Sir John Valentine Carden Survives. Part 2.

By 1942 the M3 Stuart in British service had the sponson MG largely removed. Commonwealth carriers were generally armed with two MGs anyway - an LMG and a Vickers MMG.
Generally only the carriers assigned to a MG battalion would have the Vickers and it would usually be fired dismounted from the tripod or from this heath robinson type bipod as sported by the Argyle and Sutherland chaps with the MK VII in Malaya

1679751700855.png
 
Hey did the British every get their hands in particularly Carden ITTL on Christie suspension?
Of course they did, the Nuffield cruisers A13 and now Crusader are using it. The only difference from OTL is the Covenanter was binned before production. Which is why Valiant numbers are bigger ITTL than Valentine numbers OTL. You can read about it in the first thread.
Allan
 
Of course they did, the Nuffield cruisers A13 and now Crusader are using it. The only difference from OTL is the Covenanter was binned before production. Which is why Valiant numbers are bigger ITTL than Valentine numbers OTL. You can read about it in the first thread.
Allan
Also, the Crusader was late on the scene, due to getting some actual testing, which added all the more to Valentine numbers.
 
Last edited:
Generally only the carriers assigned to a MG battalion would have the Vickers and it would usually be fired dismounted from the tripod or from this heath robinson type bipod as sported by the Argyle and Sutherland chaps with the MK VII in Malaya

View attachment 820739
Australian carriers were more heavily armed than British carriers. They all mounted an LMG and an MMG. The MMG was mounted in the sponson, the LMG in the rear if the vehicle on a tall AA mount.
 

Ramp-Rat

Monthly Donor
There can be little doubt that the Japanese invasion plans for Malaya are beginning to run out of steam. While those for Burma have been put on hold for the foreseeable future, which has the disadvantage of not cutting off the one remaining supply route to China. Note that the overland route from the Soviet Union was effectively removed by the Soviet Japanese treaty. The Japanese offensive in the DEI is not going well, and is far from achieving its primary objective, to secure for Japan a guaranteed source of oil. The only area that has seen the pre war plan succeed is in the Philippines, which has little resources that the Japanese need, and has exposed them to an area where the majority of advantages will lye with the Anglo Americans in the long run. In Malaya the ability of the British to prevent the Japanese from capturing the remaining territory and Singapore, means that they the Japanese are at the end of a very torturous supply line, one that is increasingly going to come under attack from the British, while the British have admittedly a long supply route to their principal source of advanced equipment, the home nation and America. But can draw on India for additional troops and some supplies such as ammunition, Burma and the Middle East for petroleum supplies. While Australia and New Zealand will supply personnel and as their industrial potential improves military equipment, plus food to help fead the personnel on the ground.

Unlike the Japanese supply line, the British one is essential protected from anything other than the occasional merchant raider, or an air attack. Once any merchant convoy has gotten beyond Gibraltar, it’s chances of a submarine attack are slim, and until it gets close to Malaya it will be especially safe from attacks. Close to Malaya there is a small chance of an air attack, but providing that there is cooperation between the convoy and the authorities in Singapore, there will be some form of air cover. For convoys coming from Australia and New Zealand, they too can take a route that is protected for the majority of their transit time, as can convoys coming from America that follow a southern route. While the Anglo Americans were short of some equipment at the outset of the war, they were both very much at the beginning of their industrial potential, the Americans more than the British. Without the loss of Burma or the DEI, they will not as they were IOTL be short of any vital resources. The loss of Burma and Malaya, along with the Japanese occupation of FIC, meant that there was a significant shortage of rubber, IOTL. And the loss of the DEI, meant the loss of the principal source of Quinine, and the subsequent rise in the number of personnel affected by malaria, which until the introduction of a suitable substitute, was to cause numerous deaths, incapacity and long term sickness. Note that the US Marines sent to Northern China to establish whether reporting stations, were men who due to having caught malaria multiple times were not fit for further service in areas where malaria was prevalent. All though it will take time to fully implement anti malaria drills to the Allied forces, given the experience that the American, British and Dutch, medical services have in the control of tropical diseases, and the introduction of DDT, will greatly reduce the number of casualties.

On the question of the problems that the British mechanical forces will have with the engine fitted to the American Honey Tank. For mechanics whose previous experience has been with inline water cooled, petrol or diesel engines. The introduction of an air cooled petrol radial, is going to be a big shock, and take time to adjust to. However once someone has the light bulb moment, the problem is fairly easily solved. Borrow some skilled engine mechanics from the RAF/FAA to run short instructional courses for the Army mechanics and tank crews. Plus to supervise the base mechanics for a short time, while they adjust to these new engines, and the problem will soon be over. The basic problem is that encountered with all new equipment, a lack of training, and experience in those required to operate and or maintain the new kit. However despite the problems encountered with this new tank, the arrival in theatre of a significant number of tanks that are as good or better than anything that the Japanese possess. Is another indication of just how strapped for equipment the Japanese are, and how far advanced the Anglo Americans are in comparison. The deployment of these tanks to Malaya is an example of the comparative strength of the Anglo Americans in comparison to the Japanese, these tanks which the Japanese would regard as advanced equipment and be lucky to have in the quantities that the British have. Are regarded by the British as second rate in comparison to those that they have available from from their own resources. The British regard the Honey as only useful as an armoured tracked reconnaissance vehicle, in anywhere other than the Far East, and even there would rather prefer their own medium tanks, which are better armoured and by now equipped with a larger more useful weapon.

RR.
 
Australian carriers were more heavily armed than British carriers. They all mounted an LMG and an MMG. The MMG was mounted in the sponson, the LMG in the rear if the vehicle on a tall AA mount.
That would make sense as the Vickers MMG was still used by infantry battalions in the Aussie Army (unlike the rest of the commonwealth armies) - so the Carrier platoon of a given Aussie infantry battalion (which IIRC in 41 was 19 carriers) would have been responsible for moving them around

Also Australia did continue to make its own version of the MK VII Vickers so its possible enough were produced to arm all of the carriers in an infantry battalion

But the carrier was not an AFV it was an armoured tracked utility vehicle and would be found out against even light opposition if it was used that way

Meanwhile in Australia: "shut it ya whinging pom...something something another prawn on the barbie and pass me a cold one"

1679856384615.png
 
That would make sense as the Vickers MMG was still used by infantry battalions in the Aussie Army (unlike the rest of the commonwealth armies) - so the Carrier platoon of a given Aussie infantry battalion (which IIRC in 41 was 19 carriers) would have been responsible for moving them around

Also Australia did continue to make its own version of the MK VII Vickers so its possible enough were produced to arm all of the carriers in an infantry battalion

But the carrier was not an AFV it was an armoured tracked utility vehicle and would be found out against even light opposition if it was used that way

Meanwhile in Australia: "shut it ya whinging pom...something something another prawn on the barbie and pass me a cold one"

View attachment 820990
There must be a way to stick even more firepower on that Carrier… /s
 
That would make sense as the Vickers MMG was still used by infantry battalions in the Aussie Army (unlike the rest of the commonwealth armies) - so the Carrier platoon of a given Aussie infantry battalion (which IIRC in 41 was 19 carriers) would have been responsible for moving them around

Also Australia did continue to make its own version of the MK VII Vickers so its possible enough were produced to arm all of the carriers in an infantry battalion

But the carrier was not an AFV it was an armoured tracked utility vehicle and would be found out against even light opposition if it was used that way

Meanwhile in Australia: "shut it ya whinging pom...something something another prawn on the barbie and pass me a cold one"

View attachment 820990
I see they've got the long range beer can thrower fitted to better deliver refreshments to the front line.
 
Two.Questions:
1. What gun is that?
2. That's on Mk VI Light Tank chassis isn't it? Is that same suspension as carrier? Or is it same design but heavier?
1. Its a 10.5cm LeFH 16
2. It might very well be a Mk VI light tank chassis in the sense that it is actually a Mk VI light tank chassis - while similar it is not a carrier

Looks like the Germans could not after all better our beer loving antipodean BBQ experts

Adolf is not pleased

1679861912368.png
 

Ramp-Rat

Monthly Donor
I believe that the gun shown on the rear of the carrier is a 2 pounder, I remember the Chieftain doing a video about one that is in the Australian Armoured Museum.
RR.
 
I believe that is this vehicle.
I believe that the gun shown on the rear of the carrier is a 2 pounder, I remember the Chieftain doing a video about one that is in the Australian Armoured Museum.
RR.
Carrier, 2 Pdr, tank attack, in fact, an oddball Australian vehicle that saw limited production 1943-44. Most of the vehicles were supplied to the Nationalist Chinese. It was a lengthened carrier with a 2pdr anti-tank gun mounted on the rear with the suspension units move slight rearward and the engine moved forward to the sponson on the left-side front. It was also used for the 3in Mortar Carrier, with the mortar on a turn table to the rear.
 
Top