![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
well worth the read. Thanks for the link. Cheers Rob Fast
__________________
1942 C8A- HUW " Wireless Nipper" 1943 F-60S LAAT and 1939 Bofors 1942 C8 Wireless 1943 FAT/ 17 pounder 1941 C15 GS 2B1 |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Interesting, and a very nice job you have done, too.
The first 17-pdrs produced in Australia were trialed on the (modified) 25-pdr carriage. Test firing was at Williamstown, Victoria. Charles Ruwolt P/L or GM-H (can't remember which) were the major co-ordinating contractor on the project. *** Apparently not a trial version - see later post**** Mike Last edited by Mike Cecil; 17-05-15 at 18:04. |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Can't wait to see the side by side shot of the Pheasant with vanilla 17 pounder at one side and 25 at the other ...
__________________
Gordon, in Scotland |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Rob. Is that a counterweight on the barrel, just aft of the muzzle brake?
David |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Yes David it is ,you cannot depress the barrel without it. If you do a Google search on the net for pheasant ,17/25 pdr etc you will come across several pictures, the ones with the pheasant showing a riveted cradle, un-modified shield , a full compliment of CES and missing the barrel counterweight was a gun that was used as a simulation for publicity. practically it would not operate correctly, the pheasants that were finally assembled for service were quite different and they all had welded cradles not riveted which G&J Weir developed to simplify and speed up production of.
Rob....................rnixartillery. Last edited by rnixartillery; 27-07-19 at 20:58. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Thanks, Rob.
Must say the name 'Pheasant' is a hard one to wrap one's head around for an artillery piece initially. Then I remembered getting the fright of my life many years ago working in heavy bush country when one of the little suckers suddenly exploded out of the scrub a few feet in front of me. Probably the same reaction the Germans had when they first encountered it in the field ![]() David |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
![]()
__________________
Gordon, in Scotland |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
The name 'Pheasant' was bestowed upon it by the soldiers that used them ,the correct name for the weapon was the 'Hybrid' and this was the name used by the War department for the weapon whilst in service even though it was short lived. Rob..................rnixartillery. Last edited by rnixartillery; 17-05-15 at 22:48. Reason: poor spelling ! |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Interesting: the Australian 17/25pdr was built with an all-welded and lengthened trail, a welded cradle, had a double 'spaced armour' shield, and no muzzle counterweight, just the muzzle brake. It wasn't a mock-up: test firing was done at Williamstown, Victoria.
The Aust 17pdr production version was the same as/similar to the standard 17pdr built in the UK, with a split trail, low profile, etc. Can I ask why wouldn't the 17/25pdr Pheasant depress without the counterweight, please? Thanks Mike |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
Do you have pictures you could post so we can see the differences between the two ? I have a standard 17 pdr here as well which as you all know were not fitted with barrel counter weights but have the larger heavier cradles which have a different point of balance, they elevate and depress with no problem, the pheasant however has the 17 pdr recouperator inside the lighter 25 pdr cradle and requires extra weight at the muzzle to balance the ordnance better at the trunnions .You can physically depress it without the balance but it takes both hands and a GREAT deal of effort which I have experienced. Weir's produced 17/25 pdr's were built on standard 25 pdr carriages not altered or lengthened in any way . Rob......................rnixartillery. Last edited by rnixartillery; 17-05-15 at 19:56. |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|