Michael Dorosh Posted December 14, 2001 Share Posted December 14, 2001 Ok, I've seen photos of this - are these armour thicknesses? What do the numbers mean and why are they on the vehicle? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted December 14, 2001 Author Share Posted December 14, 2001 My mistake - it is all on the Tamiya website. Here is the answer: <blockquote>quote:</font><hr> @‘æ“ñŽŸ‘åíŒã”¼‚̃CƒMƒŠƒXŒRŽå—Í„qíŽÔƒNƒƒ€ƒEƒF 402;‹B‚»‚ÌVŒ^ƒ~[ƒeƒBƒAEƒGƒ“ƒWƒ“‚̶ŽY‘̧‚ª®‚¤‚Ü‚Å‚Ì& #352;ÔA‚·‚łɶŽY’†‚¾‚Á‚½ƒŠƒoƒeƒBEƒGƒ“ƒWƒ“‚ð“‹Ú 8218;µAŒãXƒ~[ƒeƒBƒAEƒGƒ“ƒWƒ“‚Ì“‹Ú‚à‰Â”\‚Æ‚µ‚ĶŽY‚³ 8218;ꂽ‚Ì‚ªƒZƒ“ƒg[„qíŽÔ‚Å‚·BŽå‚ÉŒP—û—p‚Æ‚µ‚ÄŽg—p‚ ³‚ꂽƒZƒ“ƒg[Šeƒ^ƒCƒv‚Ì’†‚ÅA95mmžÖ’e–C“‹Ú‚Ì‹ßÚŽx‰ ;‡Œ^ Mk.IV ‚Í—BˆêŽÀí‚ÅŽg—p‚³‚ê‚Ü‚µ‚½B1944”N6ŒŽ‚̃mƒ‹ƒ}ƒ“ƒf 02;Bã—¤ìí‚É‚¨‚¢‚ĉp‘ŠC•º‘à‹@bŽx‰‡ƒOƒ‹[ƒv‚É”z”õ‚ ³‚êíŽÔ—g—¤’øã‚©‚çƒhƒCƒcŒR‚Ì–hŒä‹’“_‚ð–CŒ‚B‚³‚ç ‚Éã—¤Œã‚à‰Î—ÍŽx‰‡‚𑱂¯‚ÄŽå—Í•”‘à‚ð‰‡ŒìAŠC 52;ÝŽü•Ó‚Ì‹’“_Šm•Û‚É‘å‚«‚È“‚«‚ðŒ©‚¹‚½‚Ì‚Å‚·B<hr></blockquote> Guess I should have looked there first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tero Posted December 14, 2001 Share Posted December 14, 2001 A graduation for the 360º circle to facilitate the infantry in telling where the target is ? [ 12-14-2001: Message edited by: tero ]</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Chef Sakai Posted December 14, 2001 Share Posted December 14, 2001 beats me :confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Chef Sakai Posted December 14, 2001 Share Posted December 14, 2001 wait, is it a measurment for a contest to see wich tanker can piss further? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParaBellum Posted December 14, 2001 Share Posted December 14, 2001 The numbers seem to start at the back of the turret with "0" and then continue clockwise to 360 (?). Look at "90" which is at the exact left o fthe turret. Why they painted it that way I cannot say. Perhaps the TC had problems with battlefield navigation. "Gunner, T 34 at 1000m at...ah, left of us-wait...a little bit more to the left... no, more right...no, a little bit more... yeah, that's the one..." So the crew just painted kind of a compass onto their tank... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted December 14, 2001 Share Posted December 14, 2001 Its a picture of a Centaur from the Royal Marines Support Group. The graduations are basically degrees. It is a modification of the "clock method" of naval fire direction, where a central "clock" director which was usually mounted on the conning tower of a ship, indicated with one hand of the clock the bearing and another to the target. With the markings on the turret, it was possible for the detachment commander to tell at a glance if all his vehicles were pointing on the correct bearing to the target before giving the order to open fire. These vehicles were intended to be utilised on LCT's as fire support on the final run-in of the troop carrying landing craft. Originally, the plan had them on the LCT's with extra ammunition stowed in the engine compartments, with the engines removed. Legend has it that when Mountbatten learnt that basically the LCT's were going to be grounded and left on the beach, with the Centaurs aboard (3 per LCT, BTW), he blew his top, exclaiming he wasn't going to have them cluttering up his beaches and the Centaurs, which were only ever intended originally to be a training tank, pending availability of the Cromwell, suddenly found themselves invading Europe! They did extremely well, with tanks advancing up to 10 miles inland in support of advancing units before they were relieved. There are quite a few pictures of them around, in various books on the invasion. Basically there was only a squadron of them, if memory serves me correctly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enigma76 Posted December 14, 2001 Share Posted December 14, 2001 IIRC the Royal Marines used something like this on their Centaur(?) close support tanks on D-day. Supposedly this helped them lay down supporting fire while the tank was still loaded on a landing craft. Jesper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Posted December 14, 2001 Share Posted December 14, 2001 Excuse this Junior Member for speaking up. Parabellum has it entirely correct. The Centaur had an unsatisfactory engine so