Reply to thread

Message

The Grant's and then Sherman's medium-length, medium-velocity 75mm guns, if provided from the beginning with Brandt-design tungsten carbide core APDS shells, would have met every tank-combat performance requirement at practical European combat ranges. No need for much heavier and longer guns, no need for larger ammo, no compromise of HE ammo performance since the candidate guns already had highly effective HE shells. No need for new rounds of tank and gun development, with the wider/heavier-tank-concomitant need for new bridges...at least not right away. 1940 Brandt 75mm APDS offered 900 m/sec muzzle velocity from guns equivalent to the Sherman gun, using artillery-grade propellant. It would have been a much easier solution, able to be implemented years sooner.

[QUOTE="JWilly, post: 632622, member: 27894"] The Grant's and then Sherman's medium-length, medium-velocity 75mm guns, if provided from the beginning with Brandt-design tungsten carbide core APDS shells, would have met every tank-combat performance requirement at practical European combat ranges. No need for much heavier and longer guns, no need for larger ammo, no compromise of HE ammo performance since the candidate guns already had highly effective HE shells. No need for new rounds of tank and gun development, with the wider/heavier-tank-concomitant need for new bridges...at least not right away. 1940 Brandt 75mm APDS offered 900 m/sec muzzle velocity from guns equivalent to the Sherman gun, using artillery-grade propellant. It would have been a much easier solution, able to be implemented years sooner. [/QUOTE]

Verification