25 pounder tractors

[Lang]

I wonder if this photo was taken a few minutes after the one above. Captions say they were in two different New Guinea rivers 1944. Besides, the jeep is towing a "short" 25 pounder while the tractor has a full rigged unit.

[Lang]

This is a parade at Mount Garnet Queensland 1944

[Lang]

This is a jeep and 25 pounder on a training exercise at Trinity Beach Queensland. Capton says the gun spade has caught on the barge ramp - no wonder with the back of the jeep sagging with all that weight.

The British and Canadian people might not immediately recognise all these guns as 25 pounders. They were Australian "short" or "light weight" modifications for manhandling in the jungle covered mountains of New Guinea, Bougainville etc.

The platform, armoured blast shield and numerous other bits were removed reducing the weight by about a ton. In a few photos you can see the 9.00X16 wheels have been replaced by what appears to be car wheels to further reduce weight.

[cliff]

Originally posted by Lang
The British and Canadian people might not immediately recognise all these guns as 25 pounders. They were Australian "short" or "light weight" modifications for manhandling in the jungle covered mountains of New Guinea, Bougainville etc.

The platform, armoured blast shield and numerous other bits were removed reducing the weight by about a ton. In a few photos you can see the 9.00X16 wheels have been replaced by what appears to be car wheels to further reduce weight.

These two pics from the AWM show the differences in the Australian 25pdr Short.

The barrel was also shorter then the regular 25pdr

[David_Hayward (RIP)]

Can anyone please confirm when the 25-pdr was actually first produced? Presumably using 18-pdr components? I wish I could date that IWM photo better.

Here are photos of a gun at the Tower of London last year.

[David_Hayward (RIP)]

Herewith

[Lang]

I think the caption on the display 25 pounder should be altered to "last fired in BRITISH active service". This versatile weapon was chucking shells back and forth over the hills of Kashmir decades after its British army demise.

I am no expert but I suspect that while not having the outstanding flexibility of the the German 88's, the 25 pounder would be the leading contender for the most reliable and flexible allied field artillery piece of WW2.

The Australian modification also included a super high angle capability to allow the gun to lob over ridgelines and more importantly operate out of a small clearing without having to chop down trees.

[Mike K]

Originally posted by Lang
Has anybody else seen photos of Humbers being used by Australian units either as their own vehicles or on attachment from British transport pools?

Lang

What a great question ....

Yes, I have seen one pic of a Humber 8 cwt 4X2 as in your AWM artillery pic, being used by Aussies . In the AWM series books , published during and just after the war e.g., HMAS and all a the rest of them . In the SIGNALS book , there is a pic of FFW 4X2 Humber with some Aussies leaning on the bonnet, they have a map , discussing tactics .....

There is at least one surviving in NZ , never heard of any here though . It is owned By Mathew Lombard , originally from Christchurch , now he works at the National motor museum Birdwood South Aust. The Humber is missing its bodywork , still it's a rare vehicle down here in this part of the world .

Would have a fair road speed I would imagine , based on the Humber snipe saloon I think .

Mike

[wim sikkelbein]

David, after a quick re-read of "the 25-pounder in Canadian service" by Doug Knight the date 26 august 1936 comes up as the date when the British approved the replacement of the inner liner of the 18-pounder barrel thereby giving birth to the "ordnance QF 25-pr Mark I" aka 18-25 pounder.

Wim

[David_Hayward (RIP)]

Thanks! The Ford-Scammell and Chevrolet-Scammell FATs were trialled in 1938 with 18-pounder guns. The earliest reference that I have to FATs for 25-pounder guns was:

On 30 September 1939, Stan Ellis himself cabled in code from the High Commission to Ford’s W.R. Campbell who was by then the Chairman of the War Supply Board, referring to Colonel N.O. Carr’s enquiry to the High Commission regarding the Guy Quad Ant. Carr stated that this vehicle had been designed throughout as a 4-wheel drive 25-Pounder gun tractor and was also equipped with a winch. Could Campbell explore the possibility of using the Marmon-Herrington front end drive on the Ford of Canada 101 [-inch] chassis with an off-centre to the left rear axle differential and a rear drive shaft from the rear side Marmon-Herrington front drive shaft takeoff position on the transfer case? It would be necessary to have an offset drive shaft to provide clearance for the Guy winch which apparently could be mounted in the [Ford chassis] frame with offset Hotchkiss drive shaft as close as practicable to the left side spring. The Guy winch was from a conventional drive shaft universal joint position; this was desirable unless a transmission power takeoff of 20 h.p. capacity was available to use with an Air Compressor. The Guy winch was the best type for their [Ford] design providing an off-centre drive shaft feasible. Ellis was mailing Blueprints of the Guy chassis and winch and anticipated body details later. A photograph of the body had been mailed to Carr, as well as the drawings of the Dunlop wheel on the 22nd.

