History, Politics And Current Affairs

Bernard,

Thanks for the interesting picture and background information; always a pleasure.

He was 5 years older than Petain, actually. He does put a bit more steel into this France, for certain. He effectively shames Petain into silence, being the only effective figure that would outrank him practically and in prestige. Considering the DE France he is from, it is best that he kept the speech to a bare minimum...

Before I thought whether Foch would be around, I couldn't come up with any figure to break the 'Bordeaux death spiral' who had the influence and name to cut through the vestigal defeatism, even as the facts became clear.

Simon

A little bit from the last instalment:
Lieutenant More is the actor Kenneth More, who was in the RN in @. Commodore Shepherd is the character he played in Sink the Bismarck. Their use is a little Easter egg.

The general plan, which has changed as information comes to hand, but is now starting to come together is:
- Deploy the BEF/BLA to France under cover of the RAF and build up for a counter offensive
- Liberate Norway after the Home Fleet hammers German airbases and completes the rout of the KM. This is a job for ~1 corps plus Royal Marines, Commandos, dwarves and the airborne divisions*
- Reinforce Egypt by air with a small but powerful force
- GF comes to the Mediterranean and removes Italian offensive capacity
- Meanwhile, after Berlin, BC is put to work on the Ruhr and any important nodes for the German Army in France

Once the British Army starts to build up in Britanny and the Cotentin/Normandy, the Germans will have to pivot towards them, relieving the pressure on the French. With control of the sea and air, there is the possibility of getting a strong convoy to Bordeaux if this holds.

So, the question comes:

What does the German High Command do? How do they move to counter this enemy?

Closest guess to what I’ve planned gets a cameo or a request for the later instalments.

Simon Darkshade wrote: ↑Fri Apr 21, 2023 1:49 am He was 5 years older than Petain, actually.

Oops!

What was Russia doing on Dark Earth during WWII? Would Britain know of the need for a strategic pivot after Germany is defeated?

In the 1930s, I think everyone knew WW2 was coming. In Europe, I think they knew it would be against either Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union.

You also had the issue all the cool kids loved the Soviet Union.

Kunkmeister,

The USSR was broadly similar, but there are a few little differences that add up:

- The Finns win the Winter War, or at least get a status quo ante bellum peace with everything to the south of the Mannerheim Line formally demilitarised
- The M-R Pact, Soviet invasion of Eastern Poland and the annexation of the Baltic states prior to the WW were seen as putting the Soviets in the ranks of the aggressor states, if not formal members of the Axis
- There were also ongoing tensions in Persia and Afghanistan between the British Empire and Soviets that were essentially the carry over from the Great Game
- Significantly, there was a brief Anglo-Soviet Crisis that came very, very close to a war in 1926/27. This poisoned relations for the next decade and a bit, not to mention motivating a lot of British defence policy decisions in the 1920s
- To make things even more spicy, a Communist who had spent time in Soviet Russia shot and badly injured the Prince of Wales in 1923, causing ongoing health issues that lead to his premature death in 1932

These all combine to the Soviet Union being a 'close co-belligerent with benefits' rather than a full blown ally in the formal sense of the word insofar as Britain was concerned. They are publicly a member of The Allies in general terms, but there aren't quite the same ties; there is also a bit more distance between them in terms of interests and positions. The arrangements with Moscow were seen as temporary, not a binding change of the way the world worked, Four Policemen and the stuff that @ FDR believed in.

The British public have a slightly better view of the Soviets than the British government and establishment, courtesy of 2 years of propaganda, but even then, it isn't quite on the level of the near hagiographic adoration of @ that some espoused.

Jem,

The first part was also correct for Dark Earth. There wasn't quite the same 'Cool Kids for Communism' tendency, at least not so much in Britain; part of that springs from the more positive view of WW1 and its outcome.

On another note, the two brigades of the 51st Highland Division captured at St.Valery-en-Caux were marched through France and Belgium before being put onto coal barges to Germany and thence to Thorne in Poland. That puts the 10,000 prisoners well within range for a rescue.

https://51hd.co.uk/pow/jack_kidd_to_camp

Another snippet:

The last day had not been at all combobulated for Ambassador Joseph Kennedy. On the morning of the 14th, he had awoken at his official residence at Prince’s Gate and driven to the Embassy in Grosvenor Square as usual, but shortly before midday, he had come over quite faint in a most uncharacteristic manner. That was when whatever happened had occurred, he had now decided.

The early afternoon had seen a flurry of issues with embassy telephones and telegraph connections and a great deal of activity on the other side of the square at Number 20 for some reason. Then the British came calling and the world had turned upside down. After a lot of work, he had spoken with Sir Anthony Eden, or this version of him. The attitude of the man had changed; the British position had changed from falling over backwards to get whatever possible from the USA to…something different.

The explanation they had given was plain crazy, Kennedy had thought - a ruse by a government on the edge of being made to say uncle by Hitler. Then he had driven home that evening and seen the tanks on the streets and guns in Hyde Park unlike any others, not to mention a different skyline, with a tower and statue off in the distance! In the skies above there had been planes moving impossibly fast and…other things…

He had read his papers, many of which had been delivered by this ‘new’ English government, late into the night. He had also been drafting what would be one hell of a cable back to Washington; the brief telephone connections had been quite garbled. These English seemed determined to go on and not come to sensible terms with Germany, that was for sure. There was something very, very wrong going on as well, what with them referring to Ireland as part of their country.

Now, on the new morning of the 15th, after a fitful and failed attempt at sleep, he was in the waiting room at Number 10 Downing Street. Some crazy fool in robes and a stupid hat had been at the door, like some stage magician in an obvious attempt to put him off!

”The Prime Minister will see you now, Ambassador.”

Churchill sat behind an expansive desk and rose as his guest entered.

”Mr. Kennedy. We meet again, as it were. A long time for me, but not, I think, quite so long for you. There is much for us to discuss. You have, I trust, acquainted yourself with the information we provided?”

”I have, Prime Minister. I must say -“

”There is much we both must say, Mr. Ambassador, much indeed, but for now, I fear I must prevail upon you to permit me to speak.”

Kennedy nodded. What other choice did he have?

”Your staff has been most efficient in appraising us of the general situation insofar as they understood it. I shall endeavour to speak with President Roosevelt at the earliest possible opportunity to assuage his willingness to accept a direct mission from us to work towards what needs to be done in the war and the postwar world.”

Postwar world? Was he that delusional?

”Before that, though, it would be best if certain matters could be broached with your government in an expedited fashion. We will have no need for the arms or planes that apparently are currently on order in the United States, nor do we require the mooted transfer of surplus rifles, small arms and artillery. I am given to understand that there has been some correspondence regarding the transfer of destroyers; that too is quite unnecessary for our requirements. In the words of an acquaintance of mine, we have been given the tools; now we will finish the job.”

”I will of course relay whatever you wish me to my Government.”

“Excellent. Matters are going to be moving quite quickly, Mr. Ambassador. By this afternoon, we will be beginning our aerial strikes against the Germans in Northern France and rescuing a division of our men from the talons of the Nazis. By tomorrow, should the French be in agreement, we will begin moving our armies back to France, and sinking the German fleet in Norway. But tonight, Mr. Kennedy…tonight will be something that will give the Nazis pause.

For we go to Berlin and burn his black heart out.”

I do love the discomfiture of Joe Kennedy.

Bernard Woolley wrote: ↑Sun Apr 23, 2023 5:40 pm I do love the discomfiture of Joe Kennedy.

He's earned it. Actually, wasn't Churchill too nice to him?

He was being nice and respectful to the position and the country he represents moreso than any personal level, as is right and good. Kennedy’s support of appeasement and defeatism regarding Germany has become rather obsolete overnight, putting him in a bit of a pickle, not to mention being a tad perturbed about a very British and Protestant Ireland.

Beyond the interpersonal level, it is salient to note Churchill wanting to go over his head to Roosevelt as an equal, not a supplicant, and the effective cancellation of a host of aircraft and arms orders. There isn’t a lot of equipment that the 1940 USA can offer that Britain needs.

Parsing through what arms the DE British Army c 1943 brings to the battle:

- The SMLE battle rifle is derived from the 1930s work of Dieudonné Saive (of @'s Belgian Fabrique Nationale), specifically what would become the @ SLEM-1 and FN Model 1949. The .303" British is 7.7 x 68mmR rather than 7.7 x 56mmR, with ammunition production focused on rounds analogous to the Mark VIIIz.
- Accompanying it in infantry sections is the Enfield automatic rifle and the Bren. The latter is very similar to the @ LMG, whilst the former is a magazine fed automatic rifle with a similar role and raison d'etre as the FG-42
- The Sten is broadly similar, save for many of them being in .455" Webley Auto; the 9mm production is for the SOE/Resistance models for the Continent
- Perhaps the biggest difference in the armament of infantry sections and platoons is the addition of the Vickers general purpose machine gun, which was developed in the 1930s from a marriage of the Vickers K and Vickers Berthier. This belt fed gun is normally assigned at platoon level, but the Commandos, Paras, Rangers and Royal Marines all frequently field it at section level
- The Vickers HMG is based on the historical Vickers Gun, but chambered in .625" and air cooled; the evolution is similar to the M1917 to the M1919 Browning. There is also the Vickers MMG or MG, which is the same gun design in .303" from the 1920s and 1930s and remains in stores and supporting service
- The PIAT is described as a recoilless rifle deliberately, whilst the A-W rocket launcher is a 3.75" weapon developed along similar lines to the bazooka
- The Maxim Gun is a 1"/25mm automatic cannon that serves as an all rounder for the British armed forces, in service with the infantry, AAA and armour on land, in the light short range AA/GP role at sea and various RAF aircraft
- Lighter mortars are very similar to the @ late WW2 era weapons, whilst the 4.5" is noticeably longer ranged than the ML 4.2", with a range of 7000 yards. The 32lb shell is slightly lighter than the German 12cm Granatwerfer 42, which is not yet in German service. Rather than being operated by the Royal Engineers, the heavy 4.5" are directly attached at battalion level
- The QF 25pdr field gun-howitzer is one of the key weapons of the British Army, with each division fielding three regiments of 32. They are not the @ 87.6mm weapons and have a rather interesting developmental history:

Historical 25pdr
The 25pdr emerged from the historical need to replace the 18pdr field gun and the 4.5" howitzer in the 1920s. This resulted in testing and development of a variety of weapons - a 3.9" gun and a 4.13" howitzer being the main ones competing in 1924. The primary requirements were weight and a range of 15000 yards, which later dropped to 12000 yards. The 4.1" howitzer came out in front and proceded with trials. At the same time, a 3.3" experimental field gun to range not less than 12000 yards, be capable of AT fire and be towed by a motor vehicle emerged between 1926 and 1928, with a request sent to Vickers in June 1929 for production of a design. There were discussions of the concept of a gun-howitzer from 1928, and a proposal was put forth in October 1933 for a 3.7" gun-howitzer firing a 25lb shell. This was followed by discussions with the General Staff in which the 25pdr was proposed as the sole field artillery equipment in place of the other two proposed models. This was reduced to 3.45" to make it possible to use 18pdr jackets, breech ring and mechanism and carriages.

DE 25pdr
A requirement developed in the early 1920s to replace the WW1 24pdr and 4.5" howitzer. This resulted in testing of a number of experimental weapons, including a 4.13" howitzer and a 3.7" field gun. The primary requirements were a range of 18,000 yards and a 'field weight'. Competing experimental designs were prepared by Vickers and Armstrong-Whitworth from 1925, with the Soviet War Scare of 1926-27 greatly boosting the Army budget and driving the development of certain new weapons. The range requirement was increased to provide a means of matching the (at the time) concerning Red Army 107mm field gun. A decision was made for the dual requirements to be filled by a gun-howitzer in late 1927, refined in 1928 as a 3.75" weapon firing a 25lb shell. Additional operational lessons from the 1920s militated in favour of a flexible, long range gun capable of secondary AT fire; this lead to it also replacing the Great War era 64pdr. From the beginning, it was envisaged that the weapon would be both towed and self-propelled, the latter being based on the experimental 24pdr Birch Gun.

The project continued at high priority despite the circumstances of the Great Depression and production began in late 1932. It had an L/50 barrel of 15.5ft, a crew of 6, a weight of 5624lb and a range of 20,000 yards (24,000 yards with supercharges and long range shells was the norm from 1937/38). Perhaps the most striking feature of the 25pdr was its high maximum manual rate of fire of 12rpm (some highly trained crews were capable of 16 or even 18 rpm), which was driven in part by the need to counter the high rates of fire of rumoured Soviet 3" field pieces of the late 1920s and the established capabilities of the French 75mm; it was substantially higher than comparable German and American 105mm howitzers. By 1943, there were HE, AT, Smoke, Incendiary, Chemical, HEAT and HESH shells available; the HEAT/hollow charge round only began production in June.

- The self propelled version in production as of the time of transition, the Sexton, is characterised by a 360 degree traversable turret and a markedly increased average maximum rate of fire; some experimental production had begun on a clip fed version that would later confuse the Germans in Normandy where, in concert with the doctrine and ability to concentrate massed numbers of guns on targets, it seemed as if a fully automatic field gun had been developed by the British.
- The same factors that drove the shorter development period and earlier production of field artillery also lead to development of a new generation of medium and heavy artillery a lot earlier than January 1939 (5.5") and 1940 (the 7.2" stop gap). Development of 6"/40 and 8"/35 gun-howitzers began in 1927 in the aftermath of the Soviet War Scare, resulting in weapons entering production in 1931 and 1932 respectively; a 6"/50 heavy field gun began production in 1936
- The heaviest ordinary weapon produced for the DE British Army prior to the Second World War was the BL 9.2 inch superheavy howitzer, firing a 360lb shell out to a range of 32,000 yards, which began development in 1929 and entered production in 1935/36
- In anti-tank artillery, the 17pdr is being replaced by the 25pdr/90mm L65 anti-tank gun. This has a performance somewhat superior to the US 90mm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/90_mm_gun_M1/M2/M3 and is capable of penetrating the DE German Panther (100mm) and King Tiger tanks (185mm)
- The QF 3.75" AA gun has been used as a field piece and anti-tank weapon by the British Army during WW2 not infrequently, but also not as often as the German 88mm was pressed into service. This is because of the availability of purpose built weapons
- From the History of the Tank:
1.) 'The Crusader medium tank had its roots in a 1937 requirement for a new, heavier armoured tank to counter reported new German and Soviet designs. It was to be capable of carrying the improved anti-tank gun that was projected as replacing the QF 12pdr (itself an bored out version of the QF 6pdr) then entering service. A prototype was produced in June 1938 and the Crusader entered initial production in October 1939. With a top speed of 36mph powered by a 625hp Rolls Royce Meteor, it was substantially faster than any previous medium tank in British Army service. It was protected by up to 4” of sloped armour and armed with a QF 17pdr, a Vickers 0.5” heavy machine gun and two 0.303” machine guns.'
2.) 'The Churchill heavy tank entered service in February (1940) with home based regiments of the Royal Armoured Corps. It was exceptionally heavily protected and extremely reliable, with over 5” of sloped frontal armour and had a steady speed of 25mph over all types of terrain and carried an improved QF 120mm gun along with four machine guns. 12,564 Churchills would be built between 1940 and 1946, seeing service on every continent and with a variety of Allied armies.'
3.) 'The 79t Cromwell superheavy tank, which sported a QF 32pdr adapted from the famed 3.75” anti-aircraft gun, had a top speed of 18mph and was protected by over 6” of armour. It was an unwieldy, hulking brute of a vehicle, but proved extremely useful for leading urban assaults and heavy infantry offensives. It would only be built in comparatively small numbers due to the complex nature of its manufacture and just 1053 were built between 1941 and 1945.' (Modified TOG-2)
4.) 'The Iron Duke assault gun entered service in 1942, based on a Churchill chassis and armed with a 7.2” gun-howitzer. Independent regiments were attached at corps and army level, being attached to divisions in Italy, France and Germany for additional firepower as needed.'
5.) 'The Black Prince tank destroyer was equipped with a 5.25” naval gun and entered production in mid 1942. It was designed to engage and destroy Nazi heavy tanks from beyond the range of their 105mm and 128mm guns as well as providing overwatch for advancing medium tank regiments. It was capable of a longer range than any other direct fire weapon in service with the Royal Armoured Corps.'
- The Catapult multiple rocket launcher is a halftrack with 32 4.5" rockets

