Vickers Light tank MkVIC

Discussion in '1940' started by phylo_roadking, Jan 16, 2011.

  1. Bodston

    Bodston Little Willy

    Okay!

    "About 50" means we can take that awy from 166-168....and we're only looking at ~116-117-118 actual MkVIC tanks :)

    Now.... two on Malta...

    And back to Jentz, p.186 - British reported loss of 1 Mk VIC by 4 RTR and MK VIC by 7 RTR during period 15 - 17 June 1941 ("Battleaxe") - that's another 3...

    ...and -

    62 lost in France; 21 in the UK sent to the ME in early 1941; then ANOTHER ~20 used later in 1941 and left in the UK by the three units of 22 Armd Bde.

    Assuming the three 1941 losses are from the 21 sent earlier that year...that's -

    21+2 (Malta)+62+~20 = ~105!

    Not many left unaccounted for...

    If Fletchers figure of 60 AA Mk II is correct then we have them all, almost. Unless that Jane's figure means that "about 50" of that 60 were on Mk VICs with the remainder converted from Mk VIBs.
     
  2. phylo_roadking

    phylo_roadking Very Senior Member

    If Fletchers figure of 60 AA Mk II is correct then we have them all, almost.


    Maybe not....as of last night ;)

    But TODAY being another day I went back and checked some of the sources for the above figures, particularly the MkVICs on the strength of the constituent units of 22 Armd bde BEFORE they left the UK in August 1941...

    And found a LOT more VICs than I expected. Previously I'd been looking at the three units separately, and piecemeal; using the month of JUNE 1941 as a checkpoint (all three war diaries are missing months after that!) the three units actually fielded a total of FIFTY MkVICs!

    In June 1941...
    2nd Royal Glous. Hussars - 14
    3rd CLY - 18
    4th CLY - 18

    So - 50 in these three units as of June, 21 sent in the TIGER convoy in May, 62 lost in France in 1940 = 133!

    That seems to have accounted for the MkVIC; what was left after June 1940 seems to have been a "moveable feast", transfering around armoured units in training?
     
  3. phylo_roadking

    phylo_roadking Very Senior Member

    Now - I haven't immediately added the Malta 2 into that total above....until I find out WHEN they arrived there :wink: It's not impossible they were part of the TIGER consignment...they were on Malta in 1942, but I wonder when they actually arrived in the Middle East - did it just happen to be on the 12th May 1941? :wink: ...

    If you look at the three war diaries...we can see a number of interesting thing;

    1/ we can see 4th CLY transferring some TO 2nd Royal Glous Hussars in the months before June 1941! And correspondingly you can see them being sent off the stregngth of 4th CLY;

    2/ In all three units you can see dribs and drabs of VICs arriving from other units outside the Brigade...and occasionally before June one or two sent out of 22 Armd Bde;

    3/Looking again at 4th CLY - between February and March 1941 we can see its total of MkVICs drop suddenly from 38 to 21! A drop of 17 in one go...

    Now...6 of these went to 2nd Royal Glous Hussars at that time, as I noted above - but a consignment of 11 left the brigade entirely in one fell swoop.

    Checking here - Malta Convoys - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia - I reckon these 11 we can see taken away from 4th CLY in Feb-March 1941 are among the 21 scraped up and sent to the Middle East with TIGER.
     
  4. phylo_roadking

    phylo_roadking Very Senior Member

    If Fletchers figure of 60 AA Mk II is correct then we have them all, almost.


    I'm getting very unsure about the Light AA MkII; we have Fletcher's 60 figure, yes....we also have Janes' ~50 figure...so the number seems rather imprecise; we also seem to have varying stories of exactly WHAT hulls they were built on, we now have references to them being built on BOTH B and C chassis.:(

    I'm happy we've found the ~130 actual MkVIC tanks built...it's just a pity that that Janes' list of WD census numbers doesn't break down these two entries better...

    T4309 - T4342 = 34 MkVIc
    T5130 - T5184 = 55 MkVIc & AA MkII
    T5774 - T5812 = 39 MkVIc & AA MkII
    T5853 - T5882 = 40 MkVIc

    :(
     
  5. phylo_roadking

    phylo_roadking Very Senior Member

    I don't suppose any of the good people here with those lists of WD numbers would care to check through those two ranges and see what was Tank and what was Light AA?

    ;)
     
  6. von Poop

    von Poop Adaministrator Admin

    60 figure, yes....we also have Janes' ~50 figure...so the number seems rather imprecise

    And this would surprise you mate?
    To get even close to specifics going only from secondary stuff is pretty good going really, even with a fair dollop of speculation thrown in. When one considers the assorted vagaries of production, prototyping, testing, trialling, export, etc. then it's a pretty imprecise sort of business.
    I think it's great that detailed attention's starting to swing to British tankage, but the real work hasn't really been done... yet.

    My guess, is that the War Diaries or unit returns are never going to complete the production picture fully at a time when so much experimentation and general mucking about was going on - but Bovington's contract cards just might contain the bald stats by type, if not much more.

    On Diaries. Interesting snippet on the Bov website:
    War Diaries
    The Archive is hold virtualy every war diary of The Royal Armoured Corps regiments during World War Two. Available diaries can be found and purchased on-line here (coming soon).
     
  7. Rich Payne

    Rich Payne Rivet Counter Patron 1940 Obsessive

    Based on my experience of the Ordnance contract receipt cards for motorcycles, there will be lots of answers regarding deliveries but there will be plenty of new questions raised as well, with a few missing vital cards just to keep the research interesting.:)

    There should certainly be enough new info to lead to pencil notes all over the established definitive works (Do we all have this bad habit ? :unsure:)
     
  8. Bodston

    Bodston Little Willy

    Here are a few more pictures of the Light Tank Mk VIC

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG][​IMG][​IMG][​IMG][​IMG]
     
  9. May1940

    May1940 Senior Member

    Bodston

    I see you have posted one picture of a MkVI with the later front sprocket. I was not aware that this appeared on the type 'C'

    [​IMG]

    There is a picture of a MkVI B (Horsa), possibly of 15/19 Hussars and in Asse, posted by Rich Payne on another thread, which has the same type of sprocket here:

    [​IMG]

    Does anyone know which tanks had this new sprocket and, more importantly, to which units they were issued. Three appear on the beach at Dunkirk and have the mysterious AoS number '28'. To date, as far as I am aware, no-one has been able to identify which unit that was.

    Andrew
     
  10. sol

    sol Very Senior Member

    During the last days of December 1941, the British Command decided to send more reinforcements to Malaya and Singapore where the fighting was going very badly for the Allies. Among the reinforcements was an armoured unit : B Squadron, 3rd the King's Own Hussars. The regiment was in Egypt at that time and it had only enough tanks to equip one squadron. According to records from the PRO, the squadron had 25 Vickers Light Tanks Mark VIB and VIC (including nine in reserve). The regimental records place the number at 18 tanks including three reserve vehicles.

    British and Dutch (KNIL) Armoured Units in the Dutch East Indies, 1941-1942
     
  11. sol

    sol Very Senior Member

    Color scheme of Vickers VIC light tank, Malta
     

    Attached Files:

  12. phylo_roadking

    phylo_roadking Very Senior Member

    Hi, Sol, I've come across discussion of the Malta colour scheme a few times on modelling forums in the last few days; the very front of that scheme, the faintly cream/magnolia colour, is perhaps more accurate than the more yellow tone towards the rear of the vehicle.
     
  13. LondonNik

    LondonNik Senior Member

    Deleted
     
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2017
  14. rolfi

    rolfi Member

    Not about Mk VIs but related; the unit sign 28 was used by 5 DG as demonstrated by this photo of "Batchelor Prince".
    [​IMG]
    So
    Hermes, Hengist, Horsa
    Alpine Hut
    Batchelor Prince
    Commander, Columbo
    are all from 5DG.
     
  15. Bodston

    Bodston Little Willy

    Not about Mk VIs but related; the unit sign 28 was used by 5 DG as demonstrated by this photo of "Batchelor Prince".
    http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/3056/batchelorprince.jpg
    So
    Hermes, Hengist, Horsa
    Alpine Hut
    Batchelor Prince
    Commander, Columbo
    are all from 5DG.

    That would work. Things seem to add up if AoS 28 were 5th Royal Iniskilling Dragoon Guards (the Skins) who acted as the reconnaissance regiment for 4th Infantry Division BEF.
     
  16. Bodston

    Bodston Little Willy

    A picture of the 'skins' with their first tanks, no idea when or where. Not much in the way of markings so probably training, as the presence of the Mk IV light would indicate. What it does show is that new sprocket and different track on the leading Mk VI.

    [​IMG]
     
  17. May1940

    May1940 Senior Member

    Not about Mk VIs but related; the unit sign 28 was used by 5 DG as demonstrated by this photo of "Batchelor Prince".

    So
    Hermes, Hengist, Horsa
    Alpine Hut
    Batchelor Prince
    Commander, Columbo
    are all from 5DG.

    Rolfi

    I agree completely - I was going to post the same image (without your graphics of course) last night but got diverted. Do you know this is 5DG or are you just deducing that because it is a Scout Carrier and it carries the 4th Division sign?

    If it is 5DG, it would neatly fill the gap of the 5DG's markings which I believe are not known. The 5DG were also around the same areas as the unfortunate 15/19 Hussars in the withdrawal from the Dyle.

    Horsa is unlikely to have been 15/19 Hussars because there are pictures of that unit with the 3rd Division's formation sign clearly showing and that sign does not appear on any of the '28' tanks.

    So two more questions:

    1. Where did Columbo come from?

    2. Why '28' and not '2'

    Perhaps also we can find at least one tank with '28' and the 4th Division formation sign as well, to give a bit more prooof.

    Andrew
     
  18. May1940

    May1940 Senior Member

    A picture of the 'skins' with their first tanks, no idea when or where. Not much in the way of markings so probably training, as the presence of the Mk IV light would indicate. What it does show is that new sprocket and different track on the leading Mk VI.



    Thanks for that. I have seen the picture before but didn't remember it had the new sprocket.

    Andrew
     
  19. LondonNik

    LondonNik Senior Member

    Deleted
     
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2017
  20. rolfi

    rolfi Member

    Re post #36
    Aren't the vehicles from 102 OCTO/Westminster Dragoons? I think I can make out the regimental badge and the sign of Aldershot Command on the lead tank.
     

Share This Page