Britain's Tiger Killer - The 17-Pounder

An overview of the WW2 British 17-Pounder gun including the vehicles that mounted it.
More War Movie Content: / johnnyjohnsonesq
Second Channel: / @johnnyjohnsonhistory
Movies and video games featured:
Return of the King (2003)
Fury (2014)
#ww2 #tank

[@kingkoopa64]

Remember if the 17 pounder dont fit... PUT IT IN SIDEWAYS!!!

[@oldschoolman9878]

What if the radio doesn’t fit, or if the engine is no good?

[@kingkoopa64]

@@oldschoolman9878 cut a hole in the back and let stick out the back I guess

[@johntisso6910]

Remember if the tea drewer doesn't fit.... Back to redesigning!!!!

[@Sean-yj4wq]

​@@oldschoolman9878 get 3 car engines put em together

[@george8812]

​@@Sean-yj4wq 5*

[@Great_Sandwich]

Dad always told me he was very happy when the 17 pounder came out. Big morale booster, and solid game-changer.

[@chrisberry2414]

Was that on War Thunder or World of Tanks?

[@caroleansoldier382]

​@@chrisberry2414can't wait for it to come out in update 19.42

[@arnijulian6241]

My Great Grand father john basically said the same thing as he was in the North African campaign after being stationed Gibraltar. Sicily landing then heading North in Italy just before Rome took a Mauser round to his Aris/backside & could never sit right since as he missed a junk of his cheek with most of the bullet being left in as they could extract it in full. After his cremation 1/2 a century onward it in his ashes at my fathers place. 17 pounder was certainly useful as a moral boost then anything as big bang make troops confident. The 6 pounder was ample at the time for most anything but 17 was just to make sure.

[@Great_Sandwich]

@@arnijulian6241 They don't make men like that breed, anymore.

[@arnijulian6241]

​@@Great_Sandwich Well I was raised by him in part & his son my Grandfather Jim who was in the Korean war then Kenya. My father was out & about the globe as a mercenary when I was really young. Even my brother calls me a Victorian man as an attempted insult which I take as a compliment. Being mute till 7 I spent little time around my own generation learning from my elders instead & much preferred my own company to others. I'm as close as you get to the Great & silent generation that instructed me in polemology=warfare studies among other acumen that would not be taught today due to people lacking mental constitution. Hardship & trail with a guiding hand with encouraging words is a rarity for the youth of today. Many would not have been suited to my childhood but i enjoyed it very much. My brother was not made to do the same as I hunted since 5 of my own choice butchered with my god father as an apprentice since 10. forged my own blade at 7 & made an single cylinder engine by 9 from a block of steel. My elders showed me to think critically & made me very self reliant which made me the person I am.

[@cruzaider5339]

God bless British "fuck it, we ball" engineering

[@Mikalent]

One of my Grandfathers served as a medic on Normandy, and after the link up with the British, his unit spent a lot of time in close proximity to British units, eventually developing a friend who remained a family friend until his death in the mid 2000s. Both my Grandfather and his friend would always talk about how much British and American troop's loved having Firefly tanks around, and how bad they felt for the Firefly crews who got pulled every direction because of officers mistaking hull down Panzer 4s for Tigers. They would also poke jabs at each other, how the Americans wouldn't advance without tanks or Air cover, or how the British would stop for tea at the exact same time every day to the point the Germans learned when they could relax.

[@lufe8773]

thanks for the story my Uncle was with the British Artillery in Normandy and we visited the Normandy landing beaches including Omaha Beach a couple of years ago. The American cemetery is something to behold so sad and we have the utmost respect for the young men of all the countries that fought there. Have a good day.

[@Johnny84mm-sn4gj]

My Uncle Gerry served in the RCA (Royal Canadian Artillery) during the war. He started out on the 2-pounder and eventually served as a Gunner for a 17-pounder. He always told me that it was such a deadly gun. He also gave me heck for joining the infantry. He sadly passed in December last year. Thanks for the great videos.

[@HungarianRepublic]

What did he think of the gradual gayification of Canada?

[@robisfantasticutube]

"Sir the boiling vessel won't fit!" "Cancel it and shut down production!"

[@wbertie2604]

The BV didn't appear until the Centurion, so just missed WW2. But it was apparently a critical feature going forward.

[@jonathanball8237]

😂 damn right 👍😂

[@Spudtron98]

The 77mm is actually a 76mm gun, but it didn't share ammunition with either the conventional 76mm or the 17 Pounder, so it was renamed to prevent confusion in the field. The gun was a bit shorter and the shells a little weaker, but they still retained more than enough power to ruin any tank it came across, while having superior ergonomics.

[@bigblue6917]

That is true.

[@mattandrews8528]

It’s wild how back in the day how many different ammo types got made for the same caliber, seems like the problem was not only in small arms like was with .30 and .45 cal ammunition for rifles and handguns not matching for any allied nation in WW1, the problem only slightly being fixed by WW2. If NATO did one thing right it was standardizing ammunition.

[@mattandrews8528]

It’s wild how back in the day how many different ammo types got made for the same caliber, seems like the problem was not only in small arms like was with .30 and .45 cal ammunition for rifles and handguns not matching for any allied nation in WW1, the problem only slightly being fixed by WW2. If NATO did one thing right it was standardizing ammunition.

[@tileux]

No tank gun of ww2 could - or did - penetrate the front armour of a King Tiger.

[@Spudtron98]

@@tileux As if that bloody thing was ever relevant.

