Churchill Infantry Tank

[rickshaw]

Very true.  He also has had very kind words to say about other authors and curators.  He's spoken kindly of Dick Hunnicutt, Simon Dunstan, Steve Zaloga, and Charles Lemons, I know.  Intelligent, well-spoken, and gracious.

As for the Black Prince, it's neat, and I've always liked it, but it really was pointless.  It may have been a battlefield contender like a Tiger I or KV-85 in 1942 or even 1943, but by 1945 the world had long since passed it by.  I'd like to have seen what a Churchill chassis would have made of the Golan Heights or some of the rough terrain in the West Bank in 1967, however.  The Churchill has been considered a better hill-climber than the Sherman or the Centurion, both or which were considered some of the best in the Cold War era and they both struggled in that terrain a few times.

Cheers,

Logan

The Sherman was pretty much a lack-lustre hill-climber.  Churchill OTOH was a mountain goat, able to go where other vehicles would balk.  It was known to appear on hillsides in Tunisia and Italy believed to be impassable to tanks, surprising the Germans.   The Centurion was no mean performer either.  Such abilities are more a function of gearbox than anything else and the Merritt-Brown of the Churchill was a superb piece of machinery by all accounts (its descendents today are used in the Challenger).  I suspect that it would have coped very easily with Golan if it had, had to.

Australia after WWII received over 200 Churchills.  However, none were ever issued to the RAAC.  The RAAC in the economic stringencies of the day preferred to continue to use for the Regular and CMF (Citizen's Militia Forces - roughly equivalent to the US National Guard or the UK's Territorials), the M3 Grant/Lee or the Mathilda (the last Mathilda's were retired BTW in about 1956-7).   The Churchill was considered too big and heavy for use in the Islands  (which the Mathilda was ideal for), too slow for use on the mainland and in the end, undergunned in the face of the emerging Cold War threat.

[nev]

Just to add to the David Fletcher love-fest, I don't know the guy, but I love his Osprey books.  They are the best written, most readable books I've come across in their range.  I enjoyed his book on the Firefly so much that I was going to write to Osprey about it.  In fact, I probably still should.

As for the Churchill, perhaps is best feature was its hill climbing ability, and it really came into its own in Tunisia.  I always thought that was why they were sent to Korea as well.

[rickshaw]

If you like his short Osprey books, I'd recommend you read his longer Armoured Museum (HMSO) publications.  His prose really shines in those.

[Logan Hartke]

The Sherman was pretty much a lack-lustre hill-climber.  Churchill OTOH was a mountain goat, able to go where other vehicles would balk.  It was known to appear on hillsides in Tunisia and Italy believed to be impassable to tanks, surprising the Germans.   The Centurion was no mean performer either.  Such abilities are more a function of gearbox than anything else and the Merritt-Brown of the Churchill was a superb piece of machinery by all accounts (its descendents today are used in the Challenger).  I suspect that it would have coped very easily with Golan if it had, had to.

Not true 100%, actually.  Now the underpowered M4 & M4A1 VVSS were no good at hills, but the M4A3 HVSS and later Israeli HVSS Shermans were no slouches.  The M4A3 HVSS tanks in Korea outperformed the M26 Pershing and M46 Patton tanks when it came to the hills in Korea (as did the Centurions).  The Israeli HVSS Shermans outdid the Centurions in 1967 getting up Beit Kika.  Every Centurion there was tracked or stopped on a boulder, but the Shermans went around and made it to the top--at night!

Just to add to the David Fletcher love-fest, I don't know the guy, but I love his Osprey books.  They are the best written, most readable books I've come across in their range.  I enjoyed his book on the Firefly so much that I was going to write to Osprey about it.  In fact, I probably still should.

His are great, but my favorites are Steve Zaloga and Robert Forczyk.  Fletcher's likely my third favorite Osprey author, though.

Cheers,

Logan

[Logan Hartke]

Come to think of it, I too am wondering what if Israel had acquired Churchill tanks?  What variant(s) would have been prominent?  What kind of modifications would they have applied to the tanks?

That depends on how much history you want to change.  Without changing too much, about your only options are ex-Soviet or ex-Polish Churchills purchased from the Czechs.  Other than that, they'd have to be purchased in the 50s from the British, likely not until the mid-50s, after which the British had retired them.  The British didn't sell much to the nascent Israeli nation.

Cheers,

Logan

[rickshaw]

The British didn't sell much to the nascent Israeli nation.

Except Centurions.  While much of the Israeli fleet was bought second-hand, the sellers had to seek UK permission before they could onsell them (a standard part of most arms sales agreements is that the original manufacturing country has control over who gets to use them).  They were also planning to sell Chieftains.  The Israelis were very interested in them in the late 1960s.  Politics of course prevented greater sales.  Something bothersome about there being more Arabs than Israelis and the Arabs controlling all the oil?

