|
Les_the_Sarge_9_1 -> (5/20/2001 7:42:00 PM)
|
Recently acquired a nice book on juts artillery pieces.
Not that artillery is new to me, but it was a fine book that focused on nothing else but raw statistics.
One thing that was clear, a bigger gun is not necessarily a better gun.
The barrel length, the barrel diameter, the ammo used, the carriage employed, method of recoil management, all these played a part.
Then there is tactical doctrine added into the soup. When the 25 pdr was employed in the anti tank role, it was done so hastily at best. I believe it entered this role primarily in the opening stages of the war in the desert.
The 25 pdr was designed to perform bombardment duties as was most artillery. Anti tank capacities were rarely part of the design of most guns at the time it was developed. So its poor anti armour abilities is not a reflection of anything more than it was not designed to shoot tanks.
The size of the gun often had nothing to do with its armour stopping qualities. Anti armour performance was often ammo type or velocity characteristic driven.
My comments are not intended to be a definitive statement. Merely wished to say, that the bigger kabooms didnt automatically translate into better tank stopping potential.
|
|
|
|
