Ordnance QF 3 inch howitzer

[WAKEN]

The Ordnance QF 3 inch howitzer, fitted in British CS (Close Support) tanks; fired a 13.9lb HE shell. Does anybody know what the weight of explosive filling was in this shell?

[David W]

I seem to think that it was very low, rather like in the 3.7" Howitzer. Perhaps an Oz or two over a lb.

I too would be interested in an accurate figure. Perhaps Tony Williams might have one?

[phylo_roadking]

David - it can't have been THAT small or else it would have made as much sense to keep the 2pdr gun and use the legendary racking and 2pdr HE shells we've discussed before!

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 4&t=158962

[David W]

Phylo.

That isn't small compared to the two pounder !!
it's about seven to eight times the filler weight!
Going metric, its 70g (2pdr) to approx 500g in my estimate for the 3" Howitzer.

[phylo_roadking]

But is that 2pdr HE....or AT?

[David W]

[WAKEN]

I've seen on another forum that the filler weight for the 95mm CS howitzer was 3.1lbs. That's a lot for a UK shell. The 25pdr only has 1.8lbs.

[The_Enigma]

Does anyone have a photo of one of these on a tank; i dont believe ive seen one before?

Sorry to hijeck the thread, am under the impression that the CS Churchill I had the 3 inch mounted in the bow and retained its turret and main armament; is this correct? Did the other CS tanks do the same or did they replace the 2 pounder with the 3 inch howizter?

[Ostkatze]

They considered triple mounting in some Cromwells but didn't go thru with it.
Funny thing is the length of our mighty 3"'s barrel for a weapon of such low velocity.
Tony Williams has a photo of the 3" next to a 95mm HE round.

churchill-mkIIcs.jpg (10.2 KiB) Viewed 3927 times

tankuk2.jpg (83.12 KiB) Viewed 3924 times

[phylo_roadking]

Did the other CS tanks do the same or did they replace the 2 pounder with the 3 inch howizter?

T-E - the latter.

[verdenpark]

The 3" Howitzer replaced the 2pdr. in Matilda Mk. III and IV's.

I have been told that this gun also had an A.P. round. I find that hard to believe myself, but, if it did, does anyone know anything about it? What was the penetration?

[David W]

Just smoke & H.E wasn't it???

[JonS]

Just smoke & H.E wasn't it???

And not much HE.

[phylo_roadking]

And not much HE

David Fletcher of Bovinton wrote the Osprey Guide to the Matilda; he puts a Matilda CS load as being 68 rounds of smoke ONLY. But recently I've read the load actually contained a whopping TWO HE rounds! I wish I could remember where I read it though.

[JonS]

hehe - yeah. Two rounds ... what's the frigging point? You can't even complete the bracketting process. Heck, you can barely even start the bracketting process.