25pdr Production
1932: 156
1933: 428
1934: 525
1935: 634
1936: 687
1937: 713
1938: 832
1939: 1026
1940: 2194
1941: 4925
1942: 5276
1943: 4529 (to August)

6" production
1931: 84
1932: 135
1933: 159
1934: 210
1935: 244
1936: 297
1937: 328
1938: 356
1939: 597
1940: 1214
1941: 1642
1942: 1785
1943: 1247 (to August)

8" production
1932: 52
1933: 87
1934: 96
1935: 102
1936: 108
1937: 125
1938: 156
1939: 234
1940: 420
1941: 503
1942: 524
1943: 367 (to August)

Simon Darkshade wrote: ↑Mon May 01, 2023 7:21 am DE 25pdr
A requirement developed in the early 1920s to replace the WW1 24pdr and 4.5" howitzer. This resulted in testing of a number of experimental weapons, including a 4.13" howitzer and a 3.7" field gun. The primary requirements were a range of 18,000 yards and a 'field weight'. Competing experimental designs were prepared by Vickers and Armstrong-Whitworth from 1925, with the Soviet War Scare of 1926-27 greatly boosting the Army budget and driving the development of certain new weapons. The range requirement was increased to provide a means of matching the (at the time) concerning Red Army 107mm field gun. A decision was made for the dual requirements to be filled by a gun-howitzer in late 1927, refined in 1928 as a 3.75" weapon firing a 25lb shell. Additional operational lessons from the 1920s militated in favour of a flexible, long range gun capable of secondary AT fire; this lead to it also replacing the Great War era 64pdr. From the beginning, it was envisaged that the weapon would be both towed and self-propelled, the latter being based on the experimental 24pdr Birch Gun.

The project continued at high priority despite the circumstances of the Great Depression and production began in late 1932. It had an L/50 barrel of 15.5ft, a crew of 6, a weight of 5624lb and a range of 20,000 yards (24,000 yards with supercharges and long range shells was the norm from 1937/38). Perhaps the most striking feature of the 25pdr was its high maximum manual rate of fire of 12rpm (some highly trained crews were capable of 16 or even 18 rpm), which was driven in part by the need to counter the high rates of fire of rumoured Soviet 3" field pieces of the late 1920s and the established capabilities of the French 75mm; it was substantially higher than comparable German and American 105mm howitzers. By 1943, there were HE, AT, Smoke, Incendiary, Chemical, HEAT and HESH shells available; the HEAT/hollow charge round only began production in June.

A close analogue for the Soviet D-44 field gun, though arriving 10-15 years earlier. I think the weight figure could do with a bump of perhaps 1000 lbs. 105mm field guns of similar barrel length from the 30s all weighed in around 8000-9000 lbs.

Next snippet:

Northern France

The men of the 152nd and 153rd Brigades had been force marched for the better part of three days now. They were driven at a relentless pace by their German captors , who had beat them with rifle butts and kicked and abused the stragglers, whilst some who had fallen behind the column had been picked up and never seen again. The harsh summer sun beat down upon them and the Germans did not deem to supply them water.

Now, however, the column came to a halt. Some of their escort had driven past them to investigate the hold up over the crest of the next hill. There, they discovered something they did not expect.

Arrayed across the road in front of them and stretching out into the fields on either side were two dozen strange tanks, bigger than any of the familiar Panzers, and artillery pieces between them. Holding the shocked German reconnaissance troops and others at gunpoint were dozens of Tommies, whilst hundreds more rose up out of the fields on both sides, along with strange hovering autogyros that made no sound. Oberst Bauernknopfer blanched at the sight before him.

”Resistance is useless, Herr Oberst. We have you under our guns and your troops are are surrounded by a crack airborne division and a tank brigade.” said a British general atop one of the tanks, his voice impossibly loud and strangely overwhelming. “We have come for our men and mean to have them. It is up to you to prevent any unnecessary bloodshed.”

”Very well. May I have the privilege of knowing to whom I am surrendering?”


“Major General George Hopkinson, 1st Airborne Division. You and your men are to be gathered over there in the field, whilst we look to our men and get them loaded on our transport.”

”What transport?”

”That transport.” indicated General Hopkinson as a shadow covered them both.

Bauernknopfer looked up to see an enormous shape bearing down upon them, like a ship in the sky.

”Don’t worry. We’ve got room enough for guests.”

Vendetta wrote: ↑Fri May 19, 2023 3:35 pm

Simon Darkshade wrote: ↑Mon May 01, 2023 7:21 am DE 25pdr
A requirement developed in the early 1920s to replace the WW1 24pdr and 4.5" howitzer. This resulted in testing of a number of experimental weapons, including a 4.13" howitzer and a 3.7" field gun. The primary requirements were a range of 18,000 yards and a 'field weight'. Competing experimental designs were prepared by Vickers and Armstrong-Whitworth from 1925, with the Soviet War Scare of 1926-27 greatly boosting the Army budget and driving the development of certain new weapons. The range requirement was increased to provide a means of matching the (at the time) concerning Red Army 107mm field gun. A decision was made for the dual requirements to be filled by a gun-howitzer in late 1927, refined in 1928 as a 3.75" weapon firing a 25lb shell. Additional operational lessons from the 1920s militated in favour of a flexible, long range gun capable of secondary AT fire; this lead to it also replacing the Great War era 64pdr. From the beginning, it was envisaged that the weapon would be both towed and self-propelled, the latter being based on the experimental 24pdr Birch Gun.

The project continued at high priority despite the circumstances of the Great Depression and production began in late 1932. It had an L/50 barrel of 15.5ft, a crew of 6, a weight of 5264lb and a range of 20,000 yards (24,000 yards with supercharges and long range shells was the norm from 1937/38). Perhaps the most striking feature of the 25pdr was its high maximum manual rate of fire of 12rpm (some highly trained crews were capable of 16 or even 18 rpm), which was driven in part by the need to counter the high rates of fire of rumoured Soviet 3" field pieces of the late 1920s and the established capabilities of the French 75mm; it was substantially higher than comparable German and American 105mm howitzers. By 1943, there were HE, AT, Smoke, Incendiary, Chemical, HEAT and HESH shells available; the HEAT/hollow charge round only began production in June.

A close analogue for the Soviet D-44 field gun, though arriving 10-15 years earlier. I think the weight figure could do with a bump of perhaps 1000 lbs. 105mm field guns of similar barrel length from the 30s all weighed in around 8000-9000 lbs.

It is close to the D-44 in some ways. Elsewhere, I’ve written:

“I may have overshot the weight a bit. The extra 5mm of calibre, a slightly larger gun shield and the cradle beneath the gun barrel might not add up to 1400lb more than the D-44s 3800lb.”

The 6” does look a bit like the Soviet D-20 with a bit more of an upsized 25pdr appearance, whilst the 8” has a dual recoil system and a few other distinctive features that set it apart from the US M1 or the 7.2”.

Love the last bit

The D-44 was only built to elevate up to 35 degrees, where most field pieces of the time were built to elevate up to 42 or 45 degrees. That's one key feature in allowing it to be built so much lighter. Judging by your gun's much longer range figures, I'd say it's better to err on the heavy side.

The range is 20,000 yards as a baseline figure, which is a bit of a step up from the original 15,000 yard specification, but not in an utterly game-changing fashion. This takes the original specs (range target of 15,000 yards, 20-25lb and 3.7"), adapts them to the slightly larger DE range requirement then exceeds that by 2000 yards. The majority of that comes from the longer barrel and that ~94-95mm is around a 'ballistic sweet spot'.

I owe a reasonable amount of the origins of the 'DE 25pdr' to discussion featured here: https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/thread ... gun.14838/ as well as Stuart Slade's idea of the Nulla 3.7"/94mm gun in TBOverse, as well as my own ideas that had been percolating around for a decade before then.

(As an aside, I do like this quote from Abraham Gubler in the first link above:

First of all field guns and even medium guns almost never fire “destructive” fire missions. They fire frontages that supress and destroy enemy targets via splinters. This isn’t a hangover form open sights or such nonsense but artillery’s contribution to the combined arms fight and a crucial element of land warfare. If you want to destroy a bunker and heavy artillery is not available (or these days precision air strike) then a field or medium battery will fire a converge mission in which all 4-8 rounds of the firing unit will hit the same spot at the same time and with half your shells in PD and the other half on delay that tends to do it. But this is a real pain in the arse to shoot and is really best left with statistical weapons to a barrage of 203mm guns. And just shoot a norm which will mean most bunkers get a delay fuse 203mm in the roof which will be the end of them.

25 Pounders and 105mm are basically considered interchangeable for all missions. The difference in lethality between the shells is marginal. 105mm is almost a third bigger and that is of course better but in terms of frontage the difference is not practically noticeable. Splinter lethality is a product of proportion and quality of the shell’s steel and explosives filler. Since 25 Pounders almost always outshoot 105mm in rate of fire you can throw a lot more splinters into the frontage thanks to the slightly smaller gun. Its the splinters that supress the enemy, kill and wound their soldiers and destroy their vehicles.

To really notice a difference in shell lehtlaity you have to upgrade to medium artillery or 155mm which is a shell four times heavier than 25 Pounder and three times heavier than 105mm. That makes a difference. 203mm is eight times and six times heavier respectively. Puts the puny 1.3 times increase of 105mm into perspective.)

That makes it a larger overall weapon, as the longer barrel does not seem disproportionately outsized compared to the rest of the piece, but it differs from the D-44 in that the latter is very much derived from a tank gun, whereas the former 25pdr is very much field artillery.

You make some useful points and I'm very glad to be able to discuss the development of DE artillery, as it has been sadly not the subject of great discussion. I'm not averse to using the magical/supernatural aspects intrinsic to Dark Earth to help 'nudge' the characteristics of certain equipment, such as having the gun shield made of alu-steel (as the name suggests, the protective characteristics of steel with the weight of aluminium) or having an ogre or half ogre assigned to each gun.

One of my worlds has what I might call a chaotic magic system: you make a contract with a spirit for your power, which can be many and varied. So you have three types of units:

Standard, which aside from logistics issues like making sure you're not doing uniforms for 10 foot tall people in the same platoon as four foot tall people, it doesn't matter what you have, you get the job you want. A firemancer can be a plain infantryman if he likes, but is discouraged from using his power for standardization purposes. These are useful when a realm has a patron spirit that limits the density of energies you can use, which can often limit the ability of an integrated unit to cause maximum mayhem, and support philosophy of the nation-state that uses them of maximum freedom--even when serving you don't have to be forced into a role if you don't want to.

Integrated units are much more dangerous to their enemies. In these the powers and abilities of the troops are carefully considered and set up to maximize their abilities' destructive power. You'd have various sized troops with different powers and technologies organized to synergize to the max.

Specialized support units: basically something like a squad of magi or a platoon of giant sized troops, less synergy but easier to work into a standard unit.

You have a more uniform magic system as I understand it, so something more like an integrated unit would be common and easier to standardize.

It is a more uniform magic system, in comparison, but the salient features here aren't so much magical as inherent and materials-based.

In the first instance, the potential use of ogres or half-ogres in artillery is not a new thing, but goes back a long, long time in warfare; this is mere speculation at this point, as it likely wouldn't be needed. Once a substance has been crafted or transmuted, it simply *is* and doesn't have an expiry date or need for maintenance, lest it turn back into a figurative pumpkin.

There are some integrated units, in the form of a soldier with a smattering of magical ability, but in general:
- Dwarven units are separate batteries and battalions for logistical reasons
- Halflings are largely attached to the Catering Corps, as they are too small for most other purposes, but darn great at cooking
- Elven units are fewer in number than the dwarves, but follow similar separate lines
- Giants are used for separate specialist forces; being big in the era of the rifle, machine gun and field artillery is less useful than in earlier times
- Wizards are integrated within the Army, RAF and RN at higher levels, usually brigade and group level, and utilised in a 'specialised support' role according to your tripartite system
- Dragons are a key part of the Royal Flying Corps