Britain's Tiger Killer - The 17-Pounder
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 25 มิ.ย. 2024
- An overview of the WW2 British 17-Pounder gun including the vehicles that mounted it.
More War Movie Content: / johnnyjohnsonesq
Second Channel: / @johnnyjohnsonhistory
Movies and video games featured:
Return of the King (2003)
Fury (2014)
#ww2 #tank
Remember if the 17 pounder dont fit...
PUT IT IN SIDEWAYS!!!
What if the radio doesn’t fit, or if the engine is no good?
@@oldschoolman9878 cut a hole in the back and let stick out the back I guess
Remember if the tea drewer doesn't fit....
Back to redesigning!!!!
@@oldschoolman9878
get 3 car engines put em together
@@Sean-yj4wq 5*
Dad always told me he was very happy when the 17 pounder came out. Big morale booster, and solid game-changer.
Was that on War Thunder or World of Tanks?
@@chrisberry2414can't wait for it to come out in update 19.42
My Great Grand father john basically said the same thing as he was in the North African campaign after being stationed Gibraltar.
Sicily landing then heading North in Italy just before Rome took a Mauser round to his Aris/backside & could never sit right since as he missed a junk of his cheek with most of the bullet being left in as they could extract it in full.
After his cremation 1/2 a century onward it in his ashes at my fathers place.
17 pounder was certainly useful as a moral boost then anything as big bang make troops confident.
The 6 pounder was ample at the time for most anything but 17 was just to make sure.
@@arnijulian6241 They don't make men like that breed, anymore.
@@Great_Sandwich Well I was raised by him in part & his son my Grandfather Jim who was in the Korean war then Kenya.
My father was out & about the globe as a mercenary when I was really young.
Even my brother calls me a Victorian man as an attempted insult which I take as a compliment.
Being mute till 7 I spent little time around my own generation learning from my elders instead & much preferred my own company to others.
I'm as close as you get to the Great & silent generation that instructed me in polemology=warfare studies among other acumen that would not be taught today due to people lacking mental constitution.
Hardship & trail with a guiding hand with encouraging words is a rarity for the youth of today.
Many would not have been suited to my childhood but i enjoyed it very much.
My brother was not made to do the same as I hunted since 5 of my own choice butchered with my god father as an apprentice since 10.
forged my own blade at 7 & made an single cylinder engine by 9 from a block of steel.
My elders showed me to think critically & made me very self reliant which made me the person I am.
God bless British "fuck it, we ball" engineering
"Sir the boiling vessel won't fit!"
"Cancel it and shut down production!"
My Uncle Gerry served in the RCA (Royal Canadian Artillery) during the war. He started out on the 2-pounder and eventually served as a Gunner for a 17-pounder. He always told me that it was such a deadly gun. He also gave me heck for joining the infantry. He sadly passed in December last year. Thanks for the great videos.
What did he think of the gradual gayification of Canada?
The 77mm is actually a 76mm gun, but it didn't share ammunition with either the conventional 76mm or the 17 Pounder, so it was renamed to prevent confusion in the field. The gun was a bit shorter and the shells a little weaker, but they still retained more than enough power to ruin any tank it came across, while having superior ergonomics.
That is true.
It’s wild how back in the day how many different ammo types got made for the same caliber, seems like the problem was not only in small arms like was with .30 and .45 cal ammunition for rifles and handguns not matching for any allied nation in WW1, the problem only slightly being fixed by WW2.
If NATO did one thing right it was standardizing ammunition.
It’s wild how back in the day how many different ammo types got made for the same caliber, seems like the problem was not only in small arms like was with .30 and .45 cal ammunition for rifles and handguns not matching for any allied nation in WW1, the problem only slightly being fixed by WW2.
If NATO did one thing right it was standardizing ammunition.
No tank gun of ww2 could - or did - penetrate the front armour of a King Tiger.
@@tileux As if that bloody thing was ever relevant.
The Comet's gun was named the 77mm high-velocity (17pdr. being 76.2mm) to distinquish the two shells for logistical reasons and avoid confusion with sending the wrong munitions to the wrong unit. While the projectile was the same in both, the 77mm had a different, shorter casing to fit into tanks better. It's a bit like how .38 Special and .357 Magnum cartridges are pretty much the same, but they're given different designations to avoid confusion (and the .357 casing is just slighly longer to make it harder to fit into guns designed for .38 Special, while it's perfectly fine to put .38 Special into a gun designed for a .357 Magnum).
You do a great job condensing so much information into these shorter form videos, they’re perfect to watch when taking a short break at work
i think people really underestimate the effect of the smaller 6 pounder. it had a much faster fire rate and could pen pretty much everything up to a panther, but penning the tank isn't everything, often crews would bail out after one hit knowing that yet another round is incoming in short order. the main advantage of a six pounder is its hella manoeuvrable, you can slam that thing on the back of a universal carrier or a jeep and it'll get the battlefield much faster than a 17 pounder, which required a specialised tractor. great examples are postion 'snipe' in the second battle of el alemain where a 6 pounder section damn near destroyed 1/4 of the german tank force across a couple nights completely unsupported.
*edit(maths)
the six pounder definitely punched above its weight.. are you referencing the first or second battle of El Alamein? I’m interested in learning more
6 pounder fan here! :D
@@cw5277 It was the second battle, i should say my maths might be wrong on the half of the german force thing but they got like 57-60 kills , so its more like a quarter but considering this was about thirteen six guns its still fairly good
Something people tend to forget when discussing AT guns is that tank crews don’t fight to the death
@@matthewjones39 yeah, tiger 131 was captured by 6-pounder armed Churchills
5:50 Those puns packed quite a punch.
"Sir, the gun won't fit!"
"We did this seven times in the comments already."
The amount of content you put on these short videos is amazing!
Love the tactical cat logo =)
@@JohnnyJohnsonEsq Not mine, but I like it too
Yeah it truly is and who knows may want to also look up Soviet landmines or those Nazi mines I told about like the S-Mine or any others in that movie Land of Mine you talked about or look into guns of Mars Attacks is another has the M2 Browning and M-14 rifle there as well among others like the Colt 1911 anyway look it up or as they say now Google it.
Yes it really is and who knows what others out there but could do one on Bombers like the B-52 and Soviet Tupolev and like I already said there's many other topics.
Easily my favorite AT gun of WW2. I just love the name 17-Pounder. It just sounds so powerful. And its use in the Sherman Firefly, Comet, and Centurion 1 helped make them some of my most favorite British tanks in history.
And solid puns at the end of the video.
The challenger was the superior vehicle.. much liked by its crews.. it was very roomy and mobile... the armour was not an issue as it was deployed 1 tank to 3 Cromwell and sat back until called forward to engage at optimum deflection before moving back to reserve.. Britain defeated 5.5 panzer divisions in Normandy.. USA 1.5
21st Panzer was equipped with French trophy armour.
German tanks in in the American sector of the Bocage would have been as useless as American tanks were until modified to rhino tanks.
Almost all of the German armour came from east or south through or around Paris.
Ya know, for your next showing of a BoB scene, you should write at the top-left corner “Captain, are personal letters to be considered contraband?”
The basic reasons the US REJECTED the 17 pounder as an Arment for the Sherman tank as a standard gun, was due to supply Logistics , and the internal layout of the turret in a Sherman firefly was deemed UNSATISFACTORY for US tank crews, better to have perfect later, than good enough now mindset. The CHIEFTAIN answered this question in one of his Q and A videos
Except the 76mm was nowhere near as good as the 17 pounder in Armour Piercing without HVAP and that was rare and not readily replaced. The commanders of the US 2nd and 6th Armored Divisions were not happy with the performance of the 76mm.
I've never heard British armoured division commanders complaining about the performance of the 17 pounder.
