Unique history of a Churchill Mk III?

Discussion in 'Weapons, Technology & Equipment' started by Stefan Karlsson, May 28, 2016.

  1. Hello,
    In the collection of the Swedish Tank Museum we have a Churchill Mk III that was brought to Sweden after the war for studies. Unfortunately we have no history of the vehicle before it came to Sweden and we are now looking for help.
    If some one has pictures or information that might lead us in the right direction we would be most grateful.

    We have a reason to believe that this actual tank has been in enemy hands, and if we could find evidence for this it would be most interesting.

    Known facts:
    Vehicle registration number – T 68726
    Engine number – 22/15443R5
    Hull number – unknown

    It was bought from UK in 1946, arrived to Sweden in November 1946.
    Gun and turret drive was missing, but it was running and it was used for trials at the Swedish Armour School during 1946-1950.

    On an old Swedish photo you can see a RAC OCTU sign at the front and according to Bovington Tank Museum RAC OCTU is “Royal Armoured Corps Officers Cadets Training Unit” - se B/W picture

    On the left side of the turret there is a hit that has bounced off. - see picture of the turret

    From 1950 it was used as recovery object for Armoured recovery vehicles and then it was left abandoned before it was saved and in 1972 brought to the former Tank Museum. The vehicle was standing at the Museum a few years before it was painted in the colours that it has today. 2009 the former Tank Museum was closed and the collection (including the Churchill tank) was moved to Strängnäs where a new museum was planned. The new museum was opened in 2011, but the Churchill tank has been kept in storage since 2009.

    When we had a closer look at the tank we found that the turret had been welded to the chassis, remains still exist both on inside and outside. According to a Swedish report from June 1947 the turret almost fell off due to an accident during a test drive. In the report it is said that the turret drive mechanism was missing and the turret was removed. In a report from July 1947 it is said that the turret is back on the tank and locked with a temporary solution.
    The welding on the outside of the tank is visible on pictures from the trials during 1947-1950

    Why we believe it was captured:
    In 2014 a gentleman contacted us asking questions about the Churchill tank.
    When he was a kid in 1950 (10 years old) he was living not far from the training area where the tank was standing and he was playing in the tank and he remembered that he had seen a text pained inside the turret: ”recaptured by the allies…” there was also a date he said and he asked if the text was still there since at the time he did not understand the text and now he was curious about the date since he could not remember this.
    This was most interesting, but unfortunately the tank has been repainted also on the inside and we have been trying to find out if it could be possible to find the text under the paint, but so far no luck. It might be possible to use UV light, but we have not tried that yet.

    The text made us extremely curious – when was it captured? Dieppe? Normandy? How could we find out more?
    The man started to do some research on the internet and found out that the tank was probably not among the ones lost at Dieppe and it had probably not been used in Normandy because of the lack of later modification.
    He found out that it had probably been used in North Africa and all of a sudden he found the battle at Sedjenane in Tunis 1943 where 3 Churchills were lost and then recaptured a few weeks later.
    Could our tank be one of these?


    Questions:
    • The ad on armour on the turret could probably give some indications when the tank was used in action. As far as we have found out the tank was probably used during the North African Campaign but probably not from Normandy and onwards if you look at the modifications that came on tanks used in Europe. Could anyone help us verify this?
    • If the tank was used in Africa but not in Europe – why was that?
    • When was it assigned to RAC OCTU – is it possible to find any records of this?
    • If the text on the inside “recaptured by the allies…” was original, could there be other battles where Chuchill Mk III were lost and then recaptured again?
      The time from loss to recapturing could perhaps be everything from a day to several months – or what do you think?

      When the gun was removed we do not know, but it was done before it was sold to Sweden after the war. We do not know if it was sold by the British Army or if it was sold to a British Surplus dealer who then sold it to Sweden.
    • When were other Churchill tanks taken out of service?
    • Could it be one of the tanks at Sedjenane? Or could it have been lost elswhere?
    • What happened to the tanks that were recaptured at Sedjenane?
    • Was a hit like the one on the turret reported?
    • Is it possible to tell where the tank was used and not used due to details on the tank, armour plating etc?
    • Is it possible to find list where you can find the T-number and trace it to a unit?
    On the road wheel suspension units the fulcrum bosses are different shape - marked with circle and square on the picture of the suspension - this might be able to act as fingerprint when looking at original pictures?


    A short report of the battle of Sedjenane Feb-March 1943
    http://www.network54.com/Forum/47208/message/1107539719
    {The two Churchills were not destroyed by either Italian or German aircraft. Both were from my regiment North Irish Horse, C Squadron's 1 Troop, and were later recovered and returned to service. An extract from the Battle Report is relevent:

    "At 1900 hours, 1st March, three troops C squadron were ordered to support the 139th Brigade at Sedjenane. They arrived at Tamara at 0400 hours Tuesday morning. I had made a reconnaissance with the officer commanding Lincolnshires the night before, being under his command. His orders were to hold Sedjenane as a firm base. The enemy had infiltrated through the positions of the Forresters, 1st Commandos and the Durham Light Infantry and had driven them from their positions during Monday's fighting. The Colonel of the Lincolns asked me to dominate Sedjenane at first light and to support his infantry. I moved two troops to the village and one troop on to the Mansour Ridge to watch the left flank. All were in position by 0900 hours. The troop dominating on the right of the road was in a bad position due to difficult ground and the Germans managed to infiltrate right up to this troop. On the whole, however, the day was quiet and the Germans were held. At dusk the squadron was ordered to withdraw to harbour. The right-hand troop when retiring got caught by the dark owing to pulling out a carrier. As a result two tanks, after taking a wrong turning, went over a small cliff by a mine pit shaft."

    Both crews were unhurt, and except for one who was taken POW, returned safely.

    The photograph,which was published in Italian papers was taken by one of the Luftwaffe planes, probably on the next day, that were buzzing around at the time.}



    Many questions.
    What do you think? Any ideas? Any comments that could help us in the right direction would be most apreciated.
    .
    Stefan Karlsson, Museum Director
    www.arsenalen.se
     

    Attached Files:

  2. Swiper

    Swiper Resident Sospan

    Churchills are complicated beasts, their development history is exceptionally chequered. This puts indelible marks on the vehicle, which assuming if captured would not be altered. Only a later return and massive re-mod could potentially remove them, but this of itself would offer clues. I've done extensive research on Churchills and the relevant mods that were applied at a Brigade level, including unit innovations and am always learning more. What I'd recommend is an extensive survey of the vehicle and its component parts which should hopefully lead to ticking a series of boxes making it (eventually) possible to confirm the unit. Thus if the T- number is erroneous one could still garner a positive ID. Unfortunately simply uploading photos won't help in of itself! Devil is very much in the detail.

    A number were also captured by II SS-Panzerkorps on the Eastern Front, details are... exceptionally sketchy.

    NB. It is also why reverting Churchils to anything approaching factory spec is completely and utterly bonkers, much like rebuilding one to be as early configuration as possible, unless one enjoys mechanical sadomasochism.
     
  3. KevinT

    KevinT Senior Member

    I do not have anything on T68726 but I do have T68725 and T68728 listed.

    T68725 Belonged to 14 Canadian Armoured Regiment, The Calgary Regiment, 1 Canadian Armoured Brigade
    T68728 Belonged to 79 Assault Squadron, 5 Assault Regiment, 79 Armoured Division

    Both were built by Gloucester Railway Carriage and Wagon Company and were Mk IV's, so it would highly likely that T68726 was also built there. The engine number you quote is more than likely to be a replacement engine.

    Not much but I hope it is of some interest.

    Cheers

    Kevin
     
    dbf likes this.
  4. Thanks Kevin and Swiper, I am not an expert on Churchill, but some day I might be - so I am now trying to understand more by asking a lot of questions..

    If 68726 was a Mk III how can 68725 and 68728 be Mk IV? Were they upgraded?
    I have seen a list of Canadian tanks and in that list 68725 was a Mk II produced by Gloucester

    We have received information that T 68716-68870 were made by Gloucester which includes 68726


    Can someone tell what details we should look for?

    If the data plate is missing (as it is) - is there any other possibility to identify the tank? Are there any other numbers to look for?

    If you look at details of the hull and turret, or lack of details - is it possible to tell where the tank has been used or where it has not been used?

    As I understand the ad on armour on the turret is something that was not there from the beginning, it was added later on - correct? Can anyone tell when this was made and where? Was it done by a field workshop or did the tank has to go back to the UK?

    If a unit received the tank directly from the factory, dit it stay with this unit until the end or was the tank assigned to another unit after major repair or upgrade?

    Stefan
     
  5. hjertman

    hjertman New Member

    Thanks Stefan for the good pictures. Your first question about the added turret armour is relevant as well for the mark III that has been restored by Nigel Montgomery,it is visibly the same type of applique armor. In his book churchill tank
    there is on page 32 a T 69068/8 with turret applique armour.
     

Share This Page