6 pdr anti-tank gun

[TMO]

Just fired up HTTR again and have noticed that as currently modelled the 6 pdr AT gun has no HE capability. I think this may be an oversight as I believe HE rounds for this weapon were introduced sometime in 1943(?). Will this omission be rectified for BFTB?

Regards

Tim

[Arjuna]

Tim,
 
What's your source reference for that info. It's certainly at odds with what I recall. If the average 6pdr unit did have a regular HE capability then we can change it. But I'd like to be sure first.

[RayWolfe]

I have never read of an account of 6 pdr being used in an HE capacity, however a quick look suggests that the capability was there:
http://www.ra39-45.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/guns/page5.html
Cheers
Ray

[TMO]

Cheers Ray
 
A quick 'Google' will bring up several credible sources that sugest 6 pdr's had HE capability from '43, though I don't have any primary sources I can quote. Will let you know when/if I find them - I'm sure 'Golf 33' could help here.
 
Regards
 
Tim

[TMO]

Here's a good website:

http://members.tripod.com/nigelef/anti-tank.htm

You'll find references to 6 pdr HE ammunition here.

Also, take a look at this:

http://www.thetroubleshooters.com/80th/aladeen0001.html

It clearly mentions 6 pdr HE rounds.

Regards

Tim

[Arjuna]

Tim, yes I know they had the capability but whether it was commonly used in combat is another thing altogether.

[TMO]

I agree with you and the word 'commonly' is very important. However, the following (from http://members.tripod.com/nigelef/otherfp.htm) suggests use may have been significant:

[font=arial]

[font=arial]Anti-tank guns were operated by artillery, infantry battalions and divisional reconnaissance regiments.  Those provided by artillery were in divisional anti-tank regiments with additional regiments were commanded by higher formations and allocated as required.  The other arms had one or more platoons per battalion.  Initially anti-tank guns were limited to armour piercing ammunition.   However, in early 1944 HE ammunition was authorised for direct fire tasks.  The concern had been that too much HE would mean too much wear to the anti-tank guns and consequently lose accuracy for their anti-tank role.   The HE ammunition scale was:[/font]




[left][font=arial]6-pdr[/font][/left]
[left][font=arial]up to 25%[/font][/left]

[font=arial]1st line 96 rpg, all types[/font]

[left][font=arial]17-pdr[/font][/left]
[left][font=arial]up to 5%[/font][/left]

[font=arial]1st line 90 rpg, all types[/font]

[left][font=arial]3-in M10[/font][/left]
[left][font=arial]up to 30%[/font][/left]

[font=arial]1st line 90 rpg, all types[/font]
[font=arial]This led to anti-tank guns increasingly used in their secondary role for direct fire against hard targets such as bunkers, 'pill-boxes', MG posts, snipers in houses, OPs, etc.  In effect a similar role to assault or infantry guns in other armies. This first happened in N Africa at the beginning of 1941 using 37-mm Bofors.  However, 'concrete busting' with 17-pdr became fairly usual in Italy and M10s were also found to be very useful for dealing with strongpoints such as houses or bunkers.  Other uses included troops behind light cover, soft skinned vehicles, nuisance harassing fire and cutting wire obstacles.  These targets would normally be engaged with direct fire, at least until they became obscured by smoke and dust when there was the option of changing to indirect fire.[/font][font=arial][/font]

[/font][font=arial][/font] 
[font=arial]Not conclusive by any means though but interesting nevertheless.[/font]
[font=arial][/font] 
[font=arial]Regards[/font]
[font=arial][/font] 
[font=arial]Tim[/font]
[font=arial][/font] 
[font=arial][/font] 

[Arjuna]

Tim,
 
What's their source?

[TMO]

Not sure what source he is quoting from for the above quote but sources are listed at:
 
http://members.tripod.com/nigelef/sources.htm
 
and links at:
 
http://members.tripod.com/nigelef/linkspg.htm
 
By the way, came across this on Amazon:
 
Mars and Venus: Memories of a Gunner, 210 Battery (Worcestershire Yeomanry) 53rd Anti-tank Regiment, Royal Artillery, Territorial Army
by Jack Creed, Robin Bird
 
I'm thinking of getting it.
 
Regards
 
Tim

[Prince of Eckmühl]

This makes it sound as though CW used it differently than US:

http://www.efour4ever.com/57mm.htm

PoE (aka ivanmoe)

[TMO]

Prince

Does doesn't it? Interestingly, lack of HE round for US guns and the interchangability of US and British rounds fits in with the info at:

http://www.thetroubleshooters.com/80th/aladeen0001.html

Regards

Tim

[Agema]

Ah, I thought the 2/6/17-pounders were almost never supplied with HE (although it existed), although I've not got a source I'd count as authoratative.

[Golf33]

LOL. Thanks for the plug, but I've been out of the loop so long I can barely remember which side used the 6pdr

Game looks great so far, obviously none the worse for my bowing out!

[TMO]

Golf33

Remembered you were an artillery expert - thought you might be able to help. Nice to hear from you again.

Regards

Tim

[TMO]

Dave

Tim, yes I know they had the capability but whether it was commonly used in combat is another thing altogether.

Found this on the History Channel boards:

http://boards.history.com/topic/World-War-Ii/Us-Army-57mm/218317

If you read through the posts you will see quotes of the 57mm a/t gun being used for infantry support using HE rounds (though one vet reports only ever using solid shot). I'd like to request that you include an HE capability for the 6pdr/57mm a/t gun in BFTB, the coming Normandy game and HTTR upgrade. How about an allocation of, say, 10-20% of ammo being HE. Note that the quote about it's limited effectiveness due to the small amount of HE in the projectile: it probably won't make much difference but it all adds to the authenticity.

Regards

Tim

[TMO]

More instances of 6 pdr anti-tank guns using HE in this article:

http://www.89infdivww2.org/memories/brandell_10.htm

Regards

Tim

[Arjuna]

I'm still not convinced Tim. As pointed out above the American 6pdr units never used HE. I think we'll leave it without the HE capability for BFTB. But thanks for the research and the discussion.

[sapper_astro]

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

I'm still not convinced Tim. As pointed out above the American 6pdr units never used HE. I think we'll leave it without the HE capability for BFTB. But thanks for the research and the discussion.

What sources did you use to believe they did not?

[Arjuna]

Sapper_astro,

Nice try! Next....[;)]

[TMO]

Dave

Don't understand your comment:

As pointed out above the American 6pdr units never used HE.

The sources I quoted clearly state that they did use HE!

Reading around (don't have any sources to hand) it seems that US forces did not have an HE capability for their 57 mm until after the Normandy campaign, the British though did. Hope you change your mind.

Regards

Tim