The 17 pounders were transported to Arnhem by Hamilcar gliders. There is one survivor 17 pounder used at the battle outside Hartenstein Airborne museum.

What makes the 6-pounder story so fascinating is that its importance came from being everywhere, not from being the most powerful gun on the battlefield. The 17-pounder could handle the heavy German tanks, but the 6-pounder was lighter, cheaper, easier to position, and produced in enormous numbers. I especially liked the Arnhem example—being light enough to arrive by glider turned the gun's weight into a real battlefield advantage. Do you think battlefield usefulness is often more about availability than raw power?

Interesting but it was the 6pdr which held the ground at Snipe during Alamein.

The six-pounder’s quiet work feels overlooked. How many common weapons won forgotten battles ?

A fellow brought his 57mm anti tank gun to the Cannon Shoot at Blue Lake, Calif, in the 1990's. That thing was LOUD!  He had an ammo reloading press bolted to the floor when I visited his place to buy some military generators. Pretty amazing setup. He gave me a 57mm AP dummy round for my collection.

I really enjoyed this video.

That was really informative. I majored in History covering 1919 the Treaty of Versailles through WW2. I am glad to know this because 6 pounder doesn't sound much but you demonstrated how effective it was and the numbers they produced was a bit of an eye opener. I always thought the 25 pounder was the most prolific field artillery Britain had at over 12,000 made.
Just subscribed am looking forwaed to more

Valuable information

The APDS-T Shot used with the 6PR 7cwt......a KILLER!...but the AP-T was just as dangerous against Pz.IV...Britain (& the US 57mm M1) were excellent in their roles...& yes, HE-T & the forgotten APCBC-T...VERY damn useful...!

The towed guns played a vital role but lacked some mobility.  The 6 pounder at least could be moved by hand and in difficult positions.  Tank destroyers were needed to hunt enemy tanks. Often using stealth, terrain, maneuver, speed and firepower.  For the Commonwealth units, the Firefly tank was available.  And most German tanks were still vulnerable to the Sherman 75mm gun.  The US developed a number of tank destroyers.  The US M-10 tank destroyer being fitted with the 17 pounder.  The US wanted cheap and light tank destroyers. And focused on the mobility, maneuver, stealth, firepower, and situational awareness.  They turrets lacked a roof.  The purpose-designed M-18 finally entered service.  And the M-36 with 90mm gun became the big hitter.  When WW2 ended, the US Tank Destroyer units were disbanded. The army wanted multirole tanks with greater tactical flexibility.  And other anti-tank weapons were becoming available. As a towed gun, the 17 pounder was not easy to use.  Germany turned to regular tank hulls with no turrets and powerful forward. Hull-mounted guns. Excellent for defensive fighting from camouflaged positions.  Though some were far too large for effective stealth.  Post WW2 Germany mostly gave up on hull-mounted guns.  The German priority after WW2 became reliability and maintainability. With plenty of time during the Cold War to test tanks before going into production. Then mobility and firepower.  And eventually the better armored Leopard 2.   Some US M-10 crews were very unwilling to go to the very thin armor of the M-18.  But it was generally effective.  The US tank destroyers were not built for head-on gunfights. They were fast and stealthy hunters.  The US tank destroyer concept was to counter the great success of early WW2 German tank-led victories. Fast tank destroyers could quickly maneuver to counter enemy breakthrough attacks.  Towed-guns were generally best as defensive weapons.  Once tanks took ground, anti-tank guns were an economical option to guard flanks and transport routes.  The Soviets developed a number of options for tank destroyers. Mostly with the German hull-gun style tank destroyers.

6 pounder /57mm was standardized for UK and US forces.  The US also had a emergency heavy AT GUN the M5 but it was like the 17pounder to heavy for easy movement replaced by 3" on M10 tank destroyer.

Remember people, depending on who is telling it history is very selective. As George Santayana wrote in his book Life of Reason, "History is a pack of lies about events that never happened told by people who weren't there. History is always written wrong and so, always need to be re-written". So, thank you for this video it was very interesting and informative.

Some US 57mm guns were mounted on half tracks and went to Russia under lend lease.

The snipe battle in Egypt…..this is were it earned it spurs

I've always thought the 6pdr to one of the finest ATG's of the war. It was just large enough to kill even the heaviest German tanks from the side, or even frontally with sabot at short range. On it's carriage, it was low, and readily movable. Anything bigger - such as the Pak40, took great effort to tow, move and re-emplace. The Pa38 was roughly the peer of the 6pdr, but was rather lacking in armour penetration by '44. The 17 pdr, in British use, the next step up from the 6pdr was highly effective, but really too heavy to move about in a tactically fluid fashion. Rather than towing it with tractors, it became normal by mid '44 for it to be towed by turretless Crusader tanks! So I see the 6pdr rather like Goldilock's porridge. Not too heavy, good performance, low silhouette, fast rate of fire, easy and quick to emplace. At Snipe, in Alamein, they "Rommeled" Rommel.

The first intact Tiger captured by the British was taken out by a 6 pdr.  Tiger 131 which was then used as a test bed for weapons and ammo effective ranges.

The 6 pounder with APDS had better penetration than the 17 pounder with AP shot.

6   F była wszędzie przeciw  pjechocie punktom ckm   i stanowisk moździeżowych .

AI

There were 17-pounders in Arnhem. The shield was made smaller to fit in a glider.