[@VacatedData]

i think people really underestimate the effect of the smaller 6 pounder. it had a much faster fire rate and could pen pretty much everything up to a panther, but penning the tank isn't everything, often crews would bail out after one hit knowing that yet another round is incoming in short order. the main advantage of a six pounder is its hella manoeuvrable, you can slam that thing on the back of a universal carrier or a jeep and it'll get the battlefield much faster than a 17 pounder, which required a specialised tractor. great examples are postion 'snipe' in the second battle of el alemain where a 6 pounder section damn near destroyed 1/4 of the german tank force across a couple nights completely unsupported. *edit(maths)

[@cw5277]

the six pounder definitely punched above its weight.. are you referencing the first or second battle of El Alamein? I’m interested in learning more

[@LeminskiTankscor]

6 pounder fan here! :D

[@VacatedData]

@@cw5277 It was the second battle, i should say my maths might be wrong on the half of the german force thing but they got like 57-60 kills , so its more like a quarter but considering this was about thirteen six guns its still fairly good

[@matthewjones39]

Something people tend to forget when discussing AT guns is that tank crews don’t fight to the death

[@VacatedData]

@@matthewjones39 yeah, tiger 131 was captured by 6-pounder armed Churchills

[@bursegsardaukar]

5:50 Those puns packed quite a punch.

[@rogercude1459]

Some people get incredibly upset that this gun is actually better than the 88 on the tiger one, and it made a Sherman a big cat hunter.

[@drstrangelove4998]

Yeh, because it wasn’t, the 88 had twice the range for a start😂

[@rogercude1459]

@@drstrangelove4998 you don't know what your talking about! There are two versions of the 88 the full power flak fitted to the king and others, and the lower power, smaller barrel length and round length fitted in the tiger1 . The 17pounder fires a 76mm round at a higher velocity than the 88 on the tiger1 and goes through more armour 😂

[@williamzk9083]

Some people get upset, its human nature that all sides have and rather foolish. It must be struggled against. All tanks eventually become out of date. -The 17 Pounder had almost exactly the same performance as the German 7.5cm KwK 42 of the Panther tank and both entered service in early 1943. -The Germans in fact made an anti tank field gun version called the 7.5cm PAK 42 but only 300 were produced. The gun was allocated mainly to Panther and JagPanzer IV production. -The 'ace' that the 17 pounder had was tungsten core APCBC and APDS. The German APCBC was in short supply due to tungsten shortages and essentially not available. -The 8.8cm KwK 36 fired a 25lb shell at 820 m/sec (about 2680fps) which despite having less penetration than the 17 pounder at 3000fps had slightly more kinetic energy than the 17 pounder due to the heavier shell. Past about 1500m penetration was probably nearly equal and 2000m the KwK 36 probably a little better. -Had the KwK 36 had a lightweight tungsten core or APDS it might even have had slightly better penetration. Its a moot point as German tungsten core ammo was rare. -The APDS was not available for D day but some weeks after. Tungsten core was available. -Early APDS was troublesome likely due to poor sabot separation and incompatibility with muzzle brakes. Both US and UK tests (eg Bovingtons Trials) found that of around 9 projectiles fired at 500 yards at a captured panther most missed and those that hit tended to glance of the Panthers slopped Armour or breakup. The higher penetration was counter balanced by higher dispersion. The problem was fixed eventually. -The Germans seem to have skipped fielding the 7.5cm KwK as an AT gun and jumped straight to the 1000m/sec 3300fps 8.8cm PAK 43. Once you are over 2.5 tons you need a half track or tractor to position the gun and and extra tone makes no difference.

[@Twirlyhead]

@@williamzk9083 😴 So how many german tanks ceased to be in their inventory because of the 17pdr.

[@DeltaSierra0605]

The amount of content you put on these short videos is amazing!

[@JohnnyJohnsonEsq]

Love the tactical cat logo =)

[@DeltaSierra0605]

@@JohnnyJohnsonEsq Not mine, but I like it too

[@kellychuang8373]

Yeah it truly is and who knows may want to also look up Soviet landmines or those Nazi mines I told about like the S-Mine or any others in that movie Land of Mine you talked about or look into guns of Mars Attacks is another has the M2 Browning and M-14 rifle there as well among others like the Colt 1911 anyway look it up or as they say now Google it.

[@kellychuang8373]

Yes it really is and who knows what others out there but could do one on Bombers like the B-52 and Soviet Tupolev and like I already said there's many other topics.

[@andyleighton6969]

Better muzzle velocity that the legendary "88", and for an anti tank gun velocity REALLY matters.

[@Jay-ln1co]

The Comet's gun was named the 77mm high-velocity (17pdr. being 76.2mm) to distinquish the two shells for logistical reasons and avoid confusion with sending the wrong munitions to the wrong unit. While the projectile was the same in both, the 77mm had a different, shorter casing to fit into tanks better. It's a bit like how .38 Special and .357 Magnum cartridges are pretty much the same, but they're given different designations to avoid confusion (and the .357 casing is just slighly longer to make it harder to fit into guns designed for .38 Special, while it's perfectly fine to put .38 Special into a gun designed for a .357 Magnum).

[@richardvernon317]

My Grandfather fired one of theses things while doing an army instructors course on a range in 1943. He always talked about it being the most impressive weapon he ever fired.

[@inductivegrunt94]

Easily my favorite AT gun of WW2. I just love the name 17-Pounder. It just sounds so powerful. And its use in the Sherman Firefly, Comet, and Centurion 1 helped make them some of my most favorite British tanks in history. And solid puns at the end of the video.

[@Del_S]

"Sir, the gun won't fit!" "We did this seven times in the comments already."

