Conqueror Tank: Design the Best British Medium Tank in time for D-Day

[Landshark]

Simple enough, it's just after Dunkirk and you are handed a blank sheet of paper and the task of designing a medium tank (25-45 tons) to spearhead the British and Commonwealth contingent on June 6th 1944.

With 20/20 hindsight what do you design?

[Nick Sumner]

Centurion III

[marty92559]

How about a t34 knockoff with a 17lb gun

[strangeland]

Agreed, something very like the Centurion, which was in development at the time, but wasn't deployed until after the war.

[The Dean]

Agreed, something very like the Centurion, which was in development at the time, but wasn't deployed until after the war.

and put the 3.75in gun on it.

[Landshark]

and put the 3.75in gun on it.

Do you have a load of these things in your shed or something?

[The Dean]

Do you have a load of these things in your shed or something?

I wish. We've got a static mounted example the smaller version in the car park at Cadets though. If we had any ammunition...........

[Landshark]

I wish. We've got a static mounted example the smaller version in the car park at Cadets though. If we had any ammunition...........

You'd be blowing the crap out of Sussex?

[Markus]

Simple enough, it's just after Dunkirk and you are handed a blank sheet of paper and the task of designing a medium tank (25-45 tons) to spearhead the British and Commonwealth contingent on June 6th 1944.

With 20/20 hindsight what do you design?

Dunkirk 1940?

1. Get a 3-man turret for the Valentine ASAP!
2. Start working on a tank with a turret ring big enough for a 6pdr-gun and three men. To get the tank ASAP and aviod nasty surprises, Vickers is not to design a completely new tank, but an enlarged version of the Valentine using as many components of the Valentine in the new design as possible.
3. Start work on a completely new design: 30 to 40 tons, sloped glacis plate, turret ring big enough for a 17pdr.

This makes the Valentine the king of the battlefield until the up-armoured Pz.III appears in mid-41 and in late 41/early 42 the sucessor is ready. In OTL it took Vickers just nine month to complete the prototype of the Valiant. The tank was a bit slow, but a sloped 100mm glacis plate and a 75mm/6pdr-gun from early 42 onwards will do just fine.

[Redbeard]

All technology needed for this tank is avaialble by early 40s:

Weight:30-35tons
Armour: max 75mm
Engine: 500hp
Suspension: Torsion bar
Main gun: 75mm Cal. 45, drived from interwar AAgun.
MV appr. 800 mps for APC.

Regards

Steffen Redbeard

[Cockroach]

Simple enough, it's just after Dunkirk and you are handed a blank sheet of paper and the task of designing a medium tank (25-45 tons) to spearhead the British and Commonwealth contingent on June 6th 1944.

With 20/20 hindsight what do you design?
Centurion is the obvious choice.

Failing that, something along the lines of the AC Sentinal series of tanks would be a good option as it prooved very well suited to upgunning (though, please skip directly to the AC3 with it's nice lil 25 pounder... easily capable of dealing with anything less than a Tiger).

Edit: Other options are to design the Cavalier/Centaur/Cromwell linage with more provision with upgunning and a sloped glacis. This would effectively give you the Comet the moment required (maybe using the old 3" AA gun rather than developing the 77mm?)

[Leej]

Post Dunkirk wouldn't it be a case of the cheaper and quicker to make the better?
There is an invasion scare on afterall and though you have hindsight the population want results.

[Cockroach]

Post Dunkirk wouldn't it be a case of the cheaper and quicker to make the better?
There is an invasion scare on afterall and though you have hindsight the population want results.
In that case anyone want to try fitting the 25 pounder to a Crusader?:p
What? It'd give good HE throw ability (bye bye AT gun cres) and sufficient AP capability to turn most german tank into scrap.

[redcoatT]

Simple enough, it's just after Dunkirk and you are handed a blank sheet of paper and the task of designing a medium tank (25-45 tons) to spearhead the British and Commonwealth contingent on June 6th 1944.

With 20/20 hindsight what do you design?
You bring into widespread service the Comet tank several months ahead of schedule.
Reliable and fast with a decent gun

http://inlinethumb25.webshots.com/20888/2030342090103014230S500x500Q85.jpg

[Markus]

In that case anyone want to try fitting the 25 pounder to a Crusader?:p

Overkill! In 1940 a 2pdr can kill any german tank and the 6pdr is not even in production. The 6pdr´s HE-capability is a bit limited(cal. 57mm), with hindsight we know the 75mm gun´s range and AP-capability was insatisfactory, so a good and quick sollution is a modified 3inch AA-gun. (http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_3-45_mk1.htm)

[alt_historian]

Post Dunkirk wouldn't it be a case of the cheaper and quicker to make the better?
There is an invasion scare on afterall and though you have hindsight the population want results.
But this is a mid- long-term project... the OP says "in time for D-Day", not "as a stopgap while you work on something better".