"You know what they call a 17-pounder with cheese in Paris?"
A FrogMac?
Canon Royale
Le Big Gun?
" Because of... the metric system?"
"Check out the big brain on Czech conscript!"
A Royale with French gun crew.
A most excellent choice,naturally biased, however, just watched ,Tankies ( 5th RTR ) on the BBC, by Mark Urban....cheers, Johnny...E...😊😊😊
British guns and tanks never get proper credit =)
@@JohnnyJohnsonEsq...a former associate, was an artillery man in WW2....German POWs assured him they feared British artillery....a wonderful man...Sir Tom...RIP...
My Grandfather fired one of theses things while doing an army instructors course on a range in 1943. He always talked about it being the most impressive weapon he ever fired.
One of my Grandfathers served as a medic on Normandy, and after the link up with the British, his unit spent a lot of time in close proximity to British units, eventually developing a friend who remained a family friend until his death in the mid 2000s.
Both my Grandfather and his friend would always talk about how much British and American troop's loved having Firefly tanks around, and how bad they felt for the Firefly crews who got pulled every direction because of officers mistaking hull down Panzer 4s for Tigers. They would also poke jabs at each other, how the Americans wouldn't advance without tanks or Air cover, or how the British would stop for tea at the exact same time every day to the point the Germans learned when they could relax.
While APDS was capable of incredible penetration, they had serious accuracy issues. By Normandy tanker doctrine held that APDS was to be used at a maximum of 500 yards.
This is true! And the anecdotes of inaccuracy that were levied at the 17-pounder were exclusively due to the early APDS shells. In AP and APHE, it was as accurate as any other gun.
Amazing work keep them coming your getting better and better with every video
Thanks as always brother.
@@JohnnyJohnsonEsq your welcome my friend
Yes it really is and also even more ideas could do one on B-52 bombers, those notorious mines of Land of Mine like S-Mines and Tellers, T-54/55 tanks are another along with the M1 Abrams Tanks and like I already said before many topics out there including some already mentioned before and who knows the world is filled with a lot.
He who aims well scores. Among the best arsenals.
A bit of an ambush with the quick firing puns!
Great video, straight to the point and informative
Excellent little piece Johnny. The development and deployment of the gun is very well covered in such a short time.
Great video johhny, keep up the good work!
While the Sherman Firefly was exceptionally dangerous to the Germans, it did make the tank the highest priority target for destruction compared to the regular Shermans, attempts were made to hide the distinctive long barrel by painting a third of the barrel or adding a fake muzzle break half way the barrel to fool long distance observers.
Really enjoy your videos. Keep it up!
You're the best, Johnny. Keep it up!
I find it funny how among British tank destroyer that armed with 17-pounder, the one on US hull is considered the best (M10 Achilles and M4 Sherman Firefly) at that tine the best hull from British is Archer with Valentine hull, its only later into near the end of war where British finally came with better 17-pounder armed tanks with Comet and early Centurion (and these are not classified as tank destroyer)
Thanks buddy. Keep up the good work !
You forgot to mention the link with the Australian Cruiser program. Otherwise great vid
Interesting Fact:
The 17 pounder was one of first guns to use Armour-piercing discarding sabot or APDS rounds which could penetrate 256 mm of armour at 500 meters and 233 mm at 1000 meters. However it was less accurate fire at ranges beyond 500 yards due to less visible rounds when fired. Also, the greater penetration came at the expense of less damage to enemy tanks when penetrated.
I mean you wouldnt want to be in the tank if the enemy is putting holes through it in the first place
Another issue with the APDS on the 17-Pounder was the accuracy. It was considerably less accurate than other guns firing standard AP/APHE at the time. Unfortunately this fact has been twisted to just "The 17-pounder was inaccurate", which is not true.
@@davilioses8225 The crew is dead either way, but it's probably easier to repair a tank that "only" has a small hole in it.
'Damage to enemy tanks' is not really a consideration, and APDS was not noticably worse in this regard.
