And another choice.
If the supply of main guns (e.g. 2pdr) cant keep up with production, then either
1) Do something else with the chassis, e.g. SP gun, SPAA, etc.
2) Turn out more spares.
Sir John Valentine Carden survives.
- Thread starter allanpcameron
- Start date
- Status
If the supply of main guns (e.g. 2pdr) cant keep up with production, then either
1) Do something else with the chassis, e.g. SP gun, SPAA, etc.
2) Turn out more spares.
Or, see if there are more companies that could be conceivably encouraged to build parts. Or see if any extra productivity could be gotten out of the existing ones, running night shift as well as day-shift perhaps.
managed that and then some.about 800,000 trucks and roughly 50,000 armored vehicles,and 25 pdrs and 6 pdrs and those funny 8 barreled 2pdrs and a few hundred corvettes and frigates.......I could go on but i think everyone gets the point.
The Marmon-Herrington armoured lineup proves you can't just stuck components from civilian trucks into tanks and expect to get aywhere with them.
over 400,000 of those trucks were CMP's, I don t think you can find a more military truck in ww2.those armoured vehicles were purpose built,mostly bren gun carriers and various apc's and spg's based on sherman 's
Last edited:
The drivetrain for Valiants need to be able to deal with over 400 horse-power, which is at least four times the power a CMP can produce.
We're talking spare-parts for tanks, so not really useful.
Actually the talk was about having Canada just make spare parts which would be a major waste of industrial effort,and as for tanks Canada built a lot of those too.
The original topic was producing spare-parts for Valiant tanks. Since Canada is already producing its own (not necessarily entirely compatible) Valiants, the only way such spare parts could be (as CB13 suggested) gotten out of Canada would be to see if you could convert one of their factories to production of those parts, from whatever it had been producing before.
and my contention is why disrupt production using North American methods to produce spare parts for British methods.The big one being SAE vs BSW.
How often did parts get built in separate countries to be assembled in a third in the 40s? We can play those games now but our logistics management is so much better.
That was more-or-less my point too. Honestly, it would be better to my mind to switch those manufacturers originally planned to produce A22 components to produce components for the Valiant instead.
Very rarely I suspect, and if it happened at all, it would be for major components (engines, guns, etc.) only.
I cant resist.A lot of CMP trucks were built,knocked down to various degrees ,crated as kits then shipped to various allied countries for final assembly(including about 10,000 chasis for armoured cars).BUT these would be complete vehicles or just add a body to suit not bits and pieces sourced from various manufacturing methods.the UK using BSW threads,etc,North America using SAE and Europe using Metric.
I think a lot more final assembly work was done in destination countries remember that one of the reasons that the depression was so bad was the erection of high tariff walls which made it uneconomic to ship complete vehicles hence final assembly being done in the destination country instead. Also in Australia we seem to use both metric and imperial fasteners without problems today I can’t imagine another set of sockets and taps would have been beyond the scope of a Reme detachment in 1941
My set of Allen Keys has both Imperial and Metric Keys and I bought it, like, last year?
What strange is before WW1 the field service regulations espoused combined arms warfare however it wasn't really implemented effectively or at all. It's the same with organisation, training and handling of brigades, division and Corps formations none of the generals or brigadier had the experience necessary outside of a few and most had to learn on the fly. Heck regimental command was seen as the highlight of an officers career at the time.
Last edited:
Derek Pullem
Donor
NASA couldn't work with both as late as 1998
Mars Climate Orbiter - NASA Science
What was Mars Climate Orbiter? Mars Climate Orbiter was designed to function as an interplanetary weather satellite and a communications relay for Mars Polar Lander. Mars Climate Orbiter was lost on arrival at Mars on Sept. 23, 1999. Engineers concluded that the spacecraft entered the planet’s...
solarsystem.nasa.gov
- Status