[@occasionalscuba2179]

You do a great job condensing so much information into these shorter form videos, they’re perfect to watch when taking a short break at work

[@bigblue6917]

The Archer was a very appropriate name considering that the APDS fires a tungsten arrow. And the Firefly was more that capable of dealing with the Tiger tank with one famously killing three in one engagement. In another battle one firefly killed four panthers and knocked a fifth.

[@scockery]

"You know what they call a 17-pounder with cheese in Paris?"

[@robertsansone1680]

A FrogMac?

[@HootOwl513]

Canon Royale

[@ajb7876]

Le Big Gun?

[@joshuabessire9169]

" Because of... the metric system?" "Check out the big brain on Czech conscript!"

[@KingTrouser]

A Royale with French gun crew.

[@arnijulian6241]

The 1st Tiger tank knocked-out of the war was Tunisia on 31 January 1943. It was either done by a 6 or 2 pounder antitank gun by the 17th/21st Lancers of the British Army. Funnily a 2 pounder hit the turret ring that made the inoperable as the round was loaded in the bearings. A humble little (British Ordnance QF 2-pounder) with a contact angle of 30° at 500yards can piece 1.85 to 3.55 inches of armour depending on the round type used. Armour piecing high velocity was the best for this. All but a tiger II tanks Front hull: 100 mm (3.9 in) could be penetrated by a 2 pounder let alone a 6 pounder which could penetrate every portion of a tiger tank at 500yards. Don't underestimate small guns. The only real; draw back of the 2 pounder was (High-explosive tracer-HE/T Mk II) left a lot to be desired as 40mm diameter shell is a tad narrow for High explosive. 6 pounders 57mm shell solved this issue for anti personal role. Honestly 17pounder was over the top but great for moral as men knowing they had that going bang with a load boom is good for the spirit & disheartening for their foes.

[@arnijulian6241]

Archer was actually classified as a (Motorised Gun Carriage=MGC) & the USA equivalent is (Gun Motor carriage-GMC). British 1916 (Gun Carrier Mark I) is the 1st MGC & 1st Self-propelled gun though not al MGC are self-propelled guns to make matters confusing as the Archer is a MGC but not a self propelled gun. M3 Gun Motor Carriage is the USA's 1st GMC & self-propelled gun in 1941 which it was alright but M7 Priest was a real improvement in only a year in 1942. M6 Gun Motor Carriage would not be a Motorised Gun Carriage but a well armoured (Portée) in British doctrine & classification. Mind the USA will much like France to inflate their capability on paper alter the definition of what is & isn't.

[@JohnnyJohnsonEsq]

Glad you found this one and added some great extra info on the overlooked power of the 2pounder and 6pounder! Will try to do you justice when I cover them!

[@arnijulian6241]

​@@JohnnyJohnsonEsq will be looking forward to it. Most pay the smaller guns little mind but the bulk of what was used was on par or smaller then the British 2 & 6 pounder for the Antitank role. After the 7.5 cm Pak 40 the 3.7 cm Pak 36 was the Germans most abundant antitank gun they had which leaves more to be desired then the British 2 pounder though the German Stielgranate 41 really upped penetration but limited 300meter range. 7.5 pak 40 was a wonderful gun but F trying to move at shy of 1 & 1/2 metric tons. Germans took it right to the limit of weight for a man operated gun. 6 pounder was 1.14 or 1.215 tons if mk1 or mk2. A big gun is nice till you have to wheel it about on soft soil-ground let alone in mud. A 2 pounder is 814kg which a dozen lads in a squad could carry in it's bit s if need be. 2.8 cm sPzB 41 classified as a heavy Antitank rifle later termed light antitank gun was an odd German creation that near 3000 were made. The French had such a shortage of anti tank guns they were using Canon d'Infanterie de 37 modèle TRP's from 1916. 25 mm Hotchkiss anti-tank gun left even more to be desired as fine against armoured cars but any tank of ww2 it really wasn't up to scratch. AC 37 anti-tank gun was underwhelming as well.

[@JohnnyJohnsonEsq]

That's right. Weight and soil is everything. Half the reason why the "Big Cats" were mostly junk.

[@arnijulian6241]

​@@JohnnyJohnsonEsq Panther tanks has a 12.5 PSI which is usable. Tigers lightest Ground pressure combat tracks: 1.04kg sq cm (14.8psi) A human foot is about 16PSI for perspective Johnny. Even the heaviest variant of the Churchill tank Mk4 was 13.1 psi. Churchill tank was normally closer to 11PSI. Lightest 6 bogeys & small roller wheels, 12 bogey arms, 24 road wheels is a lot of parts compared to other tanks which gave the Churchill it's forward hang over that served other purposes like added angled armour when engaging or crossing trenches. Sherman M4 tank varied by model from 11.1 to 12 PSI roughly. USA Abrams tank is a ludicrous 15PSI British FV4201 Chieftain is 12.8 which is much 13PSI is about the limit of a what tank or vehicle can impart to be practical in combat usage. closer to 11PSI is optimal which few tanks reach down to or below. USSR T-34/85 had a very low ground pressure of 10.5PSI which you can't ask for better while retaining usable armour.

[@janwitts2688]

The challenger was the superior vehicle.. much liked by its crews.. it was very roomy and mobile... the armour was not an issue as it was deployed 1 tank to 3 Cromwell and sat back until called forward to engage at optimum deflection before moving back to reserve.. Britain defeated 5.5 panzer divisions in Normandy.. USA 1.5

[@nickdanger3802]

"The challenger" ??? 200 built. 21st Panzer was equipped with French trophy armour. German tanks in in the American sector of the Bocage would have been as useless as American tanks were until modified to rhino tanks. Almost all of the German armour came from east or south through or around Paris.

