T-50 ?

[rune]

The Russian 45mm is over rated by Jason. The Russians hated the gun and there was problems with the ammo into 1943. From rexford:

Vasiliy Fofanov has posted, on Yahoo!Tankers site, that 45mm gun had trouble penetrating front and side armor of panzers beyond 500m during 1941. He stated that one of David Glantz' books includes material on the inability of 45mm anti-tank guns to defeat panzers during June 1941.

Another quote:

The problem was so bad, according to Fofanov's recounting of the passage, that the panzer crews referred to the 45mm ATG as the Russian equivalent of the German 37mm door knocker.

And Valera states:

Vasiliy is correct about 45mm AT-gun. This gun got unpleasant nickname "Proschaj Rodina" (Bye-bye Motherland) for its low performance.

All this could have been due to

:

There was one horrible side effect to that, because it turned out that 45mm AP shell

Soviet soldiers met the war with was losing velocity faster than predicted and as a result gunnery tables were more optimistic than

they should have been. In addition the rounds were overtempered and had greater tendency to shatter than, again, predicted.

Sorry, but the 45mm was not all that impressive. My favorite quote was the 45mm had as much effect on their panzers as their panzers had on the t34. Should tell you how low opinion on both sides of the war on the 45mm.

Rune

[Tero]

Originally posted by JonS:

Why would the Russians use an imperial measurement :confused:

You should look up the Imperial Russian measurements, not the Anglo-American imperial measurements.

Also, I thought the British gun was developed around the weight of shot, rather than a specific calibre?

Both the British and the Imperial Russian field arty was based for a large part on modified naval models. For example most AT and tank guns started out by being developed and modified from naval guns.

The Red Army did surprisingly little modifications to the Imperial Russian line of development when it comes to artillery. Old models were produced as is or modernized without the lineage being discontinued.

[Tero]

Originally posted by rune:

The Russian 45mm is over rated by Jason. The Russians hated the gun and there was problems with the ammo into 1943.

But only when it comes to AT capabilities. As a infantry support gun the HE performance was excellent. It was called the Whip by the Finnish troops and it was one of the most feared and respected weapons in the field.

Sorry, but the 45mm was not all that impressive. My favorite quote was the 45mm had as much effect on their panzers as their panzers had on the t34. Should tell you how low opinion on both sides of the war on the 45mm.

While I do agree the AT performance (even with properly manufactured ammo) was not up to specs beyond 1942 the gun remained in service as a close support weapon for the infantry. The high MV and better than decent HE performance coupled with decent field manageability made it ideal for the task (hell, I operated one in 1986 and it was in the Finnish arsenal until the early 90's).

[Mace]

Originally posted by Panzer Leader:

Try DMLs 250 series if you want hard!!

Better yet, for utmost track-link frustration, try the Mirage 1/35 Renault UE tractor.

Mace

[Andreas]

Originally posted by tero:

But only when it comes to AT capabilities. As a infantry support gun the HE performance was excellent. It was called the Whip by the Finnish troops and it was one of the most feared and respected weapons in the field.

While I do agree the AT performance (even with properly manufactured ammo) was not up to specs beyond 1942 the gun remained in service as a close support weapon for the infantry. The high MV and better than decent HE performance coupled with decent field manageability made it ideal for the task (hell, I operated one in 1986 and it was in the Finnish arsenal until the early 90's).

That is my understanding as well - the gun was not kept on as an AT gun by the Red Army, but the role was changed to be an infantry gun (like the German IG75) for DF support.

tero - since you fired one, could the gun do indirect fire? If so, at what ranges?

[Tero]

Originally posted by Andreas:

tero - since you fired one, could the gun do indirect fire? If so, at what ranges?

Conceivably it could in theory fire indirect fire (like any gun). The problem is the elevation allowed by the mount. A howitzer it was not. I could envision it could do indirect fire at 2-4 km's (can't remember the listed max range) for it.

[JasonC]

"the connecton seems a bit weak"

You think the 76mm gun is exactly 3 inches just by coincidence? And the 152mm howitzer exactly 6 inches by coincidence? Not to mention .30 caliber small arms.

Everybody had calibers that reflected effects of the old measurement systems. Once a gun caliber is used, it winds up continuing in use for a long time. It is all more international and reflects longer legacy effects than you seem to suppose.

[JonS]

No offence was intended by my comments. I apologise if they were taken that way. Furthermore, with these new orthopaedic shoes that Tero and Jason provided I stand corrected

{ducks back into corner}

Regards

JonS