17/25 pdr Pheasant

[David Dunlop]

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

David

[rnixartillery]

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.

[David Dunlop]

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

[gordon]

Originally Posted by David Dunlop

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 ...

[rnixartillery]

Originally Posted by David Dunlop

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.

[Alex van de Wetering]

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

Alex

[Mike Cecil]

Rob,

"To simplify things ,the 17 pdr ordnance and recouperator were standard 17 pdr, the cradle, saddle and carriage were standard 25 pdr (British) .....One very good question would be ,why does the 17/25 pdr require a firing platform ? when in a direct fire role.............................well I believe that it is as much for ballast than anything else !"

I think the answer to that question lies in the traverse limits: a standard 25pdr had a traverse of just 4 degrees either side of the centreline (ie 8 degrees of traverse) whereas the 17pdr had 30 degrees either side, so 60 degrees of traverse. The 'Platform, Firing, No.9' allowed "... allowing rapid all-round traverse for anti-tank shooting."(User handbook, QF 25pr Marks 2 & 3: AMF 31 May 1952, page 296). The platform allowed traversing for a full 360 degrees, quickly and easily by one man using the trail spike. Assuming the 17/25pdr was as well balanced as the standard 25pdr, then the platform would have been equally as useful. Them wily Germans didn't always approach from the direct front!

Mike

[rnixartillery]

Here is some very interesting film footage.

https://youtu.be/KosCsRbAADg

Rob......................rnixartillery

[Mike Cecil]

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

[rnixartillery]

Originally Posted by Mike Cecil

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.

[Mike Cecil]

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

[rnixartillery]

To simplify things ,the 17 pdr ordnance and recouperator were standard 17 pdr, the cradle, saddle and carriage were standard 25 pdr (British) the modifications were, increasing the opening in the shield, a bespoke firing linkage and guard and the upgrade of the firing platform by boxing in the angle spokes and reinforcing the outer ring.
One very good question would be ,why does the 17/25 pdr require a firing platform ? when in a direct fire role.............................well I believe that it is as much for ballast than anything else !


Rob..............................rnixartillery.