You can interpret this as the first evidence of the FGT (although strictly I suggest that the CGT probably preceded the FGT as a consequence of the agreed equalisation of projects at the time) being designed from the outset as a 25-pdr tractor. It also seems that the Guy Quad Ant of 1937-8 and the MCC equivalents that succeded were the first production tractors intended to tow the 25-pounder. However I can go back earlier to the 1937 WD Mechanization Board Report, which is the first reference to any trialled 25-pdr tractor:

Latil four-wheeled four-wheel drive tractors

These vehicles were stated to be of French origin (SA Latil, Suresnes, Seine) although assembled in England using British components. They were in fact produced by Shelvoke & Drewry of Letchworth Garden City between 1932 and 1937, and then by Latil Industrial Vehicles in Fulham, London. The tractors were under consideration as FATs for the Government of India. The Mark 1 was fitted with a Meadows engine (3,868cc/53bhp) and the Mark II with a Latil unit (4,084cc/75bhp). Trials on behalf of the Government of India were carried out at the MEE [Farnborough, Hampshire] in September 1937. It was not possible to carry a load on either tractor because of lack of body space and the designers considered that the weight of the heavy power-driven winch provided on each vehicle would give sufficient adhesion. Each tractor hauled an 18-pounder gun and limber loaded to represent a 25-pdr gun and limber. The Report stated that they were ‘interesting vehicles’ and that their individual performance was ‘good’. However as tractors they suffered from lack of adhesion because of unsuitable tyre equipment and lack of weight......

[David_Hayward (RIP)]

Morris Commercial C.S.8/FWD four-wheeled, four-wheel drive tractor

The MCC C.S.8 derivative was not referred to in the body of the 1938 Report, neither was the independent-suspended QW Quad although specifications were quoted. Two rigid-axles prototypes were acquired on 9th February 1938 at £3,920/16/9 each, and were based on the C.S.8 Mk III 15-cwt 4x2 truck but had 3.49litre 76.8bhp six-cylinder engines and 10.50-16 Trakgrip tyres. They were trialled with the new 25-pounder guns in North Wales, the replacement for the 18-pounder. The WD subsequently elected in late 1939 for a conventional sprung chassis FAT, although with the four-cylinder sidevalve 3519cc engine, as the model MCC C.8/FWD.

[Lang]

This is very interesting. Everyone assumed the Marmon-Herrington gun tractors had run their front-line race after returning from the Middle East. Here is a photo of one in New Guinea in 1943.

[Lang]

Yes, I have seen one pic of a Humber 8 cwt 4X2 as in your AWM artillery pic, being used by Aussies . In the AWM series books , published during and just after the war e.g., HMAS and all a the rest of them . In the SIGNALS book , there is a pic of FFW 4X2 Humber with some Aussies leaning on the bonnet, they have a map , discussing tactics .....

Mike,

That is a very interesting vehicle. did he bring it over to Australia.

By the way, if the photos showed signalers looking at a map, they were not discussing tactics but the best way to use it to wrap their fish and chips the cook had promised for dinner!

[Lang]

This is how they got the 25 pounders into the DUKWs. A-frame is standard accessory for DUKW. Once lifted the DUKW would back under the gun and it would be lowered in (don't know how they got the last one in if they did not have one spare DUKW.)

[Hanno Spoelstra]

Originally posted by Lang
I did not know whether to continue the GMC thread or not. When I started looking for GMC's in Australian service during WW2 I got on a roll with the War Memorial collection.

Lang, thanks for strating this new thread. Interestingly, the pictures in this thread do not show pictures of swb GMC CCKW-352's in their intended role - towing artillery. Seems the lwb -353 did the job just as well.

Attached goes a nice shot of one of those marvellous Australian Ford/maron-Herrington artillery tractors.

Hanno

[Gunner]

Lang posted: "I am no expert but I suspect that while not having the outstanding flexibility of the the German 88's, the 25 pounder would be the leading contender for the most reliable and flexible allied field artillery piece of WW2.

The Australian modification also included a super high angle capability to allow the gun to lob over ridgelines and more importantly operate out of a small clearing without having to chop down trees."

Hi Lang:

Perhaps I can offer some thoughts based on 32 years as a Gunner and many years as an Instructor-in-Gunnery. Comparing the German 88 to the Commonwealth 25 pounder is somewhat akin to comparing an apple and an orange; both are fruit but come from different trees and different climates.

The 25 pounder was designed as a field gun-howitzer whereas the 88 was designed as an anti-aircraft gun. The 25 pounder was intended for long range relatively low velocity "lobbing" for indirect fire, while the 88 was intended for relatively short range high velocity "pitching" for direct fire.

Each was optimised for these roles, which is why the 88 also made an excellent, albeit tall, anti-tank gun. Its height was a result of the need to be able to point straight up without the breech hitting the ground on recoil.

25 pounder ammunition was separate-loading (projectile and casing were loaded separately) with variable charges- the Gunners could add or remove bags of powder to achieve great variety in trajectory. The 88 used fixed ammunition which could not be varied thus limiting the options for trajectory and its ability to fire in the indirect role.