[@joegatt2306]

Between 1st and 8th June, the 2nd, 21st, Panzer Lehr, 1st SS, 2nd SS & 12th SS Pz. divisions fielded a total of 804 tanks, or 160 average per division. Between 5th and 7th August, with the inclusion of the 116th Pz. they were down to under 300 tanks. Between June and July, the German committed a total of 1,347 tanks and 337 assault guns to the Normandy battles, including replacement tanks and new forces, (9th SS & 10th SS Pz.). During the same time-period, the British and Canadians had 5 armored divisions and 11 armored brigades with a total strength of 3,369 medium tanks, 788 light tanks and 120 SPGs, or 334 average tanks per division and 237 per brigade! These averages rarely declined due to a replacement park of 2,000 tanks, exclusively for Brit/ Can forces! For example, the three armored divisions, (Guards, 7th & 11th) together with the 27th armored brigade, committed 1,100 and 250 tanks respectively, for Operation Goodwood, (18th. July), which indicates that all four formations went into battle at full strength. Facing them were three panzer divisions and two heavy tank battalions with less than 400 tanks. Source: Brute Force by John Ellis, pages 355 to 358.

[@janwitts2688]

@joegatt2306 An attacker needs at least a three to one ratio to succeed.. so either divide the British numbers by 3 or multiply the German by 3.. duh

[@nickdanger3802]

@@janwitts2688 Doctrine of most army's is not to attack with less than 2 to 1 ratio if all other factors are equal. 16 inch/400mm guns of HMS Rodney had a range of over 20 miles/30k and Allies had air dominance, courtesy of the USAAF, allowing RAF heavies to operate in daylight for the first time in two years. Fighter bombers could operate with little to fear except flak wagons and while not the tank killer some people thought, they made life hell for unarmored and lightly armored vehicles during the day forcing any resupply of fuel, ammo, food and water to be done at night. Sunrise and sunset · Caen, Normandy, France · July 6, 2024 6:04 AM & 10:07 PM

[@AnthonyTobyEllenor-pi4jq]

What these programmes rarely mention is that whenever the Allies met German resistance, they called in the Allies airforce to soften up the Germans by bombing, strafing etc.

[@alexfogg381]

The basic reasons the US REJECTED the 17 pounder as an Arment for the Sherman tank as a standard gun, was due to supply Logistics , and the internal layout of the turret in a Sherman firefly was deemed UNSATISFACTORY for US tank crews, better to have perfect later, than good enough now mindset. The CHIEFTAIN answered this question in one of his Q and A videos THIS WAS NOT MEANT TO SHIT ON PERFORMANCE OF 17 pounder of Vehicles that used it.

[@lyndoncmp5751]

Except the 76mm was nowhere near as good as the 17 pounder in Armour Piercing without HVAP and that was rare and not readily replaced. The commanders of the US 2nd and 6th Armored Divisions were not happy with the performance of the 76mm. I've never heard British armoured division commanders complaining about the performance of the 17 pounder.

[@billballbuster7186]

No the 17 Pounder was rejected by the US because General Lesley McNair, Chief of Army Ground Forces restricted the Sherman to Infantry Support, so the 17 Pounder was not required. At least six Sherman replacement designs were rejected for the same reason.

[@surfdocer103]

Read the question in my mind.👍🏻

[@williamzk9083]

The 17 pounder had major teething problems. Both US and British trials at Bovington showed that Of 9 shells fired at 500 yards at a captured Panther 5 missed, and 2 broke up or deflected. The 17 pounder had a lot of problems and in addition the Sherman suffered lost its radio operator and hull gunner and in addition was non standard which would have cut production. The US also had an effective 90mm AT gun.

[@billballbuster7186]

@@williamzk9083 I just love these detractors. Where is your source for these claims? British tanks did not have a radio operator, the tank Commander used the radio. Your gun performance data is WRONG and relates to early tests with APDS ammunition only. Later cured by boring out the muzzle brake aperture. The obvious fact is the 17 Pounder served without a glitch for over 20 years. They destroyed hundreds of Tigers and Panthers in NW Europe during WW2. No US tank came even close. The Sherman Firefly was an interim tank until the arrival of the A41 Centurion. However by all accounts the conversion worked very well, no complaints from the soldiers equipped with it. In late 1944 the US Army placed orders for it, realizing the errors they made in 1943 in not mass producing it.

[@eamonnclabby7067]

A most excellent choice,naturally biased, however, just watched ,Tankies ( 5th RTR ) on the BBC, by Mark Urban....cheers, Johnny...E...😊😊😊

[@JohnnyJohnsonEsq]

British guns and tanks never get proper credit =)

[@eamonnclabby7067]

​@@JohnnyJohnsonEsq...a former associate, was an artillery man in WW2....German POWs assured him they feared British artillery....a wonderful man...Sir Tom...RIP...

[@02Tony]

While the Sherman Firefly was exceptionally dangerous to the Germans, it did make the tank the highest priority target for destruction compared to the regular Shermans, attempts were made to hide the distinctive long barrel by painting a third of the barrel or adding a fake muzzle break half way the barrel to fool long distance observers.

[@billballbuster7186]

This is why the 75mm armed tanks were first in line, the 17 Pounders were brought forward only if a "Heavy" was encountered.

