|
Post by Yan Taylor on Apr 17, 2013 6:13:50 GMT -6
Hi Richard, I don’t have much on the Leyland, only this; Irish Leyland Type: Armoured Car. Country: Ireland Year: 1939. Production: Four produced. Gun Stats: Main Weapon: 20mm L/60 Madsen M/33 Automatic-Cannon. Rate of Fire: 250 r.p.m. Armour Penetration: 16mm @ 500m @ 30° Elevation: -9° to +23° Secondary Weapons: 2 x .303 MGs. Ammunition: 300 x 20mm + 2.800 M.G. Weight: 9.071kg Length: 6.13m Height: 2.43m Width: 2.26m Engine: 6-Cyl / Petrol Road Speed: 72 k.p.h. (45 m.p.h.) Cross Country Speed: 32 k.p.h. (10 m.p.h.) Crew: 4. Armour: Hull Front: 13mm Hull Side: 10mm Hull Roof: 5mm Hull Rear: 10mm Turret Front: 9mm Gun Mantlet: 9mm Turret Side: 9mm Turret Rear: 9mm Turret Roof: 5mm Notes: in 1958 the Engine was converted to a Ford V-8 and Machine Guns changed to .30 Browning’s. Hi Mike, I went through my stuff and came up with these four only I am afraid. The first is for the Lahti Finish pst kiv/39 Anti-Tank Rifle. Year: 1939 Origin & Make: Finland/Lahti Type: Anti-Tank Rifle Calibre: 20mm (20x138B) Shell Weight: 337g System: Semi-Automatic / Gas Operated / Recoil Action Gun Length: 2.240mm Barrel Length: 1.300 Gun Weight: 51 kg Mount: Bi-pod (could be mounted on Skis for winter use) Sights: Iron Magazine Capacity: 10 Rate of Fire: 30 rpm Muzzle Velocity: 840 m/s Maximum Range: 6.500m Armour Penetration: 16mm @ 500m @ 60° Crew: 2 Total Issued: 1.852 Notes: First issued during the winter war, knocking out four Soviet Tanks. the others are for the Solothurn, used by these three Countries as well as the Germans & Swiss. Hungarian 36M Anti-Tank Rifle. Origin & Make: Swiss Solothurn S-18/1000 Calibre: 20mm System: Semi-Automatic / Gas Operated / Recoil Action Gun Length: 1760mm Barrel Length: 925 Gun Weight: 40.5 kg Mount: Bi-pod Sights: Iron Shell Weight: 145g Magazine Capacity: 10 Rounds Rate of Fire: 30 rpm Muzzle Velocity: 860 m/s Maximum Range: 2000m Armour Penetration: 38mm @ 100m @ 30° Notes: Also mounted on the Toldi I & II Light Tanks Finish 20mm pst kiv/18-SAnti-Tank Rifle. Year: 1940 Origin & Make: Swiss/Solothurn S-18/1000 Type: Anti-Tank Rifle Calibre: 20mm (20x105B) Shell Weight: 290g System: Semi-Automatic / Gas Operated / Recoil Action Gun Length: 1.760mm Barrel Length: 925 Gun Weight: 45.5 kg Mount: Bi-pod (could be mounted on Skis for winter use) Sights: Iron (sighted from 0 to 1.500m Magazine Capacity: 10 Rate of Fire: 30 rpm Muzzle Velocity: 910 m/s Maximum Range: 6.500m Armour Penetration: 35mm @ 100m @ 90° Crew: 2 Total Issued: 13 Notes: one bought for tests in 1939, another twelve purchased in 1940 Italian Fucile Anticarro da 20mm. Year: 1940 Origin & Make: Swiss/Solothurn S-18/1000 Type: Anti-Tank Rifle Calibre: 20mm L/45 Shell Weight: AP 0.124kg System: Semi-Automatic / Gas Operated / Recoil Action Gun Length: 1760mm Barrel Length: 925 Gun Weight: 45.5kg (wheeled mount 58kg) Mount: Bi-pod or Wheeled Mount Sights: Iron Magazine Capacity: 10 Rate of Fire: 30 rpm Muzzle Velocity: 830 m/s Maximum Range: 2.700m Armour Penetration: 11mm @ 500m @ 30° Crew: 2 Total Issued: 578 Notes: Also mounted on the L3 Light Tank. they are basically the same weapon, but you may find difference in muzzle velocities and armour penetrations due to different ammo. Hi Britt what was that film called again? One last thing, here is the Italian version of the M1 Garand en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beretta_BM59 Ian.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Apr 17, 2013 8:06:46 GMT -6
Ian: The US did essentially the same thing with the M-1 and produced the M-14. I must say that I had a certain affection for both, but I think the M-1 was a bit more of a soldier's rifle that the 14. Not by much. If you were to ask me though which one I own, the answer would be neither. It would be the 03A3, for in my view there was never a better shooter's rifle made in the US.
