home
213: Member Screenshots
214: Community Forums
215: Community Forums
216: Member Screenshots
217: Community Forums
218: Home
219: Community Forums
220: Community Forums
221: Home
222: Photo Gallery
223: Member Screenshots
224: Photo Gallery
225: Photo Gallery
226: Home
227: Downloads
228: Photo Gallery
229: Home
230: Community Forums
231: Member Screenshots
232: Community Forums
233: News Archive
234: Community Forums
235: Members List
236: Home
237: Photo Gallery
238: Home
239: Community Forums
240: Community Forums
241: Home
242: Community Forums
243: Home
244: Community Forums
245: Home
246: Community Forums
247: Downloads
248: Home
249: Community Forums
250: Photo Gallery
251: Home
252: Community Forums
253: Photo Gallery
254: Community Forums
255: Community Forums
256: Community Forums
257: Photo Gallery
258: Community Forums
259: Home
260: Community Forums
261: Photo Gallery
262: Community Forums
263: Home
264: Downloads
265: Photo Gallery
266: Home
267: Photo Gallery
268: Community Forums
269: Community Forums
270: Downloads
271: Home
272: Home
273: Home
274: Community Forums
275: Home
276: Statistics
277: Community Forums
278: Photo Gallery
279: Community Forums
280: Community Forums
281: Community Forums
282: Community Forums
283: Home
284: Home
285: Downloads
286: Community Forums
287: Home
288: LinkToUs
289: Photo Gallery
290: Photo Gallery
291: Photo Gallery
292: Home
293: Home
294: Community Forums
295: Home
296: Home
297: Community Forums
298: Home
299: Community Forums
300: Community Forums
301: Community Forums
302: Home
303: Home
304: Member Screenshots
305: Community Forums
306: Community Forums
307: Member Screenshots
308: Home
309: Home
310: Home
311: Home
312: Photo Gallery
313: Community Forums
314: Community Forums
315: Community Forums
316: Home
317: Downloads
318: Home
319: Community Forums
320: Member Screenshots
321: Community Forums
322: Photo Gallery
323: Home
324: Home
325: Community Forums
326: Member Screenshots
327: Photo Gallery
328: Community Forums
329: Community Forums
330: Community Forums
331: Community Forums
332: Member Screenshots
333: Home
334: Home
335: Community Forums
336: Home
337: Home
338: Community Forums
339: Community Forums
340: Photo Gallery
341: Community Forums
342: Home
343: Home
344: Member Screenshots
345: Community Forums
346: Home
347: Home
348: Member Screenshots
349: Home
350: Community Forums
351: Community Forums
352: Community Forums
353: Member Screenshots
354: Photo Gallery
355: Home
356: Home
357: Community Forums
358: Community Forums
359: Home
360: Home
361: Community Forums
362: Photo Gallery
363: Downloads
364: Community Forums
365: Community Forums
366: Downloads
367: Photo Gallery
368: Community Forums
369: Photo Gallery
370: Community Forums
371: Member Screenshots
372: Downloads
373: Community Forums
374: Home
375: Downloads
376: Community Forums
377: Photo Gallery
378: Community Forums
379: Member Screenshots
380: Community Forums
381: Downloads
382: Community Forums
383: Community Forums
384: Home
385: Member Screenshots
386: Photo Gallery
387: Photo Gallery
388: Community Forums
389: Home
390: Photo Gallery
391: Community Forums
392: Community Forums
393: Photo Gallery
394: Your Account
395: Community Forums
396: Community Forums
397: Home
398: Photo Gallery
399: Community Forums
400: Community Forums
401: Member Screenshots
402: Home
403: Home
404: Photo Gallery
405: Photo Gallery
406: Home
407: Home
408: Home
409: Home
410: Home
411: Community Forums
412: Home
413: Photo Gallery
414: Photo Gallery
415: Community Forums
416: Community Forums
417: Community Forums
418: Community Forums
419: News
420: Home
421: Community Forums
422: Photo Gallery
423: Community Forums
424: Community Forums
425: Community Forums
426: Community Forums
427: Community Forums
428: News Archive
429: Home
430: Photo Gallery
431: Community Forums
432: Community Forums
433: Photo Gallery
434: Home
435: Downloads
436: Photo Gallery
437: Community Forums
438: Photo Gallery
439: Community Forums
440: Community Forums
441: Home
442: Member Screenshots
443: Community Forums
444: Your Account
445: Community Forums
446: Community Forums
447: Community Forums
448: Home
449: Community Forums
450: Home
451: Downloads
452: Community Forums
453: Community Forums
454: Member Screenshots
455: Community Forums
456: Photo Gallery
457: Community Forums
458: Community Forums
459: Home
460: Community Forums
461: Community Forums
462: Statistics
463: Community Forums
464: Community Forums
465: Home
466: Home
467: Community Forums
468: Community Forums
469: Home
470: Home
471: Photo Gallery
472: Community Forums
473: Community Forums
474: Your Account
475: Community Forums
476: Photo Gallery
477: Community Forums
478: Home
479: Community Forums
480: Home
481: Home
482: Home
483: Community Forums
484: Community Forums
485: Community Forums
486: Community Forums
487: Community Forums
488: Community Forums
489: Community Forums
490: Photo Gallery
491: Home
492: Downloads
493: Community Forums
494: Home
495: Home
496: Photo Gallery
497: Community Forums
498: Photo Gallery
499: Home
500: Home
501: Home
502: Community Forums
503: Home
504: Home
505: Home
506: Home
507: Home
508: Community Forums
509: Photo Gallery
510: Photo Gallery
511: Home
512: Home
513: Community Forums
514: Home
515: Home
516: Home
517: Home
518: Your Account
519: Community Forums
520: Community Forums
521: Photo Gallery
522: Home
523: Photo Gallery
524: Home
525: Home
526: Community Forums
527: Member Screenshots
528: Home
529: Community Forums
530: Home
531: Community Forums
532: Community Forums
533: Home
534: Community Forums
535: Home
536: Home
537: Community Forums
538: Home
539: Home
540: Home
541: Home
542: Home
543: Home
544: Home
545: Home
546: Home
547: Home
548: Home
549: Community Forums
550: Home
551: Community Forums
552: Community Forums
553: Home
554: Community Forums
555: Community Forums
556: Home
557: Community Forums
558: Community Forums
559: News Archive
560: Downloads
561: Home
562: Downloads
563: Home
564: Member Screenshots
565: News Archive
566: Community Forums
567: Member Screenshots
568: Community Forums
569: Community Forums
570: Home
571: Community Forums
572: Member Screenshots
573: News
574: Community Forums
575: Home
576: Home
577: Statistics
578: Community Forums
579: Photo Gallery
580: Home
581: Community Forums
582: Home
583: Statistics
584: Community Forums
585: Downloads
586: Home
587: Community Forums
588: Member Screenshots
589: Community Forums
590: Member Screenshots

