MLU FORUM  

Go Back   MLU FORUM > MILITARY VEHICLES > The Gun Park

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 16-05-15, 03:30
Mike Cecil Mike Cecil is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Cody, Wyoming, USA
Posts: 2,384
Default

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 19:04.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 16-05-15, 10:49
gordon's Avatar
gordon gordon is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Central Scotland
Posts: 708
Default Waiting for the side by side Rob

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
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 17-05-15, 15:58
David Dunlop David Dunlop is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Winnipeg, MB, Canada
Posts: 3,660
Default

Rob. Is that a counterweight on the barrel, just aft of the muzzle brake?

David
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 17-05-15, 17:51
rnixartillery rnixartillery is offline
Rob
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Yorkshire,UK
Posts: 802
Default

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 21:58.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 17-05-15, 19:02
David Dunlop David Dunlop is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Winnipeg, MB, Canada
Posts: 3,660
Default

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 so the name probably fits rather well after all.


David
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 17-05-15, 19:12
gordon's Avatar
gordon gordon is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Central Scotland
Posts: 708
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Dunlop View Post

Must say the name 'Pheasant' is a hard one to wrap one's head around for an artillery piece.

David
I remember Rob telling us that design / production was rushed through in September of whatever year, and I wondered if they agreed the contract on the 12th of August ...
__________________
Gordon, in Scotland
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 17-05-15, 21:05
rnixartillery rnixartillery is offline
Rob
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Yorkshire,UK
Posts: 802
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Dunlop View Post
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 so the name probably fits rather well after all.


David
David,

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 23:48. Reason: poor spelling !
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 17-05-15, 23:42
Alex van de Wetering Alex van de Wetering is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Hoofddorp, The Netherlands
Posts: 2,774
Default

Lovely work on this rare piece, Rob! Well done.

Alex
__________________
Chevrolet C8 cab 11 FFW
BSA Folding Bicycle
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 17-05-15, 19:03
Mike Cecil Mike Cecil is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Cody, Wyoming, USA
Posts: 2,384
Default Aust version 17/25pdr

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
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 17-05-15, 20:14
rnixartillery rnixartillery is offline
Rob
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Yorkshire,UK
Posts: 802
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Cecil View Post
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
Mike,

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 20:56.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 17-05-15, 20:40
Mike Cecil Mike Cecil is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Cody, Wyoming, USA
Posts: 2,384
Default

All extremely interesting. I am learning a lot!

I only have a print: will scan and post later today. Don't think I've ever seen an image of the Aust 17/25 published anywhere - I just had a scan through the AWM site and only the production version is shown in images from that source.

I wonder if '17/25pdr' that is really 'right' for this Aust weapon? The carriage is of similar design to the all-welded 25pdr, but altered for the 17pdr, so really a different carriage? Maybe it would be more accurately called the '17pdr (Aust) Experimental'?)

Mike
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 00:30.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Maple Leaf Up, 2003-2016