[@billballbuster7186]

The British 17 Pounder had a shell case with almost twice the capacity of the US 76mm, the caliber may be the same but the US gun was totally outclassed. By the time of D-day landings the 17 Pounder was mounted in the Firefly and Challenger tanks and the M10 Achilles SPG. These successfully countered the German Army Group West around Caen. The Germans were stopped and were prevented from achieving any of their objectives, leading to victory for the Allies.

[@nickdanger3802]

"By the time of D-day landings the 17 Pounder was mounted in the Firefly and Challenger tanks" Really ?

[@billballbuster7186]

@@nickdanger3802 Are you being sarcastic or incredibly dumb? Around 350-400 Sherman Firefly were ready by D-Day followed by 200 A30 Challenger. By October 1944 there were over 1,000 Firefly tanks in service. Eventually about 2,250 Sherman Firefly tanks were built. The A30 Challenger was a modified A27 Cromwell built from 1943 in small numbers.

[@nickdanger3802]

@@billballbuster7186 If Challenger was so brilliant why is it only 200 were built ?

[@billballbuster7186]

@@nickdanger3802 The A30 Challenger was made by Birmingham Railway Carriage & Wagon. They also produced the Valentine and Cromwell tanks so production capacity was limited. An order for 200 A30s was placed in late 1942, but it was of new all-welded construction and so was delayed. Then in 1943 the Firefly conversion was built which was easier to produce. So the second batch of 200 A30s were built as the 17 Pdr SP Avenger entering service in May 1945. The Challenger was faster and more agile than the Sherman Firefly. It was used by the Armoured Reconnaissance Regiments.

[@jordanmagpiebullet7978]

Amazing work keep them coming your getting better and better with every video

[@JohnnyJohnsonEsq]

Thanks as always brother.

[@jordanmagpiebullet7978]

@@JohnnyJohnsonEsq your welcome my friend

[@kellychuang8373]

Yes it really is and also even more ideas could do one on B-52 bombers, those notorious mines of Land of Mine like S-Mines and Tellers, T-54/55 tanks are another along with the M1 Abrams Tanks and like I already said before many topics out there including some already mentioned before and who knows the world is filled with a lot.

[@williamashbless7904]

While APDS was capable of incredible penetration, they had serious accuracy issues. By Normandy tanker doctrine held that APDS was to be used at a maximum of 500 yards.

[@cw4623]

This is true! And the anecdotes of inaccuracy that were levied at the 17-pounder were exclusively due to the early APDS shells. In AP and APHE, it was as accurate as any other gun.

[@billballbuster7186]

This was due to the muzzle brake fouling the Sabot separation. The muzzle brakes were bored out which improved matters, but the later 20 Pounder had the muzzle brake removed entirely.

[@BHuang92]

Interesting Fact: The 17 pounder was one of first guns to use Armour-piercing discarding sabot or APDS rounds which could penetrate 256 mm of armour at 500 meters and 233 mm at 1000 meters. However it was less accurate fire at ranges beyond 500 yards due to less visible rounds when fired. Also, the greater penetration came at the expense of less damage to enemy tanks when penetrated.

[@davilioses8225]

I mean you wouldnt want to be in the tank if the enemy is putting holes through it in the first place

[@Pte.Fletcher]

Another issue with the APDS on the 17-Pounder was the accuracy. It was considerably less accurate than other guns firing standard AP/APHE at the time. Unfortunately this fact has been twisted to just "The 17-pounder was inaccurate", which is not true.

[@alltat]

@@davilioses8225 The crew is dead either way, but it's probably easier to repair a tank that "only" has a small hole in it.

[@kirotheavenger60]

'Damage to enemy tanks' is not really a consideration, and APDS was not noticably worse in this regard. Real life isn't a videogame. In real life, any penetration is all but guaranteed to knock out some vital component or crew.

[@piney4562]

​@davilioses8225 Arguably, thats an advantage. If you are successfully attacking a position defended in part with tanks, or repelling an enemy armoured attack. Such that the enemy is forced to pull back, and leave behind damaged/abandoned tanks, then the less damage they have taken, the better. It allows for better study of enemy equipment, and potentially the ability to repair and use these enemy vehicles. Not super common, but it did happen, especially the Germans used a lot of captured tanks.

[@BastiPROTON]

17-pounters were also put in the Achilles tank destroyers. Also, the first time the allies encountered Tigers they were taken out by 6-pounders in Africa.

[@williamkennedy5492]

My father was in the Royal Artillery and told me at Woolwich arsenal he first saw the gun he told his captain who didn't believe a gun would have a breach as large as a tea chest, the story continued they sent out several guns to North Africa, the story went around his regiment the 17 pounder hit the first tiger going clean through and hitting the second German tank behind the tiger, perhaps a tall story to boost moral. It was a very powerful gun.

[@drstrangelove4998]

That was a silly myth, there’s a similar story about this happening to two Shermans though which was more likely true.

[@Luis-be9mi]

Worth noting you can tell which British tank crew member operated a Sherman Firefly by paying close attention to the lack of eyebrows. Sherman Fireflies had a nasty habit of ejecting spent 17 pounder casings that still had enough hot gasses that will burn for some time.

[@jimtaylor294]

The actual severity of that claim has been contested a lot over the years. Armoured Archives has covered it in their videos on Firefly.

[@romanbrough]

Just come back from a big open air market. One stall was selling what looked like metal detector finds. He had a lump of metal labelled as a 17 pounder shell. Looked like the back two thirds of it. I wondered what it hit to break off the front third. It was heavy.

[@backrowbrighton]

Excellent little piece Johnny. The development and deployment of the gun is very well covered in such a short time.

