Hi Wildcat, ever been to the Dubbo Military Museum?
Dubbo Military Museum
We were there in 1995. I shoved two of my boys in a tank and "snapped". Did I stick'em in a Matilda?...
Matilda Churchill, British Infantry tanks in action.
- Thread starter CharlesBronson
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Hi Wildcat, ever been to the Dubbo Military Museum?
Dubbo Military Museum
We were there in 1995. I shoved two of my boys in a tank and "snapped". Did I stick'em in a Matilda?...
Amazingly useful. But every jungle fight seems to start with the assumption that tanks will be no good in the jungle. Then the other guy brings them in, blows through your lines and everybody has a change of opinion.
Used in Malaya by the Japanese and did very well. After that, everyone figured out a way to get them into the fight. Usually the lighter types (M3 or similar) early in the war but developed out to the larger Grant and Shermans. A tank that was obsolete in Europe was still very effective in the Pacific (where the Japanese had very limited AT weaponry).
Same thing happened again in Vietnam. Same lesson learned all over again.
Vassili Zaitzev
Master Sergeant
By Crocodiles, do you mean the flame tank or the design?
From what I've read, whatever tanks were around (including tankettes like the Bren Gun Carrier) were used. Leave it to the crews to figure out the best way to use them. For instance, the 2pdr gun didn't have an HE shell 'til later in the war but found they could destroy a bunker by firing the "steel bullet" at the top of a bunker, causing a collapse when the center cross beam was shattered. The Brits really seemed to do the best tank/infantry work in the Burma theatre, raising it to something of an art form with tanks getting an infantry escort and the two working in tandem.
Doesn't get much print, not nearly as much as the Sherman/Panther/Tiger battles of North Western Europe but it was pretty impressive work in it's own right.
From what I've read, whatever tanks were around (including tankettes like the Bren Gun Carrier) were used. Leave it to the crews to figure out the best way to use them. For instance, the 2pdr gun didn't have an HE shell 'til later in the war but found they could destroy a bunker by firing the "steel bullet" at the top of a bunker, causing a collapse when the center cross beam was shattered. The Brits really seemed to do the best tank/infantry work in the Burma theatre, raising it to something of an art form with tanks getting an infantry escort and the two working in tandem.
Doesn't get much print, not nearly as much as the Sherman/Panther/Tiger battles of North Western Europe but it was pretty impressive work in it's own right.
Vassili Zaitzev
Master Sergeant
Sorry Tim, I should have been clearer, yes I meant the flame tank.
Interesting info by the way, do you know any books on tanks in the PT, I might pick up one.
Interesting info by the way, do you know any books on tanks in the PT, I might pick up one.
- Thread starter
- #26
CharlesBronson
Senior Master Sergeant
Nice, is that a "Frog" ?
- Thread starter
- #27
CharlesBronson
Senior Master Sergeant
Operation Battleaxe, the kingdom in Peril:
The operation Battleaxe was the first british major offensive against the Afrika Korps, it took place the June 15th 1941. The armor componentes of this operation arrived to Alexandria in the shape with the convoy "Tiger". Those were 135 Matildas, 85 "Cruisers" tanks, and 25 light tanks.
The main objetives were to relieve the garrison of Tobruk and also atract to the battle and destroy most of the german armored forces.
One of the most strategical points were the Halfaya pass near the Libian Egyptian border.
On the eastern side, at 05:15, Coast Force, commanded by Brigadier Reginald Savory and charged with capturing Halfaya Pass, started to move on to their objective.
On the top of the escarpment was the Halfaya Group, composed of the 2nd battalion Queen's Own Cameron Highlanders, the thirteen tanks (twelve Matildas and one light tank) of the 4th Royal Tank Regiment's C Squadron (which had previously captured
Halfaya Pass during Operation Brevity), and an artillery battery from the 31st Field Regiment.
To their east and below the lip of the escarpment were the 1st battalion 6th Rajputana Rifles and 2nd battalion 5th Mahratta Light Infantry, two troops of the 4th Royal Tank Regiment's A Squadron, and a few 25-pounder guns.
At 05:40, British artillery for the Halfaya Group was scheduled to open fire on the German and Italian forces stationed in Halfaya to provide cover for the tanks and infantry, but the battery had become bogged down by soft sand.
After waiting until 06:00, fifteen minutes after the fighting began to the west below the escarpment, the commander of C Squadron, Major C.G. Miles, ordered his tanks to attack at the top of the pass; soon after though the [anti-tank guns of the German and Italian defenders opened fire and within a few hours all but one light tank and one of the Matildas had been destroyed, the well concealed 88s Flak 18 guns were particulary aiming to the british infantry tanks.
Two penetrations ...88
At 10.00 am Miles radioes a last and desperate message "…they are tearing my tank to bits ! ", minutes later he also fell prey of the german antitank guns when one 88 shell penetrated his Matilda and caused a catastrophic internal explotion.
