The British didn't extend the hull of the tank over the tracks like the Americans did with the Sherman.
Sir John Valentine Carden survives.
- Thread starter allanpcameron
- Start date
- Status
The British didn't extend the hull of the tank over the tracks like the Americans did with the Sherman.
Isn't that because of the Christie suspension, giving no benefits if you extend the hull over the tracks?
I believe the main reason it was done was doctrinal. Britain wanted their tanks a low as possible so keeping the fighting compartment between the tanks really helped with that. Look at a Cromwell next to a Sherman, two broadly similar tanks and see the height difference.
marathag
Banned
OTL they were shocked by the Char B1 and Matilda II, leading to the Tiger.
If they get spanked by medium tanks as well, that shock will be worse
The Japanese didn't have the industry, the Russians needed tanks too quickly to do proper quality control, Germany's Panzer III and Panzer IV were pretty good tanks, but the Panther and Tigers were less so, and the early (and mostly forgettable) American tanks suffered at the 'cult of the machine gun's hands.
What hurt the British most was crap doctrine, but the ministry's love of Christie suspension, and Nuffield's love of the Liberty engine certainly didn't help matters.
Last edited:
The surprising thing about the last above post is that the Italians get a free pass.
Christie suspension did have some advantages. I doubt any other system would have let the Cromwell tank jump Dutch ditches, and the tanks were so fast they were hard to hit. Speed is armour.
Christie suspension did have some advantages. I doubt any other system would have let the Cromwell tank jump Dutch ditches, and the tanks were so fast they were hard to hit. Speed is armour.
Last edited:
Rickshaw didn't mention the Italians. They mostly fall under the same category as the Japanese though.
Fair enough.
found this wonderful relevant film bit
CONSTRUCTION OF VALENTINE TANK BRITISH WWII PROPAGANDA FILM
CONSTRUCTION OF VALENTINE TANK BRITISH WWII PROPAGANDA FILM
10 June 1938. 10:00hrs. Belfast, Northern Ireland.
allanpcameron
Donor
10 June 1938. 10:00hrs. Belfast, Northern Ireland.
The team from Vickers-Armstrong looked around the site that Harland & Wolff were planning on using to build the 50 A9 tanks that had been ordered from them. As with many heavy engineering companies the Belfast shipbuilders had been asked to begin getting involved in tank manufacture as part of the “augment the war potential” program. With no experience at all of building tanks the Vickers team had been brought in to help them set up production from scratch.
The Harland and Wolff company had been moving beyond their core shipbuilding work over the past few years. In 1936 they had entered the aircraft business with Short Brothers, with a new company called Short and Harland. This had been winning orders for the Bristol Bombay bombers and had eyes on the flying boat market. They had also bought over the old Coventry Ordnance Works in Scotstoun in Glasgow, which had brought them into building naval guns and mountings for the Royal Navy. Taking on the building of tanks was another expansion of their capability.
The Carden designed A9 was lightly armoured, and its riveted construction was well within the capacity of the Belfast workforce. That was one of the first questions the Vickers men asked, what the make up of the workforce was going to be? Obviously by expanding beyond their core business would they need to take on new workers, who would have to be trained. The Harland and Wolff team were planning on using some of their experienced shipyard men to leaven up the new workers as well as training them.
The next question that the Vickers men had to ask was how the Belfast firm was getting on with the supply chain. Building the tank itself was only part of the task, they would also need to get the engines, gearbox and many other parts from a variety of companies. The Harland and Wolff people had been making a list of components that would need to be sourced, and which companies would need to be approached. The Vickers men, from experience, warned them that AEC, who made the engines could be slow, so it was better to order from them early and have the engines in stock before they were actually needed.
One of the Harland and Wolff men asked how long did the Vickers men think it would take them to produce the first tank. There was a bit of sucking teeth and thoughtful looks around them at the empty space. Realistically, it would probably take twelve months before the first tank could be delivered. The question wasn’t just when the first tank could be delivered, it was also how many tanks the new production line could deliver per month. If the order remained at 50, looking at the numbers of workers that Harland and Wolff were putting onto the line, the Vickers men reckoned they would only be producing one tank per week, maybe five a month. So, if the first tank rolled out in June 1939, then production would be complete around April 1940. Having said that, the way things were in Europe and with the Italians in East Africa, the Vickers men were sure that the order for 50 would be augmented before the end of the year.
The team from Vickers-Armstrong looked around the site that Harland & Wolff were planning on using to build the 50 A9 tanks that had been ordered from them. As with many heavy engineering companies the Belfast shipbuilders had been asked to begin getting involved in tank manufacture as part of the “augment the war potential” program. With no experience at all of building tanks the Vickers team had been brought in to help them set up production from scratch.
The Harland and Wolff company had been moving beyond their core shipbuilding work over the past few years. In 1936 they had entered the aircraft business with Short Brothers, with a new company called Short and Harland. This had been winning orders for the Bristol Bombay bombers and had eyes on the flying boat market. They had also bought over the old Coventry Ordnance Works in Scotstoun in Glasgow, which had brought them into building naval guns and mountings for the Royal Navy. Taking on the building of tanks was another expansion of their capability.
