Respect!. Greetings from Poland.

My condolences

@@dangerousdoggo5465 😂😂😂😂😂 goteeeem

Yeah, but that was a just one RAF squadron. It certainly wasn't just the Poles fgs.

I agree completely. It was very very occasionally used. Yes the big problem was the mounting, which wasn't stressed for horizontal firing. If only we'd learned from the Germans. The 3.7 was a fantastically well engineered weapon.

In the early 60s I had a summer job where the foreman had been in the Royal Artillery during the Normandy campaign. His 3.7 was used in an anti-tank role, firing solid shot (presumably apds) - the shells would go right through any German tank, spoiling the day for the occupants. Some 3.7s were left behind at Dunkirk and the Germans pressed them into service, even manufacturing new ammunition for the 9.3E gun (E for Englander)

@@BackwardFinesse Is that what they call the 17lbder?

@@geoffbell166 No Geoff, the 17 pounder was a 3 inch anti-tank gun, which was squeezed into the Sherman tank to make the Sherman Firefly, the only Allied tank capable of knocking out German Tiger and Panther tanks.

@@BackwardFinesse As you probably know It was also used in the Comet tank, the 17 pdr version of the Cromwell. It was also used in the Archer, the converted Valentine tank. The 17 pdr was originally a towed gun, as I'm sure you are aware, but its length was something the crews were not happy with. Despite claims by the US Army they never fought the Tiger in France. Like many soldiers they seem to callout any German tank as a Tiger.

Darling, you're a funny guy, was your post complete satire? RADAR was a German invention, an invention Germany wasn't interested in developing. Do you know when the V-1 attacks began? And yes, the gun crews with RADAR guided guns and proximity fuses were completely staffed by American troops, the working proximity fuse being a sensitive military item. Find this book, Bush, Vannevar (1970), Pieces of the Action, New York: William Morrow and Company, Inc.

@@davidnull5590 “ RADAR was a German invention” Irrelevant and he didn’t state otherwise anyway. Nevertheless the assertion that Britain shared _its_ RADAR technology with the U.S. during WW2 is factually accurate.

@@davidnull5590 Radar was actually discovered in many countries, radio operators noticed that metal objects such as ships interfered with radio waves, this started development in many university's. What England invented was the Magnetron which permitted microwave radar. He is wrong about American guns. The US (GE) brought in a few radar guided guns in '44 and they were used against doodle bugs. The rounds used in those guns were NOT proxy fuses. Priority was given to the campaign against kamikaze. Patton was the first to get them in the western theater. NOTE: The proxy fuse was an English invention, handed over to the US on the Tizzard mission.

@@carbidegrd1 I knew these guns were US but you have added to my knowledge so thanks.👍

@@bigblue6917 The guns shown in this video were mainly British 3.7 inch with some shots of Bofors. Perhaps the U.S guns were early examples of stealth technology.

Aint too hard to beat the glorified flu my guy.

mistery, lol......

These are the British 3.7 inch guns, not sure what your on about, and we had own proximity fuses since before the war, and the majority of crews were British don’t know why your making stuff up

@@Gfdsa40 : Well, the Prime Minister and defence minister at the time, Churchill, after the war, wrote a 6-volume history of WW2. It's very detailed, about 600-700 pages per volume. In it he describes how the guns were ordered from the USA (though not specifically for the V1 menace), arrived in time and rushed to suitable coastal sites to bring down the V1's. He even gave the statistics on how many V1's were brought down by the American guns (most of them), and how many were brought down by other means (eg barrage balloons) or got thru and did damage. So I'm not making it up, and I very much doubt if Churchill was either. And he ought to know. Churchill's WW2 history is not the only source for the facts. The story was reported in American electronics industry journals once the war in Europe was over. The proximity fuzes for the AA shells, that were small enough to fit, and could withstand the massive acceleration of being fired out of a gun, required the development of special rugged sub-miniature vacuum tubes in quantity, for which the British radio industry didn't have the knowhow. The USA did. The only British manufacturer capable of making subminiature tubes was Hivac, who hand-made small quantities for hearing aids. Philips/Mullard acquired knowhow from US affiliates after the war. What is the source of your information? You need to understand 2 important factors when reading war history: a) the tendency of British authors to claim every technology advance came from Britain. This defies logic when you consider that the USA had 4 times the population and was a very much richer country on a per person basis; b) The British in WW2 were masters of disinformation in fooling the Germans. Hence during the V1 menace, they let it be "known" that V1's could be defeated by fighter aircraft, as the sooner the Germans realised the V1 was being destroyed by proximity fuzed shells, the sooner they could introduce a counter measure. The same thing happened regarding submarines - the Brits let it leak out that u-boats were being detected at a considerable distance by radar - otherwise the Germans might have searched for an answer and twigged that their u-boats were in fact being destroyed because the Brits were decoding German naval radio messages. That eavesdropping had to be kept a complete secret, and wasn't let out until the late 1970's. Various authors of books keep repeating this sort of deliberate (and highly successful) disinformation.

@@keithammleter3824 Um no mate history is history and Churchill wasn’t exactly and expert on production or tactics, we had the capability to make those fuses multiple books mention this, yes some of the later production of these guns were given from places like Canada to the US you can read about the development if you want there’s a book basically made up of documents called the logistics of war which details production in Britain, the empire and lend lease (us)

@@Gfdsa40 : Churchill states "Steps were taken to hasten the supply from America of the electronic predictors (radar control) and radio proximity fuzes ... which made it possible to take a heavy toll of the flying bombs". Reproduced on page 600 is a directive Radio Proximity Fuzes 10 Jan 1944 Prime Minister To First Lord and First Sea Lord:- ".... We have no facilities for making such fuzes during this war. Are you content? I consider this point serious...." "Is there any possibility of obtaining an allocation from the United States? ...." I could cite many other quotes that show that Britain in WW2 could not make such fuzes and that they came from the USA. 5. On page 4, Electronic Industries, November 1944, there is an article ELECTRONIC GUN DIRECTOR HELPS LICK THE ROBOTS. This article about the US-supplied radar-directed AA guns essential for defeating the V1 menace, begins by stating the chief designer was Dr Clarence Lovell of Bell Labs, and the the radar part was made by Bell's manufacturing division Western Electric. The article gives various statistics. These radar controlled AA guns, crewed by US soldiers, were set up on the British east coast and in recaptured French territory and destroyed 76% of V1 flying bombs aimed at Britain (principally London). Due to the radar control and the American proximity fuzes, these guns could destroy a V1 in as little as 3 shots - a feat that no British made equipment could hope to come near. The article states that of the V1's that reached the British coast (typically 143 per day), 8% of them were destroyed by barrage balloons and 22% by various means by the RAF. These are the facts. 6. Incidentally, Churchill's WW2 History sold really well in the USA and other English speaking countries, due to its detail, extensive quoting of official records, and its quality. But because of its' honesty, it was less successful in Britain - Vol 1 covers how Churchill (who was called to be PM by the King AFTER Britain's previous PM had declared War on Germany) realised that Britain, even with Commonwealth help, had no chance of winning, and pleaded, begged, cajoled, tricked, and manouvered the USA into taking over. The remaining 5 volumes have a common thread running through them: You've heard of the common saying "When the going gets tough, the tough get going" - the thread is "When the going gets tough, get the Americans to do it." Then, try and manipulate the situation so that a few British troops are on the spot to claim the credit and glory. This honesty of Churchill was and is not palatable to Brits. But it is is a fact. It is very clear from the multitude of memos written by Churchill that he was pretty frustrated and annoyed with the very unsatisfactory British made arms and the poor performance of British officers.

@@keithammleter3824 Again Churchill is an Americanphile being American himself and is not a source, I suggest you find some actual sources rather than a fictional biography