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Apr 17, 2013 8:24:58 GMT -6
Hi Chuck, yes the M14 was an improvement over the M1 (Wiki says it was designed to replace four weapons in one go, M1 Carbine, M1 Rifle, M3 Sub-Machine Gun and the B.A.R. , I believe the 101st was the first unit to be fully equipped with M14s.
The Springfield 1903 has to be up there with the Legendary Lee-Enfield as one of the best Bolt-Action Rifles ever made, though some of our Japanese, Russian and German friends would throw there Arisaka’s, Mosin-Nagant’s and Mauser 89Ks into the ring.
Mike I forgot to mention the German equivalent of the 20mm ATR, no relation to the Solothurn but worth a mention.
Panzerbüchse-41 Year: 1941 Origin & Make: Germany/Mauser-Werke Type: Heavy Anti-Tank Rifle Calibre: 28/20mm Squeeze Bore Shell Weight: AP 0.125kg / HE 0.093kg Gun Length: 2.690mm Barrel Length: 1.73m Carriage: Split Trail Gun Weight: 229 kg Elevation: -5° to +30° Traverse: 70° Rate of Fire: 30 rpm Muzzle Velocity: 1.400 m/s Maximum Range: 1000m Armour Penetration: 60mm @ 100m @ 30° Crew: 3 Total Issued: 2.797 Notes: Also mounted on the Sd.Kfz 222 Armoured Car and Sd.Kfz 250/11 & Sd.Kfz 251 Half-Tracks.
Even the Japanses got in on the act, but there version was the worst of the lot.
Type 97. Year: 1937 Origin & Make: Type: Anti-Tank Rifle Calibre: 20mm (20x125mm) System: Gas Operated / Semi-Automatic Gun Length: 2.100mm Barrel Length: 1.250 Gun Weight: 51.75 kg Mount: Bi-pod Magazine Capacity: 7 Rounds Rate of Fire: 12 rpm Muzzle Velocity: 750 m/s Maximum Range: 4000m Armour Penetration: 30mm @ 250m @ 30° Crew: 4 Total Issued: 400
Ian.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Apr 17, 2013 8:45:56 GMT -6
Yes Ian the 101st was the first unit to be equipped with the M-14 in 56 or 57, and all this because it was also the test unit for the Pentomic concept.
Up until 1956 the 101st was the training division at Fort Jackson, South Carolina. They were transferred, less personnel and equipment, in other words just the colors to Fort Campbell, Kentucky, where the assets of the 187th and 508th Airborne Regimental Combat Teams were used to staff and equip the division. Think they were also the first one to have the M-60 machine gun, and virtually every other new piece of equipment then coming into the army inventory.
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Apr 17, 2013 9:02:21 GMT -6
Well Chuck, the 101st is a well-respected unit over here, we have an affection for Marines and Paratroop’s (and even the French Foreign Legion, though I go at great pains to say it), they are our finest, just look at units who bore the brunt of the fighting in the Falklands War, The Royal Marines and the Parachute Regiment (apparently these two units fought each other like cat and dog on the sea journey down there, such was the rivalry), so it makes sense to me to equip your best units with the latest weapons, its similar to the German SS Divisions getting all the new hardware before the Wehrmacht.
On a lighter note; I have come across a snippet of news concerning the town of Widnes, apparently a Widnes girl hitched up with a U.S. service man in the late 1940s he was from the U.S.A.F. base at Burtonwood, they moved back to the states and got married. They lived in Martinsville Indiana, and I have found that they have named a road over there after the Town of Widnes (Widnes Lane), why I don’t know, maybe the ex-service man ended up as Mayor.
I now have to find out if the Alaskan Town of ‘’McCarthy’’ has links to our lot over here, I wonder if there any gold around the place.
Ian.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Apr 17, 2013 9:30:58 GMT -6
Ian: I think it was more along the lines of seeing if the equipment was any good. For at least the first two years 56 and well into 58 they were a concept test bed. They were also issued the Davy Crockett, and I suppose you know how well that turned out. I always liked the Pentomic Battle Group from an organizational standpoint, although that liking was evidently not shared by the rest of the Army and we started in 1962 to organize into the more familiar brigade structure, which we have kept in modified form since then.
Maybe the street name is in repayment for you guys naming all those four pipers we lent you, that in RN and RCN service shared the names of towns in the UK and Canada with like named towns in the US. Don't know where Campbelltown is in either the US or the UK though. Pesumably yours is in Scotland. Look at it as sort of a reverse, reverse Lend Lease.
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Apr 17, 2013 9:42:38 GMT -6
It’s funny you mentioned the Davy Crocket, it was on TV last week, the program was something to do with the North Koreans kicking off again, but who ever invented that weapon should have had it shoved up his ass, what fool would let men fire a dam thing like that, sheer lunacy.
What happened to the 50 four pipers anyway.
What was the class of ships we bought from you in the early years of ww2, I think they were transports, I am sure I read somewhere that they fell apart in rough seas because they were made in prefabricated parts, but in the dark days of 1940-42 we were glad of anything.
I have been to Campbell town; it’s on the mull of Kintyre were McCartney wrote that song.
Ian.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Apr 17, 2013 10:02:54 GMT -6
Probably the Liberty Ships. The first batch had some real problems, mostly due to prefabrication. The later ones were OK and served in various roles for twenty or thirty years in some instances. Two exist today. One is in San Francisco and the other, I think, in Baltimore, but I am not sure. Both of these cities were the building sites of many of the Liberty and Victory ships.
All were scrapped. A couple served as Banana Boats. The wreckage of one is still visible at Point Honda, California, I am told, and I think there is another wreck visible somewhere, but don't recall where. In the early 1920;s an entire squadron of them ran aground at Point Honda in fog.
By 1940 when you guys got them there was not much life left in the. All the ones built by Bethlehem had already been scrapped before the war for bad power plants. They all had construction problems in that they were built to rapidly developed plans during World War I. After the war most were put in mothballs and allowed to deteriorate at Philly and San Diego. Some of the ones the UK leased were straight from active service. Others had been in reserve for 20 years.
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Apr 17, 2013 10:06:26 GMT -6
Hi Chuck, I have been aboard that Liberty ship in San Francisco, I also went on the Submarine birthed next to her, I will try and dig out the photo’s I took.
Ian.
|
|
|
Post by wild on Apr 17, 2013 12:22:15 GMT -6
Well done Ian.But I will find some obscure piece of scrape metel you do not have in your collection. Regards
|
|
|
Post by Mike Powell on Apr 17, 2013 18:21:54 GMT -6
It would be the 03A3, for in my view there was never a better shooter's rifle made in the US.
I would not argue that point though good friends would argue unending for their National Match M-1's. Personally, I prefer the 1903 finger-groove stock Springfields from an aesthetic viewpoint, but I have to admit their rear sight is a disaster for an old man's eyes, not to mention one of the poorer sights we ever sent US troops into the field with. That tiny peep halfway down the barrel - who's kidding who? My 1929 '03 is in process of fitting out with facsimile of the altered rear sight slide and front sight blade as developed by the Marine Corps in 1919 and described here: www.jouster.com/forums/showthread.php?12840-Major-Culver-s-USMC-Rebuilding-of-the-M1903-Springfield-monographPerhaps it will allow some improvement. For the dyed-in-the-wool Springfield 03A3 fan, this gentleman has a lot to offer: www.nationalmatcharmory.com/ (see his 1903 Springfield National Match Rifles Section) I once discussed with him an Alvin C. York Tribute 1903 which I will probably go to my grave kicking myself for not having carried through on.
|
|
|
Post by Gatewood on Apr 18, 2013 8:54:12 GMT -6
The Springfield 1903 has to be up there with the Legendary Lee-Enfield as one of the best Bolt-Action Rifles ever made ... Ian, I think the popular perception is that the 1903 Springfield was the standard rifle of U.S. forces in WW1 and continuing up to WW2. In fact, although the 1903 was the "official" U.S. arm, the majority of the U.S WW1 troops were armed with the M1917 Enfield (as I recall, it was about 30% Springfield & 70% Enfield). There is a minor controversy surrounding what weapon that Sgt York carried (Not sure if you even know who that is over there, but he was an American WW1 hero). The movie by that name depicts him with a Springfield, which critics contend is inaccurate as official documents indicate that his unit was issued Enfields. On the other hand, his son later said that he had acquired a Springfield overseas because he liked it better, particularly the open sights which were more like what he was used to using as a civilian. Bottom line is that no one knows for sure and likely never will. U.S. Marine units were generally equipped with the Springfield, which contributed to the Marines' reputation for marksmanship and led to their nickname of "Devil Dogs", which the Germans bestowed upon them as a result of their ability to effectively pick off targets at greater ranges than what any of the European armies were accustomed to.
|
|
|
Post by Gatewood on Apr 18, 2013 9:07:09 GMT -6
Probably the Liberty Ships. The first batch had some real problems, mostly due to prefabrication. The later ones were OK and served in various roles for twenty or thirty years in some instances. The early Liberty ships were not particularly rugged, sort of by design. At the time the Germans were sinking ships at such a rapid rate that it was presumed that the ships were likely to be sunk after only one or two transatlantic trips anyway, so there was no need for building them to last longer than that - better to produce them rapidly and on the cheap than to be durable. Part of that involved welding, rather than riveting, them together and the welds sometimes failed in rough seas. However, there were very few ships that actually experienced that problem, but the perception was (and remains) that it was fairly widespread. In any event, the problem was largely solved in later ships by the inclusion of a reinforcing band ringing the ship, sort of like a giant rubber band, holding it together.
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Apr 18, 2013 9:56:33 GMT -6
Hi Gatewood, if you ask anyone over here they would consider the Lee-Enfield to be a British Rifle, used by Britain and her Commonwealth, but as you have stated the Americans built Enfield Rifles too, but with a smaller Magazine (6 x Rounds compared to 10 x Rounds).
(Source Wiki); 1.300.000 = Springfield’s 2.193.429 = Enfield’s
They were both well-made Rifles, but you were lucky you never adopted the Canadian Ross.
Yes I have heard of Sgt York, and also watched the movie when I was a kid, we used to lick the end of our plastic rifles too after we fired.
Ian.
|
|
|
Post by Mike Powell on Apr 18, 2013 10:55:25 GMT -6
That will cut down on the glare.
I visited York's home in Pall Mall, Tennessee. The grist mill he operated is still standing beside its dam on the Wolf River. Pall Mall is off the beaten path and worth visiting not just for York but for a seldom seen look at truly rural America.
The controversy over York's weapons is not limited to the rifle he carried. In the film he uses a Luger to defeat a charge at his position. I've read that resulted from the unavailability of .45 ACP blanks.
|
|