Sir John Valentine Carden survives.

[MarcH]

You're not going to get a Meteor engine any earlier than OTL. That's a state of the art engine and the Air Ministry won't let them go. Like it or not without massive hindsight the Nuffield Liberty is the most likely engine to be used in an early war tank, simply because there is a large effort being put into getting it into production already.

It would probably initially be armoured to roughly the same level as the Crusader, which would keep the weight down and help with not overstressing the engine. All this can be upgraded later as better engines become available.

Wasn't necessarily meaning the meteor but it's not impossible, in somevways it's actually quite feasible.

More that an aero derived engine will be used because Nuffield isn't involved (thankfully). As for armour Carden has already shown plans for a tank with 80mm+ frontal armour. Given he is designing this as a response to the infantry tank specification that level of armour is a must.

 

[Cryhavoc101]

Well, you need to account for Nazi Power armour...

And whatever horrors they have conjured from their foolish dalliances with the occult

 

[Cryhavoc101]

Regarding Meteor

Halfords were originally one of the leading firms involved in Jet Engine development

RR not unsurprisingly were originally the leading firm involved in the development of Meteor

OTL they eventually swapped - with Meteor going to Halfords and RR who were better suited through their development of superchargers on Merlin and Griffon getting Jet engine development but did not have 'time' for 'tank engines'

Make the change sooner / earlier and both projects benefit

 

[brazen]

It was Rover not Halfords, Halford was set up between Frank Halford and De Havilland to develop Jet engines.

This is what I meant by using non aerospace casting, forging and machining facilities to make a Meteor or Fairey Prince derived Tank engine.

Unless you meant Halfords Auto centers, which means the tank will need bulbs and an aircon regas with every new engine.

 

[Cryhavoc101]

It was Rover not Halfords, Halford was set up between Frank Halford and De Havilland to develop Jet engines.

This is what I meant by using non aerospace casting, forging and machining facilities to make a Meteor or Fairey Prince derived Tank engine.

Unless you meant Halfords Auto centers, which means the tank will need bulbs and an aircon regas with every new engine.

You are quite right it was Rover!

They and RR famously exchanged projects/responsibilities and 'factory's' over a gentleman's hand shake

I used to work for Halfords many moons ago - the thought of them involved in jet engines <Shudders>

 

[allanpcameron]

21 October 1937. 16:00hrs. Farnborough, England.

The A13E2 had spent the last week undergoing testing. With 14mm of armour the total weight of the tank was 14 tons. The suspension, based on the Christie model, was judged capable of being stiffened up allowing it to take more weight. The designers at Nuffield however had built the suspension close to the design weight, so as it stood it would struggle to deal with any improvements.

Unlike the A13E1, the original Christie machine brought from the USA, the nose of the A13E2 had been squared off, though no hull machine gun had been added. The driver’s position was in the center of the hull, with the box shaped head cover for the driver sticking out above the glacis plate. The turret, with the 2-pdr and co-axial Vickers .303 was the same style as the A9 and was riveted, though it differed from the A9 as it had a large drum-shaped cupola added.

The transmission differed from the Christie model to include a constant mesh gearbox, and the tank was powered by Nuffield’s re-worked Liberty engine, achieving 411bhp at 2000rpm. Amal flame traps had been built into the air intakes to protect the air-cleaners. The suspension spacing had been rearranged to suit the new hull shape and shock absorbers built by Newton and Bennet has been added to soften the rebound effects. The tank ran on the original Christie size track and sprockets, though the second prototype (A13E3) was promised with a new type of double link track.

Most of the problems that had been identified during the testing stemmed from the ability of the tank to exceed 35mph, most of which could be solved by governing the engine to not exceed 30mph. The engine's power was judged to be very good, and this model's engine worked well. The A13E3 would take on board many of the criticisms and make the necessary changes before production would be contemplated. For the school of thought that Giffard Martel had been promoting since seeing the Soviet BT2s in action, the A13E2 looked like the answer to a prayer.

Below is the link to the Tank Museum's Tank Chat about the A13. All this is as OTL.
https://youtu.be/mjacUnmi2i

 

[marathag]

The RAF is looking at a marine version of the Lion for fast launches ( for rescuing of downed pilots ) so that is an option for a 500hp engine. The "Sea Lion" already exists ( circa 1933 ) and OTL was tweaked up to 600hp by the end of production.

“Mechanised Force” by Fletcher page 125
In 1937 Martel had located a surplus stock of such engines belonging to the RAF: the 12 cylinder Napier Lion type X1A which had its cylinders arranged in three banks of four. Tests by MEE indicated an output of 465 bhp at 2,500 RPM, although it would not run well on service type Grade III petrol (65 Octane gasoline) without modification; in any case it was turned down by the Army as a possible waste of money.

IIRC, it was every spare Lion the RAF had, along with spares, for 500 Pounds

 

[pjmidd]

“Mechanised Force” by Fletcher page 125
In 1937 Martel had located a surplus stock of such engines belonging to the RAF: the 12 cylinder Napier Lion type X1A which had its cylinders arranged in three banks of four. Tests by MEE indicated an output of 465 bhp at 2,500 RPM, although it would not run well on service type Grade III petrol (65 Octane gasoline) without modification; in any case it was turned down by the Army as a possible waste of money.

IIRC, it was every spare Lion the RAF had, along with spares, for 500 Pounds

That's the old aircraft engines they had , the ones I'm talking about are the marine variants used in power boats that the RAF ended up using in its rescue launches.

 

[Peg Leg Pom]

That's the old aircraft engines they had , the ones I'm talking about are the marine variants used in power boats that the RAF ended up using in its rescue launches.

Which the Army obviously decided they didn't want and I've seen nothing yet that would change their minds. We know the Nuffield Liberty is the wrong choice long term, but the Army in 1937 doesn't in either time line. Also a lot of its problems on the Crusader were down to where they put the air intakes causing them to suck up much more sand and dust than they should have done.

 

[MarcH]

Which the Army obviously decided they didn't want and I've seen nothing yet that would change their minds. We know the Nuffield Liberty is the wrong choice long term, but the Army in 1937 doesn't in either time line. Also a lot of its problems on the Crusader were down to where they put the air intakes causing them to suck up much more sand and dust than they should have done.

The army may not want them, or at least not want to pay for them. Doesn't mean someone else won't think they are worth buying to put in tanks.

 

[El Pip]

The army may not want them, or at least not want to pay for them. Doesn't mean someone else won't think they are worth buying to put in tanks.

The Army may not want to buy them, but it will have to fuel them and that's a problem. I'm fairly certain the Lion needed a petrol/benzene mix to run, a standard Lion was shipped to the US in the 20s and tested, they reported it didn't work on then US standard aviation petrol but needed 20% benzene added. I can't find out what exactly is in Grade III pool petrol, beyond the fact it is 65 Octane anyway, but statistically Benzene was <5% of total vehicle fuel used in the UK pre-war so I would be amazed if the cheap 'standard' petrol was anywhere near 20% benzene.

Therefore either the Army has to change pool petrol, and cause problems for everything else it currently runs; give the new tanks their own dedicated fuel supply chain; or re-design and then re-build the Lions to cope with the fuel. None of these options seem good, or cheap, so I can see why the Lion was rejected. I also think this is why anyone who offers them will also be rejected because the practical problems with using them are considerable.

 

[yulzari]

Minor points re assorted comments above.

The Meteor really is a Merlin less superchargers and detuned to run on Pool petrol. Various ancilliaries were cast in iron or fabricated in steel in place of the Merlin aluminium. When Meteor production was spooling up they dipped deeply into obsolete and damaged Merlins to provide blocks, heads, crankshafts etc. Merlin parts which were worn out of tolerance were worked to the easier Meteor tolerances. Some repair methods were allowed in Meteor used parts selection seeing as the RAF has an urgent problem when it breaks at 25,000 feet up while the same problem at ground level is 'b*gger, go and replace the bit that broke'.

The Napier Lion trialed for Pool was not optimised for Pool and yet nearly managed to work adequately on Pool. Probably it could if optimised to work on it. Aviation fuel of the Lion's heydays of the 1920s was not all that different on octane rating to Pool of the 1940s, although with more aromatics.