Turret blew off
The British forces below the escarpment did not fare much better, as four of the Matildas were disabled by anti-tank mines which were supposed to have been cleared; this blocked the path of the remaining two and reduced the small tank force to acting in a pillbox capacity.
Burned out. Note the small caliber impacts.
The Rajputana Rifles and Mahrattas made several attempts to reach the pass, but were repelled each time; the former losing their commanding officer, Colonel P.R.H. Skrine, in the final attack.
After 3 days of battle the offensive succeded only in capturing the Fort Capuzzo but failed any other objetive, the british forces withdrawn leaving behind 91 tanks destroyed, including 64 Matildas.
In the other hand the germans have 50 tanks damaged, but only 12 remain irreparable losses.
"Matildas graveyard", a view of the Halfaya pass with hulls of some matildas and a Marmon Harrington AFV.
The operation Battleaxe was the first british major offensive against the Afrika Korps, it took place the June 15th 1941. The armor componentes of this operation arrived to Alexandria in the shape with the convoy "Tiger". Those were 135 Matildas, 85 "Cruisers" tanks, and 25 light tanks.
The main objetives were to relieve the garrison of Tobruk and also atract to the battle and destroy most of the german armored forces.
One of the most strategical points were the Halfaya pass near the Libian Egyptian border.
On the eastern side, at 05:15, Coast Force, commanded by Brigadier Reginald Savory and charged with capturing Halfaya Pass, started to move on to their objective.
On the top of the escarpment was the Halfaya Group, composed of the 2nd battalion Queen's Own Cameron Highlanders, the thirteen tanks (twelve Matildas and one light tank) of the 4th Royal Tank Regiment's C Squadron (which had previously captured
Halfaya Pass during Operation Brevity), and an artillery battery from the 31st Field Regiment.
To their east and below the lip of the escarpment were the 1st battalion 6th Rajputana Rifles and 2nd battalion 5th Mahratta Light Infantry, two troops of the 4th Royal Tank Regiment's A Squadron, and a few 25-pounder guns.
At 05:40, British artillery for the Halfaya Group was scheduled to open fire on the German and Italian forces stationed in Halfaya to provide cover for the tanks and infantry, but the battery had become bogged down by soft sand.
After waiting until 06:00, fifteen minutes after the fighting began to the west below the escarpment, the commander of C Squadron, Major C.G. Miles, ordered his tanks to attack at the top of the pass; soon after though the [anti-tank guns of the German and Italian defenders opened fire and within a few hours all but one light tank and one of the Matildas had been destroyed, the well concealed 88s Flak 18 guns were particulary aiming to the british infantry tanks.
Two penetrations ...88
At 10.00 am Miles radioes a last and desperate message "…they are tearing my tank to bits ! ", minutes later he also fell prey of the german antitank guns when one 88 shell penetrated his Matilda and caused a catastrophic internal explotion.
Turret blew off
The British forces below the escarpment did not fare much better, as four of the Matildas were disabled by anti-tank mines which were supposed to have been cleared; this blocked the path of the remaining two and reduced the small tank force to acting in a pillbox capacity.
Burned out. Note the small caliber impacts.
The Rajputana Rifles and Mahrattas made several attempts to reach the pass, but were repelled each time; the former losing their commanding officer, Colonel P.R.H. Skrine, in the final attack.
After 3 days of battle the offensive succeded only in capturing the Fort Capuzzo but failed any other objetive, the british forces withdrawn leaving behind 91 tanks destroyed, including 64 Matildas.
In the other hand the germans have 50 tanks damaged, but only 12 remain irreparable losses.
"Matildas graveyard", a view of the Halfaya pass with hulls of some matildas and a Marmon Harrington AFV.
Vassili Zaitzev
Master Sergeant
If the 88MM could penetrate a Matilda, did the PAK40 have the same effect?
- Thread starter
- #29
CharlesBronson
Senior Master Sergeant
Yes, but at that time there was no pak 40 in the desert.
- Thread starter
- #30
CharlesBronson
Senior Master Sergeant
Matilda in dug out emplacement near Tobruk, those vehicles play a fundamental role in defeating the german attemp to breach into the fortress in april 1941. Exposing only its solid cast steel turret was a hard nut to find and to crack for the advancing german Panzers.
The arrival of the Lufwaffe in early 1941 made camouflage a badly needed improvement.
The arrival of the Lufwaffe in early 1941 made camouflage a badly needed improvement.
Vassili Zaitzev
Master Sergeant
Cool, thanks for the info.
- Thread starter
- #32
CharlesBronson
Senior Master Sergeant
You re welcome, lets talk a little about the Churchill.
"This tank carring my name have more drawbacks that me" Winston Churchill 1941.