25 pounder ammunition came in a huge variety from high explosive (HE) to incendiary to pamplet dropping to smoke to anti-tank; well you get the idea. 88 ammunition was limited to a few types designed to down airplanes or pierce tanks.

Both designs were incredibly flexible in that they could be and were used for roles other than the original design intended. With modifications, the 88 become a ferocious anti-tank gun and the 25 pounder, when fitted with a muzzle brake and using super-charge ammunition, was a formidable tank killer itself. There are even reports of the 25 pounder being used to fire at aircraft in self defence using time fuses set to minimum. In the Russian campaigns 88s were frequently required to fire indirectly to add weight to the field artillery barrages.

One of the 25 pounder's greatest limitations was that it could not engage the entire upper register (45 to 90 degrees). Work done in Canada to add a hinge to the trails allowed full use of the upper register and the Australian Baby 25 took the idea to the next plateau by stripping all extraneous metal from the gun, shortening the barrel and replacing the wheels and tyres with jeep ones.

The recoil stress on the smaller tyres led to the adoption of the American idea of axle sectors (the half moon metal thingies just inboard of the tyres) which were swung down to the ground and transferred recoil stresses straight groundwards thus protecting the tyres and reducing bounce.

The Baby 25 was a tough gun to fire as the short barrel and lack of shield exposed the Gunners to all the muzzle blast. I can tell you from experience on the L5 105mm pack howitzer of similar short barrel fame, that its like being slapped in the sinuses with a cricket bat and can lead to some spectacular nose bleeds! As a result, the Baby 25 was limited in what charges it could fire. This wasn't a big issue in jungle warfare as the ranges were generally shorter and the Gunners were closer to the front line than in more open terrain.

Both guns were extensively modified in their time and both served in more than one army. Both were mounted on a number of self propelled chassis and both are highly sought after as collectors' pieces and museum artifacts because of the images they bring to mind.

Most vets of the Second Big Bang will tell you that they were shelled by 88s... unless they were tankers or pilots its more likely that they were shelled by the German 105mm lFk 18... the most numerous artillery piece in the German inventory and the work horse of the German field artillery. I don't tell them that: as an old soldier myself I understand and wholly support the need for good war stories, hell I've told a few myself!

The 25 pounder and the 88, both excellent and incredibly flexible artillery pieces whose service careers far exceeded their designers' expectations. 88s were still in use in Norway when I was there as a GPO (Gun Position officer) and FOO (Forward Observation Officer) in the 1980s. They were in fixed coastal artillery installations guarding strategic fiords. 25 pounders are still in service in many places... Last month, I watched a national salute in Accra, Ghana fired by two 25 pounders... one made in the UK and one in Canada, both in 1943!

Forgive the long ; I hope its has added to the corporate knowledge here on MLU.



Mike

[Hanno Spoelstra]

Originally posted by Gunner
25 pounders are still in service in many places

Mike, thanks for your contribution re. the 88-mm vs the 25-pdr.

Attached goes a picture of a 25-pdr still in service in Surinam, pictured late 2006 by forum member Nuyt (source).

[cliff]

Originally posted by Lang
This is how they got the 25 pounders into the DUKWs. A-frame is standard accessory for DUKW. Once lifted the DUKW would back under the gun and it would be lowered in (don't know how they got the last one in if they did not have one spare DUKW.)

easy they used the second DUKW fitted with a lifting boom.

[Lang]

Mike,

Thanks for that info - very informative. My total 25 pounder experience was 18 months in the CMF/Reserve/National Guard/Territorials or whatever your country calls it when I was 17 and still in high school.

I can well imagine the blast from a short barrel. The first time I saw a 25 pounder fired I was on the seat! Shortage of people and 9 months on Thursday nights and weekends made me an expert gun layer!?

It was somewhat of a surprise after about a thousand training commands of "Fire!" from the gun sergeant and the resultant CLICK from my smart yank on the lever to find my first live shell resulted in someone whacking me over the head with a baseball bat. I saw stars and nearly fell off the seat. I can still remember the abuse from the gun sergeant as I wound the handles the wrong way for the second round - totally disoriented.

All too noisy so I became an Army pilot!

Lang

[Gunner]

Hi Lang:

Whoooo! You had me rolling on the floor in sympathetic laughter! My own experience on the L5 was very similar... the Number One didn't forewarn us stupid occifer kay-dets about the blast effect.

Expecting the same results as the longer barreled C1 howitzer (US M-101) a gun I had fired thousands of rounds from before I pursued a commission; I stupidly sat up straight and looked forward..... and was nearly blown off the trail by the shock and pain of my sinuses instantly imploding!

Needless to say the Sergeant winked at me and I somehow failed to warn the next guy once I passed my Layer's Test! Heh, heh, heh!

Mike

[Gunner]

Looks like they modified it by fitting Dodge 3/4 ton rims reversed!

Mike