Real life isn't a videogame. In real life, any penetration is all but guaranteed to knock out some vital component or crew.
@davilioses8225 Arguably, thats an advantage. If you are successfully attacking a position defended in part with tanks, or repelling an enemy armoured attack. Such that the enemy is forced to pull back, and leave behind damaged/abandoned tanks, then the less damage they have taken, the better. It allows for better study of enemy equipment, and potentially the ability to repair and use these enemy vehicles. Not super common, but it did happen, especially the Germans used a lot of captured tanks.
The lack of explosive filler and HE is a sad face moment.
crews preferred the 75mm over the 76mm in the shermans due to a similar issue.
One of the problems was that when using APDS, it was pretty inaccurate. At least that long ranges. Mind you, in Western Europe ranges weren't necessarily all that long. It also kicked up a huge cloud of dust when it fired which meant you couldn't spot the fall of shot. There is one of the remaining Comets at the Hong Kong Museum of Coastal Defence I think it was. I have a photograph of it somewhere. I think the gun on that had a very similar performance to the American easy eight Sherman's.
Worth noting you can tell which British tank crew member operated a Sherman Firefly by paying close attention to the lack of eyebrows. Sherman Fireflies had a nasty habit of ejecting spent 17 pounder casings that still had enough hot gasses that will burn for some time.
The actual severity of that claim has been contested a lot over the years. Armoured Archives has covered it in their videos on Firefly.
Some people get incredibly upset that this gun is actually better than the 88 on the tiger one, and it made a Sherman a big cat hunter.
Ah yes the firefly gun (Also I did notice the video quality on these vids is amazing keep it up johnny :) )
The Archer was a very appropriate name considering that the APDS fires a tungsten arrow.
And the Firefly was more that capable of dealing with the Tiger tank with one famously killing three in one engagement. In another battle one firefly killed four panthers and knocked a fifth.
The 1st Tiger tank knocked-out of the war was Tunisia on 31 January 1943.
It was either done by a 6 or 2 pounder antitank gun by the 17th/21st Lancers of the British Army.
Funnily a 2 pounder hit the turret ring that made the inoperable as the round was loaded in the bearings.
A humble little (British Ordnance QF 2-pounder) with a contact angle of 30° at 500yards can piece 1.85 to 3.55 inches of armour depending on the round type used.
Armour piecing high velocity was the best for this.
All but a tiger II tanks Front hull: 100 mm (3.9 in) could be penetrated by a 2 pounder let alone a 6 pounder which could penetrate every portion of a tiger tank at 500yards.
Don't underestimate small guns.
The only real; draw back of the 2 pounder was (High-explosive tracer-HE/T Mk II) left a lot to be desired as 40mm diameter shell is a tad narrow for High explosive.
6 pounders 57mm shell solved this issue for anti personal role.
Honestly 17pounder was over the top but great for moral as men knowing they had that going bang with a load boom is good for the spirit & disheartening for their foes.
Archer was actually classified as a (Motorised Gun Carriage=MGC) & the USA equivalent is (Gun Motor carriage-GMC).
British 1916 (Gun Carrier Mark I) is the 1st MGC & 1st Self-propelled gun though not al MGC are self-propelled guns to make matters confusing as the Archer is a MGC but not a self propelled gun.
M3 Gun Motor Carriage is the USA's 1st GMC & self-propelled gun in 1941 which it was alright but M7 Priest was a real improvement in only a year in 1942.
M6 Gun Motor Carriage would not be a Motorised Gun Carriage but a well armoured (Portée) in British doctrine & classification.
Mind the USA will much like France to inflate their capability on paper alter the definition of what is & isn't.
Glad you found this one and added some great extra info on the overlooked power of the 2pounder and 6pounder! Will try to do you justice when I cover them!
@@JohnnyJohnsonEsq will be looking forward to it.
Most pay the smaller guns little mind but the bulk of what was used was on par or smaller then the British 2 & 6 pounder for the Antitank role.
