OK, so I get that the USA had trouble putting the 90mm in a turret at the time, and they didn't like the British 17 pounder the Brits had put in a Firefly. But was there any reason not to just use the same gun with a longer barrel? Kinetic energy increases with the square of the speed, so surely every bit would have helped?
Edit: just to put things in perspective, the earlier short barreled T-34, which the Russians had already upgunned and obsoleted for poor performance, was 42.5 calibres long. It shot a 6.3 kilo AP shell at 680m/s. The gun on the Sherman was 40 calibres long. It shot a slightly lighter shelll at 619m/s.
Edit: just to put things in perspective, the earlier short barreled T-34, which the Russians had already upgunned and obsoleted for poor performance, was 42.5 calibres long. It shot a 6.3 kilo AP shell at 680m/s. The gun on the Sherman was 40 calibres long. It shot a slightly lighter shelll at 619m/s.
via International Skeptics Forum http://bit.ly/2GPLOrY
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire