United Kingdom (1942-1943)
Semi-Amphibious Cargo Vehicle – 3 Prototypes Built
The Hexonaut’s story began between 1942 and 1943. Operating in Burma (now Myanmar) during the Second World War, the British ‘Forgotten Army’ – the 14th Army – had as much of an enemy in the harsh terrain of the land as they did in the Japanese soldier. Burmese terrain was rough to say the least, with dense jungle, marsh and swamp land, rivers, and large bodies of water everywhere. This harsh landscape was tough on vehicles, and narrow jungle trails made it hard for large cargo transport vehicles to navigate and reach troops with their precious supplies.
What was required was a smaller, all-terrain vehicle, small enough to navigate this terrain while still carrying a useful load. It was the venerable Humber company, no stranger to producing military vehicles for the War Office (WO), that believed they had just the vehicle for the task.
A British company, Humber had been in business since 1887. They initially produced bicycles, and later manufactured motorbikes and cars. In the early 1930s, they would become a subsidiary of the Rootes Group. With wartime, Humber pitched into the national effort, producing a number of highly successful wheeled armored vehicles. These included staff cars, the Humber Armored Car, the Light Reconnaissance Car, and the 8 cwt Cargo Truck, among others. General Bernard ‘Monty’ Montgomery would even have them specially modify two of their Super Snipe cars into armored staff cars and used them in North Africa and Italy.
General Bernard ‘Monty’ Montgomery in one of two custom-built Humber Super Snipe cars in Italy, 1943. Photo: Wikimedia Commons
Development
The vehicle Humber would come up with would be named the ‘Hexonaut’- presumably derived from the fact it had six wheels and nautical aspirations. The GS in the full name is a little harder to explain, as there is no record. One could assume it stood for ‘General Service’, but this is just speculation. Only three prototype vehicles were built. Most of the known detail comes from the surviving records and photographs of ‘Prototype No.1’. Any unique differences and updates made between the vehicles are sadly lost to history.
Humber had grand plans for their Hexonaut. Ideally, the vehicle needed to be small enough and light enough to fit in, and be carried by a C-47 Dakota transport plane. The ability to be parachute dropped was also desired, along with the ability to float. The vehicle was not a true amphibian, being designed with essentially deep-fording in mind, rather than traversing large bodies of water on the surface.
Head-on view of the Hexonaut showing its rather narrow silhouette. Note the central driver’s cab, with the exhaust on his left and the fuel tank to his right. The plate at the bottom covers the radiator for wading. Photo: Wheels & Tracks No. 35
Design Overview
The design of the Hexonaut consisted of a narrow space-frame hull some 4 ½ feet wide (1.35 m) with an overall length of about just under 11 ½ feet (3.50 m). The rear of the hull was square, while the front sloped inwards forming a bow. The vehicle was reasonably tall, at 7 ½ feet (2.30 m). Placed on the side of the hull were 6 large tractor-like wheels fitted with deep-treaded tyres and 6-wheel drive, mounted tightly with only a few inches between them. It is estimated that the vehicle weighed approximately 3-tons (3.5 tonnes).
The upper portion of the vehicle consisted of a forward driver’s cab with a windshield that could be folded down onto the sloping nose. To the rear of the driver was a large cargo bed about 6 foot (1.8 m) long sharing the width of the vehicle, with rigid side panels and a drop-down tailgate. Capacity was 1-ton of cargo or 8 troops. The roof of the vehicle consisted of a canvas cover supported by hoops and tied down to the bed. Transparent inserts were provided for the rear of the vehicle.
