jdl Posted August 5, 2000 Share Posted August 5, 2000 Just wondering when the HESH rounds made their debut? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted August 5, 2000 Share Posted August 5, 2000 Slightly after WW2. IIRC the British had developed them before the end of the war but didn't provide them to front-line troops until too late. HESH is great though. Any weapon which can cause crew kills irrespective of armour thickness would have really given the 75mm Shermans something to fight with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Lakowski Posted August 5, 2000 Share Posted August 5, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fionn: Slightly after WW2. IIRC the British had developed them before the end of the war but didn't provide them to front-line troops until too late. HESH is great though. Any weapon which can cause crew kills irrespective of armour thickness would have really given the 75mm Shermans something to fight with.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Fionn have you ever seen any chart referencing penetration of armor for HESH? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rattus Posted August 5, 2000 Share Posted August 5, 2000 The HESH rounds were a development of the "wallburster" rounds (for concrete busting)which were designed for the experimental recoiless guns devised by Sir Dennis Burney during the war. None saw service. My understanding of HESH is that penetration as such of armour is not acheived (except on thin plates) but causes a scab of armour to be thrown off inside with catastrophic consequences for the crew. It is essentially defeated by spaced/laminated armours. There may be a limiting thickness (I think it would have to be extremely thick - several calibres of round) which prevents the scab being thrown off but I have no idea what it might be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted August 5, 2000 Share Posted August 5, 2000 Rattus is correct. It basically detonates and breaks a slab off the inside of the armour. Obviously if one could dampen the shock waves transmitted through the armour this weapon would be ineffective but no WW2 armour was so treated so, to all practical intents and purposes, a 6lber HESH round could take out a Tiger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hakko Ichiu Posted August 5, 2000 Share Posted August 5, 2000 Do Gammon bombs operate on the HESH principle? Keegan implies as much in his description of paratroop equipment in "Six Armies in Normandy". ------------------ Ethan ----------- Das also war des Pudels Kern! -- Goethe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
:USERNAME: Posted August 6, 2000 Share Posted August 6, 2000 I doubt they could be fired from a 57mm AT weapon. They were thin walled and designed so that the head literally flattened out. A high velocity weapon like a six pounder would be an illogical choice. Perhaps a 57mm recoiless rifle like the US paratroopers? Lewis [This message has been edited by :USERNAME: (edited 08-05-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted August 6, 2000 Share Posted August 6, 2000 Well, it wouldn't be optimal of course BUT don't forget that the British developed HESH rounds for their 105mm MBT cannon so high velocity is not incompatible with HESH. Also, I think this would be a situation of needs must. You could either have all 6pounders be useless vs the new German tanks or give them a supply of rounds which could knock them out but would be better fired from recoilless rifles. I know that if I was a general at the time I'd have said "Stuff efficiency... Just give me something the AT guns my units have can use to kill German tanks they otherwise can't hurt." Also, let's not forget that this is the nation which made a HE shell for the 2 pounder . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sailor Malan Posted August 6, 2000 Share Posted August 6, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fionn: Well, it wouldn't be optimal of course BUT don't forget that the British developed HESH rounds for their 105mm MBT cannon so high velocity is not incompatible with HESH. .<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The British also have a HESH round for the 120mm on the Chieftan and Challenger I and II tanks. We don't use HEAT, but use HESH instead. This is a major reason why the Royal Ordinance 120mm is not a smooth bore. HEAT works better if it is not spinning, and APFSDS does not spin (using the fins instead), so you get a drive towards smooth bore tank guns. HESH is a better general purpose round than HEAT (I am told), and can be used against infantry with great effect (as a HE round). The way to get round rifled guns with an APFSDS round is to have a 'loose' driving band (the copper that engages into the rifling of the barrel) to spin the shell. The loose band merely rotates without rotating the shell. Sorry about the length, this diversion was just to say that as far as I am aware, you can have a HESH round for any gun that can fire a decent HE round (probably 6lber an up), velocity is not especially an issue. The 2lber HE round didn't get a lot of use! ------------------ The conception of such a plan was impossible for a man of Montgomery's innate caution...In fact, Montgomery's decision to mount the operation ...