Matilda CS tank

While discussing the CS tanks in the Desert with Tom, a thought came to me....

Most of the British Army's "CS", howitzer-equiped tanks for throwing smoke were of course variants of various Cruiser types...but then there was the several hundred matildas converted at source for the same, smokethrowing role...

Which led me to another thought...

Through late 1940 and 1941, Postan in his "British War Production" notes that a number of supposedly "cruiser"-armed divisions were instead equiped with "I" tanks, because at least it got them formated and training and deployed for combat experience with SOMETHING that was coming off matured production lines at relatively fast speeds...

Was it THESE armoured divisions that were equiped with "I" tanks like the Matilda and Valentine - that should really have had cruisers - the Matilda/Valentine units that got Matilda CS tanks to throw smoke to cover their HQ squadrons???

 

Phylo
THESE Armoured divsions ? - now you are really getting confused - there was only one full scale Divison in the desert in 40/41 and that was the amalgam of 4th and 7th Armoured bdes as 7th Armoured Div. by Maj.Gen Hobart before he was fired by Godfrey - Findlayson - the 2nd Armoured div came along after Beda Fomm and was wiped out at Mechili on Rommels first attack from El Ageila- they didn't know what hit them - we had the 1st Amoured Div seemingly permanently in workshops followed by the 10th on Monty's suggestion to Gen. Harding when he took over from the Ritchie -Auchinlek duo in August '42 - at that time there were still too many Crusaders - Valentines -Grants - and some Matilda's MkII around augmented by the New Shermans - then we started winning .....as the tactics were still found to be wanting until Medenine when the Lumsden era was over and the Pip Roberts - Cyril Jolly's- Bob Crisp - the Smedhurst's and other RTR man took over - but the Sherman was commanding pride of place in the front although still out gunned by his long barrelled 75mm and 88mm although at Medenine was the first action by the four only 17 pounders giving us great hope ......
Cheers

 

Tom, the discussions on events in the Desert merely drew me to opening this thread - I'm not looking at events specifically IN the Western Desert now

What I'm talking about is that as opposed to the Army Tank Brigades...which doctrinally (however faulty! ) should have been the only ones with "I" tanks....a couple of armoured divisions were initially equiped with "I" tanks rather than cruisers.

What I'm trying to find out is - were the Matilda CS' embedded with the Matilda-armed Tank Brigades...or the Matilda-armed units making up armoured divisions? Or of course - both?

Doctrinally, it should of course ONLY be the "armoured divisions"...

 

Phylo
You continue to call them Matilda CS' Tanks - meaning Bodston's A9 and A13's - I assume - which were of the howitzer mark and blowing smoke etc -

I wouldn't know that as I thought that they had all disappeared with the BEF - the desert brigades had to put up with whatever came back from the workshops - and it appeared to be in early '41 that the difference in Armoured and Army Tank bdes became obvious and they seemed to evolve from the Cruisers in the fighting battalions and the CS Tanks acting as corps troops and being called on for the heavy thumping as at Bardia.....Christmas '40 !

Don't know too much about any Armoured divs in the Uk at that time as the 11th and Guards Armoured didn't appear until late in '43.....with 31st and 32nd as Army Tank bdes !
Cheers

 

You continue to call them Matilda CS' Tanks - meaning Bodston's A9 and A13's - I assume -


Tom, no - in addition to the early A9/A13 cruiser CS tanks....there were 118 Matilda III CS and 238 Matilda IV CS tanks built. Hence my query. Here's a MkIII CS, I guess in training/manouvers in the UK...

 

Phylo -
These are the only one I can recall seeing - and working on as "I" Tanks -never knew the "CS" terminology until the Churchill MkV with the 95mm Bombard..
Cheers

 

They do seem to be strangely transparent - in British use But they had a high-profile role in the Pacific, in Australian hands in New Guinea. The Australians had got some with their gun Matildas....and traded with the New Zealand government who had been given just over a dozen to accompany their Valentines - as there was no Valentine CS; they didn't want to run Matildas in he same units as Valentines, so according to David Fletcher at Bovington they swapped their Matilda CS tanks with the Australians, who thus ended up with them. Throwing HE rather than smoke they apparently made good bunkerbusters in New Guinea.

Question is - what happened to the OTHER @300???

 

Armoured units had CS tanks at squadron level before and throughout the war.
CS tanks were only authorised for tank units from 11 Apr 1941.

A snippet from the Valentine Profile: "The Valentine III formed the basis of the only close support version of the Valentine to be built. Matilda or later close support tanks were usually used in conjunction with Valentines". That may well apply to both Tank and ersatz-Armoured units if we are trying to account for hundreds of CS Matildas.

A more interesting doctrinal question is when/how the decision came about that smoke rounds were the antidote to anti-tank guns? The logic seems to have been that the 'independent' armoured units could not count on artillery support (as would have been expected for I Tanks supporting a deliberate infantry attack) so the in-house solution was developed. I wonder if there trials that showed smoke to be more efficient than HE?

 

"The Valentine III formed the basis of the only close support version of the Valentine to be built.

Does it say who built it? Looking at Fletcher's book on the Matilda, it's possible the NZ government managed to create this themselves with the gun installations swapped by the Aussies.

A more interesting doctrinal question is when/how the decision came about that smoke rounds were the antidote to anti-tank guns?


Anything I've seen doesn't say this - the CS tanks' smoke wasn't an antidote to wheeled A/T guns....they were created because Cruisers didn't have a way of projecting smoke to somewhere they wanted to be - only smoke candles to hide where they were.

Now - I will admit that when war broke out, events did prove that mostly the reason TO run under smoke WAS wheeled A/T! but....that's making use of the CS' role in protecting HQ squadrons I.E. smoke rounds were the antidote to anti-tank guns, yes....for vehicles other than the CS tanks, that they were accompanying! :p

HOWEVER -

CS tanks were only authorised for tank units from 11 Apr 1941.

THIS seems to be the answer I'm looking for to my question...

What I'm trying to find out is - were the Matilda CS' embedded with the Matilda-armed Tank Brigades...or the Matilda-armed units making up armoured divisions? Or of course - both?

After 11th April 1941 it was indeed BOTH THAT would account for where they all went...

 

Does it say who built it? Looking at Fletcher's book on the Matilda, it's possible the NZ government managed to create this themselves with the gun installations swapped by the Aussies.

Yes the Profile does state that it was a Kiwi local conversion using guns from Matilda IVs.

Anything I've seen doesn't say this - the CS tanks' smoke wasn't an antidote to wheeled A/T guns....they were created because Cruisers didn't have a way of projecting smoke to somewhere they wanted to be - only smoke candles to hide where they were.

Now - I will admit that when war broke out, events did prove that mostly the reason TO run under smoke WAS wheeled A/T! but....that's making use of the CS' role in protecting HQ squadrons I.E. smoke rounds were the antidote to anti-tank guns, yes....for vehicles other than the CS tanks, that they were accompanying! :p
Apologies if I've misread you: I don't think the CS tanks were there to screen the Sqn HQ tanks, the CS tanks were under Sqn control to screen the sabre sqns. I can picture a nice diagram of smoke and swastikas, I'll have to see if I can find it.

 

I don't think the CS tanks were there to screen the Sqn HQ tanks, the CS tanks were under Sqn control to screen the sabre sqns.


? Would there have been enough per unit to do that???

 

Someone must've decided that two per sqn was enough - they stuck with that ratio all through the war. I tend to think of them as the armoured equivalent of mortars; e.g. motor coys had two 3" mortars as a coy asset, not 6 at battalion.