After the 7.5 cm Pak 40 the 3.7 cm Pak 36 was the Germans most abundant antitank gun they had which leaves more to be desired then the British 2 pounder though the German Stielgranate 41 really upped penetration but limited 300meter range.
7.5 pak 40 was a wonderful gun but F trying to move at shy of 1 & 1/2 metric tons.
Germans took it right to the limit of weight for a man operated gun.
6 pounder was 1.14 or 1.215 tons if mk1 or mk2.
A big gun is nice till you have to wheel it about on soft soil-ground let alone in mud.
A 2 pounder is 814kg which a dozen lads in a squad could carry in it's bit s if need be.
2.8 cm sPzB 41 classified as a heavy Antitank rifle later termed light antitank gun was an odd German creation that near 3000 were made.
The French had such a shortage of anti tank guns they were using Canon d'Infanterie de 37 modèle TRP's from 1916.
25 mm Hotchkiss anti-tank gun left even more to be desired as fine against armoured cars but any tank of ww2 it really wasn't up to scratch.
AC 37 anti-tank gun was underwhelming as well.
That's right. Weight and soil is everything. Half the reason why the "Big Cats" were mostly junk.
@@JohnnyJohnsonEsq Panther tanks has a 12.5 PSI which is usable.
Tigers lightest Ground pressure combat tracks: 1.04kg sq cm (14.8psi)
A human foot is about 16PSI for perspective Johnny.
Even the heaviest variant of the Churchill tank Mk4 was 13.1 psi.
Churchill tank was normally closer to 11PSI.
Lightest
6 bogeys & small roller wheels, 12 bogey arms, 24 road wheels is a lot of parts compared to other tanks which gave the Churchill it's forward hang over that served other purposes like added angled armour when engaging or crossing trenches.
Sherman M4 tank varied by model from 11.1 to 12 PSI roughly.
USA Abrams tank is a ludicrous 15PSI
British FV4201 Chieftain is 12.8 which is much
13PSI is about the limit of a what tank or vehicle can impart to be practical in combat usage.
closer to 11PSI is optimal which few tanks reach down to or below.
USSR T-34/85 had a very low ground pressure of 10.5PSI which you can't ask for better while retaining usable armour.
Thanks for video 17pder 77mm guns
Helped trun the tide👍
three puns at the end we eating good with this one boys
When you realize the 17 pounder was a 76.2mm and was one of the most powerful Anti-tank guns the allies had (On the western front)
What happens when you realise it’s 76.2mm?
@@jarraandyftm 76.2mm was used on many other anti tank guns like the ZiS-3 and many guns on Shermans and T-34s and yet none of them have nearly the same pen as the 17 pounder
@@TaitLawrence-xl2xb i know. I want to know what happens when you realise it.
@@jarraandyftm The "When you realize" meme implies you get shocked when you realize something
@@TaitLawrence-xl2xb ok, just horrendous use of the English language.
Love the use of old historical footage!
Getting to a church on a hill maybe a challenge. Thanks again, Johnny. Always appreciate
Hehehe not 1 but several puns at the end ,love it
17-pounters were also put in the Achilles tank destroyers.
Also, the first time the allies encountered Tigers they were taken out by 6-pounders in Africa.
The 2nd best Gun the British developed, right behind the L7.
My father was in the Royal Artillery and told me at Woolwich arsenal he first saw the gun he told his captain who didn't believe a gun would have a breach as large as a tea chest, the story continued they sent out several guns to North Africa, the story went around his regiment the 17 pounder hit the first tiger going clean through and hitting the second German tank behind the tiger, perhaps a tall story to boost moral. It was a very powerful gun.
amazing bit of kit !!
Always liked the wave pattern used to disguise fireflies as shorter barrelled shermans, even put it on my leman russ vanquisher models.
Firefly is so uncomfortable to be in from videos ive seen. Hope you dont mind hugging the cannon
Just shows how rugged the 25 pounder gun carriage was to cope with the recoil of the 17pdr.
