Where Are The Cannister Guns On Allied Tanks?

[Col Deadmarsh]

Didn't Allied tanks have these kinds of close assault guns that were similar to the German Navthingamajig? And if so, does anybody know why they aren't included in the game?

[Gpig]

Do you mean like "grapeshot?" Or "buckshot" type rounds?

Fired into enemy held woods by a 75mm Sherman. That could be really effective. Ouch.

But I wonder if it would be any more effective than HE?

Gpig

[Vanir Ausf B]

The Answer

But Maybe It Should Be

[Dirtweasle]

...missing they are. Not only do you read about them being used in Normandy Hedgerow country, (along with WP by the way), I've read of their use in the Bulge and elsewhere.

[gatpr]

you are talking about the grenade launcher thingie right. I know some German armor had those but I don't recollect seeing them on any Sherman pix.

[Dirtweasle]

Nope, not canniser launchers. Rather cannister rounds. Sometimes called bee-hive rounds too.

[Col Deadmarsh]

Does anybody know exactly what Allied units used these rounds? Also, how were they fired? Out of the main gun? I assume they weren't fired from another gun on the hull like the German "Nav" was.

I remember in CC2, the Firefly was also equipped with these rounds and if you thought the Stu's rounds suppressed the enemy, the Firefly was even more impressive. If your infantry in the area didn't have their nose to the ground, you could kiss their ass good-bye.

[dragonwagon]

The american 37mm could also fire cannister.....

[Michael Emrys]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dragonwagon:

The american 37mm could also fire cannister.....<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Right. The Stuart used them extensively in the Pacific; probably also in the ETO. Haven't heard of a cannister round for the Sherm yet, but it might have existed and been issued.

Michael

[offtaskagain]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dragonwagon:

The american 37mm could also fire cannister.....<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The 37mm AT gun was retained for exactly that purpouse. I've read more than a few stories of it being used in the ETO. The round was brutally effective in the PTO jungle warfare. Along with WP....

[John Kettler]

panzerwerfer42,

Good points! Now, let's talk about your sig, which has a curious and amusing set of errors.

It's "Suomi" not "Soumi." The Finnish contingent has been definitively heard from on this, and I can confirm it from my own references. It's lederhosen (literally leather trousers), not liederhosen (song trousers), and I suspect "lader" is supposed to read "lady" as well.

Regards,

John Kettler

[ 08-01-2001: Message edited by: John Kettler ]

[CMplayer]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Colonel_Deadmarsh:

Does anybody know exactly what Allied units used these rounds? Also, how were they fired? Out of the main gun? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I remember reading somewhere that in

the Hedgerows a Sherman would load

a canister round in the main gun, and

then bust through a hedgerow with the

turret pointing backwards! They were

trying to land right on top of enemy

infantry, which they would then blow

to pieces. GI's then followed through

the breach.

--Rett

[ 08-01-2001: Message edited by: CMplayer ]

[Username]

The german 75mmL24 also had a cannister round. Hundreds of 9mm steel balls.

[WWB]

In other news, it was just announced that the US army is developing 120mm cannister rounds for the M1 Abrams. Now thats some grape shot.

WWB

[Pak40]

I've read about this also. I think it works like an oversized shotgun, correct?

As to why BTS didn't model this, I can understand. It requires special modeling, this isn't your typical HE shell. Cannister will definitly decrease in effectiveness over a distance, although the spread would be greater.

Also Cannister would not have the same Blast value as your typical HE shell. Therefore, it would have had to been modeled completely differently than the normal HE. For example, BTS couldnt just increase the Blast rating of a cannister shell in order to give it more killing power because the Blast power is also used to determine building destruction.

To make a long story short, I think BTS didn't model special rounds due to limited resources and time. Phosphorus and incindiaries fall into this category also.

[offtaskagain]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by John Kettler:

panzerwerfer42,

Good points! Now, let's talk about your sig, which has a curious and amusing set of errors.

It's "Suomi" not "Soumi." The Finnish contingent has been definitively heard from on this, and I can confirm it from my own references. It's lederhosen (literally leather trousers), not liederhosen (song trousers), and I suspect "lader" is supposed to read "lady" as well.

Regards,

John Kettler

[ 08-01-2001: Message edited by: John Kettler ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I didn't write it, hence the -Slapdragon at the end.

