Did the Valentine see service in Normandy

[Hannibal]

Unless I missed something the Valentine is not in the game .As far as I know about 8,000 Valentines were produced .Did any of them see service on the western front after D-day .If they did see service was wondering why they did not make the cut .

[Maximus]

Well, yeah, but it was in 1940 if anything.

[ 05-05-2001: Message edited by: Maximus ]

[Michael Dorosh]

They might have been used as OP tanks; the Ram was used in such a fashion. I think the Valentine was also used as a bridgelayer, too?

[Pzman]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hannibal:

Unless I missed something the Valentine is not in the game .As far as I know about 8,000 Valentines were produced .Did any of them see service on the western front after D-day .If they did see service was wondering why they did not make the cut .<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Most Valentines were sent to Russia in 1942 so most didn't live long. Production stoped after the Sherman was made the main stay of the Canadian Army.

[kmead]

By June 1944 the 2pdr armed Valentine was severely outclassed. It does appear in the form of the Archer, which was a Valentine chassis with a 17 pdr mounted facing backwards. IIRC they last saw service in the Sicily/Italian campaign and Western Desert.

[argie]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

They might have been used as OP tanks; the Ram was used in such a fashion. I think the Valentine was also used as a bridgelayer, too?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are right. The Valentine bridgelayer was a standard equipment in the Armored Divisions.

[ 05-05-2001: Message edited by: argie ]

[Sgt Steiner]

Hi all

The late model Valentine XI (mounting same 75mm as in Cromwell) did see limited service in NW Europe.

Apparently used as Battery Commanders AFVS in AT Regts (Archers/M10s) and as Artillery Observer OP Tanks.

Cant imagine they were very numerous.

Later

[Michael Dorosh]

Welcome back Sgt Steiner; haven't seen you in awhile. Or maybe I'm just terribly unobservant?

[Firefly]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

Welcome back Sgt Steiner; haven't seen you in awhile. Or maybe I'm just terribly unobservant?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

He's been too busy kicking my boys around NW Europe .

[Sgt Steiner]

Hi Michael et al

Welcome back Sgt Steiner; haven't seen you in awhile. Or maybe I'm just terribly unobservant?

I have just been in lurker mode (mainly due to renewed interest in Miniatures Gaming and change in duty shift pattern).

Cheers

[Sgt Steiner]

Hi Firefly et al

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Firefly:

He's been too busy kicking my boys around NW Europe .<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Dont let this hustler fool you lot as he is giving my chaps a real 'nightmare' in Normandy at present

Salutations

[JasonC]

"why they did not make the cut"

It is a fine question. 8300 were made, including 1400 in Canada. 3800 of them were sent to the Russians (300 were sunk on the way), including essentially all the Canadian built ones. The Valentine was the only lend-lease tank the Russians ask for more of. That still leaves 4500 more.

The number used for bridgelayers was small, as was the number converted to Bishop SP artillery pieces. Rather more were converted to Archers, but less than 1000 for all of these combined. Which still leaves ~3650 of the things.

650 were apparently rigged out as DD tanks, for invasions. But they do not seem to have been actually used for that purpose. They were used for training, but it is unclear if they ever left England. That still leaves 3000.

The earlier, 2-lber versions (marks 1-7), served in North Africa and were a successful design there. But the number in the field at El Alamein was only ~225, and in early offensives 200 or less. (Comparable numbers of each of Shermans, Grants, Stuarts, and greater numbers of Crusaders, were present). Many were probably lost there, so the ~200 steady number may account for a few times that in total vehicles. But nothing like all the remainder.

The later, 8-10 marks, had the better 6-lb gun. How many of those saw service in the Torch-Tunisia campaign, in Sicily, or in Italy I haven't been able to find out. Against the tanks that saw service in North Africa, a 6-lb Valentine would be a reasonable weapon. But by the end in Tunisia and the later campaigns, the armor faced wasn't half Italian anymore.

The Valentine only ran around 15 mph. It makes a Churchill look agile. Its armament was light for every period it was fielded. The only thing it really had going for it was solid armor for an early to mid-war tank. Against Italian M13/40s, early Pz IIIs with short 50mm guns, or early Pz IVs with 75mmL24 short guns, that advantage was large enough to make it a useful tank. It also benefited from its role as an "infantry tank", in that it was more likely to be used in a combined arms team than other British types, before El Alamein.

But once the standard guns it was facing were long 75mm or better, the armor was not adequate protection. Then you just had a slow, undergunned tank.

So my guess is, the remaining couple thousand were built with the idea of using them eventually in Europe, but they were made obsolete by German up-gunning. So better tanks were used instead, and what remained were sent to the Russians.