Development of the Churchill, the British Tank Doctrine
In the late thirties British tank doctrine identified three distinct roles for tanks these being classified as light tanks, intended for reconnaissance, cruisers for rapid exploitation of breakthroughs and Infantry tanks. Infantry tanks were to support the infantry providing covering fire, dealing with obstacles and fortifications etc. The primary requirement of such tanks was that they should be heavily armoured and that they were able to go everywhere the infantry went.
A22
The A22 can be viewed in many ways as a continuation of the A-20 Following Dunkirk it was realised that the static warfare that had been expected was not going to occur - at least not for some time and so the 'shelled area' concept of the A20 was abandoned.
A-20 prototype( weird...isnt ?)
However, a successor for the A12 and Valentine was still required and with this in mind the General Staff drew up a requirement for A.22. To implement this requirement the Ministry of Supply turned to Vauxhall who as we have already seen had previously been approached with regard to A.20 production.
Development work started in July 1940 and because of the urgent need to re-arm after Dunkirk, Churchill himself required that the new tank be ready for production the following March with 500 being ordered pretty much off the drawing board. The first prototypes were completed by December 1940 and the first 14 production tanks delivered at the end of June and despite missing the Churchill's target date this still represents a tremendous engineering effort.
The earlier Churchills were plagued by a whole host of problems such as tracks breaking and suspension units failing but given the incredible pace of development and the rush to get them into production this was perhaps inevitable. Despite the many component failures the design itself did prove to be quite robust with damaged vehicles often managing to limp back from their trials under their own power. As faults were identified and fixed a massive re-work program was introduced with Vauxhall engineers often being seconded to units in the field. Several times Churchill production was in danger of being the stopped but when push came to shove there wasn't any real alternative and new orders were placed.
A-22 prototype.
Armour in Focus
TANKS!
A-20 pic extracted from: The great Tank scandal By David Fletcher
"This tank carring my name have more drawbacks that me" Winston Churchill 1941.
Development of the Churchill, the British Tank Doctrine
In the late thirties British tank doctrine identified three distinct roles for tanks these being classified as light tanks, intended for reconnaissance, cruisers for rapid exploitation of breakthroughs and Infantry tanks. Infantry tanks were to support the infantry providing covering fire, dealing with obstacles and fortifications etc. The primary requirement of such tanks was that they should be heavily armoured and that they were able to go everywhere the infantry went.
A22
The A22 can be viewed in many ways as a continuation of the A-20 Following Dunkirk it was realised that the static warfare that had been expected was not going to occur - at least not for some time and so the 'shelled area' concept of the A20 was abandoned.
A-20 prototype( weird...isnt ?)
However, a successor for the A12 and Valentine was still required and with this in mind the General Staff drew up a requirement for A.22. To implement this requirement the Ministry of Supply turned to Vauxhall who as we have already seen had previously been approached with regard to A.20 production.
Development work started in July 1940 and because of the urgent need to re-arm after Dunkirk, Churchill himself required that the new tank be ready for production the following March with 500 being ordered pretty much off the drawing board. The first prototypes were completed by December 1940 and the first 14 production tanks delivered at the end of June and despite missing the Churchill's target date this still represents a tremendous engineering effort.
The earlier Churchills were plagued by a whole host of problems such as tracks breaking and suspension units failing but given the incredible pace of development and the rush to get them into production this was perhaps inevitable. Despite the many component failures the design itself did prove to be quite robust with damaged vehicles often managing to limp back from their trials under their own power. As faults were identified and fixed a massive re-work program was introduced with Vauxhall engineers often being seconded to units in the field. Several times Churchill production was in danger of being the stopped but when push came to shove there wasn't any real alternative and new orders were placed.
A-22 prototype.
Armour in Focus
TANKS!
A-20 pic extracted from: The great Tank scandal By David Fletcher
Vassili Zaitzev
Master Sergeant
The british used specilaized churchill's on D-day, and at Dieppe right?
Vassili Zaitzev
Master Sergeant
- Thread starter
- #35
CharlesBronson
Senior Master Sergeant
Vassili Zaitzev
Master Sergeant
Were any churchill's developed as DD tanks, like the sherman?
- Thread starter
- #37
CharlesBronson
Senior Master Sergeant
Not quite but there was a deep fording variant used in Dieppe.
Close up to the deep fording equipment in Churchills III.
Close up to the deep fording equipment in Churchills III.
- Thread starter
- #38
CharlesBronson
Senior Master Sergeant
Specification for the Infantry support Churchill:
Mark VII characteristics.
Mark I, and the prime minister.
Mark VII characteristics.
Mark I, and the prime minister.
Vassili Zaitzev
Master Sergeant
Cool.
Great thread, Charles, could be as interesting as the one about the Panther you did.
