Photo ID: British M10 Tank Destroyer in Normandy

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
MikeMeech
Member
Posts: 65
Joined: 28 Mar 2021, 11:12
Location: Essex, England

Re: Photo ID: British M10 Tank Destroyer in Normandy

#46

Post by MikeMeech » 28 Sep 2021, 12:14

EwenS wrote:
27 Sep 2021, 10:44
It is one thing to pull a 1.2 ton 6pdr gun across country by its crew of 6, but it is entirely another to try to pull the dimensionally physically larger 3 ton 17pdr with the same number.

Finding suitable towing vehicles for the 17pdr seems to have been an issue. The intended tow vehicles, Quads and Half tracks, seem to have struggled, leading to tank conversions based on the Ram, Crusader and Stuart before 1944 was out. Nicholas Straussler, inventor of the DD tank, produced a conversion for the 17pdr in an attempt to make the basic gun more mobile. In principle it was a strap on engine unit. It came to nothing more than a prototype. Photos here.
https://forum.warthunder.com/index.php? ... ee/page/4/
Hi

I thought the German 8.8 cm Pak 43 and 43/41 were heavier than the 17 pdr? So how did the Germans cope moving it around in similar circumstances to the British with the 17 pdr?

Mike

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

Re: Photo ID: British M10 Tank Destroyer in Normandy

#47

Post by Sheldrake » 28 Sep 2021, 20:05

MikeMeech wrote:
28 Sep 2021, 12:14
EwenS wrote:
27 Sep 2021, 10:44
It is one thing to pull a 1.2 ton 6pdr gun across country by its crew of 6, but it is entirely another to try to pull the dimensionally physically larger 3 ton 17pdr with the same number.

Finding suitable towing vehicles for the 17pdr seems to have been an issue. The intended tow vehicles, Quads and Half tracks, seem to have struggled, leading to tank conversions based on the Ram, Crusader and Stuart before 1944 was out. Nicholas Straussler, inventor of the DD tank, produced a conversion for the 17pdr in an attempt to make the basic gun more mobile. In principle it was a strap on engine unit. It came to nothing more than a prototype. Photos here.
https://forum.warthunder.com/index.php? ... ee/page/4/
Hi

I thought the German 8.8 cm Pak 43 and 43/41 were heavier than the 17 pdr? So how did the Germans cope moving it around in similar circumstances to the British with the 17 pdr?

Mike
The Pak 43/41 was an improvisation and suffered the same problewms as the towed 17 pounder.
The 43/41 proved heavy and awkward to handle in the mud and snow of the Eastern Front and gunners referred to 43/41 as the "barn door" (German: Scheunentor),[13] a reference to the size and weight of the gun. Nevertheless, the improvised Pak 43/41 proved an effective substitute for the Pak 43 until sufficient numbers of the more complex cruciform mounts could be manufactured to replace it in service.
The Pak 43 had a low cruciform platform but at 4.7 tonnes was no easier to manhandle. The 8.8 cm pack 43 & 43/41 were realy a solution to engaging heavy Soviet tanks at long range. Only 2100 were built. The main German anti tank weapon in the second half of the war was the pak 40 which was more than adequate to penetrate any western tank. These equipped the towed batteries K stN herre https://www.wwiidaybyday.com/kstn/kstn1140n1okt43.htm

The Pak 43/41 on the western front seem to have ended up in the static divisions in the Atlantic Wall. Emplaced in concrete bunkers mobility was not an issue. The one at Vierville may well have caused many casualties on Omaha Beach.

German motorised units used half tracks. These had no more armoured protection that the FET or Matador
Image

The Germans increasingly deployed anti tank guns on SP mounts. Commissioning the panzerjaeger 1 on in time for the 1940 campaign in France. At this point in the war the Germans tended to faced tanks with more armour and better guns. By 1944 most infantry dividions had some SP anti tank guns.


MikeMeech
Member
Posts: 65
Joined: 28 Mar 2021, 11:12
Location: Essex, England

Re: Photo ID: British M10 Tank Destroyer in Normandy

#48

Post by MikeMeech » 28 Sep 2021, 21:30

Sheldrake wrote:
28 Sep 2021, 20:05
MikeMeech wrote:
28 Sep 2021, 12:14
EwenS wrote:
27 Sep 2021, 10:44
It is one thing to pull a 1.2 ton 6pdr gun across country by its crew of 6, but it is entirely another to try to pull the dimensionally physically larger 3 ton 17pdr with the same number.

Finding suitable towing vehicles for the 17pdr seems to have been an issue. The intended tow vehicles, Quads and Half tracks, seem to have struggled, leading to tank conversions based on the Ram, Crusader and Stuart before 1944 was out. Nicholas Straussler, inventor of the DD tank, produced a conversion for the 17pdr in an attempt to make the basic gun more mobile. In principle it was a strap on engine unit. It came to nothing more than a prototype. Photos here.
https://forum.warthunder.com/index.php? ... ee/page/4/
Hi

I thought the German 8.8 cm Pak 43 and 43/41 were heavier than the 17 pdr? So how did the Germans cope moving it around in similar circumstances to the British with the 17 pdr?

Mike
The Pak 43/41 was an improvisation and suffered the same problewms as the towed 17 pounder.
The 43/41 proved heavy and awkward to handle in the mud and snow of the Eastern Front and gunners referred to 43/41 as the "barn door" (German: Scheunentor),[13] a reference to the size and weight of the gun. Nevertheless, the improvised Pak 43/41 proved an effective substitute for the Pak 43 until sufficient numbers of the more complex cruciform mounts could be manufactured to replace it in service.
The Pak 43 had a low cruciform platform but at 4.7 tonnes was no easier to manhandle. The 8.8 cm pack 43 & 43/41 were realy a solution to engaging heavy Soviet tanks at long range. Only 2100 were built. The main German anti tank weapon in the second half of the war was the pak 40 which was more than adequate to penetrate any western tank. These equipped the towed batteries K stN herre https://www.wwiidaybyday.com/kstn/kstn1140n1okt43.htm

The Pak 43/41 on the western front seem to have ended up in the static divisions in the Atlantic Wall. Emplaced in concrete bunkers mobility was not an issue. The one at Vierville may well have caused many casualties on Omaha Beach.

German motorised units used half tracks. These had no more armoured protection that the FET or Matador
Image

The Germans increasingly deployed anti tank guns on SP mounts. Commissioning the panzerjaeger 1 on in time for the 1940 campaign in France. At this point in the war the Germans tended to faced tanks with more armour and better guns. By 1944 most infantry dividions had some SP anti tank guns.
Hi

Thanks for that information.

Mike

User avatar
EKB
Member
Posts: 712
Joined: 20 Jul 2005, 18:21
Location: United States

Re: Photo ID: British M10 Tank Destroyer in Normandy

#49

Post by EKB » 29 Sep 2021, 13:05

...

US 57mm gun at Pont Brocard, France July 1944.png
Weight of Ordnance QF 6-pounder gun Mk IV: 2,679 lbs.


US M5 3-inch gun on M6 towed carriage (4,900 lbs) copy 2.jpg
Weight of M5 3-inch gun with M6 carriage: 4,872 lbs.

Ironically the 823rd Tank Destroyer Battalion was credited as the highest scoring unit in the TD command, despite using the unpopular towed 3-inch guns from June 1944 to November 1944. Then they received second hand, possibly clapped out, M10s from other units that converted to the M36.

Post Reply

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