The Carden designed A9 was lightly armoured, and its riveted construction was well within the capacity of the Belfast workforce. That was one of the first questions the Vickers men asked, what the make up of the workforce was going to be? Obviously by expanding beyond their core business would they need to take on new workers, who would have to be trained. The Harland and Wolff team were planning on using some of their experienced shipyard men to leaven up the new workers as well as training them.
The next question that the Vickers men had to ask was how the Belfast firm was getting on with the supply chain. Building the tank itself was only part of the task, they would also need to get the engines, gearbox and many other parts from a variety of companies. The Harland and Wolff people had been making a list of components that would need to be sourced, and which companies would need to be approached. The Vickers men, from experience, warned them that AEC, who made the engines could be slow, so it was better to order from them early and have the engines in stock before they were actually needed.
One of the Harland and Wolff men asked how long did the Vickers men think it would take them to produce the first tank. There was a bit of sucking teeth and thoughtful looks around them at the empty space. Realistically, it would probably take twelve months before the first tank could be delivered. The question wasn’t just when the first tank could be delivered, it was also how many tanks the new production line could deliver per month. If the order remained at 50, looking at the numbers of workers that Harland and Wolff were putting onto the line, the Vickers men reckoned they would only be producing one tank per week, maybe five a month. So, if the first tank rolled out in June 1939, then production would be complete around April 1940. Having said that, the way things were in Europe and with the Italians in East Africa, the Vickers men were sure that the order for 50 would be augmented before the end of the year.
Thanks for sharing that
So single use machine tools - no changing of the machine tool use throughout the life time of that production run - for all the components
Meaning that at each stage a relatively untrained man (or young lady) with no letters after their names could be used in that stage of production and could be replaced easily
If I recall correctly in 1940 Britain tried to get America to build British tanks for use by Britain and America refused. Part of the reason was that when tested the Americans were't impressed by the British tanks or they performed poorly compared to prototype US tanks. I think that is correct or close enough, I could be way off though.
Now given the likely adoption of the Valiant and it likely being a very good tank would that change anything? For a start the M3 is less likely to see serious production. That tank is definitely inferior to the Valiant. Would the Americans be more willing to build the Valiant? it is a good design and will have likely seen combat. At worst agreeing to build it let's them get a really good look at the tank so it helps their own designs. If they do agree to build it would that have any effect on the M4? if they can fit the 75mm in the Valiant why wait for the M4 when you can have the Valiant now? I admit the likelihood of the Americans adopting a British design is very low at best but it wont be a complete non starter here.
Thought's? i know i'm getting a bit ahead of thing's here but it's something that just come to me and wondered what your opinions would be.
Now given the likely adoption of the Valiant and it likely being a very good tank would that change anything? For a start the M3 is less likely to see serious production. That tank is definitely inferior to the Valiant. Would the Americans be more willing to build the Valiant? it is a good design and will have likely seen combat. At worst agreeing to build it let's them get a really good look at the tank so it helps their own designs. If they do agree to build it would that have any effect on the M4? if they can fit the 75mm in the Valiant why wait for the M4 when you can have the Valiant now? I admit the likelihood of the Americans adopting a British design is very low at best but it wont be a complete non starter here.
Thought's? i know i'm getting a bit ahead of thing's here but it's something that just come to me and wondered what your opinions would be.
marathag
Banned
You can google on Detroit Tank Arsenal to see what a 'real' tank production line looked like in 1941.
'Replaced easily' is the goal. Note the lack of any thought of OSHA and workplace safety at this time.
Glyndwr01
Banned
The skilled workers are the Tool and Die setters who set up the machines for the workers.
I have great admiration for the Chrysler Car company and what they managed to achieve and how they went about it - a company who had never built anything larger than a car let alone a sodding tank
However the Valentine design was intended to leverage 'existing industry' and existing methods as quickly and as expediently as possible - while larger factory's and production facilities (edit) built what where supposed to be the main designs - Crusader and Churchill etc
I would like to have seen a 'Castle Bromwich/Detroit' style tank factory established somewhere in Northern England during the late 30s for AFV production.
Does not have to be a 113 acre site but the ability to spam out tanks in their hundreds a month by 1940 would have paid dividends
Last edited:
Yes exactly and you can have a high ratio of unskilled to skilled workers so long as you enjoy single use machine tooling that does not have to be repeatedly reset for different parts of the process.
Did you see the suspension spring getting compressed manually using a ratchet wrench? Very slow. No pneumatic driven tools. No hydraulic/lever press for compressing the springs. Chain and pully winches worked by hand at a nice slow ratio. No moving rollers or belts in evidence. Heavy lifting in wooden tray boxes.
Last edited:
And able to be done in any of thousands of small workshops before been sent off for final assembly of the tank in the local railway works with a little fine tuning via lump hammer.
- Status