The Forge of Weyland
- Thread starter Astrodragon
- Start date
France built 110 S-35's in 1940. With an earlier start, some help on castings, and some changes in priority they could get a battalion or two of S-40's available by the start of Case Yellow. Not a lot, but better than nothing. Of course, they will probably be in the wrong place...
They would have less S-35's though.
They would have less S-35's though.
marathag
Banned
Being able to produce, and actually shipping units, two different things.
And the US Radio was the best that could be had, anywhere.
marathag
Banned
With the subterfuge of the Flying Tigers or the earlier Spanish conflict, what I read, Radios were not a problem in themselves.
No. The 37 act has no time limit but it only applies to belligerents.
The issue though is the radios are US military design and this early possibly manufacture being sold to a foreign military, which probably requires an isolationist congress to approve. FDR would do it but its going to be a hard sell to Congress. Its not like Douglas Aircraft selling Douglas aircraft IP to a foreign government.
Components or production bottlenecks like valves would be another matter until wartime, when FDR would make it happen. and the French have perfectly good radio design which fit in their vehicles and training schemes so a subcontract to Marconi Canada so Quebeckers can listen to Bing Crosby while slurping putine that happens to turn into a vehicle radio set is possible. And costs less USD which you can then use to buy fighters from Curtiss or whatever.
Quebecois. They get sensitive about that
For shame sir! You scarf poutine. You do not slurp!
Though I can't speak for Quebec. You can never tell what those guys will do.
I can understand why the helmet order might not be too popular. Assuming it's the 'Brodie' Helmet, Steel Mark I that rim is going to catch on things inside the tank, since they're not likely to be needing protection from overhead shrapnel how long before someone suggests trimming and/or reshaping it to something vaguely M1 shaped?
Random thought but might they take inspiration from rugby scrum caps? Alternatively someone with a decent memory might remember the 1916 pattern leather tank helmets, although they could likely dispense with the barred visor and chainmail mask.
The Soviet experience would seem to demonstrate that its possible with sufficient resources and political will.
Perhaps a line St Malo to Orleans to the Swiss Border using in part the Loire river.
Interesting. Hadn't come across those before, certainly a better shape. How effective were they in comparison to the American tanker's helmets do you know?
The British tank helmet is basically the same as the HSAT (Airborne helmet) but IIRC utilising a different liner and chinstrap.
Noone knows, noone ever wore it, The US tanker helmet is definitely better than a beret.
The guy in the photo is wearing the helmet but looks to be a cameraman,
The helmets are a quick fix to the problem that squaddies have two speed settings - on and off.
They will work, but be hated, so some better fixes will be tried, and pretty quickly they'll find a shape that works much better.
They will work, but be hated, so some better fixes will be tried, and pretty quickly they'll find a shape that works much better.
August 1939
17th July 1939, War Office
The issue of which guns to fit to the tanks had actually been an ongoing discussion for years. The problem was that there was no gun available that covered all the jobs a tank was expected to do. The most important one was of course fighting other tanks, and the excellent HV3pdr had been developed for this role. The problem was that exercises and tests had shown that when supporting infantry, in addition to protecting them from enemy tanks, the ability to use HE and particularly smoke was very useful. The A11 Cutlass had been designed to carry the 6/18pdr, and this did cover the close support role well, but there were two problems, First, production was not all that was ideal, and secondly it was too large to fit in the main Infantry Support Tank, the A12 Matilda. While it did carry a small number of solid AP shells, there was no intention to fight enemy armour, these were just carried 'in case'.
So the RTC needed two things; another gun suitable for the close support role, and to use a mix of closer support and HV weapons in the tank formations. There had been (at times quite loud) arguments as to the ratio of tanks to CS tanks, and eventually they had decided on one tank to three CS in the A11 formations (since it was expected they would have A10's in close proximity), and two tanks to two CS in the A12 formations, whose role would be to work with and protect the infantry.
There wasn't really an ideal gun available in 1939. A number of ideas were in development, but they needed to decide on the gun now, as A12's were finally starting to arrive from the production line. The best available was a modified QF 3.7" Mountain howitzer. Its recoil, while longer than ideal, was acceptable with the gun fitted with mechanical elevation control, and the 20lb shell was a good support weapon. It helped that smoke and HE rounds were already available, although most of the stock was in India, this could easily be obtained if the fitting was decided upon. The only issue compared to the 6/18 was the low muzzle velocity - at under 1,000fps it wouldn't be destroying enemy tanks! However as the CS tanks would be working with tanks who were carrying an AP gun, this wasn't thought to be a major problem.
In the longer term, an obvious solution was a gun that could be used in both roles, then they wouldn't have to worry about keeping various types of tanks working together. However the HV3pdr, while a very good AP gun, only carried a small HE round. Better than nothing, true, and it might be effective in limited circumstances, but it really wasn't a big enough HE charge. The 18pd shell was a fine CS round, but needed a higher velocity if it was to be a true AT weapon. The only gun that seemed to have possibilities was the new 6pdr, expected for trials towards the end of the year. An HE load would still be a bit small, but there were some ways of increasing this, and while this would probably also entail dual sights, this was a far less restrictive condition than needing another tank! The Ordnance people were asked to look at some creative ways to increase the HE (and also the smoke) load in a 6pdr shell, to see what could be done.
1st August 1939, War Office
While the current business was to get as much equipment as possible available for use, especially tanks, the long term development needs of the RTC couldn't be put completely aside. So Sir John Carden and his team from Vickers had arrived to explain some of the possibilities for improving the current models once time allowed.
They were relieved to find that this had actually been thought about when the Sabre and Cutlass tanks were being designed. Sir John had been emphatic that allowance was needed to allow a useful upgrade without having to design a completely new tank, which also gave more time to design a successful replacement.
The first question was about the speed, the Army wanted to know if the tanks could go faster. The Vickers men heroically refrained from pointing out that the Army had decided on a less powerful engine for the A11. The A10 could have a larger engine fitted, but it would need a redesign, the Kiwi Mk3 was the most powerful available engine that would fit. A petrol version would provide more power, but this would need at least 6 months development, require new production facilities, and reduce the range of the tank unless the fuel tank was enlarged. While it could be done, they suggested it was rather a waste of resources. The A11 Cutlass could certainly have a more powerful engine, but if they wanted to keep the same ammunition load and range, again redesign would be necessary.
Instead the Vickers team suggested a couple of options. The A10 Sabre was currently as well-protected as any other cruiser tank, with 50mm of frontal armour. It could be increased to about 60mm, although the additional weight would reduce the speed. However the turret had been designed to take a larger gun, and the 6pdr HV gun currently being developed would fit nicely. That way, it could kill enemy tanks at a longer range, and so increasing its own protection wouldn't be so important. It would be a fairly easy change, requiring new turret and gun fittings, but no major modifications.
The A11 Cutlass could again be fitted with the 6pdr in place of the HV3pdr or 6/18pdr currently fitted. This would be even simpler than modifying the Sabre, and once the 6pdr was coming off the production line, they saw no reason why new marks of tank carrying it couldn't replace the current models. If carefully handled, it wouldn't slow production as long as a proper appreciation was made of the changes to the equipment and fittings were done.
These changes, while improving the offensive power of the tanks, did nothing for the other components. Rather than just putting more on the existing chassis, Sir John's team suggested a new tank. This would actually be a modification of the A11 Cutlass, so would need far fewer new parts and hence be quicker into production. Laying out some drawings, then pointed out the differences. The suspension would be similar, but using the VVSS system Nuffield had been using. They'd tested this, and it definitely gave a smoother ride and allowed more speed. To provide that, they would install the 500hp diesel originally designed for the Mk1 Cutlass. This was fully developed, so just needed production facilities. The new suspension and engine meant they would lengthen the tank a foot or so to take them while retaining the original internal space.
With 50% more engine power, they could increase the armour protection and weight while keeping up a good speed. They could increase the frontal armour slightly to 75mm, as on the A12 Matilda, as well as adding some extra protection to the turret. For the gun, the 6/18pdr was still a very good support weapon, but the new 6pdr would be the HV gun option. They had heard about the possibility of better HE shells for the gun, and that would make the 6pdr option more favourable. Going to the 6pdr would actually allow more shell storage, something the RTC always wanted. With those changes, they expected a speed similar to the current Sabre, 20mph on rough terrain and 28mph on road, the power to weight ratio was similar. The weight should be around 27-28 tons. The only drawback was that any further increase in protection or firepower would really need a new, larger design - the 60" turret ring would be at its limit with the 6pdr - , but this tank would give them more time to develop its successor as a new vehicle.
The best thing, from the Army's point of view, was that by using so much of the existing tank development time should be greatly reduced. Vickers suggested that they could provide a prototype in 6 months - they could actually reduce this, but with everything else going on they were very stretched. In any case, 6pdrs wouldnt be available until the next year. If the prototype was successful, they could build it in the new plant expansion they were expecting to start up in the Autumn of 1940, with the first tanks available by Xmas. This wouldn't require any reductions in existing capacity to ramp up to the new tank. Of course, other urgent needs were taking priority, but they would give the suggestions serious thought. They asked that Vickers work on the new turret mechanisms for the 6pdr as soon as they could fit the work in, but it wasn't required urgently. The prototype 6pdrs were expected at the end of the year, and they would be supplied with some once they were available.
