Early UK tanks and the 6pdr gun

The inability to upgun the Matilda, Valentine and Crusader without producing a cramped turret and the need to keep the 2pdr in production to replace losses is well documented.

Would there have been any significant changes in battles if these tanks been capable of being upgunned in the same way German tanks were and the 6pdr had been in full scale production in some factories by June 1040?

 

Well, they would have come as a nasty surprise to the Norman's at the battle of Hastings. :lol:

 

Nah, the Temporal Police would have intervened........ :smok:

Edit, i've looked at the other site I have put this on an no-one has noticed, but then again, nor have they replied.....

 

... and it's reasonable to say that by 1066 they would have advanced to something like the Centurion or possible Chieftain.

 

William: "This battle won't be a problem, their army still uses Roman methods.... now whats that strange clanking sound.....Uh Oh..."

 

1066

"Harold, watch that bloke with the bow an arrer, he'll hev some Buggers eye out!"

 

One little typo.......

 

Harold: I spy with my little eye, something beggining with 'A'!

You know what they say; 'From little acorns, mighty oaks will grow'!!

 

William the Conqueror !

:smok:

 

Groan :roll:

Ok... provided you can get enough HE shells issued to the units ths would make a big difference.

A longer-ranged main gun, a main gun capable of both defeating tanks and delivering a useful load of HE...

All you have to do is figure out how to stop them charging AT guns and North Africa becomes a walk in the desert (or should that be dessert? )

 

The 2pdr (40mm) gun was able to handle the armor on early Pz IIIs and Pz IVs at most realisitc combat ranges. The big problems as Ricky points out are the lack of a good dual purpose HE round (for either the 2 or 6 pdr) and poor tactical doctrine.

So having a 6pdr available in 1940-41 (or even most of 1942) probably wouldn't have made that big a difference. Tanks have to be able to do more than just fight tanks.

 

Anything other than solid shot would have been an improvement. The 2 Pdr was no more than a high powered catapult, because of it's antiquated ammunition.

 

Up until what model would you consider the Panzer III early?

 

Gunter, who are you adressing?

 

I am not accusing anyone of anything. I am asking canambridge up to what model of Panzer III does he consider to be the early models.

 

Gunter.

I wasn't accusing you of anything. I just wanted to know who should answer your question, because I wasn't sure to whom it was directed.

 

Hehe and I should learn to read.

 

That's that one sorted out then!

 

Primarily those with the 30mm armor (and 37mm gun), roughly up to the Ausf G. These only had 30mm frontal armor and that should have been no trouble for the 2pdr out to 1000m or more.
Starting with the "H", the Geramns added 30mm armor to the hull front which would have brought the range for penetration down to under 400m, still not bad.
I'm aware that the Germans field modified many Pz III to add 20-30mm of armor and up gun them to the 50mm guns
The German's 37mm gun was good enough to take on the British Crusiers (Mk I - VI) from a respectable distance (500m or more, those with the 15-20mm armor from beyond 1000m), although the 78mm frontal armor of the Matilda II was more than a poor 37mm could handle.

 

I might be mistaken but I believe I read somewhere it was 38mm, for the E and had G,H had 42mm.

I am not too sure I am going off memory here.