[rickshaw]

Not true 100%, actually.  Now the underpowered M4 & M4A1 VVSS were no good at hills, but the M4A3 HVSS and later Israeli HVSS Shermans were no slouches.  The M4A3 HVSS tanks in Korea outperformed the M26 Pershing and M46 Patton tanks when it came to the hills in Korea (as did the Centurions).  The Israeli HVSS Shermans outdid the Centurions in 1967 getting up Beit Kika.  Every Centurion there was tracked or stopped on a boulder, but the Shermans went around and made it to the top--at night!

Didn't the Israelis rebuild their Shermans with new engines and transmissions?   My recollection of the poor performance of the Sherman was based on comments from an old WO who I served with who had served in Korea.  He was rather disparaging of US Armour and its vehicles as against the support that 3 RAR received as part of the Commonwealth Brigade from the RAC with their Centurions.   He often commented that the Shermans couldn't climb hills whereas the Centurion could.

Just to add to the David Fletcher love-fest, I don't know the guy, but I love his Osprey books.  They are the best written, most readable books I've come across in their range.  I enjoyed his book on the Firefly so much that I was going to write to Osprey about it.  In fact, I probably still should.

His are great, but my favorites are Steve Zaloga and Robert Forczyk.  Fletcher's likely my third favorite Osprey author, though.

Cheers,

Logan

Personal preference but I place Fletcher number 1, Zalogia is IMHO very variable.  I've been reading Zaloga since his first articles were published in MAFVA news and have always found his work often lacks substance.  I suspect small works like Osprey are there for a quick buck for him and are often used as a means of funding his more susbtantial books (where most of the information is).

[deathjester]

Would it be possible to fit the 32-pounder from the A39 Tortoise to a widened Churchill hull.  That gun would probably stop any Warsaw pact vehicle...

[Hman]

They were also planning to sell Chieftains.  The Israelis were very interested in them in the late 1960s.  Politics of course prevented greater sales.  Something bothersome about there being more Arabs than Israelis and the Arabs controlling all the oil?

I understand that they had a Chieftain on trial?

[Hman]

Hi, does anyone have any information of the post war APC prototype based on the Churchill - I understand it was "Kangaroo" ?

[nev]

Come to think of it, I too am wondering what if Israel had acquired Churchill tanks?  What variant(s) would have been prominent?  What kind of modifications would they have applied to the tanks?

That depends on how much history you want to change.  Without changing too much, about your only options are ex-Soviet or ex-Polish Churchills purchased from the Czechs.  Other than that, they'd have to be purchased in the 50s from the British, likely not until the mid-50s, after which the British had retired them.  The British didn't sell much to the nascent Israeli nation.

Ah, but he didn't say "purchase", he said "acquire"   Think of how they got hold of Beaufighters - Israeli arms dealer poses as Hollywood movie producer, buys 4 surplus Beaufighters for use in movie.  Planes take off and are not seen again till they enter Israeli service!

As for the Chieftan - IIRC the Israelis rejected it because its gun was too powerful.  They would be unable to recover enemy tanks and press them into use because not much was left...

[NARSES2]

Hi, does anyone have any information of the post war APC prototype based on the Churchill - I understand it was "Kangaroo" ?

Kangaroo was the WWII APC based on a RAM/Sherman/Priest chasis without the turret/gun. Not heard of a APC based on the Churchill ?

[Hman]

Hi, does anyone have any information of the post war APC prototype based on the Churchill - I understand it was "Kangaroo" ?

Kangaroo was the WWII APC based on a RAM/Sherman/Priest chasis without the turret/gun. Not heard of a APC based on the Churchill ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Churchill_Kangaroo_tank.jpg  I believe it was a post War idea.  All I can find is this?

[rickshaw]

Hi, does anyone have any information of the post war APC prototype based on the Churchill - I understand it was "Kangaroo" ?

Kangaroo was the WWII APC based on a RAM/Sherman/Priest chasis without the turret/gun. Not heard of a APC based on the Churchill ?

Developed post-war as a means of replacing the worn-out/clapped-out Ram (non-capitalised as not an acronym but the actual name) chassis (not many Sherman Kangaroos made and only used in the Italian theatre IIRC).  All the Priests were IIRC returned to the Americans or scrapped.  They weren't as good as the Ram chassis for the conversion.  Not many Churchill Kangaroos produced.  I think it wasn't considered a success and more specialist APCs were on the horizon.

[Hman]

Thanks for the info - any idea why I might find some piccies/plans of Churchill Kangaroo?