Basically, what US Army and Air Force? Alright I know that's an exaggeration but compared to those already at war the US forces are too small and it will take a year to 18 months to build up.
Sir John Valentine Carden Survives. Part 2.
- Thread starter allanpcameron
- Start date
20 December 1941. Luton, England.
allanpcameron
Donor
20 December 1941. Luton, England.
Vauxhall Motors was looking at the Churchill (as the A22 was now known) production figures. The delays that had slowed its introduction of the Infantry Tank Mark IV were finally resolved, or at least, mostly resolved. The first fourteen that had been built as pre-production models and delivered in June had been tested to destruction. The companies in the Vauxhall Group had all been gearing up to begin production of a tank that would be fit for purpose. Vauxhall, Beyer Peacock, Gloucester Railway and Broom & Wade had been producing the first production Mark I at about thirty a month between them. By the end of December, it was expected that Vauxhall’s group would begin producing 80 Mark II tanks per month. Once full production in all plants was achieved, 140 tanks per month would be handed over to the army, reaching that number probably around April 1942.
The original order for 500 tanks had been expanded to 1200 to provide six Tank Brigades, with enough spares for battle replacements. The Soviets had had chance to examine the Churchill, a delegation from their London embassy had spent time with 33rd Tank Brigade. They were completely unimpressed and had no desire for it to be sent to Russia. The Valiant was now the only tank they were interested in. Unless the War Office changed its mind, the complete order for Churchill tanks would be fulfilled sometime early in 1943.
The feedback from 33rd Army Tank Brigade, the first unit equipped with the Churchill tank wasn’t particularly enthusiastic. As a successor to the Matilda II, it didn’t really improve on it much. The 3-inch howitzer in the hull was badly positioned for the job it was meant to do. The armourers had been experimenting with moving the 3-inch howitzer into the turret mounting, which worked better. They were happy enough to have a BESA Machine Gun replace the howitzer in the hull. A few had just changed the two guns position, but the limited traverse of the 2-pdr in the hull made it very inefficient. The three Tank Battalions being equipped with the Mark I decided to go with a mix of 2-pdr tanks and 3-inch tanks in each Squadron, almost fifty-fifty.
Vauxhall had been preparing the Mark II which would be produced from the outset with the BESA in the hull. The Mark II would also have track covers and strengthened plates at the front horns. The engine intake louvres would be redesigned with the intake on the top rather than the side which was to prevent the engine being flooded when the tank was wading through water. These improvements were all very well, but the fundamental problem remained, it was terribly slow and with poor firepower. A Mark III with a new turret to take the 6-pdr was being looked at, but it would probably be a welded turret, and would take a few months to be ready for trials, longer before entry into service. This would at least make for better firepower, but would add more weight, putting more strain on the already struggling engine.
The managing director of Vauxhall, C J Bartlett had been consulted by Lord Beaverbrook about founding one or two tank factories under the control of Royal Ordnance. Rather than seven firms each building 20 tanks per month, having one large factory with the capacity to build 200 tanks per month was clearly a good idea, the idea of mass production was well established. It would mean the relocation of men and machinery, and therefore the loss of some production in the short term.
Bartlett was aware that Vauxhall hadn’t been invited to tender for designing another tank. They had offered various ideas based on the A22 Churchill, both a lighter ‘cruiser’ type and an even more heavily armoured version. It was becoming obvious that once production of the Churchill was wound down, Vauxhall would be asked to move to building someone else’s design. He knew that Nuffield were working on a Crusader replacement, and that Vickers were almost ready to put the Victor into production. Vulcan Foundry’s Matilda II production was beginning to wind down, both North British Locomotives and London, Midland & Scottish were completing their orders and hadn’t received any more orders for the Matilda. Springburn would be concentrating on the Light Tank Mark VII and LMS at Crewe were joining Vickers to produce the Victor.