15th August 1939 Egypt
The first contingent of Indian troops arrive in Egypt to reinforce the defences of the Suez Canal. The intention is to build the force up to a full Corp of three Divisions, one of them Armoured, but at the moment the chance of getting more troops from Britain seems small. The situation for the armour is fortunately a bit better. They had 70 of the new A13 Scimitar tank with the regiment, and training with them was going well. The training section had its full allocation of tanks, and 10 tanks a month were arriving at Alexandria. They had been promised another 150 in due course, enough to equip an Armoured Division. The picture for all the supporting vehicles needed was not as good; it seemed that everything that could be made was being swallowed up by the rapacious maw of the Home Army, so they were having to make do with old equipment and whatever they could rig up. They'd been told not to expect any of the new Armoured Cars for a while, instead they were carrying on with the Morris and their collection of light tanks. The good news was that the Italians weren't doing much better.
The issue of which guns to fit to the tanks had actually been an ongoing discussion for years. The problem was that there was no gun available that covered all the jobs a tank was expected to do. The most important one was of course fighting other tanks, and the excellent HV3pdr had been developed for this role. The problem was that exercises and tests had shown that when supporting infantry, in addition to protecting them from enemy tanks, the ability to use HE and particularly smoke was very useful. The A11 Cutlass had been designed to carry the 6/18pdr, and this did cover the close support role well, but there were two problems, First, production was not all that was ideal, and secondly it was too large to fit in the main Infantry Support Tank, the A12 Matilda. While it did carry a small number of solid AP shells, there was no intention to fight enemy armour, these were just carried 'in case'.
So the RTC needed two things; another gun suitable for the close support role, and to use a mix of closer support and HV weapons in the tank formations. There had been (at times quite loud) arguments as to the ratio of tanks to CS tanks, and eventually they had decided on one tank to three CS in the A11 formations (since it was expected they would have A10's in close proximity), and two tanks to two CS in the A12 formations, whose role would be to work with and protect the infantry.
There wasn't really an ideal gun available in 1939. A number of ideas were in development, but they needed to decide on the gun now, as A12's were finally starting to arrive from the production line. The best available was a modified QF 3.7" Mountain howitzer. Its recoil, while longer than ideal, was acceptable with the gun fitted with mechanical elevation control, and the 20lb shell was a good support weapon. It helped that smoke and HE rounds were already available, although most of the stock was in India, this could easily be obtained if the fitting was decided upon. The only issue compared to the 6/18 was the low muzzle velocity - at under 1,000fps it wouldn't be destroying enemy tanks! However as the CS tanks would be working with tanks who were carrying an AP gun, this wasn't thought to be a major problem.
In the longer term, an obvious solution was a gun that could be used in both roles, then they wouldn't have to worry about keeping various types of tanks working together. However the HV3pdr, while a very good AP gun, only carried a small HE round. Better than nothing, true, and it might be effective in limited circumstances, but it really wasn't a big enough HE charge. The 18pd shell was a fine CS round, but needed a higher velocity if it was to be a true AT weapon. The only gun that seemed to have possibilities was the new 6pdr, expected for trials towards the end of the year. An HE load would still be a bit small, but there were some ways of increasing this, and while this would probably also entail dual sights, this was a far less restrictive condition than needing another tank! The Ordnance people were asked to look at some creative ways to increase the HE (and also the smoke) load in a 6pdr shell, to see what could be done.
1st August 1939, War Office
While the current business was to get as much equipment as possible available for use, especially tanks, the long term development needs of the RTC couldn't be put completely aside. So Sir John Carden and his team from Vickers had arrived to explain some of the possibilities for improving the current models once time allowed.
They were relieved to find that this had actually been thought about when the Sabre and Cutlass tanks were being designed. Sir John had been emphatic that allowance was needed to allow a useful upgrade without having to design a completely new tank, which also gave more time to design a successful replacement.
The first question was about the speed, the Army wanted to know if the tanks could go faster. The Vickers men heroically refrained from pointing out that the Army had decided on a less powerful engine for the A11. The A10 could have a larger engine fitted, but it would need a redesign, the Kiwi Mk3 was the most powerful available engine that would fit. A petrol version would provide more power, but this would need at least 6 months development, require new production facilities, and reduce the range of the tank unless the fuel tank was enlarged. While it could be done, they suggested it was rather a waste of resources. The A11 Cutlass could certainly have a more powerful engine, but if they wanted to keep the same ammunition load and range, again redesign would be necessary.
Instead the Vickers team suggested a couple of options. The A10 Sabre was currently as well-protected as any other cruiser tank, with 50mm of frontal armour. It could be increased to about 60mm, although the additional weight would reduce the speed. However the turret had been designed to take a larger gun, and the 6pdr HV gun currently being developed would fit nicely. That way, it could kill enemy tanks at a longer range, and so increasing its own protection wouldn't be so important. It would be a fairly easy change, requiring new turret and gun fittings, but no major modifications.
The A11 Cutlass could again be fitted with the 6pdr in place of the HV3pdr or 6/18pdr currently fitted. This would be even simpler than modifying the Sabre, and once the 6pdr was coming off the production line, they saw no reason why new marks of tank carrying it couldn't replace the current models. If carefully handled, it wouldn't slow production as long as a proper appreciation was made of the changes to the equipment and fittings were done.
These changes, while improving the offensive power of the tanks, did nothing for the other components. Rather than just putting more on the existing chassis, Sir John's team suggested a new tank. This would actually be a modification of the A11 Cutlass, so would need far fewer new parts and hence be quicker into production. Laying out some drawings, then pointed out the differences. The suspension would be similar, but using the VVSS system Nuffield had been using. They'd tested this, and it definitely gave a smoother ride and allowed more speed. To provide that, they would install the 500hp diesel originally designed for the Mk1 Cutlass. This was fully developed, so just needed production facilities. The new suspension and engine meant they would lengthen the tank a foot or so to take them while retaining the original internal space.
With 50% more engine power, they could increase the armour protection and weight while keeping up a good speed. They could increase the frontal armour slightly to 75mm, as on the A12 Matilda, as well as adding some extra protection to the turret. For the gun, the 6/18pdr was still a very good support weapon, but the new 6pdr would be the HV gun option. They had heard about the possibility of better HE shells for the gun, and that would make the 6pdr option more favourable. Going to the 6pdr would actually allow more shell storage, something the RTC always wanted. With those changes, they expected a speed similar to the current Sabre, 20mph on rough terrain and 28mph on road, the power to weight ratio was similar. The weight should be around 27-28 tons. The only drawback was that any further increase in protection or firepower would really need a new, larger design - the 60" turret ring would be at its limit with the 6pdr - , but this tank would give them more time to develop its successor as a new vehicle.
The best thing, from the Army's point of view, was that by using so much of the existing tank development time should be greatly reduced. Vickers suggested that they could provide a prototype in 6 months - they could actually reduce this, but with everything else going on they were very stretched. In any case, 6pdrs wouldnt be available until the next year. If the prototype was successful, they could build it in the new plant expansion they were expecting to start up in the Autumn of 1940, with the first tanks available by Xmas. This wouldn't require any reductions in existing capacity to ramp up to the new tank. Of course, other urgent needs were taking priority, but they would give the suggestions serious thought. They asked that Vickers work on the new turret mechanisms for the 6pdr as soon as they could fit the work in, but it wasn't required urgently. The prototype 6pdrs were expected at the end of the year, and they would be supplied with some once they were available.
15th August 1939 Egypt
The first contingent of Indian troops arrive in Egypt to reinforce the defences of the Suez Canal. The intention is to build the force up to a full Corp of three Divisions, one of them Armoured, but at the moment the chance of getting more troops from Britain seems small. The situation for the armour is fortunately a bit better. They had 70 of the new A13 Scimitar tank with the regiment, and training with them was going well. The training section had its full allocation of tanks, and 10 tanks a month were arriving at Alexandria. They had been promised another 150 in due course, enough to equip an Armoured Division. The picture for all the supporting vehicles needed was not as good; it seemed that everything that could be made was being swallowed up by the rapacious maw of the Home Army, so they were having to make do with old equipment and whatever they could rig up. They'd been told not to expect any of the new Armoured Cars for a while, instead they were carrying on with the Morris and their collection of light tanks. The good news was that the Italians weren't doing much better.
Good update, though I am disappointed about the lack of development of a native 75mm gun for further tank use.
If you're planning on working with France, ammo sharing wouldn't be a bad idea.
The 3.7" would make a great CS gun. It has comparable characteristics to the early 88mm guns and the Italian 90/53 and is already available. Any thoughts on developing it further? Seeing a British gun carrier with one of those would be cool, maybe a Churchill GC equivilent?
Hopefully the 6pdr will be put in to production earlier, without a Dunkirk panic disrupting plans.
If you're planning on working with France, ammo sharing wouldn't be a bad idea.
The 3.7" would make a great CS gun. It has comparable characteristics to the early 88mm guns and the Italian 90/53 and is already available. Any thoughts on developing it further? Seeing a British gun carrier with one of those would be cool, maybe a Churchill GC equivilent?
Hopefully the 6pdr will be put in to production earlier, without a Dunkirk panic disrupting plans.
Why do they currently want a 75mmm gun?
Its not a British calibre
The upcoming 6pdr is a better hole puncher
The 6/18pdr is a better CS weapon.
Its not a British calibre
The upcoming 6pdr is a better hole puncher
The 6/18pdr is a better CS weapon.
The 6pdr is expected to have the prototypes ready by the end of 1939 -its a little advanced. Production would start around June-July, depending on what priority it gets.
Dunkirk panic? Why should they panic over a small French seaside town?
Dunkirk panic? Why should they panic over a small French seaside town?
Last edited: