Flame-thrower tank

[Scotaidh]

As I was admiring some of the Armor Whifs, I had a thought.  Was the M3 Grant/Lee ever tried as a flame-thrower tank?  It would seem to be a natural for the Crocodile conversion. 

The only question is which gun site to use - the 75mm's sponson, or the 37mm's turret?  I would go with the sponson, myself, but I can see the advantages of the turret-mount. 

[Rick Lowe]

If you mounted the flame gun in the hull and lost the turret entirely - or had an M-8/20 style mg mount, or a skate rail mounted directly in the turret ring - you'd solve the height problems, and presumably it wouldn't be sent up without other armour or infantry support, so the lack of secondary cannon wouldn't be an issue.

[zenrat]

And by mounting it in the hull you could equip it with not just a flame thrower but a flame cannon.

My youthful pyromaniac tendencies are coming back and I can picture building a functioning model with one of those gas stove lighters...

[NARSES2]

Going against the flow, but I'd put the flame thrower in the turret, leaving the 75mm in the sponson. Could then be used in assaults on defensive positions where the gun could be used against bunkers in conjunction with the flame thrower - possibly use a different gun ?

[NARSES2]

/\ 


Could upgrade the sponson gun to 105mm.

Yup I was thinking along those lines. Just need a short range but with a relatively heavy punch. Wouldn't need much penetrative power but maybe squash head ammo ? for bunker busting. Would squash head work on reinforced concrete ? Never really thought about it before.

[Scotaidh]

/\ 


Could upgrade the sponson gun to 105mm.

Yup I was thinking along those lines. Just need a short range but with a relatively heavy punch. Wouldn't need much penetrative power but maybe squash head ammo ? for bunker busting. Would squash head work on reinforced concrete ? Never really thought about it before.

IIRC, there was a version of the Churchill that had a 195mm bunker buster instead of the cannon.  It was an Engineers vehicle, for demoliton.  It basically fired a dustbin of dynamite.

[PR19_Kit]

IIRC, there was a version of the Churchill that had a 195mm bunker buster instead of the cannon.  It was an Engineers vehicle, for demoliton.  It basically fired a dustbin of dynamite.

Even I, with my limited knowledge of tanks etc. know about that one.

It's a Churchill AVRE with a Petard mortar. I made one from an Airfix Churchill a long time ago, simply because they told you how easy it was in one copy of an Aifix mag. 

[Rick Lowe]

Going against the flow, but I'd put the flame thrower in the turret, leaving the 75mm in the sponson. Could then be used in assaults on defensive positions where the gun could be used against bunkers in conjunction with the flame thrower - possibly use a different gun ?

Actually, that's a better idea, yeah.   

/\ 


Could upgrade the sponson gun to 105mm.

Yup I was thinking along those lines. Just need a short range but with a relatively heavy punch. Wouldn't need much penetrative power but maybe squash head ammo ? for bunker busting. Would squash head work on reinforced concrete ? Never really thought about it before.

And a much better idea. 

[NARSES2]

IIRC, there was a version of the Churchill that had a 195mm bunker buster instead of the cannon.  It was an Engineers vehicle, for demoliton.  It basically fired a dustbin of dynamite.

Why did I forget the Churchill AVRE ?  (Assault Vehicle Royal Engineers in case anyone isn't sure)

[Old Wombat]

wikipedia

Churchill AVRE (Assault Vehicle Royal Engineers)
Main article: Armoured Vehicle Royal Engineers
Churchill AVRE with fascine on tilt-forward cradle. This particular example is a post-WW2 AVRE on the MK VII chassis.

Proposed by a Canadian engineer as a result of experience from the Dieppe Raid,[33] the Assault Vehicle Royal Engineers was a Churchill Mark III or IV equipped with the "Mortar, Recoiling Spigot, Mark II" (or Petard), a 290 mm (11 in) spigot mortar which throws the 40 lb (18 kg) "Flying dustbin" demolition bomb with a 28-pound high-explosive warhead. The Petard, developed by MD1, was designed for the quick levelling of fortifications. The Petard was reloaded by traversing the turret to point front, slightly to the left, with the barrel directly over the co-driver's sliding hatch. The regular two piece co-driver's hatch was plated over, and a small sliding hatch was installed to allow access to the Petard.[34] The Petard barrel would then be' broken' vertically, and the co-driver would slide open his hatch. The co-driver would then push the nom into the barrel.[35] The barrel would then be closed, the Petard traversed back down, and the turret rotated back to its original position.[34] The co-driver's hands were briefly exposed during the process.
AVRE 290mm Petard Mortar and its ammunition (projectile standing on its flat nose, with tail facing up, at right)

The AVRE could also be equipped with numerous other attachments, such as the Small Box Girder bridge, which was carried at the front of the tank and laid across ditches or narrow rivers up to 30 feet wide, and the Canadian Indestructible Roller Device (CIRD),[36] which was used to protect the tracks of a tank from mines. It could also carry fascines, which are large bundles of wood carried on the front of the tank and dropped into trenches to help the Churchill cross over them, devices to place explosive charges against obstacles, and 'Bobbin's, which are massive rolls of canvas in drums, that were unrolled in front of the Churchill to help it over soft terrain. They were used during the invasion of Normandy to help the Churchill over soft sand,[33] and also served to leave a trackway for following vehicles.

By the time of the invasion of France in June 1944, 180 AVREs had been converted. They were first deployed in Normandy by the 79th Armoured Division on D-Day.[33] They were extremely successful and served until the end of the war. A further 574 followed.[37] While the driver came from the Royal Armoured Corps, the five other crew were drawn from the Royal Engineers. One of the RE crew was a demolitions NCO sapper responsible for priming the "Flying dustbin" and who led the crew when they dismounted from the tank to place demolition charges ("Wade" charges).

Other versions that did not see active service were equipped with anti-mine ploughs, mine rollers, or special demolition charges to destroy reinforced concrete walls.[33]

Post-war, new Churchill AVREs were developed on the basis of a modified Churchill Mk VII armed with a breech-loading low velocity 165mm demolition gun that fired a HESH round with about 40 lb (18 kg) of C4 explosive. The nomenclature of the AVRE was later changed to Armoured Vehicle Royal Engineers.

Unfortunately in the RW demolition guns came in post-war & the petard mortar wouldn't work on the M3 Grant/Lee hull, I'm afraid - no way you could safely load it (it was a tad dangerous in the Churchill AVRE).

However in Happy Whif World we can "fiddle" with history a bit & drag the testing of "Wallbuster"* guns ahead of schedule to, say, 1941 or 1942.

That way you could get a 7.5" or 6.5" breech-loading demolition gun into the hull of a M3 Grant/Lee without too much difficulty.

Chuck a flame-thrower into the 37mm turret & bunkers are no longer an obstacle, just a ready-made long-pork burger-maker oven.

*: OVERLORD'S BLOG

The next step came in August 1944.  The British were testing a round called the "Wallbuster". It was a 7.2" calibre gun.  The first tests on 5ft of concrete blew a hole straight through it, and blasted fragments 60 feet away.  They then fired it at a plate of 150mm thick armour. The impact blew a scab of armour about two feet square weighing 117 lbs off the inside of the armour.  They estimated the scab would be travelling at 600 feet per second. This appears to have been the light-bulb moment when the British military fell in love with HESH rounds.

Then after the war the British decided to build a new generation of AVRE's, and the tank selected was the Churchill MKVII, of which the British had a fair old number lying about spare.  Initial tests of two weapons were carried out. These were a 7.5" (190mm) and a 6.5" (165mm) gun. It was found the performance of the two guns was almost identical, only the 6.5" gave more room inside the tank, and used smaller rounds, so more ammunition could be carried.  The 6.5" gun fired its shells at the low velocity of 850 feet per second and the shell weighed 60 lbs, of which 24 lbs was plastic explosive.

From here: http://overlord-wot.blogspot.com.au/2014/03/setting-record-straight.html

[PR19_Kit]

(it was a tad dangerous in the Churchill AVRE).

Yeeeeesss, I read the procedure for that, which seemed to entail the loader lifting the bomb bit over his head, and shoving it into to breech of the mortar while he was sticking out of a hatch in the front end of the tank!

The number of possible failure modes was in treble figures I'd have thought! 

[Rheged]

If you are searching for non-standard things to do with the Lee/Grant tank, there's always the CDL

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canal_Defence_Light

They were initially tested at Lowther Park, near Penrith. I used to live up that way, and had elderly neighbours who remembered seeing searchlights flickering across the fells. One of them even had (illicitly taken) photographs!