|
I too suspect that much of the hype around the 88 might be overblown. It was itself on a heavy mounting and took time to bring into action, whereas Britain's 25-pounder, a field piece equivalent in everything but armour-piercing capability, was more agile in deployment, far faster into action and a considerably less conspicuous target once in.
With a gun like the 25 pounder in the armoury, and the drawbacks of the 3.7 in the ground role which OwenD has described above, I can quite understand a general reluctance to deploy it this way.
Nevertheless, the overpunctilious application of that reluctance to the point where battles might've been lost because of it, probably does deserve criticism.
Regards,
MikB
|