[Market Garden] was as startling as it would have been for an elderly and saintly Bishop suddenly to decide to take up safe breaking and begin on the Bank of England. (R.W.Thompson, Montgomery the Field Marshall) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rattus Posted August 7, 2000 Share Posted August 7, 2000 I have found some "penetration" info on the "wallburster" shell - but only for the 7.2" version containing 39lb of PE. A true HESH shell would be much more effective. [from Hogg] "At a trial in August 1944, against a 6" armour plate... ...the shell blew a 117lb scab, 19" by 24", off the back of the target plate at an estimated 600f/s" Ouch! Hogg notes the 2pdr HE as not issued to tanks - (It was the job of the Besa MG to engage the inf!). Given the feeble HE content it was pretty hopeless anyway. Will CM4 see Matildas at Arras? (Heh Heh!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
:USERNAME: Posted August 7, 2000 Share Posted August 7, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sailor Malan: The British also have a HESH round for the 120mm on the Chieftan and Challenger I and II tanks. We don't use HEAT, but use HESH instead. This is a major reason why the Royal Ordinance 120mm is not a smooth bore. HEAT works better if it is not spinning, and APFSDS does not spin (using the fins instead), so you get a drive towards smooth bore tank guns. HESH is a better general purpose round than HEAT (I am told), and can be used against infantry with great effect (as a HE round). The way to get round rifled guns with an APFSDS round is to have a 'loose' driving band (the copper that engages into the rifling of the barrel) to spin the shell. The loose band merely rotates without rotating the shell. Sorry about the length, this diversion was just to say that as far as I am aware, you can have a HESH round for any gun that can fire a decent HE round (probably 6lber an up), velocity is not especially an issue. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> A couple of points: 1. HESH works better from a rifled weapon. I believe that would be true as the spinning forces would "shmear" out the plastic explosive explosive on contact. 2. HEAT could also be put in a rifled gun and also use the non spinning technique you describe for APFSDS. 3. A 57mm weapon could deliver perhaps 1/2 pound of PE? I wonder about the effects this would have. The example given for the 7.2" cited almost 40 pounds of PE! Is there a big difference in velocitys for the british HESH rounds and APFSDS rounds? Any numbers? Very interesting topic. Lewis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IntelWeenie Posted August 7, 2000 Share Posted August 7, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by :USERNAME:: 3. A 57mm weapon could deliver perhaps 1/2 pound of PE? I wonder about the effects this would have. The example given for the 7.2" cited almost 40 pounds of PE! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> It would give the crew a headache THIS BIG! (Anyone remember the old Excedrin commercials? ) At any rate, I would think 6lber HESH would be no less effctive than the normal AP round on light/medium thickness armor and possibly a bit better vs. the heavier stuff. ------------------ "Belly to belly and everything's better" - Russian proverb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rattus Posted August 7, 2000 Share Posted August 7, 2000 Only data I could find was for 7.2". For a very/very rough comparison... The 7.2" "Wallbuuster" projectile wieghed 135ln & contained 39lb of PE The 7.2" HEAT projectile (also for the Burney gun - not 7.2" howitzer!)weighed 40lb & contained 9.8lb of RDX/TNT (Penetration was 3" diameter hole in 6" plate @ 30 degrees). This indicates the "Wallburster" rounds had roughly 4 times the PE of equivalent HEAT rounds. Taking US 57mm RCL as example: It fired 2.75lb HEAT projectile containing 0.4lb of composition B. An equivalent Wallbuster round might have 1.6lb of HEAT... Given that a) Physics of explosions gives (I think!) increase in force of the ratio of weights to the 1/3 to 2/3 power... A true HESH round would be much more effctive than equivalent sized "wallbuster" round. Even a 57mm HESH round could be very effective - and much more effective than its quivalent HEAT round. I know this is very rough! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sailor Malan Posted August 8, 2000 Share Posted August 8, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by :USERNAME:: Is there a big difference in velocitys for the british HESH rounds and APFSDS rounds? Any numbers? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I don't have any figures, no. The HESH is almost certainly fired with a reduced charge, hence much lower velocity. In fact normal practice for British tanks is have a HESH up the spout if you don't know what you will meet, since it will upset a tank crew more than APFSDS will upset infantry! With IFV etc it makes a lovely mess (see previous posts in this thread) ------------------ The conception of such a plan was impossible for a man of Montgomery's innate caution...In fact, Montgomery's decision to mount the operation ...[Market Garden] was as startling as it would have been for an elderly and saintly Bishop suddenly to decide to take up safe breaking and begin on the Bank of England. (R.W.Thompson, Montgomery the Field Marshall) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts