Landships II

Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: Hello, from another USA member


Corporal

Status: Offline
Posts: 23
Date:
Hello, from another USA member
Permalink   


Hello to everyone.  I'm a slight history buff in regards to WW1 artillery, and have been following (and referencing) this site and forum for a while now.  I don't make models, though.  

I joined because I finally found a detailed article about the US manufacturing process for the Canon de 75's recuperator, and thought the forum might want to see it.*  I hope to post that here (with all 63 photos), along with some explanation of the recoil system and why it needed to be so precise.  Other than that, I thank the members here for all the valuable information on WW1 weapons that have been provided.

 

*I also found detailed articles about US manufacturing processes for 240 mm howitzer recuperators, 155 mm Schneider howitzers, British manufacturing processes for BL 6-inch and 8-inch howitzers, and for 9.2-inch howitzer shells.  But it's mostly the Canon de 75's recuperator I'm interested in since it required great precision and was a feat of WW1 manufacturing.



__________________


Hero

Status: Offline
Posts: 910
Date:
Permalink   

Hello, Welcome aboard..

   I know for my self I would welcome any information you have that you would like to share. And equally I am willing to share my knowledge and research with you.

All the Best

Tim R



__________________
"The life given us by nature is short; but the memory of a well-spent life is eternal"
-Cicero 106-43BC


Commander in Chief

Status: Offline
Posts: 720
Date:
Permalink   

welcome

__________________


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1993
Date:
Permalink   

 

I wonder if the 1920 article on the Model 1917 field gun would be a useful addition to Landships II (landships.info). The format of that website

is somewhat less restrictive than this forum. PM me an email address if you want to explore this option further.

The US 240mm howitzer recoil/recuperator is the same as the French/Russian 280mm howitzer - the US went for a longer range lighter projectile

because they already had had some 240mm guns in service.

Regards,

Charlie

 



__________________


Corporal

Status: Offline
Posts: 23
Date:
Permalink   

I didn't find an article on the Model 1917 field gun (I assume that means the 75 mm gun based on the 18-pounder), but at some point I'll post links in the Reference Section to the articles I did find.

With the 240 mm howitzer, if my reading is correct, it didn't just share the recuperator with the 280 mm howitzer- all Schneider guns at that time basically shared the same design. They all had:

  • a recoil system known as the Schneider mechanism (though the 240 and 280 mm howitzers used 2 of them, with 6 total cylinders instead of 3, and each gun had its own specific dimensions for the recuperator)
  • the same basic design of box trail
  • a cradle extension at the back which counterbalanced the gun (eliminating the need for equilibrators), kept the gun from striking the ground, and supported a loading tray
  • the same design of breech mechanism (except the 155mm post-1917 French and US versions- those had a 155 GPF breech mechanism to use bagged charges instead of brass)

So by extrapolation, the techniques used in the 240 mm recuperator and the 155 mm howitzer articles should be similar to those used to manufacture all the Schneider-designed guns after 1904 (except for the breech- the 155 mm howitzer was the only one to use a different design).



__________________


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1993
Date:
Permalink   

 

Sorry, meant 75mm Model 1918 - the Model 1917 was the British 18 Pounder downsized to 75mm with the breech profiled to take French

75mm ammunition.

The Schneider guns are fairly similar to each other in design but the details would make most people's head hurt. Suffice to say that many of the WW1 Schneider guns

were designed with a pre-war 1907 arrangement with Putilov in Russia in mind. The private companies (Schneider and Saint-Chamond) were not allowed

to compete with the State Arsenals to supply the French Army with artillery until 1911. The realisation, before WW1, by some senior politicians and Army staff that the

French Army was mostly equipped with the Mle 1897, an unreliable 155mm 1904 howitzer and a whole range of old guns dating back to the 1880s and

likely would go to war with this unsatisfactory artillery park produced what is known in Australia as a "brown trouser moment".

Schneider doesn't seem to have been convinced of the advantages of rear-mounted trunnions as Krupp, Rheinmetall and Saint-Chamond were. Admittedly, the

elevation gear has to be partially off-loaded by spring or hydraulic equilibrator cylinders but the increase in rate of fire by not having to retrieve the breech

from the depths of the carriage after high elevation shots must have made the extra engineering worth it. Schneider guns were often mix and match affairs

with barrels from other guns swapped onto Schneider carriages. This often meant having massive balance weights above the breech to rebalance the barrel

around the trunnions.

Almost all the Schneider guns used bagged charges, the 105mm and Mle 1915 C 155mm were exceptions. The obturator was, unsurprisingly, the de Bange obturator

which had been used from the 1870s.

Regards,

Charlie

 



-- Edited by CharlieC on Monday 9th of December 2019 01:41:24 AM



-- Edited by CharlieC on Monday 9th of December 2019 01:46:17 AM

__________________
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard