I was curious about this, and googled it. Is this what was in the original timeline the L3/33?
https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/italy/Carro_Veloce_L3-33.php
Sir John Valentine Carden survives.
- Thread starter allanpcameron
- Start date
- Status
https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/italy/Carro_Veloce_L3-33.php
Derek Pullem
Donor
If the bunker has an AT gun capable of penetrating 50 mm armour then it need something other than a flamethrower tank to work it over.
which you won't know until you go boom?
matilda ii would seem a better candidate.
Sooty
Banned
Matilda Frog
The Matilda Frog was a flamethrower tank produced in Australia, around the A12 Matilda infantry tank Mk II.
www.historyofwar.org
The Australians produced a number of specialised versions of the Matilda, under the overall designation of 'Circus Equipment'. The standard European flamethrower tanks, with a separate fuel container towed behind the tank, wasn't suitable for use in the jungle. The 'Frog' thus carried the flame projector and eighty gallons of fuel within the turret, along with a single crew member.
Flame Thrower and-or Gun, no problem, enter the Sherman Crocodile,
The spares vs tanks issue is one the Germans had in spades
Its fine if you are able to pick when you are fighting and have loads of time between battles
However its a different matter when the action is happening think and fast or you are haveing to conduct a retreat
Having 120 tanks on day 1 sounds good - until you get to day 5 and you are down to 40 with another 60 that could be easily fixed but you have no spares whilst the otherside now have 70 tanks because they managed to repair a lot of their lightly damaged tanks.
It was exacibated by the difficulty of conducting maintance and repairs on a number of the German designs. The road wheels on a Panther were great for spreading the weight of the tank and reducing ground pressure - but a real pain to replace if it was not an outside wheel that suffered damage.
Its fine if you are able to pick when you are fighting and have loads of time between battles
However its a different matter when the action is happening think and fast or you are haveing to conduct a retreat
Having 120 tanks on day 1 sounds good - until you get to day 5 and you are down to 40 with another 60 that could be easily fixed but you have no spares whilst the otherside now have 70 tanks because they managed to repair a lot of their lightly damaged tanks.
It was exacibated by the difficulty of conducting maintance and repairs on a number of the German designs. The road wheels on a Panther were great for spreading the weight of the tank and reducing ground pressure - but a real pain to replace if it was not an outside wheel that suffered damage.
Hard to balance the choices here.....
As you get a specific model heading towards obsolescence in the primary theatre, do you immediately re-build all to a supplentary role for that primary theatre (such as self-propelled artillery), or take the entire inventory of the model and shift them as a group to secondary theatres?
I think the answer is completely dependent upon whom you ask.
If I was leading the forces in primary theatre I would want those obsolete tanks Jerry-rigged as quickly as possible to support my fighting units.
If I was in charge of the secondary theatres or training schools, I would want the obsolete units redeployed as quickly as possible.
Perhaps most important is if I was in charge of logistics, I would be requesting a shift to homogeneous units as quickly as possible to ease the burden of spares in each theatre, so again that would mean a deployment.
Very much looking forward to which of these decision makers Allan will allow to make the final call in his wonderful story.
to the list of options one can add keeping the production line active but producing fewer complete units but of engineering models ,more spare parts and moving existing units to secondary theatres.
On flamethrower tanks.
To start off with HERE is a video about the Crocodile and how it was used. It really is worth a watch.
First off it is important to note that while suggestions were made to convert Cruiser tanks into Flamethrower tanks they never went anywhere, for the British it was infantry tanks all the way. I don't know of any official reasoning as to why but I suspect the much heavier armour of the Infantry tanks was a deciding factor.
The critique of
Now given this story so far has only had Vickers looking at non tank AFV's it stands to reason that they will be quickest off the mark with a new design for a flamethrower tank. It will be based on one of their own vehicles, either the Valiant or Victor. Beyond that the Matilda II is not a bad choice but again the logistical issues mean that it would be second fiddle to something that could share spares with the Valiant's, SPG's, SPAAG's and any other vehicle built on the Valiant hull, assuming that is the hull ultimately used. if not then a Victor Crocodile would also make sense as you share parts with the Victor anyway.
To start off with HERE is a video about the Crocodile and how it was used. It really is worth a watch.
