Help support TMP


"6-pounder, American Style" Topic


9 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the WWII Discussion Message Board


Areas of Interest

World War Two on the Land

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Ruleset


Current Poll


497 hits since 9 Dec 2019
©1994-2020 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Tango01 Supporting Member of TMP09 Dec 2019 11:44 a.m. PST

"The Ordnance Department gave its permission to produce the British QF 6-pounder under license in February of 1941 in order to supply them through Lend Lease. At that point, only prototypes of the gun had been built. Even though the 6-pounder was ready for production in the summer of 1940, the British decided to postpone it for mass production of 40 mm QF 2-pounder guns. This was a logical decision. The British needed to rapidly compensate for the armament lost in France, and six 2-pounders could be made for the cost of one 6-pounder.

Production of the QF 6-pounder in Britain began only in November of 1941, and even then, in a simplified form. The Mk.II gun had a 43 caliber barrel instead of 50 caliber. This restriction was imposed by British industrial capabilities. The Americans, on the other hand, had no such issues, and so they decided to produce the Mk.I with a 50 caliber barrel. This gun was standardized as the Limited Standard 57 mm Gun M1 on Carriage M1. Soon after, the carriage was improved with wheels and suspension of the American type. This carriage received the index M1A1. The index of the gun did not change. The M1A2 carriage with free traverse was produced after September 1942, on British initiative. This carriage allowed the gunner to disconnect the regular traverse mechanism and aim the gun using a shoulder stock, which made it easier to track moving targets…"

picture


Main page
link

Amicalement
Armand

Fred Cartwright09 Dec 2019 6:29 p.m. PST

Always thought it was a nice looking gun. Anyone what the purpose of the scalloped top to the gun shield was? Would have thought easier and cheaper to have a simple straight edge to it.

Murvihill09 Dec 2019 6:35 p.m. PST

Don't straight lines draw the eye?

laretenue10 Dec 2019 2:09 a.m. PST

At the risk of diverting the thread a little …

I know that the US Airborne drew adapted 6pdrs from British stocks before Overlord. Did they keep these for Market Garden, or had these been replaced by Autumn by US kit?

Richard Baber10 Dec 2019 3:09 a.m. PST

The US using the British gun had something to do with the US carriage being taller or wider and not fitting into gliders. I`m pretty sure the US airborne later had their own guns with modified carriages.

Personal logo Patrick R Supporting Member of TMP10 Dec 2019 5:16 a.m. PST

An irregular shape is considered easier to hide from visual identification, especially if you're trying to spot something using vision slits in a tank.

donlowry10 Dec 2019 8:10 a.m. PST

six 2-pounders could be made for the cost of one 6-pounder.

But did anyone consider that 1 6-pdr might be more useful than 6 2-pdrs?

Fred Cartwright10 Dec 2019 9:59 a.m. PST

But did anyone consider that 1 6-pdr might be more useful than 6 2-pdrs?

Not in 1940, the 2pdr was more than capable of dealing with anything the Germans had.

deephorse10 Dec 2019 10:23 a.m. PST

But did anyone consider that 1 6-pdr might be more useful than 6 2-pdrs?

Yes. It explains why they chose the 2pdr in the article.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.