The Nuffield Liberty showed it's age by the multi part construction methods but was sound - as long as it was not pushed too far. Which is what Nuffields did do to it and didn't help with rubbish ancillaries. When the Crusader came out of service and was put to the task of being a turretless 17 Pounder gun tower it was derated and proved adequately reliable in 1944/5 on it's Nuffield Liberty engines. Thus they could have used the Liberty as long as they did not over rev it or overload it. There are many better engines but the Liberty was not an impossibly bad choice necessarily. Leaves a neat Rover Meteor hole when removed too as in the Cavalier/Centaur/Cromwell of OTL.

 

[marathag]

We know the Nuffield Liberty is the wrong choice long term, but the Army in 1937 doesn't in either time line.

It was known by 1920 that the Lion was far more reliable than the Liberty, and the accessories were all shaft or gear driven, rather than external chains on the Liberty.
Next was power, the Lion did 500hp@2050rpm and 1335ft.lbs of torque at 1730, from 1461 cubic inches, vs the Liberty 400hp@1800 with 1650 cubic inches.
The Navy had over 11,000 Liberty engines warehoused in 1924 when the type was abandoned. Engines in airships were needing to be rebuilt or replaced every 75 hours of operation

Lions were good for 300 hours.
Lions used magnetos, rather than automotive battery breaker. It had four valves per cylinder, rather than two

Libert was a WWI motor, developed in six days.
Lion was a 1920s motor, with fixes for problems found during thr war, like the Sunbeam Arab.

Best thing about the Libery was there ten thousand available, at scrap weight price in the 1930s, and as been abandoned by USN and USAAC, it was public domain, free license.

 

[marathag]

The Napier Lion trialed for Pool was not optimised for Pool and yet nearly managed to work adequately on Pool.

Liberty engines, using breaker point ignition, are easier to adjust by retarding the ignition and changing the advance curve for fuel quality.
That's what allowed Model T to run on Kerosene on up, driver had spark advance lever right on the Steering shaft, along with 4.2C:R. Most Lions had 5.5 compression. Liberty, slightly less.
Magnetos, like on the Lion, much harder to adjust

 

[marathag]

Therefore either the Army has to change pool petrol, and cause problems for everything else it currently runs; give the new tanks their own dedicated fuel supply chain;

Running higher than needed Octane in an engine doesn't hurt it.
And there was later a seperate supply chain, for the Diesel powered tanks.

Soviet Union supplied 70 octane for their gasoline powered tanks in the 1930s, but British had to stick with 63?

 

[MattII]

Plus I've always liked the Churchill, put a better engine in it, maybe the repurposed aero engine from the "Cardentine" and it will be even better. Then Black Prince with a meteor, one can only dream of those landing at normandy

You don't need black prince, you just need to find a way to put a decent-sized turret on Churchill.

 

[MarcH]

You don't need black prince, you just need to find a way to put a decent-sized turret on Churchill.

Well yeah but I still want the Black Prince.

 

[El Pip]

Running higher than needed Octane in an engine doesn't hurt it

The ministry of supply disagrees with you.
http://ww2talk.com/index.php?threads/uk-use-of-mt80.58510/

High octane in principle is not a problem. How that octane is obtained and what is mixed into the fuel can be a problem, as it was in OTL with the switch to MT80 fuel. The problems can be solved, but it's another cost.

The lion ran on petrol-benzene mix, could you check the rest of the fleet and check they are all OK with that and make the required changes? Of course you could. But it's another big expense for a cash strapped service

 

[marathag]

The ministry of supply disagrees with you.
http://ww2talk.com/index.php?threads/uk-use-of-mt80.58510/

High octane in principle is not a problem. How that octane is obtained and what is mixed into the fuel can be a problem, as it was in OTL with the switch to MT80 fuel. The problems can be solved, but it's another cost.

The lion ran on petrol-benzene mix, could you check the rest of the fleet and check they are all OK with that and make the required changes? Of course you could. But it's another big expense for a cash strapped service

That was with US fuel with higher mixes of TEL as a booster to get to 80, rather than the UK moving from 63 to the low 70s, by improving the base fuel.In the UK, the higher octane fuel was Benzole, a mix of Benzene and Toluene, leftovers for the town gas plants. Its a synthetic, sort of. But far higher octane rating equivalent.
Most common was a mix of that fuel and regular pump petrol, 50-50 with an anti-knock rating of 90

 

[Dan]

Its so beautiful

Coming soon as a Tier V premium tank in World Of Tanks hopefully.