95mm / 3.7" question

[Burney Davis]

I attach below a picture from an official publication regarding 95mm ammunition. The HEAT projectile is clearly marked 95mm & 3.7in Howitzer Anti Tank. However, the Page is headed 95mm Tank Howitzer. I can find no information on a 3.7 in Howitzer AT, nor what case it might have used. The only other 3.7in fixed round that bears any similarity is the 3.7in Mortar, which is a bottle neck type case.

Can anyone enlighten me on this? TIA

 

[Listy]

If memory serves early on there was a carriage version of the gun. Could it be an archaic reference to this?

 

[Eggburt1969]

Are you sure it says AT an not IT? Well in full '95mm&3.7 in HOW-IT'. Could the -IT bit be short for Infantry Tank?

 

[TimG]

There was apparently a "Ordnance QF 95-mm infantry howitzer" which didn't officially enter service. It is possible that it was also known as a 3.7in Howitzer (3.45" - 25Pr). The 3.7" Mountain Howitzer doesn't seem to have progressed beyond Mk I and the letters after "How" I think might be "II" - Mark II. Thus the 3.7" Infantry Howitzer might well have been described as Mk. II.

TimG

 

[Burney Davis]

Here a picture of the stampings from an actual projectile. So definitely "A T ".

 

[Eggburt1969]

There was apparently a "Ordnance QF 95-mm infantry howitzer" which didn't officially enter service. It is possible that it was also known as a 3.7in Howitzer (3.45" - 25Pr). The 3.7" Mountain Howitzer doesn't seem to have progressed beyond Mk I and the letters after "How" I think might be "II" - Mark II. Thus the 3.7" Infantry Howitzer might well have been described as Mk. II.

TimG

Yes something like two capital 'i' with crossed tops and bottoms would make more sense. And as you said, these would be short for Mark 2 (Mk. II).

Doesn't really look at AT in the diagram, but certainly seems to be AT as part of the actual projectile stamped markings.

 

[greif]

Perhaps the stampings on your projectile refer to the the projectile only and not to the cartridge as a whole like on the AP projectiles of the 17 Pdr / 77 mm. The HC projectile was also used with the 3,7 “ How. On the internet I found pictures of 2 identical cases. The 1942 case is stamped 3,7 “ HOWR, the 1944 case is stamped 95 mm SP & INF .

 

[tankbarrell]

The 95mm tank howitzer used fixed ammunition with a 206mm long case.
The 95mm infantry howitzer used semi fixed ammunition with an 89mm long case. They share projectiles.
The infantry howitzer was produced but did not seem to see service. It was also mounted in the SP Alecto whuch did see limited service. It is not the same gun as the 3.7" howitzer.

 

[Burney Davis]

The 95mm tank howitzer used fixed ammunition with a 206mm long case.
The 95mm infantry howitzer used semi fixed ammunition with an 89mm long case. They share projectiles.
The infantry howitzer was produced but did not seem to see service. It was also mounted in the SP Alecto whuch did see limited service. It is not the same gun as the 3.7" howitzer.

As I understand it, largely from Hogg's book on British Artillery, the two 95mm guns shared the same ammunition as you say, so that covers the 95mm reference stamped on the projectile (as it is generic) even though one is fixed and the other separate loading.
The book then references that the 3.7" Howitzer (pack Howitzer) had a 3.7" Mk I HEAT shell (page 38) but in the 95mm description (page 40) it says of the 95mm Mk I shell ...."resembling the 3.7" pack Howitzer HEAT shell but elongated to give greater explosive capacity"
From that discription it would appear that there were 2 types (lengths) of HEAT shell, one for the 95mm and a shorter one for the 3.7" How. That however doesn't explain why the longer 95mm shell would then be stamped with the 3.7" reference. Unless of course the information is incorrect.

Is there any more specific information around that might throw more light on the subject?