2 years later.
Sadly reporting that no, they did not.
Was definitely used. I believe this unit is Royal Artillery though, but it does confirm APDS being available in July 1944.
The Archer and Achilles can easily be confirmed to have used APDS.
1 Like
do you really want it to get a higher br for a round that will never hit?
Let the salt flow.
It already needs to go to 5.0 lmao, anyway, could put a second Firefly in a folder with jt
1 Like
when its hardly better than the 3.7 panzer 4 H i have to disagree
1 Like
This myth originated from american trials which had used unproofed ammunition. while early sabot shot was less accurate than full bore counterparts it wasnt as severe as the pop culture around tanks would insist.
APDS in game is also very accurate its worth trying out as its quite effective when it doesnt shatter on a PT76
every test showed that APDS fired from a sherman firefly was horribly inaccurate not just the american tests, and even non US testing showed chances of hitting a panther sized target at medium range was bad enough to not be worth firing
and it was not an ammunition problem because american trials showed APDS fired from 17 pdrs mounted in different vehicles were more accurate
The Ap is perfectly fine at 4.7 and if they added apds I wouldn’t use it because of the poor post pen damage. 190mm of pen is overkill already for that br.
“In contrast to the results obtained in this test with 17pdr SABOT, in firing conducted by First U.S. Army at Balleroy on 10 July 44, 5 rounds were fired at the front plate of a Panther tank at 700 yards. Examination of pictures of this firing indicates that the first round struck the mantlet, the second between the track and the nose plate, the third at the junction of the nose and glacis and penetrated. The fourth and fifth were fair hits on the glacis and both penetrated. The conflict between these results and those obtained by the board is explained by Col. A. G. Cole, Deputy Director of Artillery, Ministry of Supply. Col. Cole witnessed part of the test and states that the ammunition lot furnished the board had not been proof fired. He further states that, in his opinion, the lot is of sub-standard manufacture and if proof fired would not have been accepted.”
Balleroy test (mentioned above) for comparison. “At 1730 hrs we learn that the shoot with SABOT amn was complete success” - “succeeded in hitting a piece of white paper 2” square which was pasted on the tank at 700 yards."
ah yes, testing from anti tank guns not those mounted in sherman firefly, its almost like its known that the APDS was significantly less accurate when fired by the firefly like I had mentioned
If they aren’t going to have cracking over-hard armour and poor reliability of some mechanical components why would they have inaccurate ammunition?
Yes you mentioned tests other than the US ones - what tests are those and where are the results?
You might be blind. Both of those are US tests.
Or you might not be able to read - he’s specificall referring to tests that show the Firefly gun is less accurate than hte AT gun - by all means do do a little context checking before making an arse of yourself.
yes and they are not of the firefly tank, but of the 17pdr gun outside of it
when I specifically said that the problem was due to the mounting not the gun itself
Its hard to grasp why the main developing country got a worse version of its vehicle than the copy paste nation.
1 Like
It’s the ammunition.
Woolwich 17-Pdr APDS was simply accepted due to satisfactory work in the past, and did not pass proof. As soon as they switched to the Mackie’s produced APDS the performance was fine.
“It is thought that some such conditions as these may quite likely be present in other trials, as, for example, those reported from Lulworth, and that a very careful scrutiny should be made of the conditions of firing each round when any report of inaccuracy of the equipment is being assessed.”
17-Pdr APDS is less accurate than APCBC (not to such a degree as US testing showed anyway). There’s tons of tests that prove as such, but, 17-Pdr APDS isn’t inaccurate because of the gun. It’s because one of the manufacturers were making substandard ammo.
2 Likes
even without that your source shows that it still was horribly inacurate with it hitting tracks and such in what was likely a 500-700 yard test on a panther
and I didnt say it was because of the gun, I said it was because of the mounting because all testing showed that the APDS was significantly less accurate when fired by a firefly than other mountings of the 17pdr