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 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: Sun Mar 14, 2010 9:58 pm
Post subject: Sherman Firefly

Hi folks

I'm reading an book (yes I'm already old enough to know what that is) called "Sherman at war"

And in the book they dicuss the history of the Sherman and it's variants, including the British 17pdr (Firefly) version

At the end of the Firefly description it tells that there are records showing that the US army had, at 1 point during WW2, about 100 Sherman's armed with British 17pdr available

Also that it is not clear what has happened to these tanks after the war

Does some of you know more about this story?

Michel

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

Offline Offline
Joined: May 27, 2006
Posts: 2865
Location: Normandy, France
PostPosted: Sun Mar 14, 2010 10:21 pm
Post subject: Re: Sherman Firefly

Rolling Eyes Michel, how old are you?

I've never heard of such a thing called "a book"...

P-O

26 y-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
Michel_Krauss
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Oct 30, 2009
Posts: 953
Location: Zuid-Holland, The Netherlands
PostPosted: Sun Mar 14, 2010 11:33 pm
Post subject: Re: Sherman Firefly

35 years and 3 month's young Cool

An book is an bunch of printed e-mails however both sides of the paper is used Laughing

Michel

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

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 637

PostPosted: Sun Mar 14, 2010 11:45 pm
Post subject: Re: Sherman Firefly

This is the only information I know about them
freespace.virgin.net/s...usnew.html
and it's little.
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 15, 2010 12:20 am
Post subject: Re: Sherman Firefly

I wonder if any of these were among the stock of "Fireflys" acquired by Argentina and upgraded as "repotendiados" or if all of those vehicles came from exclusively European stocks (which had been my understanding)?
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website Photo Gallery
binder001
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 25, 2006
Posts: 363

PostPosted: Mon Mar 15, 2010 2:02 pm
Post subject: Re: Sherman Firefly

These tanks probably went immediately from the depot to surplus. The unit(s) that were undergoing conversion training to the 17-pounder were probably told to immediately turn in their vehicles. The 17 poounder project was stopped just as the ETOUSA was near to having operational Fireflys, but since the gun with its associated parts and ammo were non-standard they were dropped like a hot rock. I imagine that the US Army "Fireflys" were either scrapped or merged into the stocks of tanks that were provided to European armies. The primary features seem to be the US vision cupola for the commander and a variation in the radio box design. There have been questions about any use of HVSS or wet stowage hulls. Otherwise a "US" M4 with 17 pounder would be functionally like the British ones. THe M4A3s would have been unique, but except for a possible one found on a firing range, there haven't been any sightings of an M4A3 "Firefly".
Back to top
View user's profile
warddw
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 24

PostPosted: Mon Mar 15, 2010 2:28 pm
Post subject: Re: Sherman Firefly

Mark Hayward's book on the sherman firefly has some documented US usage in Italy - recommended - a good read exclusively devoted to the firefly...

Back to top
View user's profile
Michel_Krauss
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Oct 30, 2009
Posts: 953
Location: Zuid-Holland, The Netherlands
PostPosted: Mon Mar 15, 2010 5:24 pm
Post subject: Re: Sherman Firefly

Hi folks,

thanks all, for the info

Concerning the dropping of the 17pdr because of being non-standard in the US army... Rolling Eyes

Indeed it woud make more sense developing an complete new 76mm gun with new ammo for the 76mm Sherman Twisted Evil
Instead of using an proven gun design

For what I could find about the history of the Firefly there was another main reason the US army did not want to use the 17pdr gun

Concerning teh book about the Firefly, I have that
It's an the pile of books, still to read

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: Mon Mar 15, 2010 6:03 pm
Post subject: Re: Sherman Firefly

- Michel_Krauss
Hi folks,

thanks all, for the info

Concerning the dropping of the 17pdr because of being non-standard in the US army... Rolling Eyes

. . .

For what I could find about the history of the Firefly there was another main reason the US army did not want to use the 17pdr gun

. . .

Michel


Michel - I'm curious, what was the other reason the U.S. did not want to use the 17pdr? Or am I reading something into your comment that isn't there

The reasons I have heard over the years (And I'm not saying which I believe, I'm just listing theone I remember being suggested)

1) Supply constraints - All possible production was being used by the British units. A variation of this is that even if there were enough guns 17pdr ammo was a constant shortage item

2) Command did not see the need for a more powerful gun

3) The very poor performance of 17pdr HE ammo

4) NIH [ Not Invented Here ]

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

Offline Offline
Joined: Oct 30, 2009
Posts: 953
Location: Zuid-Holland, The Netherlands
PostPosted: Mon Mar 15, 2010 9:55 pm
Post subject: Re: Sherman Firefly

Bob,

the ones you listed are the ones I know also, only in an different line-up

1) NIH [ Not Invented Here ] (especially true with-in some locations of US army command)

2) Command did not see the need for a more powerful gun
The "more" powerful 76mm was developed for the Sherman, so there was need for an more powerful gun according some one's idea.
Also certain part of command thought there there was no need because there was an special branche in the US army called the tank destroyers.


3) Supply constraints - All possible production was being used by the British units. A variation of this is that even if there were enough guns 17pdr ammo was a constant shortage item

The US industry made ammunition and all kinds of other stuff for the British army
The US air force had the (British) Rolce-Royce Merlin engine made in license to put them in the P-51 Mustang
The navy copied the (British) all steel flight deck on the aircraft carriers to replace the wooden fligth decks
The US army could not copy the 17pdr design...........
Confused

4) The very poor performance of 17pdr HE ammo
The 76mm gun was developed to deal with the German Pz 5 and Pz 6 armour
Also the 76mm HE ammo wasn't know in the service for it's good performance either
In the field the 75mm was prefered for HE because of it's better performance


Michel

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

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 29, 2006
Posts: 2069
Location: Razorback Country
PostPosted: Tue Mar 16, 2010 2:24 am
Post subject: Re: Sherman Firefly

I think between the tanks not being fielded in time for ETO and the need for commonality after the War these tanks were destined for surplus.

Commonality for the 75mm and 76mm would not be a problem since US wartime production of this ammo would last a long time after hostilities ceased. We have (more like had) an amazing capability to produce large amounts of munitions during the war. Once peacetime kicked in everything ceased and munitions were stockpiled. I was still firing WWII manufactured API and API-T in Iraq for my .50 cal back in 2007. With the 17pdr a new production line would be needed and since the war ended why continue making ammo when you don't really need it. I imagine this would have been a major factor in it's demise

The M26 was coming on line and the Army had pretty much decided the 90mm was the gun of choice for tanks. So much so that when they made the higher velocity 90mm for the M47 they made sure it could still fire the older rounds but tapered the newer rounds near the forcing cone to prevent their accidental use in the older tanks.

Fielding a new gun in peacetime is not that hard, having ample munitions for it is another story. When the M60 came on line there was a serious shortage of 105mm ammo for her. This led to the M48A3 not receiving the 105mm gun. Priority for 105mm was in Europe to counter the T55 and T62's. They figured the 90mm was plenty for other areas, and were proven correct in Vietnam.

_________________
Joe_D
Back to top
View user's profile Photo Gallery
bsmart
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 2523
Location: Central Maryland
PostPosted: Tue Mar 16, 2010 2:51 am
Post subject: Re: Sherman Firefly

Michel
I wasn't putting them in any particular order but going with your order

1) There is no way NIH can be discussed or defended it is a 'religious issue'.

2) Tank Destroyers are a doctrine issue separate from the weapon issue itself. It does play into the discussion but I'm going to avoid it just because I don't even want to try to justify the decision based on it. Yes it had an affect. Given the overall offensive role of the U.S. Army in NW Europe it could be considered a flawed doctrine. But if the U.S. had been tasked with a primary defensive role (As the Germans were at the time) it may not have been seen that way. I believe the doctrine that had tank battalions outside the Infantry division structure and only attached them 'as needed' (Which ended up being almost all the time) was at least as much of a doctrinal flaw that can be laid back at the feet of Gen McNair as the TD doctrine can.

3) Yes the U.S,. did supply a lot of ammunition to the British. But except for small arms ammo I believe the great majority was for American spec weapons. The lead time was fairly extensive. The best example of ammo interchangability is the 6pdr/57mm which was used in both armies in large numbers. I believe it took over a year for the 6pdr gun to be put in production in the U.S. as the 57 mm. A lot of that time was spent changing detail drawings to American Standards that could be released to US manufacturers for production use.

The Merlin engine had the same issue in being set up for U.S. production. There were enough differences in the Rolls Royce and Packard engines that Lancaster bombers were given different Mark numbers based on the engines installed and engines from the different manufacturing pools could not be interchanged.

The difference I see with the 17pdr is the time frame that some 17pdr proponents think the adoption could have been made in. Given the time it would have taken to adopt the 17pdr as a standard there were two other solutions coming along. Th e76mm in the short and mid term and the 90mm gun tank in the long term. I think if the effort had been put into rushing an increase in 90mm gun production and adapting the T23 turret to handle it, or pushing the T26 turret forward faster and installing it on the Sherman there would have been no discussion of a 17pdr Sherman for the U.S. Army.

The steel flight deck was adopted for other reasons (Jet exhausts) If you mean the armored flight deck we will have to move that to a different forum. I believe that argument makes the Sherman discussion look simple and straight forward. Rolling Eyes

4) I used to have a comparison of the various HE rounds (It was from a message on the old AFV news) Yes the 75mm was the best the 76mm was less effective and the 17pdr was at least twice that far below the 76mm. Only when the tank gun is stepped up to the 90mm did a tank gun equal or exceed the 75mm
In my amateur opinion I see the difference as being directly related to the muzzle velocity of the gun. As the MV increased it was necessary to increase the thickness of the shell wall to handle the increased stresses. This cuts the size of the HE filler down. Some people will say 'so what the higher MV makes it a better AT round. The problem comes when the uses the tanks were put to is examined. While tanks had to be prepared to fight other tanks they spent most of their time fighting non-tank targets where HE was the preferred round. Even the British didn't use the 17pdr in all tanks in a unit.

