CoolColJ Posted September 1, 1999 Share Posted September 1, 1999 Did the British ever employ a Jumbo with the gun from the Sherman Firefly (17 pounder?) CCJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Beman Posted September 1, 1999 Share Posted September 1, 1999 I don't think so. It woulda been a major boon for all involved, but Jumbos weren't produced in high enough numbers, or for long enough, to permit this sorta fooling around. Only a few hundred (248 rings a bell?) Jumbos were produced, and the time scale was only between D-Day and the assault on the Siegfried Line. (I think) They just weren't common enough for people to fiddle with. But, as I think you think, a 17-pdr-armed Jumbo woulda been NASTY. DjB ps "Oh we'll be hanging up our washing on the Siegfried Line..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dano6 Posted September 1, 1999 Share Posted September 1, 1999 I do not believe the British or anyone other than the US recieved any of the 254 M4A3E2 jumbos. All were recieved before October 1944. And yea the 17lbr would have been great in this chasis. Too bad the US "could not" have refitted a factory or two to make the 17lbr and its ammo as the british were strapped on this gun and ammo. dano6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Peltz Posted September 1, 1999 Share Posted September 1, 1999 As mentioned, the Jumbo was only used by the US. It came with either the 75- or 76mm gun. Not only was the War Department not in favour of disrupting production to produce tanks with the 17pdr- there seemed to be some sort of aversion to using "foreign" equipment, unless there was no other choice. I scratchbuilt a model of the Jumbo a long time ago- it would have been a bear to retool for the 17pdr, involving altering the turret "bustle", same as on the Fireflies- except the bustle on the Jumbo was more than 4" thick, because of the thicker cast turret. [This message has been edited by Kevin Peltz (edited 09-01-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Beman Posted September 1, 1999 Share Posted September 1, 1999 Yeah, this aversion to "foreign" stuff is apparent, even though, often, the foreign stuff is better. Case in point: When the M1 Abrams was designed, various military planners wanted it to have the (current) 120mm Rheinmetall cannon, but they were overruled. Only later was the clear superiority of the 120mm gun demonstrated, and the order to up-gun given. I remember reading a report about this, which stated that the opposition was almost *purely* bureaucratic and from the standpoint of not using "foreign" equipment, and that all involved were aware of the 120mm's superiority. If this is so, then somebody needs to teach the paper-pushers a lesson. DjB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ssnake Posted September 2, 1999 Share Posted September 2, 1999 Doug, I read it was a SMART move to initially fit the M1 with that old 105er slugger. That way they could deceive congressmen about licensing that evil German gun - but the M1 was prepared to get it from the beginning, so it wasn't much hassle to replace the guns. Source ? I GUESS it was the manual of the original M1 Tank Platoon (not the sequel)... Sure, just one opinion - but what can I say? There's been a lot of common US-German development on battle tanks in the 70s, and even after the "divorce" the outcome were two outstanding tanks, being unrivaled in armor protection, firepower, and all-weather capability (and mobility to some extent) for 15 years. Ssnake ------------------ PGP key ID: 0xBCD59BA1 I strongly recommend the use of encryption software for e-Mail contacts. Ensuring privacy makes people feel better ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Fox Posted September 2, 1999 Share Posted September 2, 1999 As I mentioned on another thread the 17pdr gun was around quite a while before it was placed in a tank, and the US had plenty of time to have a look at it. I believe a few were shipped over (along with an 88 I might add) but they declined the opportunity to use it. Even the British proved incapable of designing a decent tank around it during the war. Recently however I did read of the Canadian units using M10's fitted with a 17pdr gun. Anybody know more about that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Peltz Posted September 2, 1999 Share Posted September 2, 1999 Simon: The M10/17pdr combination in Commonwealth service was called "Achilles" by the Brits. They also used the unmodified M10, calling it "Wolverine". The Achilles was apparently well liked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoolColJ Posted September 2, 1999 Author Share Posted September 2, 1999 Can Charles post some Penertration charts for a 17 pounder against a king Tiger? CCJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Beman Posted September 2, 1999 Share Posted September 2, 1999 Holy crow, Ssnake, you're right! THAT'S where I read about the 105/120 issue, the M1 manual! I'd just plain forgotten what it said. I wonder if that's still sitting around somewhere at my fathers house? Sure like to re-read it... DjB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted September 2, 1999 Share Posted September 2, 1999 OK, back from exile for just a sec. Got some 17 pdr vs. King Tiger charts at http://www.bigtimesoftware.com/images/17vsKT.jpg . "SVDS" is super velocity discarding sabot, a kind of tungsten round. Even it cannot penetrate the King Tiger's glacis place (though it can go through the turret and lower hull). Charles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoolColJ Posted September 2, 1999 Author Share Posted September 2, 1999 Well its good to see there is at least a 30-40% chance from the front,of some sort of damage being caused You always get the impression of the KIng Tiger being indestructable from the front (especially in CC3, even with the RealRed patch). This bodes well from the Allied point of view - would have boosted the British tankers morale no doubt, if they had some Jumbos to put them in! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts