±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: 657
Total: 657
Who Is Where:
 Visitors:
01: Photo Gallery
02: Community Forums
03: Community Forums
04: Photo Gallery
05: Community Forums
06: News Archive
07: Community Forums
08: Community Forums
09: Photo Gallery
10: Home
11: Community Forums
12: Community Forums
13: Community Forums
14: Community Forums
15: Community Forums
16: Photo Gallery
17: Home
18: Home
19: Community Forums
20: Statistics
21: Community Forums
22: Community Forums
23: Photo Gallery
24: Home
25: Community Forums
26: Your Account
27: Downloads
28: Community Forums
29: Downloads
30: Community Forums
31: Home
32: Community Forums
33: Community Forums
34: Community Forums
35: Photo Gallery
36: Community Forums
37: Community Forums
38: Photo Gallery
39: Community Forums
40: Photo Gallery
41: Community Forums
42: Community Forums
43: News Archive
44: Community Forums
45: Community Forums
46: Photo Gallery
47: Community Forums
48: Community Forums
49: Photo Gallery
50: Downloads
51: Community Forums
52: Community Forums
53: Community Forums
54: Community Forums
55: Community Forums
56: Photo Gallery
57: Community Forums
58: Downloads
59: Your Account
60: Community Forums
61: Community Forums
62: Community Forums
63: Community Forums
64: CPGlang
65: Home
66: Member Screenshots
67: Community Forums
68: Community Forums
69: Community Forums
70: Community Forums
71: Photo Gallery
72: Member Screenshots
73: Community Forums
74: Community Forums
75: Community Forums
76: Community Forums
77: Community Forums
78: Your Account
79: Community Forums
80: Photo Gallery
81: Community Forums
82: Home
83: Community Forums
84: Home
85: CPGlang
86: Community Forums
87: Community Forums
88: Community Forums
89: Home
90: Home
91: Community Forums
92: Community Forums
93: Community Forums
94: CPGlang
95: Community Forums
96: Home
97: Community Forums
98: Home
99: Photo Gallery
100: Community Forums
101: Community Forums
102: Community Forums
103: Tell a Friend
104: Home
105: Photo Gallery
106: Home
107: Community Forums
108: Photo Gallery
109: Photo Gallery
110: Community Forums
111: Photo Gallery
112: Community Forums
113: Community Forums
114: Community Forums
115: Community Forums
116: Community Forums
117: Community Forums
118: Community Forums
119: Community Forums
120: Community Forums
121: Community Forums
122: Home
123: Community Forums
124: Home
125: Community Forums
126: Home
127: Photo Gallery
128: Community Forums
129: Photo Gallery
130: Community Forums
131: Home
132: Your Account
133: Community Forums
134: Community Forums
135: Home
136: Home
137: Community Forums
138: Member Screenshots
139: Photo Gallery
140: Downloads
141: Community Forums
142: Community Forums
143: Home
144: Photo Gallery
145: Community Forums
146: Community Forums
147: Community Forums
148: Community Forums
149: Community Forums
150: Community Forums
151: Photo Gallery
152: Community Forums
153: Downloads
154: Photo Gallery
155: Photo Gallery
156: Community Forums
157: Community Forums
158: Community Forums
159: Home
160: Home
161: Home
162: Community Forums
163: Community Forums
164: Community Forums
165: News Archive
166: Community Forums
167: CPGlang
168: Home
169: Community Forums
170: Community Forums
171: Community Forums
172: Home
173: Your Account
174: Photo Gallery
175: Photo Gallery
176: Photo Gallery
177: Downloads
178: Community Forums
179: Community Forums
180: Community Forums
181: Home
182: Community Forums
183: Photo Gallery
184: Community Forums
185: Home
186: Community Forums
187: Downloads
188: Downloads
189: Photo Gallery
190: Home
191: CPGlang
192: Community Forums
193: Downloads
194: Home
195: Home
196: Home
197: Community Forums
198: Community Forums
199: Photo Gallery
200: Community Forums
201: Community Forums
202: Member Screenshots
203: Community Forums
204: Community Forums
205: Member Screenshots
206: News Archive
207: Community Forums
208: Home
209: Community Forums
210: Photo Gallery
211: Member Screenshots
212: Community Forums
213: Photo Gallery
214: Community Forums
215: Community Forums
216: CPGlang
217: Community Forums
218: Home
219: Home
220: Community Forums
221: Photo Gallery
222: Community Forums
223: Community Forums
224: Community Forums
225: Community Forums
226: Photo Gallery
227: Photo Gallery
228: Community Forums
229: Community Forums