I have also heard that there was another problem with the 17pdr in the Sherman. I remember reading that the 17pdr had some elevation restrictions in teh Sherman and could not be fired at 'certain elevations' because the gun could not recoil the full way at those elevations (I seem to remember that it was at elevations where the turret ring interfered with the full recoil)

I was curious if you had some other factors that I hadn't heard of over the years

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

Offline Offline
Joined: Oct 30, 2009
Posts: 953
Location: Zuid-Holland, The Netherlands
PostPosted: Tue Mar 16, 2010 7:24 pm
Post subject: Re: Sherman Firefly

Hi Bob,

I thought you had them in an particular order, so.. Mr. Green

1) concerning the NIH I have to agree on that, there are an lot of people who already tried to discuss or defend that

2) I mentioned the TD branch because that was an reason to block an capable AT gun in the Sherman. If they had put the 17pdr or 90mm in an Sherman it would have made the TD branch an sort of ... obsolete

3) Concenring the ammo, if I remember correcty the US also produced bigger ammo then only small arms ammo
For sure the US produced the fuzes used for British artillery shells, according British spec's
They also produced ammo for non-US spec small arms, for an example the US .303 rifle ammo was made for the Bren MG. However because it was not according British spec, the cartridges got bended and they got stuck in the MG. After this the US .303 cartridge was only allowed to be used for the British Lee-Enfield rifles

I only mentioned the Merlin engine and the metal Wink flight deck to illustrate the fact that they where willing to incorporated already existing better solutions, instead of inventing something new

4) Concerning the performance of the HE rounds. The 76mm was primarily developed for dealing with the armour of the German Pz 5 and Pz 6 tanks. The performance of the HE round was not the main reason to develope an new 76mm gun.
The 76mm was based on an 76mm AA gun with an high MV. They redesigned the cartridge to make it suitable for handling it inside an tank turret, however keeping the same performance as the AA round. After the first protoype's they decided to shorten the barrel, because it was sticking to far out Shocked
However with the shortening of the barrel the AT performance of the gun dropped, because the MV dropped

Concerning the 17pdr breech sticking out to far, that was only true on the first versions. Latter versions had an redesigned shorter breech.
The British had one 17pdr armed Sherman on every four tanks, so they had the HE performance and the AT performance combined

About the MV of an shell to knock-out an enemy tank
There are 2 type's of shell suited to take an tank out;
1) it has an high MV, giving it high impact energy
2) the shell is big enough, no matter what type of shell it is. The Russian 152mm HE shell of the ISU-152 was big enough to take out an German Pz 5 or Pz 6, only because of it's size

Nothing new to ad Wink

Nice such an discussion, should we do more often


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: Wed Mar 17, 2010 12:28 pm
Post subject: Re: Sherman Firefly

Some interesting side points

Yes we produced fuses to British specs. In fact my mother in law worked in a factory in Elkton MD that produced fuses. They hated it when they did fuses destined for British stocks. They had quotas and when doing British spec fuses it took much longer to produce the same number of fuses.

I don't think it was a case of the TD branch blocking the good gun in the Sherman. I think it was a case of once the TD doctrine was established it was impossible at the highest levels to justify the better gun

Armor Branch Officer - We need a better gun to kill German tanks
Staff Officer - You aren't supposed to be killing tanks, that is the job of TDs
A O - but sometimes we run across German tanks
S O - Then call for TD support
A O - (shaking head) The Germans won't wait for the TDs to show up, They kill our tanks and move on

I just had an interesting thought
Actually deployment of the Firefly was actually just taking the TD doctrine down to the platoon/troop level. If the U.S. had made a tank platoon two M36 TDs and three 75mm Shermans you would have the same thing as the British had without having to add a new weapon to the system.

and yes big shells have a capability all their own. Beldon Cooper mentions using M12 self propelled 155mm guns as AT weapons. In that case you had large caliber and high MV Shocked

And yes I like discussions like this. We used to have them more often , maybe they will come back

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

Offline Offline
Joined: Apr 08, 2008
Posts: 5397
Location: Lugano, Switzerland
PostPosted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 3:25 pm
Post subject: Re: Sherman Firefly

Actually deployment of the Firefly was actually just taking the TD doctrine down to the platoon/troop level. If the U.S. had made a tank platoon two M36 TDs and three 75mm Shermans you would have the same thing as the British had without having to add a new weapon to the system.

In post-war years, once a larger amount of tanks was available, the italian army tried to mix Shermans with 17pdr and 76mm with Shermans with 105mm at the smaller unit level possible. I guess they came to similar conclusions
Back to top
View user's profile
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    Reply to topic    Printer Friendly Page    Forum Index ›  AFV News Discussion Board
Page 1 of 5
All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Go to page 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