1:04: Spinning right 'round, 'round, 'round, 'round...
Was expecting Girls und Panzer, simply because. Did not expect, err, the third Lord of the Rings movie, of all things?
Addendum: I wonder if those Archers will be used for St. Gloriana in Girls und Panzer das Finale?
17 pounder ready~!
- 17 pounder emplacement when selected
Just come back from a big open air market.
One stall was selling what looked like metal detector finds.
He had a lump of metal labelled as a 17 pounder shell. Looked like the back two thirds of it. I wondered what it hit to break off the front third.
It was heavy.
Sure man, you put out great videos!!!
And I never take your videos for Grant Ted!!!
That was quite the whopper of a gun. Thanks, Johnny, catch ya for another one.
l know about this amazing 17-Pounder from the War Collage many years ago.....Thanks JJ for the fine video your friend Old F-4 Shoe🇺🇸 in my 80's....
The 17 Pounder was quite effective as an anti-tank gun but it was in some respects too powerful for use as a tank gun. It had a massive muzzle flash which was one of the reasons the version mounted on the Sherman got the name Firefly but it both gave the tank’s position away and also could blind the crew so they couldn’t see where the shot hit, reducing follow up accuracy. Whole it did have a high explosive round it wasn’t terribly effective. In order for the shell to survive the powerful gun firing the casing needed to be thicker which reduced the amount of explosive filler it held. And while it was one of the first guns to use discarding sabot ammunition those had a reputation for being very inaccurate at range, so it was good that the regular armor piercing shell worked so well. It turned out the gun was so high velocity the alloy the sabot was made from would start to melt in the barrel. This meant that the sabot petals didn’t always come away cleanly, making the penetrator drift off target. The Comet tank used the same projectiles but with less propellant, the reason its gun was called 77mm instead of 17 Pounder to tell the ammo apart, and it didn’t have the accuracy problem. Post war the sabot alloy and its design was changed which also corrected the problem.
And also a bit of trivia on why it’s called a 17 Pounder. It’s a holdover from the days of muzzle loading cannon and is similar to the gauge rating of shotguns. The name refers to the weight of an iron ball that will fit down the barrel, so in this case 76.2mm. Other common British gun sizes were 2 Pounder (40mm), 6 Pounder (57mm), and 20 Pounder (84mm).
I think you mean lead ball because those guns fired steel shells with the same weight as the name implies.
Which makes me question whether that’s true or just simply the weight of a steel projectile of that caliber.
@@kimjanek646The British “pounder” naming convention did indeed refer to the weight of a cast iron round ball that could be fired by an 18th or 19th century smooth bore muzzle loading canon of a given muzzle diameter. For some reason they kept the same convention long after the guns became rifled and breach loading. So a modern gun with an approximate bore diameter of 76mm would have fired a cast iron round ball of 17 pounds were it an 18th century muzzle loader. Made no sense really.
@@Chiller11 But a 17pdr AP shell weighs 17pdr but isn't spherical. So to me this doesn't seem plausible.
Same with the other AT guns.
Like the 25pdr fired a 25lb HE round.
@Chiller11 poundage is actually a very intuitive way of describing guns, as the numbers more approximately follow the power. For example, a 17pdr is a lot more powerful than a 6pdr, which is reflected in their poundage.
This difference appears much less if you use calibres - a 76mm sounds a lot closer to a 57mm than it actually is. This is because weapon volume increases approximately in the cubic power compared to the linear increase in calibre.
@@kimjanek646 The old muzzle loading cannons fired iron round shot, amongst other types of ammo, and the calibre was the diameter of an iron ball that weighs (for example) eight pounds. The calibre of shotguns was worked out by the diameter of a ball of pure lead that, in the case of a 12 bore, is one twelfth of a pound. This was 0.729 inches.
Love the puns at the end there.
All i remember about this gun, is that its emplacement was huge and difficult to fit into certain spots in Company of Heroes, but my god was it powerful.
This makes me proud to be British
Standard everywhere i could get it in the old game "close combat: a bridge too far"
Always the most difficult maps where when i had to use 6 pounders because the 17 wasnt avaliable. With clear line of sight, 17 pounders were taking out tigers fro. 1500-2000 meters.
I think my husband told me his favorite vehicle from his serve the Rooikat has a 17 pounder gun.
Comet'ary on this pounding topic was a blast! 😅
Good video really surprising of this taking out the German 88mm gun and also other future videos and still waiting may want to do ones on SA-7, Stinger and any missiles against aircraft, AK-47 rifles, M-14 rifles, RPG-7, MIG Jets family and MI-24 Hinds are good candidates and also may think of those notorious German Nazi mines to think about like the S-Mine and Teller anti-tank mines to think about as well as M2 Browning and DSHK machine guns are good among others anyway many others to look into.
Man, I remember getting jumpscared by exploding panzer out of nowhere when playing company of heroes because of this big gun
I would say that this video has but one Achilles' Heel
Would be interesting to see the QF-32 Pounder (a derivative of the QF-3.7" AA Gun) covered.
Just want to add context for anyone who still wonders why the gun is pointing to the rear on the Archer->Recoil. It was tested with it pointing forward->Flip was the answer.
Hey Johnny, you didnt mention the Churchill variant "Black Prince" A43. It also used the 17-pounder.
You missed the Avenger. Very similar to the Challenger but with an open topped turret
the archer was good value ...a reliable chassis , good punch , a great hit and run vehicle for the $ ...even the russians loved that chassis
Will a Panzer 4 video come out? It would be great to hear about its use in tv shows, especially Japanese kaiju flicks in the 60s-70s like Mirrorman, Izenborg, and Ultraseven
The puns…….. God!! Help!!!
Surprisingly enough, the 17 pounder was place on the British Sherman’s turret that turns into a Sherman firefly
Jesus Christ when will you make a Lee enfield video? I mean it’s way more iconic than these other guns your talking about
M16: ik what you mean
I believe the Yankee designation for the 17-pounder is the Dr. Disrespect, if I've heard correctly.
This was a really good gun. But as far as I know, Archer was not very popular among their crews. The driver has to move out from his seat during shooting because recoil of the gun would smash him
That's a myth the driver was perfectly safe sitting in his seat. The whole idea of the Archer was to shoot and scoot that's not going to work if you have to wait while for the driver to climb into the cramped drivers seat. Also if the driver gets out of his seat where does he stand there is no room in the vehicle.
@@stuartburton1167 I have checked it On Wikipedia there are two different versions (PL vs EN). So you are right, and thank you very much
Can you do the dukw
In war Thunder they only used solid shot....but also sabot in upper tiers
Archer glad he brought up the 17 pounder?
I just shot 3 different tanks with this in war thunder and they shot back and killed me immediately
Finally, a video about weapons without the stupid cartoons.
Can you cover the Canon de 75 modèle 1897?
Too bad you forgot about the avenger
The British really did come up with the dorkiest looking tanks.
And yet they worked. Churchill, Sherman Firefly, Cromwell.
My Ninja
Three tanks, one gun.
I wonder why Saunders University have a Sherman Firefly with a 17 pounder gun.
Because it's "technically" mostly still an American vehicle.
(albeit if you don't count the gun, radio, side skirts & various smaller aspects)
They can't spend all their money on hamburgers and Coca-Cola.
@@jimtaylor294 57,307 No 19 British Radio Sets shipped to British Empire under Lend Lease.
What actually was the "17lb" bit? Was it the weight of the propellant bit or the weight of the projectile?
Or the whole thing?
Nominal weight of the projectile. Some ‘17 pounder’ projectiles were lighter. Have a look at the Wikipedia entry for 17 pounder QF, there’s a table of projectile weights in there.