it was only used, with those markings and that oddball brown paintjob, on D-Day and a few weeks after. That bigass ugly 90mm howitzer turret was so useful that it was kept on as a C.S. (Close Support) Cromwell until the end of the war in HQ squadrons. The numbers are to assist the battery commander in gun laying, the large periscope housing in front of the T.C.is also worth noting. Sincerely Junior Armour Grognard Don Sather P.S. I am also looking for my first PBEM Game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stoffel Posted December 14, 2001 Share Posted December 14, 2001 Hey Don< Just send me a setup dont mind what side or what terrain or what wheater only rule no ubertankfights Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted December 14, 2001 Author Share Posted December 14, 2001 Thanks, gents, knew one of you would have the answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mccooper Posted December 14, 2001 Share Posted December 14, 2001 Hello Well most of the RMCS information has already been taken care of but there are a couple of more points - there were 3 squadrons that went shore on D-day supporting on Gold, Juno and Sword - the "oddball brown paintjob" is actually Khaki Drab which was the official british color for armour until 42-43 when they switched over to Olive Drab. The Centaur being an older tank used for training was never repainted although there one pic of a tank that looks to be OD. - they were crewed by RM except for the driver who was on loan from the RTR - although there is no solid evidence the Centaur are reported to have been handed over to the Cdns as support arty - one final thing .... I wish there were lots of pics of these vehicles! Unfortunately only a handful have ever been published. Later Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c3k Posted December 14, 2001 Share Posted December 14, 2001 You're all close, but wrong. These markings were applied just prior to D-Day. They planned on launching the tanks just offshore. Extensive pre-invasion studies proved that in deep water, the tanks would sink tail first. Hence, the water-depth markings. These would assist the follow-on wave in finding the shallowest water. Very similar to the Plimsoll (sp?) markings on the bows of ships. You're welcome. Ken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve oda Posted December 14, 2001 Share Posted December 14, 2001 Ken, These markings are 360-degrees around the turret. None on the hull. I'd think if the tank sunk down to turret level, there would be no need to know the exact water depth. Markings on the front of turret are in the "200" range. Mighty deep water. No? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murph Posted December 14, 2001 Share Posted December 14, 2001 Wow, pretty cool. But...I don't get it When the turret rotates, the numbers turn as well, so how does that provide a guide as to direction of fire for those in the tank? Moreover, for a commander looking at a group of tanks, wouldn't he just look for the turret to determine where the tank was pointed at? It seems that if the markings were on the hull, it would make more sense. I'm sure I'm being a dumb moron, but hey, it ain't making sense to me! Murph Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenGriffon Posted December 14, 2001 Share Posted December 14, 2001 HA! And you call yourself grogs. Those tick marks were obviously painted on to represent the number of kills the tank has racked up in combat. Must have been an ace crew, because they had 360 kills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMplayer Posted December 14, 2001 Share Posted December 14, 2001 interesting stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilhammer Posted December 14, 2001 Share Posted December 14, 2001 Murph: Imagine that you have compass, and a focal point under the tank (or, more likely, under the platoon). So, if a focal point with a direction is set (say, North), then you turn the turret to set degrees off of a compass heading. So. point your body in one direction, and trun your head 90 degrees to the left, and imagine you have these markings on your head, and someone wants to look at your head to determine your exact facing. The same principle is used for turning Guns on mounts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve oda Posted December 15, 2001 Share Posted December 15, 2001 Bill, What is kinda corn-fusing is that the gunner has his own calibrated gunsight. Why have two sets of azimuth markings? And looking at the thing... 