Hexonaut ‘Prototype No. 1’. With its 6×6 drive and narrow silhouette, it was definitely a unique vehicle among Humber’s other militaristic endeavours. Photo: Wheels & Tracks No. 35
Propulsion
Designers of the Hexonaut would employ a propulsion layout that would later appear on the Morris Company’s Terrapin ‘4-ton Amphibian’. A pair of Humber/Hillman 14hp, four-cylinder engines would be placed back-to-back in the lower hull. The forward engine (under the driver’s seat) powered the right 3 wheels, while the rear engine (under the cargo bed) powered the left 3 wheels and a winch for self-recovery. Both engines ran 4-speed Hillman gearboxes and transfer cases attached to the rear of each engine. A single gear stick controlled both gearboxes. The whole system shared one exhaust – to the left of the driver – and one radiator found in the nose. Fuel was carried in a small tank (capacity unknown) placed on the right of the driver. Provision was made for the stowage of two ‘jerry’ cans behind the driver’s head. However, on a later vehicle, this was replaced with an air cleaner system. Altogether, this system provided a blistering road speed of 20 mph (32 km/h) – this would of course be reduced off-road.
Hexonaut rolled on 6 large steel-disc wheels fitted with large, deep-cleated tires. There was no suspension, the wheel hubs being directly mounted to the final drive stations, which were bolted to the hull. Steering was achieved via tank-style tiller bars, and effectively used a similar ‘skid-steer’ principle. To turn right, for example, one would throttle up the left wheel’s engine and apply breaks to the wheels on the right – and vice versa. It was said that pulling hard on one stick while pushing hard on the other would let the vehicle make a sharp – almost – pivot steer. Six wheels provide a lot of ground friction, making turning difficult. It was found this could also stall an engine. To combat this, the middle wheel was minted ever-so-slightly lower than the fore and aft pair. While making pivoting easier, this had the unfortunate side-effect of creating a seesaw effect when driving on a hard surface. On soft ground, it was not a problem, as the wheels partially sank into the ground, canceling out the imbalance.
The power-train layout of the Hexonaut. The centrally aligned engines are clear to see, as are their drive shafts to the respective wheels. This diagram also shows the radiator at the front, and the powered winch at the rear. Photo: Wheels & Tracks No. 35
Mud-Skipper
Hexonaut was not designed to be ‘amphibious’ in the true sense of the word. It was not designed to float over large water bodies. Its design catered more to deep-wading, and the traversing of extremely muddy bog and swamp areas that a standard vehicle would likely drown in. Its boat-like bow would carve a path while its deep-tread tires would push it through the slop.
To keep the vehicle watertight and in-turn add flotation, gasketed steel plates would be tightly sealed against the radiator grill at the front of the vehicle and the open winch compartment at the rear. These plates were held in-place by tightened wing-nuts. When not in use, they were presumably stowed in the cargo bed.
Rear view of the Hexonaut. The transparent windows in the canvas roof are plainly visible. Note also the rear tailgate, and water-tight plate on the bottom of the vehicle. Behind this was the winch. Photo: Wheels & Tracks No. 35
That Sinking Feeling
Ultimately, the Hexonaut would prove to be something of a failed experiment. One major flaw was the steering system. It was found that any faults with the running of one of the engines – reduced speed, loss of power, full on stall – could catastrophically affect the steering. Depending on which engine had a fault, the vehicle could snap to one side. Given the vehicle was rather tall, narrow, and without seat belts, this could be highly traumatic for the driver. This could be considered not ideal.
The Hexonaut project ended before it had reached full development, and no more than the three prototypes were produced. One of these was tested by the Wheeled Vehicle Experimental Establishment (WVEE) at Farnborough (Hampshire, South England), but the outcome of these trials are unknown. It was still in military possession in June 1946, when it was displayed at an exhibition of military equipment and vehicles at the Fighting Vehicle Research and Development Establishment (FVRDE) in Chertsey (Surrey, South England). After this, the story of Hexonaut turns to mystery.
Life After Death
One of the Hexonaut prototypes did somehow survive, however. Whether this was the same vehicle seen at the FVRDE exhibition is unknown. The vehicle was acquired via Government Surplus Auction by one Mr. Stanward, and found civilian use in Somerset (Southwest England). Much of the superstructure was removed – but kept – and a large crane was added to the cargo bed. It was used to haul lumber until the mid-1950s.
The surviving Hexonaut as it looked while under civilian operation from the 1950s to 1970s. Note the addition of the large crane, itself powered by a third engine. The gentleman at the controls is Mr. Stanward of Somerset. Photo: Wheels & Tracks No. 35.
The vehicle was used hard and, in 1971, the vehicle changed hands again, this time falling into the collection of Geoff Theobald of Exeter. It was then later sold to Guy Arend of the Belgian Victory Memorial Museum, Arlon. Mr. Arend restored the vehicle to a semi-accurate state with what materials were available. Unfortunately, his museum went bankrupt in 1998, and the collection was spread around the world. The Hexonaut would not surface again until 2012, when it was put up for auction by RM Sotheby’s at The National Military History Center, Indiana, USA, on the 8th of December. It sold for almost $50,000 (almost £40,000 at that time). What happened to it after that is unclear, although it would now appear (as of 2024) that it belongs to the Wheatcroft Collection (Leicestershire, Central England). Quite a journey.
Conclusion
The ‘Hexonaut’ was little more than a private venture by Humber. A largely forgotten vehicle, it is by pure luck some original photos have survived. These were found in a clear out of Devonshire House in Piccadilly, London, once a headquarters of the Rootes Company. Rootes themselves practically ignored the vehicle, focussing more on Humber’s more successful military vehicles.
Nonetheless, the Hexonaut is an example of alternative thinking that – had it entered service – could have really found a use in the environment it was intended for. The Humber’s contemporaries, such as Morris’ Terrapin, would have a far more successful story, still, little vehicles like the Hexonaut should not be ignored as part of armored vehicle design history. It is lucky that one still survives, more than can be said for many other experimental oddities. Humber would continue to produce armored vehicles well into the Cold War era. The most famous of these are the FV1611 Humber Pig Armoured Car and FV1620 Humber Hornet Missile Carrier.
The surviving Hexonaut at the RM Sotheby’s auction in 2012. Photo: RM SothebyThe Humber Hexonaut GS 6×6. One of those unique military designs that was largely forgotten. Illustration by Pavel ‘Carpaticus’ Alexe, funded by our Patreon Campaign.
Specifications
Dimensions (L-W-H)
11ft x 4 ½ ft x 7 ½ ft
(3.50 x 1.35 x 2.30 m)
Crew
1 driver
Weight
Approx. 3-tons (3.5 tonnes)
Load capacity
1-ton of cargo/8 troops
Propulsion
2x Humber/Hillman 14hp, four-cylinder engines
Speed (road)
20 mph (32 km/h)
Sources
T.L.O. (Technical Liaison Office) Report No. 2 – 15th January 1944.
T.T.2 Technical Liaison Report No. 16 – November 6th 1944.
AFV Weapons Profile No. 21: Armoured Cars: Guy, Daimler, Humber, AEC, 1970
Wheels & Tracks Magazine No. 35, Pg. 15 – 19, 1991.
Stephen Lewis, Humber Cars: The Post War Years, Amberley Publishing, 2021 RM Sothebys
United Kingdom (1950)
Heavy Gun Tank – 3 Prototypes Built
In the early years of the Cold War, Western powers felt somewhat outmatched and outgunned by the Red Army of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). With its display at the 1945 Berlin Victory Parade, the Soviet IS-3 heavy tank sent a chill down Allied spines. With its piked nose, heavy armor, and large caliber gun, the Soviets had, apparently, taken a huge leap forward in armored vehicle design.
The race was on. France, Britain, and the US immediately began the design and development of their own heavy or heavily armed tanks. The Americans would create the 120 mm Gun Tank M103, while the French experimented with the AMX-50. Both of these tanks had 120 mm guns that would – it was hoped – be able to combat the IS-3 threat. The British would pursue two avenues of design, the Medium Gun Tank ‘Centurion’, and the FV214 Heavy Gun Tank ‘Conqueror’. In development since the middle of the Second World War, the Centurion had just entered service, but at this time it was only armed with the 17-pounder gun. It was projected that it would soon be equipped with the 20-pounder (84 mm) gun, but still, a more powerful gun was desired.
This is where the development of the FV214 came in. Part of the FV200 ‘Universal Tank’ program and a descendant of the A.45/FV201, the FV214 was projected to be armed with a 120 mm gun. At the time, this was to be the heaviest and most powerful gun tank ever created for the British military. Commonality was sought with the American T58 120 mm gun. The T58 itself was too heavy, so it was redesigned by the Armaments Design Establishment (ADE) – a process that took 3 years. The resulting gun would be known as the Ordnance Quick-Firing 120 mm.
However, like previous projects, it would become apparent that the gun would be ready before there was a method of mounting it on a vehicle. In a race to get the new gun in action, an interim design was developed. This resulted in the FV4004 Heavy Gun Tank program, mounting the QF 120 mm Gun – which would later be designated the L1 – on the Centurion’s chassis.
The term ‘Heavy Gun Tank’ was a uniquely British designation. It referred to the size and power of the gun, not the size and weight of the tank. Heavy Gun Tanks were specifically designed to destroy enemy tanks and/or fortified positions.
The FV4004, also known as ‘Conway’, when it was on display at The Tank Museum, Bovington. Photo: Overlord.
Development of the ‘Conway’
In the early 1950s, with the FV214 project far from complete, the British ‘Top Brass’ grew concerned that a war may be imminent with the USSR. If that were to happen, there was a fear that they would have no tank field-ready that would be capable of taking on the perceived threat of the IS-3 – at the time thought to be produced in large numbers – and, perhaps, any future heavy tank that the USSR might bring to the table. As a counter, by autumn 1950, an “up-gunning” program was devised by the War Office (WO). This sought to take existing hulls, such as the Cromwell, Centurion, and even the archaic Churchills, and fit them with guns such as the 20-pounder, 120 mm, and a proposed 180 mm gun. The 20-pounder project evolved into the Cromwell-based FV4101 Charioteer, while the 120 mm would become the Centurion-based FV4004. The 180 mm project would become another Centurion-based vehicle – the infamous FV4005.
It was proposed by the Head of the Fighting Vehicle Research and Development Establishment (FVRDE. FVDE until 1952) that the newly developed 120 mm L1 heavy gun intended for the FV214 could be placed on the Centurion’s existing hull. This stand-in design – simply designated ‘Centurion 120mm’ at this time – would be a short-term counter to the IS-3, and would get the gun into service while the FV214 was still undergoing development. At a meeting at the FVRDE on 2nd October 1950, the proposal of this ‘Stop-Gap Heavy Gun Tank’ was approved. This was actually the second time the Centurion had been suggested as a mount for the 120 mm gun, after it had initially been dismissed as being “too much work”.
As highlighted by the post-project report extract below:
“The design of the short-term Heavy Gun Tank was influenced by two main considerations:-
1. The urgency with which it was required in the Service.
2. The need to produce it without interfering with the Centurion 20 pr. tank gun production programme and the development and production of the longer term Conqueror Heavy Gun Tank.”
– WO 194/300, “FV4004, 120mm, GUN TANK ‘CONWAY’ ”, L. C. Monger, 19/5/58
With these considerations in mind, the Mk.III Centurion’s hull was chosen, with minimal alterations other than hull ammunition stowage and minor cosmetic changes.
Early mock-up small-scale model of the FV4004 showing a proposed design for the new turret armed with the 120 mm Gun on the existing Mk.III Centurion’s hull. Photo: Ed Webster
Although, on the face of it, this would be an easy conversion, some rather important practical considerations had to be taken due to the increased weight and the resulting shift in balance/center of gravity. The foremost issue was that of suspension loading. It was felt, that if the gun was mounted on its trunnions (vertical pivot) in a standard low-profile turret, ie, far-forward (allowing the gun and breech to recoil in the internal space of the turret ring), the center of gravity would be so far forward that it would put excessive wear on the forward suspension units, drastically shortening their service life. It would also, of course, imbalance the turret.
