Is It Good Enough?

The U.S. Army has a very good tank armor. That fact was proved last week to newsmen who visited the American Car & Foundry Co.'s light-tank plant at Berwick, Pa. A.C.F. showed off its new, remarkably tough 1-inch tank armor by firing 37-mm. shells into sample plates. The shells used in the tests had extra-heavy charges of explosives, but were fired from a standard 37-mm. anti-tank gun at the point-blank range of 100 yards. From A.C.F. armor placed at a sloping angle to the line of fire, the shells bounced without making a dent. When they were fired smack into plates at a flat right-angle to the gun, the shells penetrated the first layer of armor, stuck harmlessly in the rear layer.

It was a fine demonstration, but among the things it showed was the fact that the Army's anti-tank gun, even when firing overcharged shells, could not stop a light tank armored with A.C.F. plate.

The U.S. Army's Ordnance Department used to be proud of its relatively light (850 lb.), highly mobile anti-tank gun. Ordnance officers encouraged reports that the 37-mm. shell could pierce 1 1/2-inch armor at 1,000 yards, tear through even heavier armor at shorter ranges. Ignored or denied were contrary complaints in the Army that the gun had been hastily adapted from an already obsolescent German model, that the U.S. version lacked the punch to stop modern tanks, that at best the gun worked none too well. Even after the Army quietly turned to 75-mm. field pieces for anti-tank work, mounted heavier guns in its newest tanks (to stop enemy tanks), the 37-mm. gun remained the official anti-tank weapon. At last reports the Army was getting twelve 37-mm. guns a month, had 6,500 or more on order (on hand last spring: 228).

Red-faced Ordnance officers last week lamely said that the A.C.F. demonstration was more of a tribute to A.C.F. armor than a reflection on the Army's anti-tank gun, declared that nobody else had armor as tough.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.