Kirill S. Posted October 21, 2001 Share Posted October 21, 2001 well, that is the weirdest tank I'v ever seen. The question(s): Why were they made and how successful they were and why didn't they have HE ammo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offtaskagain Posted October 21, 2001 Share Posted October 21, 2001 They were built to kill pillboxes. They were fairly successfull AFAIK. Their main round actually was an HE round I think, but in order to get it's concrete penetrating abilities BTS had to make it a HC round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted October 21, 2001 Share Posted October 21, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kirill S.: well, that is the weirdest tank I'v ever seen. The question(s): Why were they made and how successful they were and why didn't they have HE ammo?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> They were Engineering tanks, they were incredibly successful, and they stayed in service according to Chamberlien until 1957 -- which says something about how good they were. The big 290mm demo bomb levels houses and breaches walls, while it could tow things into battle. They do not have HE because they just have a big flying bomb that is one big HE round if fired at infantry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirill S. Posted October 21, 2001 Author Share Posted October 21, 2001 Also it seems to be the only tank to kill Jagdtiger in the front. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offtaskagain Posted October 21, 2001 Share Posted October 21, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kirill S.: Also it seems to be the only tank to kill Jagdtiger in the front.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Hardly, 76mm t rounds can kill it from close up and 90mm from a little farther away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirill S. Posted October 21, 2001 Author Share Posted October 21, 2001 another question: why did it have to be a churchill? couldn't it be cromwell? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirill S. Posted October 21, 2001 Author Share Posted October 21, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Hardly, 76mm t rounds can kill it from close up and 90mm from a little farther away. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Are you sure you are not talking about Jagdpanther. The Jagdtiger has 250mm armor and When I tested it against Pershing tungsten, it was ricocheting fromn 10m! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offtaskagain Posted October 21, 2001 Share Posted October 21, 2001 That's the front hull you're getting ricochets on. The superstructure can be pierced. [ 10-21-2001: Message edited by: panzerwerfer42 ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cpl Carrot Posted October 21, 2001 Share Posted October 21, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kirill S.: another question: why did it have to be a churchill? couldn't it be cromwell?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You have to get close. Close means surviving a lot of attention, and a Cromwell won't be able to stand up to it. Well my 2c anyway Cpl Carrot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andreas Posted October 22, 2001 Share Posted October 22, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kirill S.: another question: why did it have to be a churchill? couldn't it be cromwell?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> When they were first converted, they used surplus Churchill Mk.I. The Cromwell was considered too valuable for this kind of use, and probably also unsuitable, since they needed a lot of space inside to carry the extra guy and the engineering equipment. The round is actually a 40lb (26lb HE) HESH (?) round (I think) that was designed to destroy bunkers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edward_n_kelly Posted October 22, 2001 Share Posted October 22, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Slapdragon: They were Engineering tanks, they were incredibly successful, and they stayed in service according to Chamberlien until 1957 -- which says something about how good they were. The big 290mm demo bomb levels houses and breaches walls, while it could tow things into battle. They do not have HE because they just have a big flying bomb that is one big HE round if fired at infantry.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> It was a big, slow flying bomb. Range limited to about 200 yards though because it was not the most accurate of creatures it was more like 50 yards. The AVRE was equipped with many things externally to blow up, explode or just "bridge" obstacles. From the dreaded fascine to aniti mine ploughs and rollers, to the Giant Viper to bridges (as the SBG), to anti-Atlantic wall devices like GOAT and ONION. The chassis could stand the load for a short time, was haevily armoured, had capascious storage bins in the track sponsons and ready access to the outside world through side doors. It was the best for the job at the time and could not be replaced for some years afterwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Affentitten Posted October 22, 2001 Share Posted October 22, 2001 Just to blow my own trumpet, here's a story I wrote earlier this year on the next generation AVRE. Remember, I was writing for a general audience. (And I've just noticed that I said most AVRE's were based on Sherman hulls. Ooops! Enter the Trojan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted October 22, 2001 Share Posted October 22, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Germanboy: When they were first converted, they used surplus Churchill Mk.I. The Cromwell was considered too valuable for this kind of use, and probably also unsuitable, since they needed a lot of space inside to carry the extra guy and the engineering equipment. The round is actually a 40lb (26lb HE) HESH (?) round (I think) that was designed to destroy bunkers.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Designed by Dennis Burney, the "wallbuster shell" for the Petard was the first application of the "pancake" effect that plastique explosive had when it was spread over a flat object and exploded - the shockwaves caused flaking or "scabbing" to occur on the inner surface and these would fly around, causing damage to the occupants. Burney after developing the Petard round, went onto design a gun which could fire it - his range of recoilless rifles, varying in calibre from 3.45in up to a proposed 7.2in weapon. While effective, his method of achieving a recoilless effect - exhausting an equal amount of gases from the chamber to the rear to counter-balance the recoil from the round travelling forwards out of the barrel wasn't found to be practicable - it suffered too much erosion around the jet venturis because they turned at right angles to exhaust behind gun. Elements though, were combined with the Rhienmetall system of utilising a frangible base in the shell with one large ventnuri to produce a successful range of RCLs utilised in the British Army after WWII (BAT, MoBAT, WomBAT). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricochet Posted October 22, 2001 Share Posted October 22, 2001 Another note, The petard was a type of mortar and had to be loaded externally. The loader sat to the right of the driver and had a special hatch designed for him to pop up and drop the bomb down the tube. Needless to say it was a very hazardous job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts