Bomber Command spent the first 9 months of the war littering North West Europe with bum fodder. Factories weren't to be bombed (even arms factories) because they were private property. This wasn't the RAF's fault, Chamberlain's Government was insane.
The Forge of Weyland
- Thread starter Astrodragon
- Start date
marathag
Banned
Make me wonder if somewhere, somebody at the Air Ministry was worried about littering charges for the leaflet drops that BC was allowed to do
Upgrading the tanks
December 1938, Upgrading the Tanks
With the likely increase in tank production in the near future, it was time to decide on how to improve the current tanks. Given the intelligence reports on the current German tanks, it wasn't thought that completely new models were needed yet, but a Mark2 version could include quite a few minor improvements.
First for discussion was the Vickers A10*. Vickers had proposed before that they could increase the armour thickness with only a small effect on the speed. There were reports of Germany testing 5cm guns, which would give a performance as least as good as the HV3pdr, so the decision was agreed to increase the frontal armour to 50mm from 40mm, and the side/read from 30mm to 35mm, The latest version of the Kiwi engine would be fitted, giving 360hp, and Vickers thought the speed would still be around 20mph on rough ground and 29mph on the road, which was considered adequate. The weight would go up to 20 tons, which was very heavy for the Army's lighter bridging equipment, but this should be manageable with care. The biggest change was the gun mounting; after the Lulworth Cove tests, a version of the elevation mount from the A11 would be fitted. As this meant there would be more room in the turret, an additional 8 rounds could be carried. The radio would be the new Wireless Set No9 which was just about to go into production, a far superior set to the No7 currently fitted. The tank would also use the new high-strength tracks for better life. Finally a package of small changes and modifications suggested by the MEE and the RTC after using the tanks would be incorporated.
Vickers also suggested they could do an upgrade to the existing tanks. Once they had the new elevation control in production, they could build additional ones for retrofitting; while not easy, they thought the base workshops could do the job, which avoided them having to use the factory. Some of the modifications could be done at the same time - they could see which ones were simple and supply the necessary components. The new tracks could be supplied, and once enough had been produced, the existing radio could be replaced by a No9. They suggested the existing No7's be supplied to the carrier platoons - it was less capable, but the carriers were less likely to need the longer range set. If required, they could also weld an extra plate on the glacis - to give the same protection as the 50mm on the new mark, it would need to be about 13mm thick. Adding extra armour to the side and rear would be a much harder job.
The Army decided to go with the refitting with the exception of appliqué armour, which they didn't consider necessary yet. To avoid confusion, this would be the Mark 2, and the new build with thicker armour the Mark 3.
Next was the Vickers A11. Given its weight and protection, the Army didn't feel the need to increase it yet, and they were worried about the engine power and suspension if the weight increased. The only changes required were the No9 radio set, and again a small package of modifications. Vickers again agreed that most of this could be applied to the existing tanks, but in view of the minimal changes, only the new tanks would be the Mark 2.
The A13 design from Nuffield was a little more controversial. While it had very good speed, the armour protection wasn't as good as the A10*. There were also issues with the engine system. While it had performed acceptably on trials, now the training establishment was using them there were getting concerned about issues with reliability and cooling. Before a Mark2 model could be approved, they wanted this issue investigated fully. One possibility was the Kiwi engine, slightly more powerful than the Nuffield Liberty, it would allow more protection to be added while retaining the current speed. Nuffield were very much against changing the engine, but the real problem was that production of the Kiwi was barely enough to meet the needs of the A10/A11 tanks, and production wouldn't be ramped up for some time. Nuffield also suggested a new Meadows flat 12 engine that was just finishing development. This produced 300hp, and wouldn't have the supply issues of the Kiwi, but it would be a tight fit. Nuffield offered to design a new tank based closely on the A13; this would have 45mm frontal armour and 30mm side and rear, if the Meadows engine were to be used they could widen the tank to give the needed space in the engine compartment. If they were looking at tanks to be deployed to Europe, perhaps they could design it for the continental rail gauge rather than the British one, which would allow a wider tank. Like the A10*, it would come it at about 20tons, but this could be reduced by nearly a ton by using welding instead of the riveting on the A13. They estimated the speed at 18mph on rough ground and 28mph on the road, but were hopeful of improvements in power from the new engine. This tank could also have the new elevation gearing. With the different shape and size of the Vickers equipment, it wouldn't fit easily in the old turret, and it probably wouldn't be practical to try and refit it. While something could be done, it would require a resign of the control mechanism. The Army decided to consider this after attempts had been made to rectify the problems with the Liberty engine package; they needed more tanks, and if the engine could be improved, and some minor improvements added, they were considering a follow-on order for the A13 even if it didn't have the new elevation controls. The final issue was the range - the large petrol engine meant the tank was shorter-legged than the other tanks. Nuffield's engineers had been considering this issue. While there really wasn't more internal room for petrol, the Nuffield engineering team had designed an external drum tank; this would be used during transit and while not in combat, and it would double the tank's range.
The final tank under construction was the A12 by Vulcan. As with the A11, the protection was considered adequate, it was even thicker than the A11. There were also issues with refitting elevation gearing, but Vulcan were confident a new turret would easily take this. As the purpose of the tank was infantry support, and it wasn't supposed to be fighting other tanks, no changes were proposed for the current model. Its production was already late, and the Army would rather have them than wait for an improved version. Once the tank was in proper production, they could look at a redesigned turret.
Both Vulcan and Nuffield promised to provide updates once the immediate problems had been fixed with their tanks.
The issue of new tanks, not considered urgent yet, was put to the firms for consideration, and they were each asked to produce a proposal for new tanks, either infantry, cruiser or both.
With the likely increase in tank production in the near future, it was time to decide on how to improve the current tanks. Given the intelligence reports on the current German tanks, it wasn't thought that completely new models were needed yet, but a Mark2 version could include quite a few minor improvements.
First for discussion was the Vickers A10*. Vickers had proposed before that they could increase the armour thickness with only a small effect on the speed. There were reports of Germany testing 5cm guns, which would give a performance as least as good as the HV3pdr, so the decision was agreed to increase the frontal armour to 50mm from 40mm, and the side/read from 30mm to 35mm, The latest version of the Kiwi engine would be fitted, giving 360hp, and Vickers thought the speed would still be around 20mph on rough ground and 29mph on the road, which was considered adequate. The weight would go up to 20 tons, which was very heavy for the Army's lighter bridging equipment, but this should be manageable with care. The biggest change was the gun mounting; after the Lulworth Cove tests, a version of the elevation mount from the A11 would be fitted. As this meant there would be more room in the turret, an additional 8 rounds could be carried. The radio would be the new Wireless Set No9 which was just about to go into production, a far superior set to the No7 currently fitted. The tank would also use the new high-strength tracks for better life. Finally a package of small changes and modifications suggested by the MEE and the RTC after using the tanks would be incorporated.
Vickers also suggested they could do an upgrade to the existing tanks. Once they had the new elevation control in production, they could build additional ones for retrofitting; while not easy, they thought the base workshops could do the job, which avoided them having to use the factory. Some of the modifications could be done at the same time - they could see which ones were simple and supply the necessary components. The new tracks could be supplied, and once enough had been produced, the existing radio could be replaced by a No9. They suggested the existing No7's be supplied to the carrier platoons - it was less capable, but the carriers were less likely to need the longer range set. If required, they could also weld an extra plate on the glacis - to give the same protection as the 50mm on the new mark, it would need to be about 13mm thick. Adding extra armour to the side and rear would be a much harder job.
The Army decided to go with the refitting with the exception of appliqué armour, which they didn't consider necessary yet. To avoid confusion, this would be the Mark 2, and the new build with thicker armour the Mark 3.
Next was the Vickers A11. Given its weight and protection, the Army didn't feel the need to increase it yet, and they were worried about the engine power and suspension if the weight increased. The only changes required were the No9 radio set, and again a small package of modifications. Vickers again agreed that most of this could be applied to the existing tanks, but in view of the minimal changes, only the new tanks would be the Mark 2.
The A13 design from Nuffield was a little more controversial. While it had very good speed, the armour protection wasn't as good as the A10*. There were also issues with the engine system. While it had performed acceptably on trials, now the training establishment was using them there were getting concerned about issues with reliability and cooling. Before a Mark2 model could be approved, they wanted this issue investigated fully. One possibility was the Kiwi engine, slightly more powerful than the Nuffield Liberty, it would allow more protection to be added while retaining the current speed. Nuffield were very much against changing the engine, but the real problem was that production of the Kiwi was barely enough to meet the needs of the A10/A11 tanks, and production wouldn't be ramped up for some time. Nuffield also suggested a new Meadows flat 12 engine that was just finishing development. This produced 300hp, and wouldn't have the supply issues of the Kiwi, but it would be a tight fit. Nuffield offered to design a new tank based closely on the A13; this would have 45mm frontal armour and 30mm side and rear, if the Meadows engine were to be used they could widen the tank to give the needed space in the engine compartment. If they were looking at tanks to be deployed to Europe, perhaps they could design it for the continental rail gauge rather than the British one, which would allow a wider tank. Like the A10*, it would come it at about 20tons, but this could be reduced by nearly a ton by using welding instead of the riveting on the A13. They estimated the speed at 18mph on rough ground and 28mph on the road, but were hopeful of improvements in power from the new engine. This tank could also have the new elevation gearing. With the different shape and size of the Vickers equipment, it wouldn't fit easily in the old turret, and it probably wouldn't be practical to try and refit it. While something could be done, it would require a resign of the control mechanism. The Army decided to consider this after attempts had been made to rectify the problems with the Liberty engine package; they needed more tanks, and if the engine could be improved, and some minor improvements added, they were considering a follow-on order for the A13 even if it didn't have the new elevation controls. The final issue was the range - the large petrol engine meant the tank was shorter-legged than the other tanks. Nuffield's engineers had been considering this issue. While there really wasn't more internal room for petrol, the Nuffield engineering team had designed an external drum tank; this would be used during transit and while not in combat, and it would double the tank's range.
The final tank under construction was the A12 by Vulcan. As with the A11, the protection was considered adequate, it was even thicker than the A11. There were also issues with refitting elevation gearing, but Vulcan were confident a new turret would easily take this. As the purpose of the tank was infantry support, and it wasn't supposed to be fighting other tanks, no changes were proposed for the current model. Its production was already late, and the Army would rather have them than wait for an improved version. Once the tank was in proper production, they could look at a redesigned turret.
Both Vulcan and Nuffield promised to provide updates once the immediate problems had been fixed with their tanks.
The issue of new tanks, not considered urgent yet, was put to the firms for consideration, and they were each asked to produce a proposal for new tanks, either infantry, cruiser or both.
While these improvements will give them some good tanks, they aren't going to be arriving until late 39 at the earliest. They also aren't that much better than German tanks - the A10*Mk3 is basically the later 1940 PzIII with the 50mm gun and applique/thicker armour, the A11 the PzIV with the thicker armour.
Asian Jumbo
Monthly Donor
Why did you think we were so keen to keep the US on our side... close call, that one....
Driftless
Donor
We have enough lawyers in the US where I'm surprised their availability isn't treated like a commodity on the futures markets... You know, betting on the relative size of law school graduating classes in the same way they bet on the size of the soy bean crop.
Wouldn't an Army of American lawyers desert the first time they heard an ambulance go past?
Hmmm.
No-one seems interested in tanks.
I guess I need to start writing that piece on the Armoured Mobile Bath Units
No-one seems interested in tanks.
I guess I need to start writing that piece on the Armoured Mobile Bath Units
In peace time, aren't US accident compensation lawyers known as 'ambulance chasers'?
Only if you can bring in the St.Trinians school girls to the story.
The tanks sound darn good, but I'm always struggling to remember what ones are what due to the lack of names 
The numbers always throw me and I curse the pre-war British army for not giving their vehicles names!
If they as was said
I see that welding is being used rather than riviting and this is a good thing and the Liberty may well be on its way out. With a better tank armed with a 47mm gun that can hopefully fire a small HE shell the UK will have better tanks, better doctrine and training. But the problem's numbers, the UK's armoured brigades are going to be outnumbered by the Panzers and they've been doing the same kind of thinking, not as motorised for sure but still. the big changer is the APC's though, that could be very useful and will be very popular with the troops too.
The numbers always throw me and I curse the pre-war British army for not giving their vehicles names!If they as was said
If that's true that's still a mark up from what they had at the start of the war, the A11 ITTL is armed with what? I've kinda lost track and not sure whats changed with what. If that's got a HE lobber and is an infantry support tank as per the Panzer IV's original design but better then again, that's a marked step up and a larger vehicle capable of growing into something else in the future.
I see that welding is being used rather than riviting and this is a good thing and the Liberty may well be on its way out. With a better tank armed with a 47mm gun that can hopefully fire a small HE shell the UK will have better tanks, better doctrine and training. But the problem's numbers, the UK's armoured brigades are going to be outnumbered by the Panzers and they've been doing the same kind of thinking, not as motorised for sure but still. the big changer is the APC's though, that could be very useful and will be very popular with the troops too.
They did upgrade some MkVi's in Egypt with the 1 1/2pdr COW gun, but the MkVI is seen as obsolete, they aren't planning to build more. Well, probably
Initially the Italians get to play with the Nuffield A13 , which still looks like a Centurion to the Italian tankettes...