Whats the Little John device if i might ask but summarized.
1 Like
A squeeze bore adaptor, there’s a suggestion specifically for the Locust with it
1 Like
Squeezebore adapter for the 2pdr, (and 37mm) think APDS but the sabot is flattened instead of discarded.
Adds a good chunk of penetration.
6 Likes
Ah interesting, the other suggestion says that the modified barrels are rendered useless without the LJ adapter installed. Might be true, might not.
Thank you for the advice!
Other suggestion guy here, while i dont know 100 percent if it is true that the shortened barrels were worthless without the adaptor on, it is a simple logic arguement to make for that. A 37mm without the adaptor has less armor pen to begin with and would have even less once the shortened barrel is taken into account, so it is inferior for AP. If you removed the adaptor it could now shoot HE, sure, but at a lower velocity than a unmodified 37mm. At that point, why not just use a regular locust for HE fire support?
In my suggestion I have a screenshot from newsreel footage showing a littlejohn adapted tank being loaded into a glider for Operation Varsity to prove they were used in combat. We also have pictures of standard locusts at Varsity, so pretty clearly the standard ones were used for HE infantry support (and AP where applicable) while the littlejohns would have a more dedicated AT role.
Thinking about it, the question is what modification has to be done to the barrel to allow the LJ to be fitted? Cutting, weakening, threading, etc, might have a minor or major effect on firing without the adaptor, depending on how much work is actually required.
The influence on the HE of velocity is less important than the calibre, evidenced by the lower velocity of most HE rounds.
I think the rule was one or two LJs per troop of 4 vehicles?
Also the rumour that SV ammo was found to be more effective even without the LJ, so presumably the effect on the barrel was actually negligible.
Added HE and APSV ammunition following research. The APSV blueprint is marked “Not for manufacture”, but could be included in game for flavour to act as a 37mm APCNR.
+1, including the Little John adapter.
That T9E1 also looks like a highly interesting vehicle that would be worth a suggestion
1 Like
Littlejohn would be interesting but maybe troublesome to implement, as it limits you to only the APSV round. I’d support it as a Premium or Event vehicle but this suggestion is for the British service Locust without the LJ.
The one with the bow guns is the T9, the T9E1 is just an M22 prior to reclassification in Sept 1944. Could be a Premium for USA.
You can support the it in the M22 Littlejohn suggestion.
1 Like
Considering the US is getting the Skink (something they had no hand in) I think it’s time the British got the Locust and Boarhound moved into their correct tree.
Both were built at request for the British, paid for with British money, built for the British, sent to the British, and used for the British.
6 Likes
While the recent trade does give me hope to see US-designed British move duplicated in the UK tree, I think copying over Locust and similar vehicles won’t be justified based on the Skink/Ram II event. Those are both Canadian vehicles, and Canada is not currently a designated subtree of and other TT, meaning their vehicles can be placed into any TT for (it seems) any reason.
You know my opinions on this match your own, in that US-designed British kit should be present in the UK TT, including lend-lease vehicles. I just see the trade as being justified mostly by the US TTs need for AA vehicles, while Ram II is a payment-in-kind in return for Skink. Call it a supplementary source as far as the main effort goes.
How DARE! you call the locust bad he is a speedy boi
1 Like
If you check the specs in the first post you will see he is not fast enough
40mph aka 64km/h
Also the horsepower is too high but that’s an(other) argument I’m having with the snail.
1 Like
Ah why not, take a +1 from me!
Pretty sure the HP comes from the same source Gaijin use for other US tanks. Standard ordinance items or something like that.
@FlyingOstridge, thank you for showing me the source from which I found the following information;
The total number of Locust tanks shipped to the UK was 420.
4 Likes
The issue is… That says T9. Which is the prototype as seen above.
As we know only one T9 was built, I think we can safely assume it means T9E1s (aka M22s).
The wiki article on the Littlejohn suggests this is not true - that the adaptor could be easily removed if HE was going to be required for example.
However it also includes a couple of interesting things:
1/ Americans testing it in 1943 found the adaptor distorted after a few shots; and
2/ When British a/c crews found the AP ammo for the adaptor worked perfectly will without it, and was superior to standard AP, they just used it without the adaptor fitted!!
Likely point 2 above - it had a tungsten core so defectively HVAP
The Americans may not have classified it as the M22 when this document was created. The Locust was originally built specifically for the British as a replacement for Tetrarch.