360-degree mark on the rear of turret. Okay. But, 200-degree mark on the front? Those Brits... Probably painted onto tank to confuse the enemy gunners. Didn't work very well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted December 15, 2001 Author Share Posted December 15, 2001 Steve, I think he was kidding... Nice info on the tank paint colour - however, the uniforms are the wrong colour in the first pic, - or were Centaurs crewed by Royal Marines? Tank crews wore black berets, while marines and commandos wore green... The green battledress MIGHT be an attempt to portray denims, but they are a little too green for that, aren't they???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offtaskagain Posted December 15, 2001 Share Posted December 15, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: Nice info on the tank paint colour - however, the uniforms are the wrong colour in the first pic, - or were Centaurs crewed by Royal Marines? Tank crews wore black berets, while marines and commandos wore green... <hr></blockquote> Somebody earlier in the thread said they were crewed by Marines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted December 15, 2001 Share Posted December 15, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by mccooper: - one final thing .... I wish there were lots of pics of these vehicles! Unfortunately only a handful have ever been published. <hr></blockquote> Depends upon what you're reading I suppose. Having been in the game for over 30 years, I have a lot of oddball publications, including an ancient issue of AFV-G2 which included a fairly extensive article on the Marine Support Group. Had quite a few pictures, including of models of how the Centaurs were carried on the LCT Mk.6's. Two in the well deck and a third on a built up platform that filled the bow, just aft of the normal ramp. I'll try and dig it out and scan the pictures from it, if you like. Whatever happened BTW to AFV-G2? It just faded from the scene in about 1980 (I think). Shame, excellent magazine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mccooper Posted December 15, 2001 Share Posted December 15, 2001 Hello "I'll try and dig it out and scan the pictures from it, if you like." Brain if you have any additional RM photos I would love to see them and I'm sure a number of other member of DG would as well. Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: Nice info on the tank paint colour - however, the uniforms are the wrong colour in the first pic, - or were Centaurs crewed by Royal Marines? Tank crews wore black berets, while marines and commandos wore green... I have yet to come across any rock solid refs on this issue. I don't agree with the colors that the modeler of the first Centaur used but in general its hard to say what is correct for RM soldiers. CS being sort of an ad-hoc unit of sorts (put together for the landings then disbanded) chances are they would not have a standardized uniform. Instead a mixture of RM and tanker gear. To make matters worse the RMs played so many roles during the war that I'm not even certain if there was an overall uniform for the force. On the topic of RMs wearing green berets while that is true today it was only introduced late in WWII. At that time many RMs didn't care for the color as it was considered sissy (green being associated with women) and many wore other items including the RM Blue berets. Later Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattias Posted December 15, 2001 Share Posted December 15, 2001 I for one has read the same explanation as the one given by tero in the beginning of this thread: To allow anyone outside the tank to easily communicate the location of a threat to those inside the tank, i.e. "we need fire on the house at your 100 degrees". I bit less sophisticated an explanation but in line with the direct support role of the vehicle. Or is this just another way of phrasing the same answer M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts