Perplexed about the Valentine

[Andreas]

Originally posted by Mark Gallear:

You seem to have accepted that the British Army did not use HE with the 2pdr at this time?

Please, do not try to detract from what this is about. I have never claimed the British used HE with their 2-pdr. Neither has anyone else here, as far as I can tell.

It is not the beta testers who are against you, it is the evidence. You claiming this to be an issue of 'bias' is a bit like the pope claiming that the theory of the earth circling the sun is 'biased', and anyway, it can't be true because it is against received wisdom.

That you have not read the document is not any excuse. Simon has provided you with a full reference. If you choose not to believe him, you can get the document yourself.

So far you have not even shown the flimsiest bit of evidence for your claim, other than platitudes along the lines of 'wartime documents full of propaganda'. To turn someone pointing that out to you into persecution by 'the beta testers' is a bit rich, if you don't mind me saying so.

Regarding the German auto-cannons, let's just see what you said, shall we:

German Armoured cars were given auto-cannons with no HE potential either. Some modern vehicles that use auto-cannons are not issued He rounds because the blast is so small the effectiveness is marginal compared to fire solid shot.

You may continue to claim that ACs with AP only are

not unheard of

but we are still waiting to hear which ACs that were, and which modern vehicles those are. In your own time.

The only prejudice in arguments is on your side, since others have gone on the basis of the available evidence. Not accepting the evidence for spurious reasons, and not bringing any evidence of your own, is not good enough. To then claim that 'the beta testers are against you' is plainly ridiculous. Where's the beef, Mark?

Edit because I hate UBB code.

[ March 03, 2003, 08:44 AM: Message edited by: Andreas ]

[flamingknives]

posted by:Mark Gallear

There does appear to be a German 20mm gun in the game with only AP ammo.

There is; and if it's the one I'm thinking of, mounted on the 250/11(?) HT, then it is a squeeze bore gun that couldn't fire an HE shell anyway

I was just pointing out that not having HE ammo for all AT weapons is not totally unheard of.

Could you please specify then. You mention modern autocannon only having solid shot.

The 30mm RARDEN, (Warrior, Scimitar, Sabre), the 25mm Bushmaster (M2 Bradley, LAV 25 and Desert Warrior), the Russian 30mm (BMP-2, BMD-2 and BMP-3), the 20mm cannon mounted on the Marder and the 40mm mounted on the CV90 are all supplied with HE, and I can't think of any other modern vehicles mounting autocannon offhand

[gibsonm]

Originally posted by Mark Gallear:

That info from gibsonm is very interesting indeed. Are we talking about a British or ANZAC unit?

Neither actually. Australians. ANZAC only formally applying for the First World War.

Originally posted by Mark Gallear:

It may have been that Australia made some 2pdr HE rounds at the end of war. Be interested if anybody from Downunder has heard about this?

I suspect a fair few veterans would take issue with early 1942 being considered the "end of the war". In the European context that was roughly the half way mark and here in the Pacific it was right at the start.

I don't know if the natures were home made or not.

[Andreas]

Originally posted by flamingknives:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> posted by:Mark Gallear

There does appear to be a German 20mm gun in the game with only AP ammo.

There is; and if it's the one I'm thinking of, mounted on the 250/11(?) HT, then it is a squeeze bore gun that couldn't fire an HE shell anyway</font>

[JonS]

Originally posted by Andreas:

... the sPzB41 ... One should be very clear on it though - this is a very special gun, and comparisons to the 2-pdr are quite clearly not valid.

With one (not unimportant) caveat. AIUI, the 2-pr. with the Littlejohn adapter couldn't fire HE, because the adapter turned it into a tapered bore weapon and there was no tapered-bore-compatible HE round developed. IIRC, the Littlejohn became more-or-less standard for the Recce Regts in NWE, but some units (or some vehicles within those units) didn't fit the adapter. Basically, they accepted reduced AP performance so that they could retain the ability to fire HE (note: British units, equipped with 2-pr., firing HE, during WWII)

I'm away from my sources at the moment, so I can't provide a ref., though maybe this will jog someones memory? Also, a search through the CMBO archives should throw up some useful threads (I suggest "Littlejohn" as a seach term)

Regards

JonS

[Mark Gallear]

Just for Andreas - one more try.

My thinking is that the British Army didn’t have 2pdr HE rounds and 2pdr HE rounds were not manufactured, therefore they could not have been sent to Russia. The evidence that 2pdr rounds were sent to Russia is one document that says it happened.

My illogical thinking is that I have every reason to believe 2pdr HE rounds were not produced or used by the British Army so there is a very good chance that this document is slightly inaccurate on this point. (I have already pointed out that it seems to include figures for one Canadian tank we know was sent to Russia but not the other.) I am not an expert on logic but if something says something is so when from your experience/knowledge that it cannot be – warning bells should go off in your head.

This is an attack on one part of one document not on the honesty or cleverness of the poster. I have not even seen this part of the document quoted in full – I know I should go off and get the British Library to photocopy it and send me.

I find the view that it was not British doctrine to use HE in tanks so they could have produced them and sent them to Russia a bit hard to swallow as well. I know from the document they are sending obsolete stuff and we know that the Russians moaned about it. I have also pointed out how relieved British tankers were when they got the 6pdr with HE and the same goes for the American made Stuart’s, etc - that could fire HE.

My unofficial history of the 2pdr in British army service is this:

The reason was that the British Army had been totally under funded in the post-war period and only just about had an armoured force. (It was even worse in the US). There was a 6pdr design on the table ready to go, which the Army wanted, as it was a much better gun. But having lost most of their weapons in France and the Germans were banging on the door and it seemed like only a matter of time before an invasion took place. (America believed that England would fall as did many people in Britain.) It was decided by the powers that be to produce the 2 pdr for which some manufacturing facilities were available as rapidly as possible in as great as numbers as possible rather than attempt to switch over to the 6pdr.

There was no HE round but an experimental round was developed the blast was not exactly all that impressive. Also a Czech designer presented them with the plans for a device that increased the penetration of the 2pdr which would keep it effective against most German tanks until the 6pdr could be produced. Slight problem guns with the adapter cannot fire HE rounds. Oh well thought the powers that be – the test 2pdr HE rounds are not up to much anyway and we are not producing them – better to fit the adapter and get the extra penetration – the tanks have got MGs after all.

In the Far East 2pdrs were used until 1945 as better weapons were reserved for use against Germany who had the better tanks. Clearly a HE round would have been more useful here than an extra bit of penetration. I suspect the accounts of HE use here can be put down to home-made rounds (for which I seem to have some evidence) or manufacture in Australia (for which I don’t have any evidence). I learned a lot from the posts on this subject and it made me think but just because they existed in this theatre does not prove that they were sent to Russia. (In Russia as well as the Desert war tank fighting is going to be the main purpose of the 2pdr on the Matilda and Valentines.)

This bit is as Andreas says is beside the point – they seem to have picked on these points because if they make me look mistake or an idiot then I have got to be wrong about the 2pdr HE. I suppose there is logic to that somewhere.

German Armoured cars were given auto-cannons with no HE potential either.

Flammingknives came to my rescue on that point. If it needs HE then I suspect Andreas is a beta tester and better rush off and do something about it.

Some modern vehicles that use auto-cannons are not issued He rounds because the blast is so small the effectiveness is marginal compared to fire solid shot.

From some accounts of battles – (I have read a lot of accounts of Helicopter crews in Vietnam and armoured warfare there) – I have noted that yes there are indeed HE, Flechete rounds – no doubt CS gas and anything else you want as well are made. The crews of scout vehicles and APCs figure that AP round will kill a light armoured vehicle but HE probably won’t. An AP round will put a big hole in a man if you hit him, the HE explosion is so small that you just about have to hit him anyway. A modern autocannon puts out a lot of rounds so you going to hit a man size target sooner rather than latter. So what do they do – fill up on AP and leave the HE at home. That’s all I meant by that. (Sometimes they fill up onm He and leave the AP at home!)

Modern tanks don’t carry HE they have HEAT - it is not much use for killing infantry – if you are desperate you could fire it at an AT gun but its not really meant for that and is not as effective as HE would be. The primary anti–infantry device on a modern MBT are the MG guns!

I now freely admit that I am rude, an idiot, bad at playing CM, can’t spell, can’t write, can’t explain myself, don’t have important history friends and everything else that I have been accused of or can be accused of. I almost changed the title of the post to “Peng has got a 2pdr”. However, my personal failings do not prove that HE rounds were manufactured in Britain just for Russian use. If they were I am going to write to my MP and demand to know why our boys in the desert were not better equipped, it is after all a national scandal!

This is my last post on this subject – please have the last word and don’t call me back.

[Andreas]

Thanks Jon, I did not know that the Littlejohn adapter turned it into a squeeze bore gun.

[Andreas]

Originally posted by Mark Gallear:

Just for Andreas - one more try.

[snip]

German Armoured cars were given auto-cannons with no HE potential either.

[sNIP]

This is my last post on this subject - please have the last word and don’t call me back.

To be honest, if this is the extent of your contribution, I guess you won't be missed much either.

FYI - it is not just me, but also John Salt, Simon Fox, and a number of others who have trouble with your attitude of 'my opinion and unofficial (better: uninformed) reasoning counters all those accounts and documents you can provide' - but please, continue to make an idiot of yourself. You are doing well.

Also, short lesson in German guns. The sPzB41 is not an autocannon. It is a single-shot weapon. A quick look into the game would have shown you that, but you seem to be too lazy to carry out even that bit of research.

[JonS]

Originally posted by Mark Gallear:

… In the Far East 2pdrs were used … a HE round would have been more useful here than an extra bit of penetration. I suspect the accounts of HE use here can be put down to home-made rounds (for which I seem to have some evidence) or manufacture in Australia (for which I don’t have any evidence) ...

Producing HE rounds is a rather complex process, not just something you can get the EME boys to whip up over a brew and a smoke. If you are referring to this…

This quote although not gospel suggests that some 6pdr HE shells were home-made by their units in the Desert War.

“The 6 Pdr. tank gun and the anti-tank gun listed below did not have H.E. shells issued for them. This meant that these guns could not be used for close defence against infantry or provide fire support during assaults. Why this was, nobody knows, but there are accounts of British anti-tank gun crews making their own case shells for close defence against infantry assault. This was done by removing the A.P. shell head, filling the cartridge with a suitable piece of cloth, filling the shell case with stones and gravel, and sealing it with another piece of cloth or encasing the shrapnel content in thick axle grease. This tactic was quickly improvised in the North African campaign, and there is some indication that tank crews employed it with the 6 Pdr. L.45 as well.”

… as your evidence, then it is pretty thin evidence. The modified round as described is an oversized shotgun cartridge or flechette round. This is something that could be ‘whipped up', but it is most assuredly not an HE round.

Regards

JonS

[ March 03, 2003, 06:08 PM: Message edited by: JonS ]

[John D Salt]

Originally posted by Andreas:

[snips] Not quite correct - von Senger und Etterlin states there was an HE round for this gun. Production of rounds was not that high, apparently:

1941 - 9,200

1942 - 373,300

1943 - 130,100

Is the von Senger und Etterlin "German Tanks of WW2"/"Die Deutschen Panzer"? If it is, I'd appreciate knowing what edition you've got, as I have the Galahad (possibly 1969) edition, and I can't find ammunition production figures in it.

All the best,

John.

[Andreas]

Ammo production numbers quoted in this thread are from a different source. A website , but one I pretty much trust.

How rusty is your German John?

www.lexikonderwehrmacht.de

Do Andreas (not me) a favour and click on some of the banners, he does a superb job.

Andreas works quite closely with another chap going by the name of Jörg Wurdack who is a living encyclopedia of the Wehrmacht. I have yet to see Jörg to fail to answer a question about the most obscure units of the Wehrmacht in the most obscure places you can think of.

He posts at http://forum.panzerlexikon.de

[John D Salt]

Originally posted by Mark Gallear:

[snips]My thinking is that the British Army didn’t have 2pdr HE rounds and 2pdr HE rounds were not manufactured, therefore they could not have been sent to Russia. The evidence that 2pdr rounds were sent to Russia is one document that says it happened.

When presented with one piece of documentary evidence saying something is so, and zero pieces of evidence of any kind saying that it is false, it is completely irrational to believe that it must therefore be false. It does not even merit the term "thinking".

Originally posted by Mark Gallear:

My illogical thinking is that I have every reason to believe 2pdr HE rounds were not produced or used by the British Army

If you have "every reason to believe" this, why have you, despite repeated polite requests, completely failed to provide any evidence for this belief? Why do you choose to disbelieve all the other evidence that refutes this belief? And why do you never answer any of the questions put to you?

Originally posted by Mark Gallear:

I am not an expert on logic but if something says something is so when from your experience/knowledge that it cannot be – warning bells should go off in your head.

When you are presented with numerous pieces of evidence from trustworthy sources that disagree with your previous opinion, one if the things a wise man may consider doing is revising his opinion. Another of the things he may do is collect evidence in favouir of his old opinion. You have done neither.

Originally posted by Mark Gallear:

My unofficial history of the 2pdr in British army service is this:

Oh dear.

Originally posted by Mark Gallear:

Also a Czech designer presented them with the plans for a device that increased the penetration of the 2pdr which would keep it effective against most German tanks until the 6pdr could be produced.

The following dates are taken from the booklet "British Tanks: 1939-1945, The Second World War", 7th edition, 1978, published by the Tank Museum, Bovington:

May 1942: First 6-pdrs arrive in the Western Desert.

January 1943: First Littlejohn adaptors fitted to 2-pdrs.

March 1943: First 17-pdrs arrive with 8th Army.