There had been times that Bartlett had feared that the A22 project would be cancelled altogether. The attempts to get the product right, and tested properly had taken longer that hoped, but was still less than the two years that such a project would normally take. By late 1942 the Army would have most of their order for a replacement for the Matilda II. By the end of 1942, Vauxhall’s foray into tank design and manufacture would likely have come to an end. That being the case, Beaverbrook’s idea for a couple of large tank factories under the auspices of Royal Ordnance would make a lot of sense. Bartlett was happy to recommend to the Board of Directors that that heavy engineering department put together in a hurry to build tanks should be handed over to the Government, and let Vauxhall concentrate on doing what they do best.
Vauxhall Motors was looking at the Churchill (as the A22 was now known) production figures. The delays that had slowed its introduction of the Infantry Tank Mark IV were finally resolved, or at least, mostly resolved. The first fourteen that had been built as pre-production models and delivered in June had been tested to destruction. The companies in the Vauxhall Group had all been gearing up to begin production of a tank that would be fit for purpose. Vauxhall, Beyer Peacock, Gloucester Railway and Broom & Wade had been producing the first production Mark I at about thirty a month between them. By the end of December, it was expected that Vauxhall’s group would begin producing 80 Mark II tanks per month. Once full production in all plants was achieved, 140 tanks per month would be handed over to the army, reaching that number probably around April 1942.
The original order for 500 tanks had been expanded to 1200 to provide six Tank Brigades, with enough spares for battle replacements. The Soviets had had chance to examine the Churchill, a delegation from their London embassy had spent time with 33rd Tank Brigade. They were completely unimpressed and had no desire for it to be sent to Russia. The Valiant was now the only tank they were interested in. Unless the War Office changed its mind, the complete order for Churchill tanks would be fulfilled sometime early in 1943.
The feedback from 33rd Army Tank Brigade, the first unit equipped with the Churchill tank wasn’t particularly enthusiastic. As a successor to the Matilda II, it didn’t really improve on it much. The 3-inch howitzer in the hull was badly positioned for the job it was meant to do. The armourers had been experimenting with moving the 3-inch howitzer into the turret mounting, which worked better. They were happy enough to have a BESA Machine Gun replace the howitzer in the hull. A few had just changed the two guns position, but the limited traverse of the 2-pdr in the hull made it very inefficient. The three Tank Battalions being equipped with the Mark I decided to go with a mix of 2-pdr tanks and 3-inch tanks in each Squadron, almost fifty-fifty.
Vauxhall had been preparing the Mark II which would be produced from the outset with the BESA in the hull. The Mark II would also have track covers and strengthened plates at the front horns. The engine intake louvres would be redesigned with the intake on the top rather than the side which was to prevent the engine being flooded when the tank was wading through water. These improvements were all very well, but the fundamental problem remained, it was terribly slow and with poor firepower. A Mark III with a new turret to take the 6-pdr was being looked at, but it would probably be a welded turret, and would take a few months to be ready for trials, longer before entry into service. This would at least make for better firepower, but would add more weight, putting more strain on the already struggling engine.
The managing director of Vauxhall, C J Bartlett had been consulted by Lord Beaverbrook about founding one or two tank factories under the control of Royal Ordnance. Rather than seven firms each building 20 tanks per month, having one large factory with the capacity to build 200 tanks per month was clearly a good idea, the idea of mass production was well established. It would mean the relocation of men and machinery, and therefore the loss of some production in the short term.
Bartlett was aware that Vauxhall hadn’t been invited to tender for designing another tank. They had offered various ideas based on the A22 Churchill, both a lighter ‘cruiser’ type and an even more heavily armoured version. It was becoming obvious that once production of the Churchill was wound down, Vauxhall would be asked to move to building someone else’s design. He knew that Nuffield were working on a Crusader replacement, and that Vickers were almost ready to put the Victor into production. Vulcan Foundry’s Matilda II production was beginning to wind down, both North British Locomotives and London, Midland & Scottish were completing their orders and hadn’t received any more orders for the Matilda. Springburn would be concentrating on the Light Tank Mark VII and LMS at Crewe were joining Vickers to produce the Victor.
There had been times that Bartlett had feared that the A22 project would be cancelled altogether. The attempts to get the product right, and tested properly had taken longer that hoped, but was still less than the two years that such a project would normally take. By late 1942 the Army would have most of their order for a replacement for the Matilda II. By the end of 1942, Vauxhall’s foray into tank design and manufacture would likely have come to an end. That being the case, Beaverbrook’s idea for a couple of large tank factories under the auspices of Royal Ordnance would make a lot of sense. Bartlett was happy to recommend to the Board of Directors that that heavy engineering department put together in a hurry to build tanks should be handed over to the Government, and let Vauxhall concentrate on doing what they do best.
The peace time British Army and RAF were huge compared to the peace time US Army and US Army Air Corps, and by 1939 much better equipped.
Britain had a lot of overseas possessions to manage though, the USA didn't.
Looking a bit worrisome for the Churchill's future, might be looking at a timeline where there aren't any past the first run of mk1-3.
It really is a matter of 'we have viable alternatives' this time around compared to OTL.
The mention of the lighter, faster medium-weight derivative (the A23, I believe) is interesting. I hope something comes of it assuming it'll be capable of scaling the same sorts of slopes its larger cousin can. That sort of mobility would make for a handy, (presumably) less-expensive alternative to the Victor for the infantry support role, like a successor to the Valentine that has the same capacity for being modified for whatever purpose it's needed for.
It really is a matter of 'we have viable alternatives' this time around compared to OTL.
The mention of the lighter, faster medium-weight derivative (the A23, I believe) is interesting. I hope something comes of it assuming it'll be capable of scaling the same sorts of slopes its larger cousin can. That sort of mobility would make for a handy, (presumably) less-expensive alternative to the Victor for the infantry support role, like a successor to the Valentine that has the same capacity for being modified for whatever purpose it's needed for.
marathag
Banned
callback to my idea of a complex at Blackpool
Sir John Valentine Carden Survives. Part 2.
Be interesting to see how the exercise will play out.
www.alternatehistory.com
It wasn't until the Mk.VII that the Churchill was "got right" IOTL. It had a long process of rearmament and re-armouring based on user experience in North Africa (NA-75 version) and Italy. It had to be rebuilt in early 1944. Basically its engine/brakes/gearbox/transmission had to be rebuilt completely. As for speed, it proved more than adequate in NW Europe during the advance to Bremen where it operated in general support of the infantry almost like a cruiser. It's hill climbing ability which no other Allied tank could match was proved in Tunisia and Italy, climbing like a goat. Overall the Churchill was an excellent tank and in it's specialised roles, unmatched as flamethrowers, AVREs and bridge layers. I remember seeing a superb British Army film, "Men in Armour" which demonstrated all the specialised versions which were available in 1945.
Look More Closely Later
Gone Fishin'
Isn't it a bit late now to be building tank factories? I think original timeline Winston Churchill said something about it taking four years to get war materials factories up and running at peak capacity, and surely with the Americans in the war now, the British don't expect the fighting to go on for more than four more years?
Unless they're looking at a possible post-war Soviet threat, which I guess is always a possibility...
Unless they're looking at a possible post-war Soviet threat, which I guess is always a possibility...
Here it's received more testing, so we might have skipped several of the early steps. As to its hill-climbing, the Victor will be receiving the Merritt-Brown gearbox (OTL, the Churchill was the only tank to get it until the Cromwell in 1944), so the Churchill might not seem all that impressive on that front.
allanpcameron
Donor
I take your point @Richshaw but we built 4276 of them during the war, the third most produced British tank. (Valentine 6267, Crusader 4678 were first and second). That number doesn't seem to include all the early models that had to be rebuilt, as you mentioned. That was a lot of work for a tank which I can't agree with you was 'excellent'. It had good points, and the specialised roles in 79th Division no one will argue with. But 'climbing like a goat' was damning the tank with faint praise. Remember it is a replacement for the Matilda II in Army Tank Brigades. But as mentioned in the update, it actually isn't that much better than the tank it is replacing. Yes, thanks to the Valiant being built here (basically a better Valentine) Vauxhall have been able to iron out some of the defects before full production. OTL 690 were built in 1941, here it is about 200, enough for one Tank Brigade. 200 (mostly) working tanks compared with, I believe at one point there was only 10% actually running: 69! Personally, I would have done to the Churchill what I did to the Covenanter, cancelled it altogether so that those 746 Covenanters became Valiants. In 1942 with the Churchill (1731) and Covenanters (986) production being switched to Valiants or Victors would give 2717 good tanks rather than rubbish tanks.
Something that can only be claimed with the benefit of hindsight. The Churchill was in 1943 almost cancelled but instead it was decided to rebuild all the existing vehicles. That effort brought the tank good, taking it from "merely adequate" to "excellent". Without the Churchill there would have been something else which wasn't as good for conversion to all the specialist versions that went into battle as part of 79 Armoured Division and as part of the Royal Tank regiments. The vehicle was adequate for it's task. It performed well as an AVRE, as a Crocodile flame thrower tank, as a bridge-layer and as a gun tank. I'll leave it there.
Soooo it was almost canceled in 1943 otl?
Welll here they have a suitable replacement standing ready so i do not have high hopes for it.
marathag
Banned
Ford built Willow Run in two years to churn out B-24 bombers, and was of no use after August 1945, and Ford washed their hands of it, allowing Kaiser to buy it for pennies on the Dollar, and then GM got a great deal after they folded in 1953
EDIT:
and something the British Automotive sector really needed postwar, was a large unified production line.
That avoids the postwar issue with Morris? Austin? building bodies in one plant, then shipping the unprimed bodies to another factory for completion.
Problem was, the bodies were no protected against weather on that trip, and it's never foggy or rainy in the UK that might cause rust, right?
Last edited:
Just talking out of my [rear-end]....
But as planners do appear to be looking ahead, the need for a "heavy tank" to break through entrenched defensive positions is going to be obvious. Especially in terrain like Northern France, there will be environments where allied tanks are going to have to take "first hits" from camouflaged defensive positions. So instead of focusing on speed (which arguably the other models already have covered), evolving the tank to "heavy" where they willingly exchange speed for protection, maybe the logical next step. Assuming the re-design focuses on a larger turret, they would then have lots of time to engineer and manufacture a 3-inch howitzer variant to be able to "recon by fire" dumping HE into any foliaged area along with a 17-pounder equivalent for dealing with any nasty Panzer IV + Panthers + Tigers that also may be lurking. Hypothetically, if deployed in squads of (5) tanks, with (3) 3-inch howitzer variants and (2) 17-pounder equivalents (the ratio depending on enemy tank density expected in theatre) as long as given lots of ammunition, suddenly the bocage looks far less terrifying.
But as planners do appear to be looking ahead, the need for a "heavy tank" to break through entrenched defensive positions is going to be obvious. Especially in terrain like Northern France, there will be environments where allied tanks are going to have to take "first hits" from camouflaged defensive positions. So instead of focusing on speed (which arguably the other models already have covered), evolving the tank to "heavy" where they willingly exchange speed for protection, maybe the logical next step. Assuming the re-design focuses on a larger turret, they would then have lots of time to engineer and manufacture a 3-inch howitzer variant to be able to "recon by fire" dumping HE into any foliaged area along with a 17-pounder equivalent for dealing with any nasty Panzer IV + Panthers + Tigers that also may be lurking. Hypothetically, if deployed in squads of (5) tanks, with (3) 3-inch howitzer variants and (2) 17-pounder equivalents (the ratio depending on enemy tank density expected in theatre) as long as given lots of ammunition, suddenly the bocage looks far less terrifying.
Last edited:
I'm kind of hoping for a Tortoise equivalent with a spare 6-inch 26 cwt howitzer in the casement. Just an old stonker of a gun (first used as a field piece in WW1 and still going strong in the 40s) thumping out 152mm of hurt on whatever it doesn't like the look of. Like a British SU/ISU-152 but with better ergonomics.
How is a Churchill-derivative vehicle going to be better than a re-engineered Victor? If the Churchill has the same design as OTL, the turret ring will be just 54.25", compared to (IIRC), 60" for the Valiant, and 69" for the Victor.
Last edited:
allanpcameron
Donor
That means something quite different on this side of the Atlantic...unless of course you mean it that way...
Anyway, isn't that what the TOG I and II were for?
Allan