230: Downloads
231: News Archive
232: Community Forums
233: Photo Gallery
234: Community Forums
235: Photo Gallery
236: Downloads
237: Community Forums
238: Photo Gallery
239: Member Screenshots
240: Community Forums
241: Community Forums
242: Community Forums
243: Home
244: Community Forums
245: Community Forums
246: Community Forums
247: Community Forums
248: Home
249: Home
250: Search
251: Community Forums
252: Community Forums
253: Community Forums
254: Photo Gallery
255: Photo Gallery
256: Community Forums
257: Community Forums
258: Community Forums
259: Community Forums
260: Photo Gallery
261: Community Forums
262: Home
263: Community Forums
264: Community Forums
265: Community Forums
266: Community Forums
267: Photo Gallery
268: Community Forums
269: Community Forums
270: Home
271: CPGlang
272: Community Forums
273: Photo Gallery
274: Community Forums
275: Community Forums
276: News Archive
277: Community Forums
278: Member Screenshots
279: Community Forums
280: Community Forums
281: Community Forums
282: Community Forums
283: Community Forums
284: Community Forums
285: Photo Gallery
286: Community Forums
287: Community Forums
288: Home
289: Member Screenshots
290: Photo Gallery
291: Community Forums
292: Community Forums
293: Community Forums
294: Community Forums
295: Photo Gallery
296: Community Forums
297: Community Forums
298: Community Forums
299: Community Forums
300: Photo Gallery
301: Community Forums
302: Community Forums
303: Community Forums
304: Photo Gallery
305: Member Screenshots
306: Community Forums
307: Photo Gallery
308: Community Forums
309: Community Forums
310: Community Forums
311: Community Forums
312: Photo Gallery
313: Community Forums
314: Photo Gallery
315: News
316: Community Forums
317: Community Forums
318: Community Forums
319: Home
320: Photo Gallery
321: Statistics
322: Community Forums
323: Home
324: Community Forums
325: Photo Gallery
326: Photo Gallery
327: Photo Gallery
328: Home
329: Home
330: Community Forums
331: Community Forums
332: Community Forums
333: Community Forums
334: Community Forums
335: Community Forums
336: News Archive
337: Photo Gallery
338: Community Forums
339: Community Forums
340: Home
341: Community Forums
342: Community Forums
343: Home
344: Community Forums
345: Home
346: Community Forums
347: Photo Gallery
348: Member Screenshots
349: Community Forums
350: Community Forums
351: Community Forums
352: Community Forums
353: Community Forums
354: Community Forums
355: Community Forums
356: Community Forums
357: Photo Gallery
358: Community Forums
359: Community Forums
360: Photo Gallery
361: Community Forums
362: Community Forums
363: Community Forums
364: Community Forums
365: Community Forums
366: Community Forums
367: Community Forums
368: Community Forums
369: Home
370: Community Forums
371: Community Forums
372: Community Forums
373: Community Forums
374: Community Forums
375: Community Forums
376: Community Forums
377: Community Forums
378: Photo Gallery
379: Community Forums
380: Home
381: Photo Gallery
382: Photo Gallery
383: Community Forums
384: Community Forums
385: Community Forums
386: Downloads
387: Community Forums
388: Member Screenshots
389: Community Forums
390: Community Forums
391: Community Forums
392: Community Forums
393: Community Forums
394: Downloads
395: Downloads
396: Community Forums
397: Home
398: Community Forums
399: Community Forums
400: Community Forums
401: Photo Gallery
402: Community Forums
403: Photo Gallery
404: Community Forums
405: Community Forums
406: Community Forums
407: Community Forums
408: Community Forums
409: Community Forums
410: Photo Gallery
411: Photo Gallery
412: Member Screenshots
413: Community Forums
414: Community Forums
415: Community Forums
416: Community Forums
417: Community Forums
418: Community Forums
419: Statistics
420: Photo Gallery
421: Home
422: Photo Gallery
423: Community Forums
424: Home
425: Community Forums
426: Member Screenshots
427: Community Forums
428: Community Forums
429: Community Forums
430: News
431: Community Forums
432: Member Screenshots
433: Downloads
434: Community Forums
435: Community Forums
436: Community Forums
437: Home
438: Community Forums
439: CPGlang
440: Community Forums
441: Community Forums
442: Member Screenshots
443: Community Forums
444: Home
445: Community Forums
446: Community Forums
447: Home
