WW-2 Romania again

[Mobius]

The Germans tested several shells in the 4.7cm PaK (t)L/43.4
mm penetration @ 30°

AT shell 36(t)
52 at 100m
47 at 500m
40 at 1000m

AT shell 36(r)
52 at 100m
47 at 500m
40 at 1000m

AT shell 35(ö)(umg.)
44 at 100m
41 at 500m
34 at 1000m

The French 1937 SA or 4.7cm cannon 181(f)-frz.37 using AT shell 178(f)
50 at 500m

Note - I think the 'r' would at the time of testing refer to Romanian not to Russian as this was pre Barbarossa. The 'o' would be Austrian.

[Mk 1]

A ) The Germans tested several shells in the 4.7cm PaK (t)L/43.4
mm penetration @ 30°
...
B ) The French 1937 SA or 4.7cm cannon 181(f)-frz.37 using AT shell 178(f)
50 at 500m

Oooh, interesting stuff there.

But there are perhaps three ways to interpret what you have written in what I have labelled as A ).

First is that the Germans tested three different rounds of ammunition in the Czech 47mm gun. Which begs the question how did the Germans load three different rounds, of different case sized, into the same 47mm cannon?

Second is that the Germans tested three different projectiles loaded into a Czech cartridge. Interesting to see some variance in performance, and tells us something about the level of AP projectile design in the different nation's repertories, but not much help in understanding how the different rounds (and different guns) would have performed.

Third is that they tested three different guns -- and also a fourth if we add the results in B ).

Does your source information give any further background to clarify this?

If these were indeed tests of different ammunition in different guns, I am quite surprised to see the similarities in performance. There were substantial differences between these cartridges, and guns, and I would have expected substantial differences in penetration.

For example (from Tony Williams' data tables):

Austrian Bohler 47mm x 195mm
Projectile Weight: 1.5kg
Muzzle Velocity: 630 mps

French 47mm x 380mm
Projectile Weight: 1.72kg (HE projectile weight. No info on AP projectile weight)
Muzzle Velocity: 855 mps

Firing a projectile of 15% greater weight, at 35% greater velocity, if the projectile ballistics were at all comparable the French AT gun should have delivered almost 100% more energy onto its target, no?

[Mobius]

They list the (r) along with the (t). They might consider them interchangeable.
Here is some more hints
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 6ca0b6e9ae

[kiasutha]

Gentlemen, I'm really getting confused now...
your pardon for a few disjoint thoughts I hope you can help clarify...

Are we talking about Czech 47's to compare performance with the Schneider/s?
Since the only non- "t" Skoda 47 I can find is a "j" (Yugoslavia), what are these other "r" and "o" test munitions?
Obviously, the Austrians had their Bohler 47mm.
I know of no Russian made 47mm atg's; only 45mm's- but there was a "47mm 196(r)" .
It was another export Bohler that the Russki's "aquired" when they annexed the Baltics.
Could these rounds have fit the Skoda gun for tests?

My list of "fremden-gerat" letter codes lists "r" as Russian; with no code given for Romania. Was one ever added later? if so, it shouldn't be "r"...
That list/system was developed and instituted pre-war, so "r" would have been in place for Russia from the start. It was origionally intended to classify all known foreign weapons; not just captured ones. ("fremden"=foreign, not "feinden"-enemy; as I understand it)
(again, my source material could well be in error, and my spelling probably s*cks...)

The Romanians already had the rather weak Bohler/ Breda 47, (and recognized that; they used it more as an Lig) as well as some other light atgs.
One would think there was a good reason they went to the trouble of buying and even manufacturing the Schneider 47.
"Occams Razor" suggests it must have been significantly better than what they had.
A gun "on par" with a Pak 38 would have been worth producing right to the end.
Another question is whether data on the origional French ammo / gun performance will answer the question.
Romania may well have re-chambered it for a better round; either the later French one, or a home grown one.
The Germans did with the Czech 47; & brought it near equal to a Pak 38, or so I've read.

Guess I've put my head in enough nooses for now ! <GG>
But this HAS been interesting !
Regards,
Jim R.

[Mobius]

One table lists the 47mm ammuntion as (r). Maybe its a typo and should be (t).

[Mk 1]

And now for some information provided by a French forum-buddy, drawn from French language sources:

Pachy (from TankNet) provided:
According to Stéphane Ferrard*, the Schneider 47 mm gun weighted around 500 kg, versus 1055 kg for the APX gun (47 SA mle 37). Its muzzle velocity was 750 m/s which possibly meant it used neither 47mm x 193mm nor 47mm x 380mm but perhaps something inbetween? It is said to perforate 70 mm @ 400 m @ 30°. The wheels could be deployed on the sides so as to extend the shield, which is shown on two photographs.

* France 1940: L'armement terrestre, by Stéphane Ferrard

Looking at the stats, the 47mm Schneider AT gun used by the Romanians was only half the weight of the 47mm gun used by the French. So a much smaller / slighter gun. So it appeared to my eye in the pictures.

The MV of 750mps is pretty good. But also indicates that it probably did not fire the same ammunition as the 47mm AT gun used by the French. Still, with that muzzle-break, maybe it did fire a round that was over-powered for the gun and barrel.

If the barrel had reasonable length (which it appears to from the photos), I suppose it might possibly have achieved that velocty from the French 47mm x 193mm cartridge. After all, the SA-35 tank gun achieved 630mps with a barrel that was only L34. Going from an L34 to an L45-50 barrel might have provided another 20-25% improvement in velocity. But I doubt it would have been quite that much of an improvement. The French SA-35 gun was not known for excessive muzzle flash, which would be the indicator of a gun that really begged for a longer barrel to take advantage of its cartridge. If the round was already burning up all of its propellant while the projectile was still in its relatively short barrel, it would not have gained so much from a longer barrel.

Most likely this gun fired a different round, one that we have not yet identified. But at least we have a benchmark on its performance, which doesn't look bad. About half-way between a Bohler AT gun and a French 47mm AT gun.

Interestinger and interestinger...