First off it is important to note that while suggestions were made to convert Cruiser tanks into Flamethrower tanks they never went anywhere, for the British it was infantry tanks all the way. I don't know of any official reasoning as to why but I suspect the much heavier armour of the Infantry tanks was a deciding factor.
The lack of armour aside on the A15 you have other issues, firstly Vickers won't be the ones making any A15 variant's it will be Nuffield so out of reach of Carden in this story. The issue that waiting for Nuffield presents is that their track record isn't great at the moment. Waiting for them to design something and then fix it's flaws and then get it into production will take a long time. Add in the Logistical issues inherent in adding the A15 to your force creates and I think you have a non starter, yes you can do things like increase the armour by
but that only solves one of the issues and taking the vehicle further away from a tank and stressing the suspension will likely trouble Nuffield to get it right. I really don't see the A15 being used for much ITTL, the production lines could be far better dedicated to building something better anyway.
The critique of
isn't, in my opinion at least a valid critique. You likely wont know what is in the bunker and any flamethrower tank is going to have at most 150 yards of effective range which will be more like 80-100 in reality. At that range 50mm can be penetrated by not only the 5cm Pak 38 but also the 3.7cm Pak 36 so really 50mm is too vulnerable, particularly because the required trailer for the fuel and propellant limit the tanks maneuverability making it more vulnerable. Yes you have the option to attack only places where there are no AT guns but is that really a good way to spend resources, on a tank that can only be uses where there are absolutely no AT guns.
Now given this story so far has only had Vickers looking at non tank AFV's it stands to reason that they will be quickest off the mark with a new design for a flamethrower tank. It will be based on one of their own vehicles, either the Valiant or Victor. Beyond that the Matilda II is not a bad choice but again the logistical issues mean that it would be second fiddle to something that could share spares with the Valiant's, SPG's, SPAAG's and any other vehicle built on the Valiant hull, assuming that is the hull ultimately used. if not then a Victor Crocodile would also make sense as you share parts with the Victor anyway.
Industrialists are chasing contracts here. The government could issue a new requirement for extra spares as a contract, but so could Vickers. Tailor that sub-contract to suit the company struggling to get the go ahead on full production (Vauxhall) and they might regard it as a stop-gap measure to keep the plant busy and train up on tank parts.
Sooty
Banned
I see your Sherman and raise you a Churchill Crocodile.
Churchill Crocodile - Wikipedia
Many of the single men were also sent to the 12 RBC, the new Reg Force Unit that in fact replaced the FGH as an Armour Unit....
So, they are looking for mine clearing equipment. Mine flails were the most well-known and impressive OTL solution. I struggle thinking of anything better. I am assuming thus that they will be the go-to solution here as well? Also, that's a thing one can put on a tank to make it ever more frightening to enemy conscripts.
Also, flamethrower tanks, woo! It's interesting that the Italians primarily used fairly light tanks for that role, whereas to the best of my knowledge, noone else thought that would be a good idea.
And Hobart getting to setting up his 'Funnies' earlier. This can only be good.
What mr Tuomi said - a flamethrower tank needs to get close to the target. to be effective. If the man-portable weapons which can kill it are relatively rare and have a shorter maximal effective range than the flamethrower, it has enough armour. A lightly armoured cavalry tank is a lot more likely to be killed by a lot of things. I am fairly sure that even the biggest anti-tank rifles can potentially penetrate a cavalry tank from certain angles. For AVRE types not meant for direct combat like bridgelayers, it's a different matter.
That said, because the Italians are using lightly armoured flamethrower tanks, if the idea is rushed into production the A15 might be used, I am hardly the #1 person to tell here. I don't think they will persist with A15-based flamethrowers though once they start losing them.
Making the A22 with the standard variant having a 6-pounder turret and a hull mounted flamethrower is not a terrible idea. It will at the least have a niche of it's own. Ideally, if this idea is incorporated while the tank has been sent back to the drawing boards, the flamethrower fuel will be stored not in a trailer but either an internal tank or something similar to a more armoured variant of the external fuel tanks.
That said, a Matilda Frog-alike is probably the best bet, as it gives potentially already extant Matilda II's which are judged to have too weedy a main gun a way to actually be useful on the front lines well into the war.
- Status