Private Bluebottle Posted September 12, 2005 Share Posted September 12, 2005 I decided to email the RAC Museum at Bovington about the matter and received this reply: I have checked the `Service Instruction Book for the Churchill III and IV, A.V.R.E. Fitted With Mortar, Recoiling Spigot, Marks I and II' First Edition March 1944. This book provides information on the No.I. Demolition Bomb. There is no mention of a H.E.A.T. version. However, the shell is not described as being a H.E.S.H. type either. The No.I. Demolition Bomb had a base filled with 25/75 Pentolite or 50/50 R.D.X./T.N.T. which was then sealed with wax before the main body was filled with Nobels explosive 808. We believe the design of the No.I. Demolition Bomb is too basic to be identified as H.E.S.H. type ammunition. The closest we can come up with an individual associated with the design of the A.V.R.E. and its gun is a Canadian R.E. officer called Denovan although there is little information about his work. Re: Sir Dennis Burley Another document The Armament Design Establishment `Development of H.E.S.H. Shell by C.E.A.D. To June 1951' mentions that the Mk. 1 round, designed in 1944, for the 6.5in gun was developed entirely by Sir Dennis Burley. The 6.5 inch gun was designed for the Churchill A.V.R.E. Mk VII and fitted into Centurion A.V.R.E.s. As you are aware, Sir Dennis Burleys' work was on rounds for the recoilless rifle and there is no evidence to suggest that he worked on the No.I. Demolition Bomb for the 290mm spigot mortar. I hope this information is of help to you. Yours sincerely, Stuart Wheeler Assistant Librarian, The Tank Museum It appears I was incorrect, it wasn't HESH, per se but rather simply a bloody big HE charge. I apologise, in that regard. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted September 12, 2005 Share Posted September 12, 2005 So I was not so far off in comparing it to a mattress charge? The means of delivery is radically different, but once there the function is about the same? Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted September 12, 2005 Share Posted September 12, 2005 Pulled off another discussion forum, here's a poster's father's memoir of the AVRE: "Mr E.J.Orsbourn recalls an AVRE Mk 4 I was the driver of an AVRE and was one of those who had come from the Royal Armoured Corps... ...I always remember the time when we were told to go to a town called Goch in Germany to blow away a roadblock. We approached the roadblock to within about 80yds; it was a built out of tree’s having been driven into the ground. We fired the Petard and to our horror the dustbin round (nickname for the Petard round) fell out of the gun barrel rolled down the front of the tank and laid on the ground in front of us. That was the fastest time that I had engaged reverse gear and then reversed the tank out of harms way. " :eek: [ September 12, 2005, 09:21 AM: Message edited by: MikeyD ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted September 12, 2005 Share Posted September 12, 2005 My memory = bad. Explosive density ~ 1700kg/m^3 So that's a cylinder 228mm diameter by 160mm long. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_wittman44 Posted September 17, 2005 Share Posted September 17, 2005 I wonder if any German heavy vehicles got knocked out at close range by a Churchill AVRE? I ask this because I read this old commando comic about an AVRE knocking out a Tiger Ein (Mark One). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SgtMuhammed Posted September 17, 2005 Share Posted September 17, 2005 If you dig enough you can probably find examples of nearly everything killing nearly anything. Remember that the Western Allies didn't face that many German tanks so the odds of a specialized weapon killing a rare vehicle are quite small. Still it might have happened. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted September 17, 2005 Share Posted September 17, 2005 Yes, there was that famous incident of Serb Partisans disabling German tanks with Lend-Lease chewing gum. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonC Posted September 17, 2005 Share Posted September 17, 2005 There were a surprising number of AVRE Churchills - 750, 180 of them available by D-Day and the rest converted after that because it was deemed a success. Did they ever get close enough, that would be the question. Possible, since they were armored enough to stop 75L48 from the front. But they can't have been favored in such a confrontation - 10 times the range is too decisive an edge in most circumstances. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Other Means Posted September 17, 2005 Share Posted September 17, 2005 Does anyone have an accounts of these things being used in their intended role? They seem a strange idea. Where they to be used DF? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted September 17, 2005 Share Posted September 17, 2005 Originally posted by Other Means: Does anyone have an accounts of these things being used in their intended role? They seem a strange idea. Where they to be used DF? See: Op NEPTUNE, Boulougne(SP?), TOTALISE, Rhineland, etc. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonC Posted September 17, 2005 Share Posted September 17, 2005 They were meant to destroy concrete pillboxes. Put 20 concrete MG pillboxes on a field and give the attackers a British infantry company. Make much headway? Add 3 AVREs. Any trouble now? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Other Means Posted September 18, 2005 Share Posted September 18, 2005 Originally posted by JonS: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Other Means: Does anyone have an accounts of these things being used in their intended role? They seem a strange idea. Where they to be used DF? See: Op NEPTUNE, Boulougne(SP?), TOTALISE, Rhineland, etc. </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunwinglow Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 What you need to do is find a 'book'. Remember them? Contrary to popular belief, all human knowledge does not reside solely on this new-fangled Interweb doodah..... What you need is a copy of 'The Story of the 79th Armoured Division', published in 1946 in Hamburg, written anonymously but containing reams (that's lots...) of stuff on AVREs, Crabs, Crocodiles and the rest of Hobarts toys. I can recommend eBay; I got mine for £23.00. And before you ask, no, you can't have my copy! wunwinglow 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magyar Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 Another good book is "Churchill's Secret Weapons: The Story of Hobart's Funnies" by Patrick Delaforce. linkerooni 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 A ream? that would be 500 sheets, no? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 No, he said reamS, so that's at least 1000 pages. Big book. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_wittman44 Posted September 20, 2005 Share Posted September 20, 2005 Didn't some Churchill AVRE's have 152mm frontal armour?? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted September 21, 2005 Share Posted September 21, 2005 michael_wittman44, I believe the AVREs were all made from early model Churchills, whereas the Crocodiles were built from later, better protected versions. If BFC got the armor thicknesses right, this was borne out in one CMBO ROW scenario a few years ago. In it, I found out that an AVRE hit frontally was a tasty Pak 40 treat, but a Croc ate a Pak 40 PB with cannon fire--after sustaining at least three direct hits--at close range. If any Funny had 152mm frontal armor, my bet would be that it was the Crocodile, not the AVRE. Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted September 22, 2005 Share Posted September 22, 2005 Postwar AVREs were based on the late Churchill chassis - plus they had a proper demolition gun. Those types didn't make it to WWII but I think a couple made it into Korea. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted September 22, 2005 Share Posted September 22, 2005 John is right about the AVRE being based on earlier Churchills, the Mk. III and IV. These had a max of 102mm of armor, although Chamberlain & Ellis claim that the cast turret on the later mark offered better protection. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_wittman44 Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 John Kettler, thanks for the info! Greatly appreciated. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.