A tank a day keeps Politicians at bay.

Discussion in 'The Barracks' started by von Poop, Nov 1, 2019.

  1. SDP

    SDP Incurable Cometoholic

    That's one of the most professional 'put downs' I've ever seen: quality thorough argument and natural conclusion...but leaving the door open as well (how about that for diplomacy!)
    JimHerriot and Richelieu like this.
  2. Robert-w

    Robert-w Banned

    And Australians are not always renowned for diplomacy!
    SDP and canuck like this.
  3. TTH

    TTH Senior Member

    The RAAC gave a trial to a small batch of M24s on Bougainville. They liked the vehicle's lightness and handiness, both desirable qualities in jungle warfare, but the so-so armor was considered a major weakness.
  4. TTH

    TTH Senior Member

    I am very big on the French war in Indochina. I have three books on DBP, Windrow, Fall, and Jules Roy, of which Windrow's is the best. The story of the tanks at DBP really is remarkable. I know tank enthusiasts place more value on tank-vs-tank combat than on infantry support, but for my money the tragic Yves Hervouet is one of the great tank leaders of all time.
    CL1, Dave55 and von Poop like this.
  5. TTH

    TTH Senior Member

    The Conqueror is truly a fascinating vehicle. Was there ever any attempt to sell it to other countries, like the Centurion?

    FCT...I can just imagine what the troopers made of that. GET THAY OOP IN'T FOOKING COONTZ TURRET!
  6. von Poop

    von Poop Adaministrator Admin

    Splendid mastery of British colloquial speech there. Have you spent time in the North? :)

    I don't recall Conqueror being seriously considered for export.
    It was such a short-serving project for a specific perceived need that was overtaken rapidly by things like the L7 gun. Once you can buy Cents & Leopards that are starting to carry such ordnance, it all looks a bit irrelevant & a complication of supply.
    Wouldn't be surprised if there was some discussion with the Aussies, Iraqis etc., but it doesn't ring a bell.

    I see one made it into Mr Littlefield's collection, though.
    So that's at least one post-service export.
  7. von Poop

    von Poop Adaministrator Admin


    The Grosstraktor...s

    Irrelevant & significant in equal measure.
    What do you call AFVs when Treaty restrictions mean you really shouldn't be working on them at all? Tractors! Who could object to innocent agricultural machinery or towing vehicles...

    Germany in the mid 20s/30s playing about with what tanks might be, largely coming to reality in the territory of their Russian mates, away from Western eyes.
    The intention seeming to be one of testing as many possible variants of contemporary technology as they could, as economically as possible.

    Three types, one batch of two chassis each by Rheinmetall, Krupp & Daimler/Benz, with some crossover between (Krupp had their own turret, while the others shared a design).
    Jentz tells us that they all look similar as the requirements for ability, dimensions etc. were so tightly set out.
    After shipping to Kasan, the Daimler ones managed 66km between them & retired hurt, so the next four years of testing & serious mechanical alterations went on between Krupp & Rheinmetall. This may explain why coverage often talks of two manufacturers, or only blurs Daimler in.
    Shipped back to the Fatherland in late 1933 & given another year or two testing, & even some troop issue for exercises.
    After the machines were put aside, they were issued to Panzer Barracks for gate-guardian-ish display purposes, which explains why in the relatively rare photos available they're often sat on what appear to be rockeries...

    Sometimes confused with the next generation Neubau Fahrzeug (I may well have done so with the last two here), all fed into the medium tank development of Germany's Mark IV.

    gross_6.jpg rheinmetall_gross_188.jpg 0c92fe0d36a2375ed9409f7a2de98e6a.jpg 6303037949_f34d64c761_b.jpg grosstraktor-iii.jpg gross2.jpg gross2dd.jpg

    If nothing else, they provide an unusual ID factor of 'is that the same garden at a different time?' when looking at photos.
    SDP, Owen, Juha and 2 others like this.
  8. Dave55

    Dave55 Atlanta, USA Patron

    Slipdigit likes this.
  9. von Poop

    von Poop Adaministrator Admin

    The Kaiser's Maus!
    Though at least Maus moved under it's own steam.

    And everything is smaller than something with a 27 man crew...
  10. TTH

    TTH Senior Member

    Never been in the North, but:
    1. My old man's an actor, used to love to do British voices when he read us Dickens, Conrad, etc.
    2. When I was at the IWM I spent loads of time listening to tapes of 50th Div veterans and trying to puzzle out what the hell they were saying.
    3. Pythons.
    4. I was an Andy Capp fan as a kid.
    5. I was on a flight from Australia to London when I met and chatted with a couple of classic Yorkies, real football hooligan types who were coming back home from some Thai sex resort called Pattaya. They didn't use articles. "Fly to Yorrrrk. Bloak coom pick us oop in't car."
    canuck, Chris C, Owen and 1 other person like this.
  11. Robert-w

    Robert-w Banned

    Being pedantic but in't is "in the" and the is an article
  12. Owen

    Owen -- --- -.. MOD

    The NORTH.

    SDP likes this.
  13. Dave55

    Dave55 Atlanta, USA Patron

    "What news of the north?"

  14. Vintage Wargaming

    Vintage Wargaming Well-Known Member

    That’s like saying the North starts at Watford.

    Every one knows it’s really Darlington :lol:
  15. TTH

    TTH Senior Member

    It sure didn't sound like one, but then I don't really speak Yorkshire.
  16. von Poop

    von Poop Adaministrator Admin


    The BT-7 & predecessors.

    More 'Tractors', Nudge nudge, wink wink.
    A slightly neglected classic, & don't think we've had any red stuff so far.

    Some export shenanigans via the Sov's US company 'AMTORG' (look 'em up - fascinating business) led to them getting their hands on two of JW's '1931' machines.
    The SU was, quite sensibly, looking at an armoured update & saw them as an off-the-shelf bit of clever engineering.
    BT stands for 'Bystrochodnij Tankov' - 'Fast Tank', & Christie's design kick-started the series. The evolution was fairly rapid until the 7 crystallised in '37 as their best pre-war bit of work.

    Nice firepower, excellent mobility, but distinctly lacking in protection - something that cost it dearly in Finland.
    Deployed against the Japanese though, with some parlous armoured opposition, it excelled.

    Though Christie's work can be seen in so many machines, the BTs are probably the closest to his thoughts in terms of actual in-service tanks. Right down to the trackless high-speed road ability.


    Longer version of that stump bridge gif:

    Trackless (It did have forward gears...):



    The Finns ended up with a few to play with:

    And a BT-5 with subtle rockets... You can just about see them if you squint.
    Chris C, Juha, SDP and 1 other person like this.
  17. Juha

    Juha Junior Member

    Finns modified 18 BT-7s to produce BT-42s. They were armed with the British Q.F. 4.5 inch Howitzer Mk 2, the Finnish designation of the howitzer was 114 H/18, 114 came from the calibre in mm. It was selected because Finns did not like it and so Field Artillery wanted to get rid of them. Not the most succesful AFV.
    More info on BT-series and their use by Finns here: FINNISH ARMY 1918 - 1945: BT-5, BT-7 AND T-50 TANKS
    on BT-42: FINNISH ARMY 1918 - 1945: ASSAULT GUNS

    von Poop and Owen like this.
  18. von Poop

    von Poop Adaministrator Admin


    Landsverk L60

    Watch the Bovington M40 variant race past. Hear people saying "What's that? Is it German?" "Yeah, I think so. Definitely WW2"...
    Resist the urge to point out it's Swedish. Nobody wants to be that person.

    When you compare it to other machines developed in 1934-5, it's rather advanced.
    First mainstream tank to crack torsion bar suspension. Periscopes instead of vision slits & welded construction.
    Served as M38-40. Very light, liked by crews. Served almost until the C21st
    Bought by the Irish, Hungarians & Dominican Republic (serving in their civil war of 1965 - taken out by Ontos & Patton. Rare example of Ontos being used for what it was intended.) - Hungarian Toldi a licensed copy.
    Various proposals to up-armour & up-gun rejected by Landsverk as they really seemed to want something particularly suited to Swedish terrain. Though one TD variant, the Varjan, was trialled postwar.

    Curious side-note: The chap that designed it, a German named Otto Merker, went on to be a leading light in Uboat design back in his home country. A Wehrwirtschaftsfuhrer & recipient of the Knights cross of the War Merit Cross, with swords.

    Nice page (And site):
    Strv m/38-39

    strv_m38-7.JPG strv_m39-3.JPG strv_m39-8.JPG i697860.jpg tkFkkru.jpg

    Yeah, errr... No.

    Well & truly 'Ontos'd':
    Juha, Dave55, Owen and 2 others like this.
  19. Robert-w

    Robert-w Banned

    Periscopes were used in tanks from about 1919
  20. von Poop

    von Poop Adaministrator Admin

    To an extent, but the panoramic scope with some sighting capability in Landsverk's offerings was a rarity even in contemporary prototypes.
    The Gross & Leichte Traktors had them, but those never reached service. The Sovs were fitting them in almost contemporary BT-5s & a few later things before abandoning the effort, but the Swedes do appear to be the first to have got them into a production tank.

    Not simple mirrors really. An attempt to use good Zeiss optics to solve the vision problem. A problem that wasn't ever really addressed until much later generations of MBT.

Share This Page