While digging through various US ARMY ordnance\tech manuals I was unable to find any evidence that an HE round was produced for the US 57mm Anti-tank gun. The only rounds described as being employed by the 57mm were M70 AP and M86 APC ammunition. Nothing regarding HE ordnance is described in the Field Manual for the weapon either (FM23-75, Jun 15, 1944). The Reticle on the M69C gunners telescope also shows no evidence of range graduations for HE fire.

Was there any official data indicating the US was obtaining British Manufactured 6pdr-HE for the 57mm? If so what sort of quantities were involved?

quote:

---

The nature of the terrain, and the fog which blanketed the area, compelled Lt. Col. Daniel to place his anti-tank assets well forward, in order to have sufficient visibility to support the foxhole lines. He set up three 57mm anti-tank guns covering the road running east to Bullingen, and supported them with three M-10 self-propelled tank destroyers mounting 3-inch guns. He sent three more AT guns to bolster the main line of resistance, or MLR, in the E and F Co areas. Each of the 57mm guns had, as part of its ammunition supply, seven to ten rounds of British discarding sabot (DS) ammunition, which the British had given to the regiment before D-Day.' These rounds used a disposable sleeve, or sabot, around the penetrator for the British 2-pounder gun. The result was a lighter projectile with increased velocity, about 4200 ft/sec vice 2900 ft/sec for the normal 57mm round. With this velocity, a DS round could penetrate approximately six inches (154mm) of armor at a 30° slope. This made the obsolescent 57mm gun more effective, particularly against the heavy Panther tank and Jagdpanther tank destroyer.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jeff Duquette:
[BEach of the 57mm guns had, as part of its ammunition supply, seven to ten rounds
of British discarding sabot (DS) ammunition, which the British had given to the regiment
before D-Day.' These rounds used a disposable sleeve, or sabot, around the penetrator
for the British 2-pounder gun. The result was a lighter projectile with increased velocity,
about 4200 ft/sec vice 2900 ft/sec for the normal 57mm round. With this velocity, a DS
ound could penetrate approximately six inches (154mm) of armor at a 30° slope. This
made the obsolescent 57mm gun more effective, particularly against the heavy Panther
tank and Jagdpanther tank destroyer.[/B]

---

This is misleading. APDS and APCR tungsten core projectiles were superb against
a flat surface or mild slope, but they had very rapidly diminishing performance
beyond a 30 degree angle of impact. Partly because of the small diameter and length
of the subcore penetrator. At 60 degrees impact, its penetration capability was not
much different than a standard full bored round. And actually much worse than a full
bored solid shot that was properly heat treated to avoid shattering on contact.

The most common Allied antitank projectile used during World War II was
a steel capped APCBC type which at 76mm and above had sufficient velocity
and weight, but tended to shatter on impact except when they hit poorly
manufactured armor plating. The German APCBC projectiles may have been
slightly better in this respect, but the Soviets commonly used an uncapped
steel round with inadequate heat treating and these broke up even more easily
against high quality armor plate.

Since APDS had poor performance against sloped armor, it was essentially
a dead end development until the projectile was reshaped into a fin stabilized
dart that extends deeper into the cartridge case.

Thanks for your insights. I guess I was trying to get some info regarding whether a 2-pdr's penetrator was adapted for the 6-pdr APDS. The A2D2 study implies a 2-pdr penetrator was wraped in a sabot and employed as 6-pdr APDS.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jeff Duquette:
Dan:

Thanks for your insights. I guess I was trying to get some info regarding whether a 2-pdr's penetrator was adapted for the 6-pdr APDS. The A2D2 study implies a 2-pdr penetrator was wraped in a sabot and employed as 6-pdr APDS.

[This message has been edited by Jeff Duquette (edited 11-28-2001).]

---

If you can find a copy of Hunnicutt's THE SHERMAN at a local
bookstore or library there is an appendix in the back and I think
it might have detailed specs for the 57mm gun and its munitions,
including weight of projectile vs. weight of the complete round.

The APDS shot for the British 76.2mm gun weighed about half
as much as the 17-pound (full bored) projectile but I don't recall
the shot weight of the 57mm APDS.

--

I have a copy of Hunnicutt in my pile of books here at the house. That was one of the first places I thought to check. Unfortunately with regards to the 6-pdr Hunnicutt provides no details on APDS.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jeff Duquette:
Dan:

I have a copy of Hunnicutt in my pile of books here at the house. That was one of the first places I thought to check. Unfortunately with regards to the 6-pdr Hunnicutt provides no details on APDS.

Did the Little-John adapter for the 2-pdr fire a different type of round than normal 2-pdr AP or APCBC?

---

The Royal Tank Museum probably has cutaway drawings or models of the shells so they should be able to answer your question. I think Bovington has a Web site/e-mail.