Jump to content


Photo

Firefly! Manic Strikes Again!


  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#1 shep854

shep854

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,558 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Birmingham AL, USA
  • Interests:Military History, Aviation

Posted 20 March 2017 - 1308 PM



#2 Brian Kennedy

Brian Kennedy

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,262 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 1505 PM

Awesome! 

 

Does raise the question -- was the 17-lb-er ever used that often as an AT gun (i.e., not tank-mounted)?



#3 Wobbly Head

Wobbly Head

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,901 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Moncton

Posted 20 March 2017 - 1722 PM

Awesome! 
 
Does raise the question -- was the 17-lb-er ever used that often as an AT gun (i.e., not tank-mounted)?


Yes it was quite common the first ones were mounted on the 25 pounder gun carriages until purpose built carriages could be made.

#4 DKTanker

DKTanker

    1strdhit

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,773 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

Posted 20 March 2017 - 1759 PM

8fbd51b47bbedcbafaa261591afd4da0.jpg



#5 TOW-2

TOW-2

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 596 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 20 March 2017 - 1945 PM

NOICE.  Always good to see another (quickly uploaded!) Manic Moran video!



#6 Markus Becker

Markus Becker

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,767 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Westphalia, Germany

Posted 21 March 2017 - 0714 AM

Firefly? Really?! ... Oh, you were referring to the tank.;)

Edited by Markus Becker, 21 March 2017 - 0714 AM.


#7 DougRichards

DougRichards

    Doug Richards

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 8,808 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Looking at Tamarama Beach, Sydney, Aust
  • Interests:Degree in History and Politics. Interests are Military History, military models,

Posted 22 March 2017 - 0649 AM

Awesome! 

 

Does raise the question -- was the 17-lb-er ever used that often as an AT gun (i.e., not tank-mounted)?

 

Somewhere in my father in laws long lost photo albums is a photo of a 17pdr being hoisted for shipping to Korea from Japan. 

 

See

 

http://artilleryhist...pdr_snl699.html



#8 Markus Becker

Markus Becker

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,767 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Westphalia, Germany

Posted 22 March 2017 - 1044 AM

Good job highlighting the multibank engine and the differences it made. 



#9 shep854

shep854

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,558 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Birmingham AL, USA
  • Interests:Military History, Aviation

Posted 22 March 2017 - 1144 AM

Good job highlighting the multibank engine and the differences it made. 

Yeah, and it's a good thing that beast was so reliable--troubleshooting would have been a right nightmare

#10 Gavin-Phillips

Gavin-Phillips

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,246 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:England, UK

Posted 22 March 2017 - 1221 PM

Great video!  Really enjoyed watching that.

 

Were there any plans for a Firefly to use the wider HVSS suspension type?  



#11 R011

R011

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5,173 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Posted 22 March 2017 - 2052 PM

Great video!  Really enjoyed watching that.

 

Were there any plans for a Firefly to use the wider HVSS suspension type?  

Probably not.  The conversion was only developed for the older model Shermans with the earlier model 75 mm turret.  The 76 mm armed models with the later turret would have required them to develop an entirely new design.  There would also be less need for them as they had the Comet coming on line by then and the 76 mm was quite good enough against most of the tanks it would encounter immediately post-war i.e. other Shermans and T-34-85.



#12 Manic Moran

Manic Moran

    Mad Irish Tanking Ilk

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9,430 posts
  • Interests:Blowing things up, scale modelling, wargaming.

Posted 22 March 2017 - 2324 PM

Zaloga disagrees. http://www.missing-l...eflysz48_1.html

 

"About 550 M4A3 (75mm) were built with HVSS, and several of these were converted as part of the US 17 pdr program"



#13 JasonJ

JasonJ

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 7,030 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 23 March 2017 - 0025 AM

Zaloga disagrees. http://www.missing-l...eflysz48_1.html
 
"About 550 M4A3 (75mm) were built with HVSS, and several of these were converted as part of the US 17 pdr program"[/size]


I think the only part that would be disagreed with is R011 saying "older model Sherman", likely in reference to M4 or M4A1 hulls. There doesn't seem to be any example of the turret armed with the 76mm being converted to 17 pounder, which is probably the more important point. So a minor disagreement to a generalized statement. Those severely M4A3s in the US 17 pdr program, is just that, several, and it seems that all still had the 75mm, not 76mm. M4 Sherman production and upgrades were rather complex in the variant types, probably most generalizations on the M4 can be proven wrong with some lesser known occurrence.

Or perhaps change "disagree" ---> "actually" as the matter started with "probably not" rather than "no".

Edited by JasonJ, 23 March 2017 - 0034 AM.


#14 Manic Moran

Manic Moran

    Mad Irish Tanking Ilk

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9,430 posts
  • Interests:Blowing things up, scale modelling, wargaming.

Posted 23 March 2017 - 0139 AM

GP asked specifically about the HVSS suspension, the gun/turret was not inquired about.

#15 JasonJ

JasonJ

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 7,030 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 23 March 2017 - 0149 AM

GP asked specifically about the HVSS suspension, the gun/turret was not inquired about.

 

Don't often see a response starting off with either "agree" or "disagree" to an inquiry in question form. But English mutates so often. So one more oddity of the language to explain to the learners of the language if it becomes more common place later down the road of mutation.



#16 Markus Becker

Markus Becker

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,767 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Westphalia, Germany

Posted 23 March 2017 - 0542 AM

Zaloga disagrees. http://www.missing-l...eflysz48_1.html
 
"About 550 M4A3 (75mm) were built with HVSS, and several of these were converted as part of the US 17 pdr program"[/size]


The US had a 17pdr program? They had the M36.

#17 Dark_Falcon

Dark_Falcon

    The Stryker's Friend

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,038 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicagoland

Posted 23 March 2017 - 0852 AM

 

Zaloga disagrees. http://www.missing-l...eflysz48_1.html
 
"About 550 M4A3 (75mm) were built with HVSS, and several of these were converted as part of the US 17 pdr program"[/size]


The US had a 17pdr program? They had the M36.

 

 

Yes, but in 1945 the US Army did have a batch of M4A1s and M4A3s converted to carry the 17-pounder, though none of them saw action and 20 of them were signed over to the British Army.



#18 Gavin-Phillips

Gavin-Phillips

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,246 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:England, UK

Posted 23 March 2017 - 1557 PM

Zaloga disagrees. http://www.missing-l...eflysz48_1.html

 

"About 550 M4A3 (75mm) were built with HVSS, and several of these were converted as part of the US 17 pdr program"

 

Thank you.

 

With your comment on the video about the Firefly's weight increase I was wondering if at least it had been looked into.  Apparently so, but evidently not in even modest numbers.



#19 R011

R011

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5,173 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Posted 23 March 2017 - 2052 PM

I was under the mistaken impression that the later 75 mm armed Shermans used the same turret as the 76 mm as this seems to have been the case with the Jumbo version. 



#20 DKTanker

DKTanker

    1strdhit

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,773 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

Posted 23 March 2017 - 2153 PM

I was under the mistaken impression that the later 75 mm armed Shermans used the same turret as the 76 mm as this seems to have been the case with the Jumbo version. 

76mm was only mounted in the T23 turret while the 75mm could, and was mounted in both the smaller* original turret and the T23 turret.  The "Jumbo" used the T23 turret because it offered better armor protection, and because by the time Jumbos were being built the T23 turret had become the new standard.

 

*Smaller turret but same turret ring diameter of 69" (1752 mm)


Edited by DKTanker, 23 March 2017 - 2156 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users