448: Community Forums
449: Community Forums
450: Home
451: Community Forums
452: Community Forums
453: Community Forums
454: Downloads
455: Member Screenshots
456: Downloads
457: Home
458: Photo Gallery
459: Home
460: Community Forums
461: Photo Gallery
462: Community Forums
463: Photo Gallery
464: Community Forums
465: Community Forums
466: Community Forums
467: Photo Gallery
468: Your Account
469: Community Forums
470: Downloads
471: Community Forums
472: Community Forums
473: Community Forums
474: Community Forums
475: Community Forums
476: Home
477: Photo Gallery
478: Community Forums
479: Community Forums
480: Photo Gallery
481: Community Forums
482: Community Forums
483: Photo Gallery
484: Photo Gallery
485: Community Forums
486: Community Forums
487: Photo Gallery
488: Community Forums
489: Photo Gallery
490: Statistics
491: Home
492: Community Forums
493: Photo Gallery
494: Community Forums
495: News Archive
496: News
497: Photo Gallery
498: Home
499: Home
500: Community Forums
501: Photo Gallery
502: Photo Gallery
503: Community Forums
504: Photo Gallery
505: Community Forums
506: Photo Gallery
507: Home
508: Community Forums
509: Community Forums
510: Photo Gallery
511: Community Forums
512: Photo Gallery
513: Photo Gallery
514: Community Forums
515: Community Forums
516: Community Forums
517: Community Forums
518: Photo Gallery
519: Community Forums
520: Community Forums
521: Home
522: Member Screenshots
523: Community Forums
524: Downloads
525: Photo Gallery
526: Community Forums
527: Community Forums
528: Community Forums
529: Community Forums
530: Community Forums
531: Home
532: Community Forums
533: Community Forums
534: Community Forums
535: Community Forums
536: Community Forums
537: Community Forums
538: Photo Gallery
539: Home
540: Community Forums
541: Home
542: Community Forums
543: Community Forums
544: Downloads
545: Community Forums
546: Community Forums
547: Community Forums
548: Community Forums
549: Community Forums
550: Community Forums
551: Community Forums
552: Community Forums
553: Community Forums
554: Community Forums
555: Statistics
556: Downloads
557: Community Forums
558: Community Forums
559: Member Screenshots
560: Home
561: Photo Gallery
562: Downloads
563: Community Forums
564: Community Forums
565: Downloads
566: Community Forums
567: Home
568: Community Forums
569: News Archive
570: Home
571: Community Forums
572: Community Forums
573: Home
574: Member Screenshots
575: Home
576: Photo Gallery
577: Community Forums
578: Community Forums
579: Home
580: Photo Gallery
581: Community Forums
582: Community Forums
583: Community Forums
584: Home
585: Community Forums
586: Community Forums
587: Home
588: Downloads
589: Photo Gallery
590: Community Forums
591: Community Forums
592: Community Forums
593: Community Forums
594: Photo Gallery
595: Community Forums
596: Home
597: Photo Gallery
598: Photo Gallery
599: Community Forums
600: CPGlang
601: Community Forums
602: Home
603: Community Forums
604: Community Forums
605: Community Forums
606: Photo Gallery
607: Photo Gallery
608: Community Forums
609: Community Forums
610: Community Forums
611: Community Forums
612: Home
613: Home
614: Photo Gallery
615: Photo Gallery
616: Community Forums
617: Community Forums
618: Photo Gallery
619: Downloads
620: Community Forums
621: Home
622: Community Forums
623: Community Forums
624: Community Forums
625: Community Forums
626: Home
627: Community Forums
628: Community Forums
629: Community Forums
630: Community Forums
631: Photo Gallery
632: Community Forums
633: Photo Gallery
634: Community Forums
635: Community Forums
636: Community Forums
637: Home
638: Community Forums
639: Photo Gallery
640: Community Forums
641: Photo Gallery
642: Community Forums
643: Photo Gallery
644: Community Forums
645: Community Forums
646: Community Forums
647: CPGlang
648: Community Forums
649: Community Forums
650: Community Forums
651: Downloads
652: Photo Gallery
653: Photo Gallery
654: Downloads
655: Photo Gallery
656: Downloads
657: News Archive

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 (bsmart@xecu.net)
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: 2066
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 (bsmart@xecu.net)
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 (bsmart@xecu.net)
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