2-pdr HE rounds again

Discussions on all aspects of the The United Kingdom & its Empire and Commonwealth during the Inter-War era and Second World War. Hosted by Andy H
User avatar
David W
Member
Posts: 3516
Joined: 28 Mar 2004, 02:30
Location: Devon, England

Re: 2-pdr HE rounds again

#106

Post by David W » 28 Aug 2016, 14:25

2/2 changing to 2/3 appears to have been the misleading element.

User avatar
Urmel
Member
Posts: 4896
Joined: 25 Aug 2008, 10:34
Location: The late JBond

Re: 2-pdr HE rounds again

#107

Post by Urmel » 28 Aug 2016, 15:35

I don't see what difference that makes.
The enemy had superiority in numbers, his tanks were more heavily armoured, they had larger calibre guns with nearly twice the effective range of ours, and their telescopes were superior. 5 RTR 19/11/41

The CRUSADER Project - The Winter Battle 1941/42


User avatar
Sheldrake
Member
Posts: 3726
Joined: 28 Apr 2013, 18:14
Location: London
Contact:

Re: 2-pdr HE rounds again

#108

Post by Sheldrake » 28 Aug 2016, 15:42

ChristopherPerrien wrote:
Urmel wrote:
ChristopherPerrien wrote:
Urmel wrote:Coming back to this, there is reference in the AWM OH 'Tobruk' that 2/2 Australian AT Regt used HE shell in their defensive action at Halfaya Pass on 26 April 1941, acting in an infantry gun role.

Presumably again the APHE?
Believe this might be the "2/2nd Field Regiment" which I gather had 18 or 25 lb er's at the time.
Well it says 'the anti-tank gunners of 12th Battery' which makes it 2/3 Anti-Tank Regiment. But definitely anti-tank.

I'd prefer to go back to the sources rather than 1970s books.
Hey it was your nomenclature error not mine, no source is linked.

Sources ? LOL, Well, Ian Hogg was in the British Artillery and fought in WWII and was the Master Gunner at the Royal Military College after retiring as the highest rank Artillery NCO in the British Army and quite a scholar and historian. 20-30 years as Editor of Jane's Weapons. You will NEVER find a better 1st person expert source about such things again.
The action at Halfaya on 26th April involved anti tank guns from both 2/2 and 2/3 Anti Tank Regiments, which may account for the confusion. According to "Gunners the history of the Royal Australian Artillery " by David Horner, 12th battery of 2/3rd Anti Tank Regiment was equipped with twelve 47mm Italian Anti Tank guns mounted as portees on the back of Fordson trucks. This is the unit which engaged enemy infantry with HE rounds.
Last edited by Sheldrake on 28 Aug 2016, 20:20, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
David W
Member
Posts: 3516
Joined: 28 Mar 2004, 02:30
Location: Devon, England

Re: 2-pdr HE rounds again

#109

Post by David W » 28 Aug 2016, 15:54

2/3 and 2/3!

It's easily done!

ChristopherPerrien
Member
Posts: 7051
Joined: 26 Dec 2002, 01:58
Location: Mississippi

Re: 2-pdr HE rounds again

#110

Post by ChristopherPerrien » 28 Aug 2016, 16:16

Urmel wrote:Thanks for helping Christopher. I have no idea which part of 'Australian AT Regt' I got wrong, but it's always a pleasure to be set right by someone with your deep insight and helpful attitude. You're a fountain of knowledge and an asset to the forum. Just an alround great guy. You have a good day now, and let those who know their stuff talk, okay?
Times like this , I don't know if I should say "Thank You, Urmel" or " "Thank You" , you condescending green citrus eating illegitimate son of a four legged gnome".

Thank you, Urmel. :D

User avatar
Sheldrake
Member
Posts: 3726
Joined: 28 Apr 2013, 18:14
Location: London
Contact:

Re: 2-pdr HE rounds again

#111

Post by Sheldrake » 28 Aug 2016, 20:20

David W wrote:2/3 and 2/3!

It's easily done!
amended

User avatar
Urmel
Member
Posts: 4896
Joined: 25 Aug 2008, 10:34
Location: The late JBond

Re: 2-pdr HE rounds again

#112

Post by Urmel » 29 Aug 2016, 19:06

Thanks guys. The text from the AWM is now quoted here:

http://rommelsriposte.com/2016/08/28/d- ... april-1941
The enemy had superiority in numbers, his tanks were more heavily armoured, they had larger calibre guns with nearly twice the effective range of ours, and their telescopes were superior. 5 RTR 19/11/41

The CRUSADER Project - The Winter Battle 1941/42

User avatar
Urmel
Member
Posts: 4896
Joined: 25 Aug 2008, 10:34
Location: The late JBond

Re: 2-pdr HE rounds again

#113

Post by Urmel » 29 Aug 2016, 20:01

ChristopherPerrien wrote:
Urmel wrote:Thanks for helping Christopher. I have no idea which part of 'Australian AT Regt' I got wrong, but it's always a pleasure to be set right by someone with your deep insight and helpful attitude. You're a fountain of knowledge and an asset to the forum. Just an alround great guy. You have a good day now, and let those who know their stuff talk, okay?
Times like this , I don't know if I should say "Thank You, Urmel" or " "Thank You" , you condescending green citrus eating illegitimate son of a four legged gnome".

Thank you, Urmel. :D
Good choice!
The enemy had superiority in numbers, his tanks were more heavily armoured, they had larger calibre guns with nearly twice the effective range of ours, and their telescopes were superior. 5 RTR 19/11/41

The CRUSADER Project - The Winter Battle 1941/42

Post Reply

Return to “The United Kingdom & its Empire and Commonwealth 1919-45”