In Kelly’s Heroes Oddball is Happy to make the Germans believe his Sherman has a 17 pdr or 90mm gun,by adding extra barrel length.All that does is make your tank a shot-magnet.

[@musicbruv]

His thinking was it makes the enemy keep their distance, but as you say, it just makes them a target.

[@GunnerHeatFire]

Great video johhny, keep up the good work!

[@jaymorris3468]

Great video, straight to the point and informative

[@bobmetcalfe9640]

One of the problems was that when using APDS, it was pretty inaccurate. At least that long ranges. Mind you, in Western Europe ranges weren't necessarily all that long. It also kicked up a huge cloud of dust when it fired which meant you couldn't spot the fall of shot. There is one of the remaining Comets at the Hong Kong Museum of Coastal Defence I think it was. I have a photograph of it somewhere. I think the gun on that had a very similar performance to the American easy eight Sherman's.

[@blusofa8814]

You're the best, Johnny. Keep it up!

[@charliedurnford3277]

Really enjoy your videos. Keep it up!

[@t.j.payeur5331]

Thanks buddy. Keep up the good work !

[@ptonpc]

You wouldn't want that at your prostate exam.

[@TaitLawrence-xl2xb]

When you realize the 17 pounder was a 76.2mm and was one of the most powerful Anti-tank guns the allies had (On the western front)

[@jarraandyftm]

What happens when you realise it’s 76.2mm?

[@TaitLawrence-xl2xb]

@@jarraandyftm 76.2mm was used on many other anti tank guns like the ZiS-3 and many guns on Shermans and T-34s and yet none of them have nearly the same pen as the 17 pounder

[@jarraandyftm]

@@TaitLawrence-xl2xb i know. I want to know what happens when you realise it.

[@TaitLawrence-xl2xb]

@@jarraandyftm The "When you realize" meme implies you get shocked when you realize something

[@jarraandyftm]

@@TaitLawrence-xl2xb ok, just horrendous use of the English language.

[@gypsydildopunks7083]

Getting to a church on a hill maybe a challenge. Thanks again, Johnny. Always appreciate

[@nursestoyland]

Love the use of old historical footage!

[@larryalvares1369]

Ya know, for your next showing of a BoB scene, you should write at the top-left corner “Captain, are personal letters to be considered contraband?”

[@davidjordan697]

Always liked the wave pattern used to disguise fireflies as shorter barrelled shermans, even put it on my leman russ vanquisher models.

[@callsigntonks4029]

Ah yes the firefly gun (Also I did notice the video quality on these vids is amazing keep it up johnny :) )

[@paullyon-vv9tb]

Thanks for video 17pder 77mm guns Helped trun the tide👍

[@TheFunkhouser]

Didnt the Fireflies even camo the barrels of the epic 17 because the Germans knew how deadly they were! 💪

[@dovidell]

amazing bit of kit !!

[@mathiasemmens3451]

three puns at the end we eating good with this one boys

[@davidcarr7436]

A bit of an ambush with the quick firing puns!

[@julmdamaslefttoe3559]

The lack of explosive filler and HE is a sad face moment. crews preferred the 75mm over the 76mm in the shermans due to a similar issue.

[@dettie1948]

In its initial form this gun was code named pheasant and the shells the "Beak", my Father in law (Sergeant Regimental Major Fred Penlington ) was part of a patrol sent to recover a damaged version that was effectively behind enemy lines (being field tested) despite attack from the air the gun was recovered successfully.

[@sigmatus303]

You forgot to mention the link with the Australian Cruiser program. Otherwise great vid

[@HandyMan657]

That was quite the whopper of a gun. Thanks, Johnny, catch ya for another one.

[@steveshoemaker6347]

l know about this amazing 17-Pounder from the War Collage many years ago.....Thanks JJ for the fine video your friend Old F-4 Shoe🇺🇸 in my 80's....

[@aidanfarnan4683]

Love the puns at the end there.

[@MegaNever2010]

All i remember about this gun, is that its emplacement was huge and difficult to fit into certain spots in Company of Heroes, but my god was it powerful.

[@tkyap2524]

He who aims well scores. Among the best arsenals.

[@mugsnvicki]

Sure man, you put out great videos!!!

[@mugsnvicki]

And I never take your videos for Grant Ted!!!

[@michaelandreipalon359]

1:04: Spinning right 'round, 'round, 'round, 'round... Was expecting Girls und Panzer, simply because. Did not expect, err, the third Lord of the Rings movie, of all things? Addendum: I wonder if those Archers will be used for St. Gloriana in Girls und Panzer das Finale?

[@tanfosbery1153]

Just shows how rugged the 25 pounder gun carriage was to cope with the recoil of the 17pdr.

[@JustPassingBy90]

Hehehe not 1 but several puns at the end ,love it

[@adrianybas778]

17 pounder ready~! - 17 pounder emplacement when selected

[@TheDeputy173]

This makes me proud to be British

[@aaronpaul9188]

Standard everywhere i could get it in the old game "close combat: a bridge too far" Always the most difficult maps where when i had to use 6 pounders because the 17 wasnt avaliable. With clear line of sight, 17 pounders were taking out tigers fro. 1500-2000 meters.

[@sinisterisrandom8537]

Just want to add context for anyone who still wonders why the gun is pointing to the rear on the Archer->Recoil. It was tested with it pointing forward->Flip was the answer.

[@jimtaylor294]

Would be interesting to see the QF-32 Pounder (a derivative of the QF-3.7" AA Gun) covered.

[@everythingsalright1121]

Firefly is so uncomfortable to be in from videos ive seen. Hope you dont mind hugging the cannon

[@TellySavalas-or5hf]

Those ones are used at Market Garden. Baskey field VC. Look it up!

[@kellychuang8373]

Good video really surprising of this taking out the German 88mm gun and also other future videos and still waiting may want to do ones on SA-7, Stinger and any missiles against aircraft, AK-47 rifles, M-14 rifles, RPG-7, MIG Jets family and MI-24 Hinds are good candidates and also may think of those notorious German Nazi mines to think about like the S-Mine and Teller anti-tank mines to think about as well as M2 Browning and DSHK machine guns are good among others anyway many others to look into.

[@LoosiuFlying]

Comet'ary on this pounding topic was a blast! 😅

[@chrisyoung1576]

Man, I remember getting jumpscared by exploding panzer out of nowhere when playing company of heroes because of this big gun

[@kimjongoof5000]

Will a Panzer 4 video come out? It would be great to hear about its use in tv shows, especially Japanese kaiju flicks in the 60s-70s like Mirrorman, Izenborg, and Ultraseven

[@PitFriend1]

The 17 Pounder was quite effective as an anti-tank gun but it was in some respects too powerful for use as a tank gun. It had a massive muzzle flash which was one of the reasons the version mounted on the Sherman got the name Firefly but it both gave the tank’s position away and also could blind the crew so they couldn’t see where the shot hit, reducing follow up accuracy. Whole it did have a high explosive round it wasn’t terribly effective. In order for the shell to survive the powerful gun firing the casing needed to be thicker which reduced the amount of explosive filler it held. And while it was one of the first guns to use discarding sabot ammunition those had a reputation for being very inaccurate at range, so it was good that the regular armor piercing shell worked so well. It turned out the gun was so high velocity the alloy the sabot was made from would start to melt in the barrel. This meant that the sabot petals didn’t always come away cleanly, making the penetrator drift off target. The Comet tank used the same projectiles but with less propellant, the reason its gun was called 77mm instead of 17 Pounder to tell the ammo apart, and it didn’t have the accuracy problem. Post war the sabot alloy and its design was changed which also corrected the problem. And also a bit of trivia on why it’s called a 17 Pounder. It’s a holdover from the days of muzzle loading cannon and is similar to the gauge rating of shotguns. The name refers to the weight of an iron ball that will fit down the barrel, so in this case 76.2mm. Other common British gun sizes were 2 Pounder (40mm), 6 Pounder (57mm), and 20 Pounder (84mm).

[@kimjanek646]

I think you mean lead ball because those guns fired steel shells with the same weight as the name implies. Which makes me question whether that’s true or just simply the weight of a steel projectile of that caliber.

[@Chiller11]

@@kimjanek646The British “pounder” naming convention did indeed refer to the weight of a cast iron round ball that could be fired by an 18th or 19th century smooth bore muzzle loading canon of a given muzzle diameter. For some reason they kept the same convention long after the guns became rifled and breach loading. So a modern gun with an approximate bore diameter of 76mm would have fired a cast iron round ball of 17 pounds were it an 18th century muzzle loader. Made no sense really.

[@kimjanek646]

@@Chiller11 But a 17pdr AP shell weighs 17pdr but isn't spherical. So to me this doesn't seem plausible. Same with the other AT guns. Like the 25pdr fired a 25lb HE round.

[@kirotheavenger60]

​@Chiller11 poundage is actually a very intuitive way of describing guns, as the numbers more approximately follow the power. For example, a 17pdr is a lot more powerful than a 6pdr, which is reflected in their poundage. This difference appears much less if you use calibres - a 76mm sounds a lot closer to a 57mm than it actually is. This is because weapon volume increases approximately in the cubic power compared to the linear increase in calibre.

[@dp-sr1fd]

@@kimjanek646 The old muzzle loading cannons fired iron round shot, amongst other types of ammo, and the calibre was the diameter of an iron ball that weighs (for example) eight pounds. The calibre of shotguns was worked out by the diameter of a ball of pure lead that, in the case of a 12 bore, is one twelfth of a pound. This was 0.729 inches.

[@discount8508]

the archer was good value ...a reliable chassis , good punch , a great hit and run vehicle for the $ ...even the russians loved that chassis

[@chrismair8161]

The United States had no answer to this Cannon till the 90mm mounted on the M-26. The 76mm ACP mounted on the M-18 was a joke at long range. The German Crews knew to take the (FireFly) first as it was the only one to take them at range.

[@nickdanger3802]

1,335 M4's with US 76mm gun Lend Leased to Britain, 2,000 to USSR.

[@MiguelWario05]

I would say that this video has but one Achilles' Heel

[@MayumiC-chan9377]

I think my husband told me his favorite vehicle from his serve the Rooikat has a 17 pounder gun.

[@rafaelnishizumi6330]

The 2nd best Gun the British developed, right behind the L7.

[@jonathanzobel1662]

You missed the Avenger. Very similar to the Challenger but with an open topped turret

[@kielbasamage]

I believe the Yankee designation for the 17-pounder is the Dr. Disrespect, if I've heard correctly.

[@tank-eg6ig]

Can you do the dukw

[@worldbiggestfan1]

Surprisingly enough, the 17 pounder was place on the British Sherman’s turret that turns into a Sherman firefly

[@apokos8871]

Hey Johnny, you didnt mention the Churchill variant "Black Prince" A43. It also used the 17-pounder.

[@geordiedog1749]

The puns…….. God!! Help!!!

[@bettysola3039]

In war Thunder they only used solid shot....but also sabot in upper tiers

[@polymathart]

Can you cover the Canon de 75 modèle 1897?

[@dirtyd2749]

Archer glad he brought up the 17 pounder?

[@blackmark7165]

I find it funny how among British tank destroyer that armed with 17-pounder, the one on US hull is considered the best (M10 Achilles and M4 Sherman Firefly) at that tine the best hull from British is Archer with Valentine hull, its only later into near the end of war where British finally came with better 17-pounder armed tanks with Comet and early Centurion (and these are not classified as tank destroyer)

[@bw6524]

Comet did not have the 17 pounder.

[@blackmark7165]

@@bw6524 i still put it there because its projectile is still 17-pounder

[@Twirlyhead]

Why is that funny ?

[@blackmark7165]

@@Twirlyhead because american tank hull that came out as the best instead british own design until near end of ww2

[@Twirlyhead]

@@blackmark7165 That's got nothing to do with the 17pdr, that's just you being a mean spirited, cheerleading yank. British using US gear is not a point of contention. America used the British 6pdr AT gun: great, allies working together. Get over it. _Funny._ 🙄

[@Demolitiondude]

Three tanks, one gun.

[@georgiebestmanutd4746]

Whatever happened to Montgomery's vaunted 25 pounder?

[@anthillmob7455]

?

[@documentingtheforgotten8726]

My Ninja

[@iaingriffiths2587]

Never got the obsession with front on armour, tanks move and so hit the wheels/track and its a sitting duck. the idea its front on front combat has confused so much thinking about armoured warfare. (yes Uk english). Maximise deflection at the front , maximise penetration defence at the side. after that its lap of the gods.

[@StevenSmith-dc1fq]

The British really did come up with the dorkiest looking tanks.

[@andrewcombe8907]

And yet they worked. Churchill, Sherman Firefly, Cromwell.

[@isaacrodriguez4773]

I wonder why Saunders University have a Sherman Firefly with a 17 pounder gun.

[@jimtaylor294]

Because it's "technically" mostly still an American vehicle. (albeit if you don't count the gun, radio, side skirts & various smaller aspects)

[@Lonovavir]

They can't spend all their money on hamburgers and Coca-Cola.

[@nickdanger3802]

@@jimtaylor294 57,307 No 19 British Radio Sets shipped to British Empire under Lend Lease.

[@wiktorberski9272]

This was a really good gun. But as far as I know, Archer was not very popular among their crews. The driver has to move out from his seat during shooting because recoil of the gun would smash him

[@stuartburton1167]

That's a myth the driver was perfectly safe sitting in his seat. The whole idea of the Archer was to shoot and scoot that's not going to work if you have to wait while for the driver to climb into the cramped drivers seat. Also if the driver gets out of his seat where does he stand there is no room in the vehicle.

[@wiktorberski9272]

@@stuartburton1167 I have checked it On Wikipedia there are two different versions (PL vs EN). So you are right, and thank you very much

[@andrewcombe8907]

Yanks love to criticise the British and Montgomery’s performance from 6.6.1944 but they forget that from DDay until the fall of Caen and the closure of the Falaise Gap in August 1944 the Brit’s, Canadians and Poles faced the majority of German armour. The Brit’s, Canadians and Poles faced 10 German divisions whereas the US faced 1. Of those 10, 6 were armoured. The Tiger and Panther tanks were thrown against the Brits and Canadians and Poles and the only weapon capable of stopping these heavy Germans were the 17 pdr and the PIAT. Had it not been for the 17pdr and the men who operated it inside Shermans or on Archers etc the invasion of France in 1944 may have failed.

[@KevinSmith-yh6tl]

WOW You're really gonna go there? Yanks criticizing British. And the British didn't do the same to the Americans? Didn't we,along with our other allies,just finished our remembrance of D-Day? I think it goes without saying without each other, things could have turned out much differently? That's about all I'm gonna say. I like Johnny's channel alot,and respect the guy for working hard to bring all this history to us in a hugely entertaining way. So I'm not gonna start a useless argument with you,but I felt I should say something. BTW, if you notice, I was courteous enough not to bring up Monty during my reply to you. TOUCHE SIR.!

[@nath9091]

In Steven Zalogas recent talk on WW2TV he highlighted that there were 33.8 German AFVs per mile on the Caen front (675 over 20 miles) which is way higher than anywhere else in the war at the time.

[@andrewcombe8907]

@@KevinSmith-yh6tlyou seen that garbage movie “Saving Private Ryan” which had so many historical inaccuracies it might have been called a work of fiction? Remember that bit where they said Monty was “overrated”??? You know what else was inaccurate? When the Tiger was attaching the Yanks at the end. You know that the Tigers were all facing the Brits???

[@KevinSmith-yh6tl]

@@andrewcombe8907 What did I say yesterday? I'm not going to argue with you. You replied to my response, that's fine. But now you're persistent in trying to start an argument. I'm starting to consider this harassment, please stop. Besides, KZbin wouldn't allow me to respond to you the way I would like. So I'm asking again politely, please stop egging on an argument.

[@andrewcombe8907]

@@KevinSmith-yh6tlmy point is this - many Americans at the time and revisionists attacked the Brits and Monty for being “too slow” especially in taking Caen and breaking out of the beaches. They forget the Brits and Canadians and Poles faced the majority of German armour and faced brutal German counterattacks including with Tiger tanks by Wittman. The British offered the Sherman Firefly and 17pdr to the US but it was refused. The British, Canadians and Poles absorbed the majority of German armour from June to August 1944 which allowed the US to break out and sweep through France nearly unopposed by German armour. If the British hadn’t had the 17pdr and PIAT then the Tigers and Panthers may have rolled up beachheads.