[Dirtweasle]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CMplayer:

I remember reading somewhere that in

the Hedgerows a Sherman would load

a canister round in the main gun, and

then bust through a hedgerow with the

turret pointing backwards! They were

trying to land right on top of enemy

infantry, which they would then blow

to pieces. GI's then followed through

the breach.

--Rett

[ 08-01-2001: Message edited by: CMplayer ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The SOP I read in the book "Closing with the enemy: How the Allies fought the War" (or something lose to that), was for the tank to "poke" through the Bocage and fire WP into the corners, 60mm mortar then lobbed into and behind the bocage, Infantry advances with MG support. Cannister rounds sound good too, but I'm not thinking I read about Shermans using it like that, it was the WP they had a formal SOP for use busting Bocage.

[Username]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by panzerwerfer42:

I didn't write it, hence the -Slapdragon at the end.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This thread's spelling is as bad as dried fish in a Soumi Rest-ER-rawnt.

[Chad Harrison]

wheres the WP! why dont we have WP! im sure this has been beaten to death, but it was such an important round for the allies. and it was an excellent tool (i loved WP in adv squad leader!). i dont have time to wait for the search, and i dont expect an answer. i just wanted to say that i miss those little guys in CM.

[Pak40]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chad Harrison:

wheres the WP! why dont we have WP! im sure this has been beaten to death, but it was such an important round for the allies. and it was an excellent tool (i loved WP in adv squad leader!). i dont have time to wait for the search, and i dont expect an answer. i just wanted to say that i miss those little guys in CM.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just curious: Does any have any figures on how many WP and Canister rounds were produced or used as compared to Normal HE? (tank rounds only, not artillery)

[Chad Harrison]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pak40:

Just curious: Does any have any figures on how many WP and Canister rounds were produced or used as compared to Normal HE? (tank rounds only, not artillery)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

i dont have any specific numbers, but for those of us who have seen WP go off, those little pieces of shrapnel are covered with the burning chemicals. so those rounds were dual purpose, and could kill some guys while laying down some good smoke. i dont know how often it was used in the ETO, but i do know in the PTO it was used a LOT to flush the Japanease out of caves. burns like a mo!

[offtaskagain]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chad Harrison:

i dont have any specific numbers, but for those of us who have seen WP go off, those little pieces of shrapnel are covered with the burning chemicals. so those rounds were dual purpose, and could kill some guys while laying down some good smoke. i dont know how often it was used in the ETO, but i do know in the PTO it was used a LOT to flush the Japanease out of caves. burns like a mo!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Good old blowtorch and corkscrew tactics. WP was also really good at finding other entrances to tunnel complexes. I've read one case of a WP round being put into a cave entrance, only to watch smoke rise from 15 other points on the hill side.

Incidentally, my granpa's brother who was an FO in the '50s said they were supposed to call for WP when the target was concentrated, not against dug-in targets.

[Jeff Duquette]

F.M. von Senger und Etterlin in “German Tanks of WWII” indicates that the early Stug III’s equipped with the short-barreled 75L24 employed a canister round. Presumably a function of the early Stugs lack of coax, hull, and\or TC\loader position MG.

[Mark IV]

The cannister, or "beehive" rounds we had for the M60 tank had a timing ring on the shell. For distant troops in the open or light cover, the ring was twisted to set the detonation range with a vernier scale etched on the round.

If memory serves, the ideal range was to explode it 75m in front of the enemy. Thus, if the enemy was 300m away, you wanted the round to go off at 225m. However, this round used flechettes, the little arrows that looked like finned finishing nails (nasty things). The round balls in WWII probably had somewhat less scatter and effective range.

So this round did more than turn the main gun into a giant shotgun... it allowed you to fire a single round timed to explode in front of the enemy, more or less regardless of range, for optimum coverage of soft targets. I don't know if the WWII equivalents had this feature or not, but I'll be looking....

WP, btw, made for poor smoke screens compared to regular chemical smoke rounds, and they were not its primary purpose. WP was designed for incendiary purposes as has been discussed many times before, unfortunately lost to the ages until the horrid Search engine is fixed. Or somefink.

[Mark IV]

And, ta-da, both the 75 and the Stuart did have canister rounds, and they did not have the range setting. "Upon emerging from the muzzle, the pressure of the [steel] balls causes the case to disintegrate and the balls continue their flight in a pattern similar to that of a shotgun." (FM 17-12) And later (specifically for the 37mm), "Canister is very effective against exposed personnel at ranges of less than 200 yards. It is useless at greater ranges. In jungles it can be used to clear foliage on reconnaissance."