So, obviously, something along the lines of the OTL Centurion tank (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centurion_tank) would be better, but of course simplified as much as possible in order to get it mass-produced before D-Day rather than just as the war ends. Also, the given weight restriction is 25-45 tons, and the Centurion was just over 50 tons, so the weight would have to be reduced somehow. I assume this is in order to fit on the existing tank transporters?

Anyway, something like the Centurion (sloped glacis, decent gun) but a slightly cut-down (to, say, 35 tons), simplified version. Maybe bring it in with the 6-pdr (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordnance_QF_6_pounder)? And make the turret big enough to take the 17-, then the 20-pdr at a later date...

[Cockroach]

Overkill! In 1940 a 2pdr can kill any german tank and the 6pdr is not even in production. The 6pdr´s HE-capability is a bit limited(cal. 57mm), with hindsight we know the 75mm gun´s range and AP-capability was insatisfactory, so a good and quick sollution is a modified 3inch AA-gun. (http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_3-45_mk1.htm)
The 25 pounder is already in wide spread service though and in OTL was (from 1941 IIRC) equiped with an AP shell which could kill anything short of a Tiger. It's got a better HE shell than either the 3" AA or the yanks' 75mm guns. And also it's a design from the mid-1930s vs the early 1910s (as per your 3" AA).

[Redbeard]

The 25 pounder is already in wide spread service though and in OTL was (from 1941 IIRC) equiped with an AP shell which could kill anything short of a Tiger. It's got a better HE shell than either the 3" AA or the yanks' 75mm guns. And also it's a design from the mid-1930s vs the early 1910s (as per your 3" AA).

The 25 pdr. has much lower muzzle velocity than a dedicated AT or AA gun, which in itself makes it more difficult to hit a moving target, but alse cause a more curved trajectory, making correct range estimation essential. Before laser correct range estimation on the battlefield was extremely difficult. I have myself done direct fire with a 105mm howitzer (US M1), which had similar ballistics to the 25pdr., and even on a "peaceful" peacetime firing range hitting a moving target beyond a few hundred yards is practically impossible.

The 25 pdr. or a similar weapon would be suitable for specialised support tanks, knocking out stationary targets like AT guns and pill boxes. If taking the trouble of a specialised armament I would prefer something bigger though - above 10cm calibre. Many WWI/interwar howitzers were available in 10-15cm calibre and of relatively light construction. The US 105mm howitzer fitted comfortably in the Sherman turret and I believe a 12cm would be possible too. A 15cm (like on Brummbär) would be really nice - a 45 kg shell after all has certain ompfh that a 7kg (75mm), 14kg (105mm) or 25kg (120mm) doesn't, but handling such a big shell (separate charge) would probably require two loaders - prohibitting a turret and pointing to a turretless assaultgun.

Had the need been recognised in a tank design from pre WWII (to be in service by 1941) for a combined capacity for AT and HE I guess a utilisation of one of the numerous 75-77mm fieldgun designs would have been an obvious choice. The 75mm on the M3 Lee/Grant was a direct descendant of the famous French 75mm and it would not have been impossible to put it into a turretring and develop an AP round with a MV of well above 500 mps. Millions of HE rounds already existed. Judging from the PzIV, which started with a 75mm infantry gun (even shorter than the 75 mm field guns), a high velocity 75mm (17pdr.) would have been possible to fit in at a later date.

The PoD needed probably is the Royal Artillery not suceeding in convincing the chiefs that firing HE shells is not something crude tankers should bother about but be left to the refined artillery.

Regards

Steffen Redbeard

[Markus]

The 25 pounder is already in wide spread service though and in OTL was (from 1941 IIRC) equiped with an AP shell which could kill anything short of a Tiger. It's got a better HE shell than either the 3" AA or the yanks' 75mm guns. And also it's a design from the mid-1930s vs the early 1910s (as per your 3" AA).


25pdr ... the artillery gun. I thought it was some kind of AT-gun, but I obviously mixed that up with the 32pdr.

[Redbeard]

25pdr ... the artillery gun. I thought it was some kind of AT-gun, but I obviously mixed that up with the 32pdr.

There was a 20 pdr./84mm AT gun which was mounted on the early production models of the Centurion - a very effective gun - even in late 20th century.

Regards

Steffen Redbeard