British army create a universal tank class
- Thread starter SCOUT 5249
- Start date
The British Army was the most mechanised army in the world 1939 and still was in 1945. Think the US Army was 1 vehicle per 7 men and the British was 1 vehicle per 5 men.
1 - 12pdr cannon, 1 coax MG, 1 hull MG, 0.5in Vickers pintle-mounted, RR Kestrel engine, Horstmann suspension, crew of 5, 3-men turret, 26-28 tons, 30 mph on road.
2 - Armament stated above; reliability of suspension system has no bearing on type of armament.
3 - Yes.
4 - Best case is that Germans get bogged down in France and/or Belgium in 1940.
5 - Many types in many countries.
Tis, also its brutally ugly!
Just like it’s predecessors. Ugliness would change until the T34 with slopped armour and removal of shot traps.
Then you get this sexy beast
Last edited:
This cannon right?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/QF_12-pounder_12_cwt_naval_gun
Ouch to the poor Germans!
Wow someone in axis will cry foul in 1939-40
Not necessarily a left-over from the Great War, but hopefully a new design that can also use left-over ammo.
The idea of the AEF - a single Brigade in the early 30s costing so much money that it would sufficiently derail other development is I feel a bit far fetched as I will try to explain below
Britain had all the components and units for the EAF or AEF (??) just not working together as a unified command - and for relatively little extra money compared to what was being spent anyway in order to provide a dedicated Brigade staff it could have been done.
Britain had what 5 Peace time divisions in the early 30s of which the AEF was but one Brigade and would have used existing units not new ones
As for the officers of the British army being a bunch of useless gin drinkers and Garden fence hoppers.....thats a Daily Mailish stereotype and needs to be treated as such.
Yes peace time armies are generally more conservative but the British army had managed to keep up with the times - it was after all the first to push for an all mechinised force
As for "UK armoured doctrine was learned mainly in the Egyptian desert in the late 30's and it proved to be a disaster, from what I can see our tactics consisted of 'find the strongest enemy position, assault head on, lose all our tanks, withdraw and re-equip, repeat again'"
This does not explain Operation Compass's extrordinary success (even in the face of such poor opponents) of said unit not doing said tactic of frontal attacks and actually repeatidly finding weak points and encircling Italian formations with a far far weaker force or how Rommels subsequant Operation Sonnonbaum did not defeat such a shambles when it was at its absolute weakest point in terms of fighting ability and equipment stretched as it was across 3 continents?
Indeed the flawed wargames in 1934 the then version of the AEF attempted to bypass the main positions of resitance by attempting to acheive suprise through a night move but a total lack of Brigade staff and individual commanders not used to working together (and disagreeing with each other) hamstrung the exercise and ultimately the 'unit' was deemed to have been defeated by 1st Division. A regular Brigade with all of the sub units familiar with each other along with a proper Brigade staff would have been able to move the unit faster and have been less impacted by the friction imposed on such manouvres as a night march and been far more likely to have achieved the operational suprised that it intended to have imposed.
As it was the Exercise probably did more damage to British Combined arms experiance than it improved and the units and equipment were split up with the only lessons apparently being learned by some German observers!
A sucessful exercise in 1934 with a regular formation rather than the Ad hoc affair that was used would very likely have resulted in a more successful result for the Brigade and an acceptance of such a fomation amoing the greater 'tribe' and greater learnings for both combined arms and the Infantry Divisions that 'fought it' on Sailisbury plains over the subsequant years.
So the POD remains a EAF becoming a regular Brigade with regular units and a full staff - with the only additional costing really being the cost of a full Brigades staff.
Better tanks and increased size of units would come later
Much like the American 75 which was based off the French artillery cannon and could use French ammunition.
Would the 12 pounder make a good cannon yes! It utterly defeats any cannon in the 1939-40 should the Germans find out expect to have 88 armed tank destroyers to counter the British super tank.
Britain is visited by the Italian Ideas Fairy (TM) and accordingly builds a Vickers 6 ton upscaled to the 13-15 ton range. So Basically an M13/40, but with better steel, more advanced construction techniques, belt fed machine guns, a 2 pounder, a better engine, and a Horstmann suspension in place of leaf springs.
After the fall of France they get working on a bigger version to provide an answer to the Panzers III and IV, and they settle on a 26 ton version (like the Italian P40, but again, British-ified) armed with something like the QF 13-pounder 9 cwt.
After the fall of France they get working on a bigger version to provide an answer to the Panzers III and IV, and they settle on a 26 ton version (like the Italian P40, but again, British-ified) armed with something like the QF 13-pounder 9 cwt.
Last edited:
Really?
British version of the p 40 sounds like a fairly good tank sans the rivets of course but use cast or wielded armour.
The Brits used rivets as late as 1944, its just how their industries were set up.
I think if the problems with the A7e3 tank had been sorted out sooner. You have your universal tank.
With that suspension it would as capable as a Churchill in the cross country capability.
Thanks for posting that. I've got a spare 15mm PSC A10 kit I've just found inspiration for kitbashing...
So what counter would the Germans come up with and would the US follow suit or stick with light tank, medium tank and tank destroyer doctrine?
This was the tank the army designed. And realy wanted. The suspension was one of the bigest issues. But she had a crew of four, could do 25mph, and had a three pounder gun. And was started in 1929.
What would have been great in the late 1920's is all the old cavalry in Cardenden Lloyd tankets with a mix of 303 vickers and vickers. 50 . And mixed in vickers 6 ton armed with pom pom guns.
With the RTR getting the A7e3. But that is just wishful thinking
Good enough in the late 20s early 30s. go with a tks. Dose the light cavalry job. And light infantry support. The poles killed a few pzkw Iv. With the tks .
And even if you only make half the old cavalry tankets. You have a culture being built up in the army.