The view that the Littlejohn served as a kind of "stop-gap" for the 6-pdr seems quite hard to sustain given that the 6-pdr preceded it into service by more than half a year.

Originally posted by Mark Gallear:

This bit is as Andreas says is beside the point – they seem to have picked on these points because if they make me look mistake or an idiot then I have got to be wrong about the 2pdr HE. I suppose there is logic to that somewhere.

Nobody is trying to make you look an idiot, with the exception of yourself.

The reason for picking you up on errors of fact is simply to correct those errors. If you really can't tolerate being corrected on matters of fact, you might reconsider your apparent policy of uttering fresh untruths every time you are corrected on those you have uttered already.

Originally posted by Mark Gallear:

German Armoured cars were given auto-cannons with no HE potential either.

Flammingknives came to my rescue on that point.

No he didn't; he asked you to name an example of an auto-cannon with "no HE potential". He didn't even limit himself to German WW2 armoured cars, either, which makes things even easier for you, but you have so far not deigned to answer.

Originally posted by Mark Gallear:

Some modern vehicles that use auto-cannons are not issued He rounds

Please name one.

Originally posted by Mark Gallear:

I now freely admit that I am rude, an idiot, bad at playing CM, can’t spell, can’t write, can’t explain myself, don’t have important history friends and everything else that I have been accused of or can be accused of.

I don't think anyone has accused you of most of those things. The main thing that is being pointed out to you is that you are wrong, which is apparently the one thing you still refuse to admit.

All the best,

John.

[Simon Fox]

Originally posted by Mark Gallear:

Ok, the sources such as they are do not say if Little John Adaptors were fitted or not. If you believe they were not fitted then I think the AP penetration of the 2pdr game should be reduced downward for all vehicles. I have come across info on the different marks of 2pdr both tank and AT – some have the Little John others do not – they are listed as distinctly different weapons but to a soldier in the British Army they were all 2pdrs. (I will point out again if it's got the Little John it cann't fire HE anway.)

Its pretty obvious you know bugger all about the Littlejohn adapter, amongst other things. Tony Williams website, which you linked to earlier and which is very good, is actually quite informative. Well, I had no trouble comprehending it.

No, the Littlejohn adapter should not be in CMBB as there is no evidence that the ammunition was supplied to the SU. This should have no impact whatsoever upon 2-pr penetration in the game.

The Littlejohn adapter is not a gun, its a thing which fits on a gun and it can be removed or attached quite readily depending on the preference of the crew. They are not distinctly different weapons.

As already pointed out it was introduced in 1943 when most 2-pr tank and AT guns were being supplanted. At best it should be seen as extending the life of the 2-pr not as a stopgap prior to the 6-pr.

Although indications are that the Littlejohn adapter was widely available to Brit armoured car and light tank crews by 1944 its not entirely clear as to how widely used it was used. It was sufficiently unusual that the war diaries of Brit armoured car units in NWE remark upon instances of its use. Brit tank gunners are not so ill trained that they don't know what combination of gun, adapter and ammunition they are using. Littlejohn may be seen referred to as "2pdr squeeze" in Brit accounts.

I will point out that if it's got the Littlejohn not only can't it fire HE but it can't fire AP or APC either.

[Kanonier Reichmann]

But Simon. Can it fire those dinky little hand made rounds with the rocks and stones and things?

Regards

Jim R.

[flamingknives]

Posted by:Mark Gallear

Some modern vehicles that use auto-cannons are not issued He rounds because the blast is so small the effectiveness is marginal compared to fire solid shot.

Mauser Mk30-2 on the ASCOD has HE, the Italian Dardo Hitfist might not, but given that everything else does it is more logical to assume that it does.

The 25mm round from the M2/M3 Bradley is rated as having an effective blast radius of 5m - not too shabby and the OICW (advanced grenade launcher uses 20mm "smart" shells/grenades.

In addition, all WWII aircraft mounted guns of 20mm and higher (with a few notable exceptions) used HE shells for air-to-air and air-to-ground missions. Testimony of RAF pilots shows that this was effective.

[John D Salt]

Originally posted by Kanonier Reichmann:

But Simon. Can it fire those dinky little hand made rounds with the rocks and stones and things?

Once at most, I should think... but it conjours up a wonderful image.

Anyone who has had the blank-firing adaptor of an SLR fly past their head on exercise will probably cringe at the thought of doing something similar on this scale...

After which Lt. Langridge-De'Ath (Bart.) of the Baron of Osterley's Own Mounted Police Hussars (BOOMPH) will apologise with a winning smile and the words "frightfully sorry, old chap, there seems to be too much choke on my Purdey".

All the best,

John.