churchill AVRE effectiveness

[Private Bluebottle]

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.

[Michael Emrys]

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

[MikeyD]

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 ]

[flamingknives]

My memory = bad.

Explosive density ~ 1700kg/m^3

So that's a cylinder 228mm diameter by 160mm long.

[michael_wittman44]

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).

[SgtMuhammed]

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.

[Michael Emrys]

Yes, there was that famous incident of Serb Partisans disabling German tanks with Lend-Lease chewing gum.

Michael

[JasonC]

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.

[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?

[JonS]

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.

[JasonC]

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?

[Other Means]

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>

[wunwinglow]

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

[Magyar]

Another good book is "Churchill's Secret Weapons: The Story of Hobart's Funnies" by Patrick Delaforce.

linkerooni

[flamingknives]

A ream? that would be 500 sheets, no?

[JonS]

No, he said reamS, so that's at least 1000 pages. Big book.

[michael_wittman44]

Didn't some Churchill AVRE's have 152mm frontal armour??

[John Kettler]

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

[MikeyD]

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.

[Michael Emrys]

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

[michael_wittman44]

John Kettler, thanks for the info! Greatly appreciated.