"Honey tank" - Turret-less or otherwise.

Greatly lowered profile, reduced weight, higher top speed, improved all round visibility for more than one pair of eyes - all good reconnaissance features. (It was also seen, in the British army at least, that giving recon troops too many heavier weapons, even if just a 37mm, was often a bad idea as they were then more likely to use them when they got the chance, not something to be encouraged when you're supposed to be sneaking about).


Absolutely correct Adam.

Reconnaissance is all about obtaining the enemies disposition and numbers, without him seeing you if possible.

The number one function was to get this important intelligence back to Division to be acted upon as quickly as possible.

Getting into a firefight was not a good idea, although it did happen.

The 3.7cm was similar to the small German Pak and was considered a door knocker when used against a Mk IV, Panther or Tiger!

It made real sense to use the turretless Stuarts for Recce work and a .50 cal Browning MG was a useful weapon to have on board.

Regards
Tom

 

thanks for that i wish i'd found you earlier it would have saved me a few quid!

 

Hi A-58



When I was being re-trained as a "Tankie" all we saw during our training were Shermans so you can imagine my surprise on joining my unit to find I was going into action with this bastardised version of a tank without a gun !

Having said that, it was still a rugged carrier that used to get up a fair speed over rough terrain and I was sorry to have it replaced with a Bren Gun Carrier.

Regards

Ron

I bet that was a surprise. I have seen pictures of Shermans in use without the turret, and the self-propelled 105s without the main gun used as apc's before. The Bren Gun Carrier was small wasn't it? That had to change your operation a bit I'm sure, replacing the Sherman with something smaller.

 

Greatly lowered profile, reduced weight, higher top speed, improved all round visibility for more than one pair of eyes - all good reconnaissance features. (It was also seen, in the British army at least, that giving recon troops too many heavier weapons, even if just a 37mm, was often a bad idea as they were then more likely to use them when they got the chance, not something to be encouraged when you're supposed to be sneaking about).
Yes, that makes sense now. With the main gun, the crew would probably be tempted from time to time to engage a target of opportunity when they should head out and report what they found. Thanks for the info.

 

Taking POW's in North Africa


U.S. Tank in Libyan desert with British 8th Army

 

Paul's photo:



... reminded me that I have some notes on the conversion in Italy from WO 204/7957. I've cleaned them up as much as possible and attached them as a pdf. This looked a better thread than here to resurrect. Better late than never, eh?

 

Idler

That's my baby!
http://www.ww2talk.com/forum/weapons-technology-equipment/7438-honey-tanks.html#post95419

Ron

ps
On studying the pic a little closer I see that the 30 mg Machine gun (see covered) was not mounted on the turret as was ours.

 

Highland 51 -
Major Robert Crisp, DSO : MC: was a clever tank person -

EXCERPT FROM “BRAZEN CHARIOTS” – Robert Crisp – 3rd RTR

The Stuart was a strange looking contraption, straight from Texas, tall in the saddle and with a Western flavour accentuated by two Browning machine guns……..the drivers gasped when the engine cover were lifted
Off..it was simply an aeroplane engine stuck in a tank, with radial cylinders and a fan that looked like a propellor….”let’s see what it will take “ – I shouted down to the driver “try and shed one of those tracks”…..Whaley put her through a variety of turns and manoeuvres that made the desert floor look like an ice rink- “that’ll do – I shouted – we are beginning to wear out the desert:

“Well Whaley – what do you think of it -? He plainly under the influence of the nearby Texan said simply “ it’s a honey Sir:

from that moment they were never known as anything else

Heliopolis – Beni Yusef August 1941

 

Awwwww!

Love the guy in the Egypt pic...with a puppy under his right arm!

Even in war "we are a nation of dog lovers"....

 

Mike D
The Canadians never did accept the cast off's of the 7th Armoured div vehicles - what happened was that when the 5th Cdn Armoured landed in Italy shortly after the 7th AD left Italy in the Oct '43 leaving all their vehicles behind - they were "invited" to take on those beaten up wrecks - they declined and much to everyones disgust - they sat there until they could be equipped with new stuff from the UK - so their first time in action was after Ortona in the Dec/Jan '43/44 - they then upset the Seaforths coming out of battle and after the ensuing fracas - Monty fired the 5th Cdn AD - and Gerry's 25 Tank bde and mine - the 21st TB were "volunteered"
to become the Armoured support for the 1st Cdn Inf. Div - the 21st stayed with them all the way until they left for Belgium in the Feb of '45...
Cheers

 

Ron, that turretless Stuart is part of IWM Duxford Landwarfare Hall exhibitions and in fact that is an Arty Tractor, not Recce Honey.
In 1999 I was given kindly permission to go over the fence (she was part of dio) and took pics of that Honey interior... No MG pintle mount(s) or even MG ring at all, pure prime mover with ammo racks fixed on the rear of hull.

 

Greenbaron

Thanks for the correction, and there was I getting all excited

The best photo I've seen of the Honey that I fought in, i.e. the nearest one that matches my memory, was the one I show again below

Best regards

Ron

 

Hi Ron,
Apologies if you have mentioned it before or not, but what colour was your Honey? In the photo above it looks like it could possibly be a 'sand' colour or a very thick layer of dust.

 

Andy

"My" Honey had been out of the desert a long time

If my memory serves me correctly all the vehicles in the 4th QOH, at the time that I joined them in March '45, were painted in dark green.

In the dust of Italy everything looked as if it were it were covered in a sandy dusty beigey colour and this included whoever was travelling outside of a vehicle

We really ate dust in those days !

Ron

 

What a speedy reply thanks Ron! Thank you for the insight, one day I would really like to build a model of a 4th NZ armoured Recce Stuart....one day it will happen lol.

 

Andy
What a speedy reply thanks Ron! Thank you for the insight, one day I would really like to build a model of a 4th NZ armoured Recce Stuart....one day it will happen lol.
__________________
Cheers,
Andy


and when you do, put a tiny model loader/op behind the 30.mg facing front and call him Ron

Ron

 

Taken in NWE this seems to be a Recce Honey (M3A3, turretless) too. Although I am not able to identify unit this little gem belongs to, the picture provides good imagination how laden those were during campaign.
Source: British Pathé, for can, film and frame number see the name of picture

 

Another one Recce Honey (M3A3, turretless), Italian campaign, vehicle sporting name BLOWER. No unit identification, picture taken IVO Florence. Dust brings shells...
Unfortunately I can not remember the source of picture, sorry.

 

Would it be of any interest to know that the vehicles round here that empty the cess-pits are called 'Honey Wagons'?

Jim