25 pdr AT British Gun

nimu · Post by **nimu** » Sat May 19, 2001 7:18 pm

The 25 pdr ATG is one of the new weapons put in ver 5.01. I have some question about it:why it is always yellow coulored in the purchasing screen?And why it is so useless??Almost no penetration attitude!If the 17 pdr is so strong as an ATG the 25 should be even better right?Can anybody axplain that to me??
Thanks

troopie · Post by **troopie** » Sat May 19, 2001 8:34 pm

I think the main problem with the 25pdr is that's a field gun being dragooned into being an ATG. The 17pdr was IIRC a dedicated ATG.

troopie

Igor · Post by **Igor** » Sat May 19, 2001 8:35 pm

The 25 pounder was a howitzer (short barreled). Many were retread 18 pounders, bored out to 3.45 inches. The muzzle velocity was rather low, all things being considered, for anti-tank work.

Reg · Post by **Reg** » Sun May 20, 2001 4:09 pm

The British 25lb'er was one of their most versatile and effective weapons. However you must understand how they were actually used rather than just looking at their raw statistics.

The early British artillery regiments were equipped with 50% 2lb anti tank guns and 50% with 25lb howitzers. The 2lb only shot AP rounds so the 25lb gun firing HE was needed to deal with infantry and soft targets. This mix gave these regiments a high degree of well balanced firepower in both direct and indirect roles.

Another factor was the expected targets in the early stages of the war. Against PzII, PzIII Pz38(t)and M 13/40 tanks, the armour thicknesses were in the order of 30mm and less (generally). The 2lb'er was all that was required and even the low velocity 25lb'er could give these vehicles a hard time due to their large projectile. Lightly amoured vehicles were especially vunerable.

The introduction of new German tanks changed this situation rapidly and the 25lb'er was soon employed more and more in the conventional bombardment role while the 2lb'er was supersceded by the 6lb'er. The HE direct fire role was assumed by 75mm dual purpose guns carried on the new Grants and Shermans.

It's quite interesting to read unit histories and see the evolution of tactics. I got this info out of 'The Desert Rats' The history of the 7th Armoured Division.

Reg.

[ May 20, 2001: Message edited by: Reg ]

Reg · Post by **Reg** » Sun May 20, 2001 4:23 pm

The yellow colour (IIRC) indicates that the item is out of production (supersceded) or rare which fits in with the description above. You would need to pick a very early date (ie mid 1940) to find these guns commonly used in this role.

I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong.

Reg.

Les_the_Sarge_9_1 · Post by **Les_the_Sarge_9_1** » Sun May 20, 2001 4:42 pm

Recently acquired a nice book on juts artillery pieces.
Not that artillery is new to me, but it was a fine book that focused on nothing else but raw statistics.

One thing that was clear, a bigger gun is not necessarily a better gun.
The barrel length, the barrel diameter, the ammo used, the carriage employed, method of recoil management, all these played a part.

Then there is tactical doctrine added into the soup. When the 25 pdr was employed in the anti tank role, it was done so hastily at best. I believe it entered this role primarily in the opening stages of the war in the desert.
The 25 pdr was designed to perform bombardment duties as was most artillery. Anti tank capacities were rarely part of the design of most guns at the time it was developed. So its poor anti armour abilities is not a reflection of anything more than it was not designed to shoot tanks.
The size of the gun often had nothing to do with its armour stopping qualities. Anti armour performance was often ammo type or velocity characteristic driven.

My comments are not intended to be a definitive statement. Merely wished to say, that the bigger kabooms didnt automatically translate into better tank stopping potential.

AmmoSgt · Post by **AmmoSgt** » Sun May 20, 2001 4:59 pm

From what i have read Brit 25lbr's and US 75mm and 105mm Hows usually found themselves in involuntary AT roles during German penetrations such as at Salerno .. where 13 PzIV's had broken thru the first line of resistance only to be ambushed by 105mm near the 36th Div CP .. At Salerno about noon on the 10th of Sep 43 and attack by 13 PZIV's was thwarted when 2 105mm knocked out 5 of them and forced the others to withdraw ... 1 of the two 105mm arrived during the Battle and set up under fire aprox 200yards from the german tanks ..( no mention is made in the report i read about terrain ) typically a 105mm arriving on a DUKW would only have a 21 round supply of ammo when it hit the beach .. so somebody was doing some pretty fair shooting

sven · Post by **sven** » Sun May 20, 2001 5:16 pm

also on the fun with arty front...

in one of the earlier versions of SP I used to love hitting Tigers with the 203mm cannon. I'll bet that those German treadheads were experiencing 'excedrin headache no. 9'...

Originally posted by AmmoSgt:
From what i have read Brit 25lbr's and US 75mm and 105mm Hows usually found themselves in involuntary AT roles during German penetrations such as at Salerno .. where 13 PzIV's had broken thru the first line of resistance only to be ambushed by 105mm near the 36th Div CP .. At Salerno about noon on the 10th of Sep 43 and attack by 13 PZIV's was thwarted when 2 105mm knocked out 5 of them and forced the others to withdraw ... 1 of the two 105mm arrived during the Battle and set up under fire aprox 200yards from the german tanks ..( no mention is made in the report i read about terrain ) typically a 105mm arriving on a DUKW would only have a 21 round supply of ammo when it hit the beach .. so somebody was doing some pretty fair shooting

Igor · Post by **Igor** » Sun May 20, 2001 7:19 pm

"in one of the earlier versions of SP I used to love hitting Tigers with the 203mm cannon. I'll bet that those German treadheads were experiencing 'excedrin headache no. 9'..."

Historically, the Soviets got a great deal of Tiger killing milage out of the SU-152...and, one supposes, a mop and a body baggie.

sven · Post by **sven** » Sun May 20, 2001 7:24 pm

Originally posted by Igor:
"in one of the earlier versions of SP I used to love hitting Tigers with the 203mm cannon. I'll bet that those German treadheads were experiencing 'excedrin headache no. 9'..."

Historically, the Soviets got a great deal of Tiger killing milage out of the SU-152...and, one supposes, a mop and a body baggie.

so do you think they squeegeed out the remains, or just scooped them?

SHOCKWAVES KILL!

Reg · Post by **Reg** » Wed May 23, 2001 11:28 am

As an example of the use of the 25lb'er in the early part of the Desert War (Jun - Dec 1940) consider the following extract from 'The Desert Rats'.

.... and it was in this phase of the Campaign that "Jock Columns" first made their appearance. They were named after Lieutenant-Colonel J.C. Campbell, 4th R.H.A., and were small columns of all arms: armoured cars for reconnaissance, 25-pounders for hitting, and infantry companies for the protection of the guns and for doing night work. Their task was to probe into the enemies rear areas and attack any suitable target that presented itself.

Note this unconventional use of the howitzers. In this tactical situation it would make quite good sense to carry AT ammunition in case the column bit off a bit more than it could chew as support would not be available. The lack of penetration of these rounds would not be considered a problem due to the light nature of any encountered Italian armour.

Battles such as Beda Fomm (4th Feb 1941) had the guns (2lb AT and 25lb howitzers) in or close to the front lines. Quite a different situation to later engagements.

The Jock Column would make quite an interesting small to medium sized scenario depending on what it was facing (hint hint scenario designers....).

Reg.

murx · Post by **murx** » Wed May 23, 2001 9:46 pm

One question about the British 2 pounder - why has it only 1 movement point ? The German 37mm has 4 - and the 2 pounder seems to be smaller even then the 37mm.

murx

ZinZan · Post by **ZinZan** » Thu May 24, 2001 12:43 am

This may be an allout guess, but I SEEM to recall that the 2pdr had a carriage that was difficult to move once setup, it was possible just not easy. That could explain the slow movement rate.

Or I may be talking through my hat after all

bchapman · Post by **bchapman** » Thu May 24, 2001 2:31 am

At Salerno about noon on the 10th of Sep 43 and attack
by 13 PZIV's was thwarted when 2 105mm knocked out 5 of them and forced the others
to withdraw ... 1 of the two 105mm arrived during the Battle and set up under fire
aprox 200yards from the german tanks .

AmmoSgt. What unit was this?

john g · Post by **john g** » Thu May 24, 2001 3:19 am

Originally posted by murx:
One question about the British 2 pounder - why has it only 1 movement point ? The German 37mm has 4 - and the 2 pounder seems to be smaller even then the 37mm.

murx

The 2pdr was originally a naval gun, when deployed it had a 360 degree field of fire just like a tank turret. It didn't sit on the wheels with a split trail back behind it to lock it in place. It therefore sat up rather high and was a much larger target similar to the way an 88flak is a bigger target than the 88pak.

Perhaps when guns start losing shots or gaining suppression every time they change facing except for the 360 mounts like the 2pdr and the 88flak, then this will be factored into the game.
thanks, John.

john g · Post by **john g** » Thu May 24, 2001 4:07 am

Originally posted by Urquhart:
The 25 pdr ATG is one of the new weapons put in ver 5.01. I have some question about it:why it is always yellow coulored in the purchasing screen?And why it is so useless??Almost no penetration attitude!If the 17 pdr is so strong as an ATG the 25 should be even better right?Can anybody axplain that to me??
Thanks

Actually I thought someone would have come across this by now, but if you compare it with the 2pdr, which was the other gun they were using at the time, even at range 10 the 25pdr has higher penetration. Imagine what the war would have been like if all those Matilda II's or Valentines had 25pdrs mounted instead of 2 pdrs.

Years ago I had the GDW game covering Dien Bien Phu. It was flawed in that the 10 tanks in the Valley could boost any infantry assault to a certain win, and the NVA didn't have a whole lot of chances to kill them off.

If a scenario involving Legion paras supported by m24's was gamed out vs anyones best guess as to the NVA in the '50's it would be a slaughter. The tanks would never survive.

The NVA Recoilless Rifles would have had the same chance vs the French light armor as 25pdrs vs Pzkw III's.
thanks, John.

AmmoSgt · Post by **AmmoSgt** » Thu May 24, 2001 3:59 pm

bchapman it was in the History of the 36th Inf Division (Big T for Texas patch)

Panther · Post by **Panther** » Thu May 24, 2001 4:29 pm

Speaking of SU 152 I saw a picture with an su 152 that had a good name given to it.
The crew called their SP the Animal Killer.
Igor said
Historically, the Soviets got a great deal of Tiger killing milage out of the SU-152...

I think that was pretty cool.

Guderian · Post by **Guderian** » Sun May 27, 2001 4:16 am

Actually almost everyone missed the point here

IMHO the question was about the 25mm SA ATG which was added recently. It is a french light ATG used en masse in 1940 and yes it had very poor performance. The 25 pdr gun-howitzer (calibre 87mm) was quite decent AT weapon due to fully rotating "base" which allowed it to change targets faster than many normal guns.

Kluckenbill · Post by **Kluckenbill** » Sun May 27, 2001 4:41 am

Does anyone know? Did the British have HEAT or AP ammunition for the 25 pounders in the desert, or did they just fire HE and hope that the blast effect was adequate for the task?