equivalent to a broadside of a cruiser.

[Soren]

Thanks for the info Kurfürst & Tony.

[k9kiwi]

More than likely AP with that ME reading.

Apart from the fact that everyone learnt early on that unless you used AP against another warship all you were likely to do was clear the seagulls from the rigging.

in contrast to their rarer direct hits on targets the size of tanks

Try reading the book by Group Captian Desmond Scott RNZAF, it is strangely enough called "Typhoon Pilot".

Read up on the Cab Rank system and how devastating it was for the tiffies in 2nd TAF, especially in the Falaise Gap.

It was not actually necessary to get a direct hit, a few feet away would cause enough blast and over-pressure to render a crew into soup inside their tank, if it didn't flip the damn thing over.

And that was a 2 rocket salvo, meaning 4 sets of 2 for each aircraft from a Squadron of 18 aircraft makes for a really bad day for a convoy in anyones language.

RP3 60 Pound HE/SAP (High Explosive / Semi-Armor Piercing Rocket)
Diameter Length Total Weight Warhead Explosive Velocity Range
125mm 1397 mm 36.8 kg 27.22 kg 6.4 kg 350 m/s 800 m

RP3 60 Pound HE/GP (High Explosive Anti-Tank Rocket)
Diameter Length Total Weight Warhead Explosive Velocity Range
125mm 1397 mm 36.8 kg 27.22 kg 5.8 kg 350 m/s 800 m

The SAP version of the 60 Pound had enough explosive force to destroy any lightly armored vehicle, or disable it with a near miss. It was devastating against exposed targets such as troops, trucks, or artillery. The GP version could penetrate 85mm of armor, although it still suffered from the same angle of impact problems as with all HEAT weapons. It was good enough to destroy a Pz.III or Pz.IV tank from any direction, and the famed "Panther" tank from the back and sides. All 60 Pound rockets had a reported accuracy of 1% against a stationary tank-sized object at 300 meters range.

[JoeB]

Originally Posted by k9kiwi

1. Apart from the fact that everyone learnt early on that unless you used AP against another warship all you were likely to do was clear the seagulls from the rigging.
2. Try reading the book by Group Captian Desmond Scott RNZAF, it is strangely enough called "Typhoon Pilot".

Read up on the Cab Rank system and how devastating it was for the tiffies in 2nd TAF, especially in the Falaise Gap.

3. All 60 Pound rockets had a reported accuracy of 1% against a stationary tank-sized object at 300 meters range.

1. Depends on the ship. Rockets in practice were used against unarmored ships, destroyer size or below though big enough to hit at a reasonable rate. Against those type targets, destroyers would use 5" common (the usual term for HE/SAP naval rounds of that caliber, essentially the same as rocket warheads). Just like a tank would fire AP against another tank, but not against say, a truck or AT gun position, where it would fire HE.

2. One of the biggest claim v. actual damage discrepancies in WWII era was fighter bombers claims against tanks v actual destruction of tanks. It ran on the order of 10:1. The Falaise Gap was a prime example, wreck surveys showed relatively few German tanks actually KO'd by fighter bombers, a small % of what was claimed. In contrast it's true that fighter bomber attacks (not limited to rockets; also bombing, .50cal/20mm strafing and napalm) were often quite effective against the soft skinned support vehicles of armor columns; ominpresent fighter bombers did severly impact German mechanized operations overall. They just didn't actually destroy many tanks. The discrepancy in FB claims and tank kill is documented in numerous sources, I think it qualifies as common knowledge at this point.

3. Hard to hit a tank as I said, especially considering such ratings were typically in test conditions and not matched in combat. And see above, near misses by 5" naval shells/5" head rockets were not in fact likely to KO a tank, although it was possible. A photo in "Panzers in Normandy Then and Now" shows a Panther with track cut, and abandoned, after apparent rocket near miss right behind it. A few tanks were at least 'mission killed' even by .50cal strafing, documented. But neither was common, leaving again real tank kills by fighter bombers a small % of what their pilots believed they'd achieved.

In contrast it was not that hard to hit a fair size ship with a rocket, equivalent to a 5" hit, and crippling if several hits in repeated attacks on the relatively small unarmored warship targets, as happened on occasion both in ETO and the Pacific. Claims of warships sunk or seriously damaged by rockets and the actual damage recorded by the other side were much more in line than with tanks targets.

Joe

[renrich]

All of the British 6 inch shell(according to Jane's) weighed the same. The ME would not vary with HC or AP as long as the projectile weight was the same.

[trackend]

The Swordfish had some success against submarines using very crude 4 inch rockets with solid heads but obviously a sub is alot bigger than a tank how they faired when carrying 60lb rockets against targets I have little info on . In the desert campaign they were deployed as dive bombers using amour piercing bombs and according to The Swordfish Story by Ray Sturtivant managed to be surprisingly effective against amour . I suspect due to their extremely slow air speed.

[delcyros]

All of the British 6 inch shell(according to Jane's) weighed the same. The ME would not vary with HC or AP as long as the projectile weight was the same.

Janes here is almost correct. Comparing the actual datas (for this question it has to be Campbells Naval weapons of ww2) shows only slight differences in weight for UK 6"ers:

6"/50QF MK V (1955):
APC: 129.75lbs
HE: 132 lbs

British 6"/50 (15.2 cm) QF Mark N5

6"/50 BL MK XXIII:
Common: 112lbs
HE: 112 lbs

British 6"/50 (15.2 cm) BL Mark XXIII

6"/50 BL MK XXII:
common: 100lbs
common (from 1942 onwards): 112 lbs

British 6"/50 (15.2 cm) BL Mark XXII

It seems that ww2 era 6" ammo was serialized at around 112 lbs.

[Glider]

Its interesting to compare these figures with the 75mm carried in the B25 which presumably only fired a shell of around 13pds.

[k9kiwi]

Apart from anything to do with rockets, the expression was applied to the Tsetse Mosquito that was equipped with the 57mm auto loading gun as well as the 8 rockets.

Specification of the Molins 6 pounder Anti-tank Gun.

Bore 2.25in (57mm)
Action Recoil
Cyclic Rate 60 rounds per minute
Muzzle Velocity 2,600ft/sec (792m/sec)
Ammo feed Molins automatic
Magazine 22 rounds (some sources say 25)
Length 12ft 5in (3.8m)
Height 38in (965mm)
Weight 1,800lbs (816kg)

[Tony Williams]

Actually, the muzzle velocity of the gun/ammo combination used in the Molins was 890 m/s (2,920 fps). I spent some time tracking down the variations, not helped by the fact that the 6 pdr was made in two different barrel lengths. You can see the results here: Untitled Document