@@RB-qq1ky Thank you.
Jagdpanzer IV L/70 ahhh gun. Speaking of Jagdpanzer IV...
Meanwhile in Warthunder...
I thought it was a 105 mm
Yanks like to compare their 76mm gun to the 17lbr, but the reality is the 76mm was actually 75mm bore, renamed to 76mm to not confuse or demoralise the troops. The 17lbr had considerably more propellant than the 76mm, kilos more.
The yanks like to claim innaccuracy due to the APDS round, but the APDS wasnt issued until mid september early october '44, and all the tiger 1, tiger 2, and panther kills attributed to it in normandy were done using APCBC, APBC, and possibly some APCR. Three of those kills were confirmed at 1000-1200 yards, from Wittmans last attack, in five minutes. Wittman was crisped at a range of approx two hundred yards ny canadians to his left. The first king tiger knocked out was taken out on the very first intro to battle, litterally as soon as it appeared, by a firefly, which reported it as a panther. A second was knocked out later that day, but it wasnt until hours later they were identified as a new tank type.
The 17lbr was the one western gun that scared the.panzer crews, andvit shocked IISS pzr korps when they found a few batteries had been flown into oosterbeek in the arnhem battle...Bittrich, the korps commander, pulled the tanks out and only used them as infantry support when they believed no 17lbrs were about.
Limeys liked to rename everything received under Lend Lease so they could pretend they designed it and outsourced it to the USA.
And yet we have Estrees la Campagne on 9th August 1944 during Operation Totalize when the Canadian 28th Armoured Regiment lost a whopping 44 Shermans, mostly to the Tiger Is of Schwere SS Panzer Abteilung 101 sniping them at 1,000 metres or more. Not a single Tiger was lost. The Canadian 28th Armoured Regiment had a Firefly in each troop as far as I can tell, so why were their Fireflies ineffective? The Canadians had the high ground and were behind hedges.
Its baffling how the Fireflies made zero impact.
@@lyndoncmp5751 Not really. Inexperienced and poorly trained crews. Canadian basic crew training, which vovered all positions in the tank, was one month. There was very little follow up training in the UK, and generally only one half day range practice in total. The later canadian reinforcements and units were very susceptible to tiger fright.
@@Gungho1a Or maybe the Tigers were merely out of range of even effective Firefly damage? Can't believe not ONE Firefly crew knew what it was doing. That's quite an aspersion. The Tigers just outgunned and out armoured them and were able to stand off and use these advantages. The Tiger I gun and sight was still very accurate at 2,000 metres and even further. Long range knock outs at 3,000 metres were known.
@@lyndoncmp5751 It was 102SS heavy tank bn, plus a company of panther from 12SS. The BCR had the problem that they were on the wrong objective, one of the polish ones, and although the poles were only a couple of miles off they also were timid due to inexperience. Apart from those poles, no one else knew where the BCR battle group was, hence no support. That said, that in itself says something about that and earlier attacks. The BCR had broken through, the only thing between it and falaise was 12SS headquarters, but the offensive orders called for them to sit on a hill, which they did till effectively wiped out...their should have been one, if not two, follow up armoured divs right on the coat tails of canadian 4th armoured and polish 1st armoured to actually convert breakout to breakthrough and conduct maneuvre fighting to shred the german rear and push deep. That failure was a hallmark of all montgomery offensives from alamein onward. The BCR simply didnt fight well, it had been set up to fail, so not their fault. Likewise the poles to some extent. They did get a lot better, but they were the scapegoats for command incompetence and lack of professionalism, and shockingly woeful doctrine.
Pounder? I barely know her
Why the Gothmog cameo?
I added the horn song at the beginning just randomly and it reminded me of the scene where the Roherrim show up. So just random fun for me.
@@JohnnyJohnsonEsq...hunting horns were in use by British infantry in Tunisia and France,Belgium and the Netherlands in WW2....no longbow incidents though...
👍🏻🇨🇦👍🏻