The imbalance of the turret would also prevent it from rotating correctly with the existing traverse mechanism. Expansion of the turret ring was out of the question due to the aforementioned requirement so as to not affect the continuing development of the standard Centurion. The simple solution was to raise the gun drastically, allowing it to recoil into the turret bustle. There were pros and cons to this solution, however. Pros; it did not affect the production of the standard tank and – if needed – allowed spent cartridges – sizeable chunks of brass in the case of the 120 mm – to be ejected directly out of the turret via a ‘trap door’. Cons; the increased height of the turret meant a larger overall profile – a bigger target – and the gun’s vertical traverse would be limited to just -5º to +10º.
The same scale model from above, seen from a different angle showing the turret face. Photo: Ed Webster
In these early stages of development, the vehicle was simply called ‘Centurion 120mm’ or ‘FV4004 Centurion’. It was not until later that it would become known as the Conway, named after the Welsh town of Conwy, anglicized to Conway.
The FV4004 ‘Conway’ in Detail
Base: The Centurion
Being the basis of the FV4004, it is only appropriate to take a brief look at the Centurion. Centurion was developed in the latter stages of the Second World War as the A.41. While it was ready by the war’s culmination, it was too late to see action. Further development of the tank resulted in the FV4007 Centurion Mk.III.
The hull of the Mk.III was specifically chosen for the FV4004 program. This model of Centurion appeared in the early 1950s. Upgrades over the previous Mk.II included the replacement of the venerable 17-pounder (76.2 mm) gun with the newly developed, more powerful 20-pounder (84 mm) gun. The coaxial BESA machine gun was also replaced with a more NATO standardized .30 Cal. (7.62 mm) Browning M1919A4 (L3A1 in British service).
As already discussed, apart from the negation of the regular turret, the hull would remain mostly unaltered. The armor on the hull remained the same thickness, with about 3 inches (76 mm) at roughly 60º on the front slope. A 650 hp Rolls-Royce Meteor petrol engine, located at the rear of the vehicle, propelled the tank. The Centurion used a Horstmann-style suspension, with three bogies per side carrying two wheels each. The drive sprocket was at the rear, with the idler at the front. The driver was located at the front right of the hull.
The Centurion Mk.III. The FV4004 was to be based on Mk.III hulls should it have ever entered service. Photo: super-hobby
The Centurion was one of the most successful tanks ever produced by the UK. It would go on to serve for decades thanks to various forms of upgrades. It would also serve multiple countries and spawn multiple variants based on its hull. These included vehicles such as the FV4003 AVRE, FV4006 ARV, FV4018 BARV, and many others.
The New Turret
The most important feature of the proposed vehicle was, of course, a new turret, the design of which was also influenced by the necessity to not hinder the standard Centurion’s development/production. The new turret had to be capable of housing the 120 mm gun practically while making it comfortable for the three turret crew to operate in its confines.
Auster Aircraft Limited of Leicestershire was charged with the design of the turret. Initially, this consisted of a mostly symmetrical octagon, rather angular in its design, utilizing a welded construction. This had a few benefits, namely, it would not interfere with the casting of the standard Centurion’s turrets, and would also allow previously unsuitable foundries to contribute to production. The turret’s face featured a large single-piece plate, narrowing to the top. It was sloped to the rear, the gun placed high and center with a large square mantlet. The turret cheeks were large, square, and equally sloped to the rear.
The design would change over the development process, keeping the octagonal shape, but becoming far more asymmetrical. The mantlet became less square, and more rectangular, with an opening on the left side for a coaxial machine gun – a component not on the original mock-up. Around the mantlet, mounting brackets were installed for a canvas cover. There was also an alteration to the turret face – the insertion of the inset, angled triangular plates at the lower left and right corners. This proposed change was aimed at reducing obstruction to the driver when the turret was traversed, just in case he needed to leave in a hurry.
Photo of the FV4004 prototype showing the inset triangular plates, intended to make life easier for the driver should he need to bail out. Also, note four lifting ‘eyes’ at the top of the turret. Photo: The Tank Museum
On both the left and right turret cheeks, there were mounting points for the standard ‘Discharger, Smoke Grenade, No. 1 Mk.1’ launchers. Each launcher featured two banks of three tubes and was fired electrically from inside the tank. Another addition was that of stowage bins installed on the left and right of the turret. Four in total, they were seemingly taken straight from Centurions with minor alterations to fit the new profile. This would make sense, taking the development ethos into account.
At the rear of the turret was a large two-piece door. As well as for crew access, this also allowed empty propellant cases to be ejected directly out the back during firing – propelled by recoil alone – or to be tossed out by the crew. Measuring almost 3 feet (91 cm) long and weighing up to 60.9 pounds (27.6 kg) when live, the cases would have taken up considerable space in the turret should a large number of rounds be discharged. The doors were manually opened, but it was proposed that these be automated in later models – should the vehicle have entered full-scale production. Just above the top-right corner of this door, on the rearmost angled plate of the turret side, was a mounting point for a spool of telephone wire – known as the ‘Cable, Reel, Continuous Connection’ – that was carried by most British tanks of the time. It would be used in bivouac areas when the tanks were in their defensive positions. The wire was hooked up to each tank and allowed them to discreetly communicate without broadcasting their positions via radio.
Photo of the FV4004 when it was on exterior display, at the mercy of the elements. Note the two-piece rear door and stowage bins. Also, note the ‘nub’ just to the top right corner of the door. This is the mounting point for the wire wheel. Photo: John Durston
The turret crew consisted of the commander, gunner, and loader. The gunner was positioned at the front right of the turret. He controlled the gun using the ‘No. 3 Mk.1’ control, and aimed via the ‘Sight Periscopic AFV No. 9 Mk.1’ that protruded through the roof above him. He had no other vision outside the vehicle and also did not have a hatch of his own. Directly behind him, in a slightly elevated position that required a ‘step-up’ in the turret roof, was the commander. To his front were three ‘Tank, Periscope, No. 18 Mk.1’ vision periscopes, with another single ‘No. 18 Mk.1’ scope to his rear – capable of rotation – under the stepped-up armor. He could also assist in gun sighting via a back-up ‘Blade Vane Sight, No. 6 Mk.1’ lined up with the center scope – another item taken from the existing Centurion. He also had the ‘Range Finder, Artillery, No. 2 Mk.7’ at his disposal. The commander had a single round hatch that opened upwards and swung back. Behind him, to his left, would be the radio, specified as the ‘Set No. 19/31’. The loader was located on the left of the turret. As well as servicing the main gun, he would also be responsible for reloading the coaxial machine gun. Like the commander, he had a simple round hatch in the turret roof and, unlike the gunner, had his own rotating ‘No. 18 Mk.1 periscope, located at the front left corner of the turret roof.
Two interior photos taken inside the wooden mock-up turret. Left: The loader’s position showing the breech of the mock 120 mm with dummy 120 mm projectiles underneath. Dummy propellent cases can be seen on the left, with ammunition boxes for the coaxial machine gun in the background. Right: The gunner’s position complete with his seat. The traverse and elevation controls can be seen, as well as his periscopic sight and foot trigger. Photos: Ed Webster.
Armor protection for the turret comprised a face of 5 3/16 inches (132 mm) sloped at 19° and 3 ¾ inches (95 mm) thick cheeks. This was comparable to the standard Centurion. The turret sides were 1⅞ inches (48 mm) thick, while the rearmost side plates and back of the turret were just 1 3/16 inches (30 mm) thick. The roof armor consisted of a 0.6 inch (17 mm) plate.
As expected, the new turret increased the vertical profile of the vehicle, but not drastically, with a height of 10 feet 6 inches (3.2 m). For reference, a standard Centurion was 9 foot 7¾ inches (2.9 m) high, making FV4004 approximately just 10 inches (approx. 25 cm) taller. Weight was also not adversely affected, with the FV4004 weighing in at around 50 tons* (50.1 tonnes), much the same as the standard gun tank.
*As this is a British vehicle, mass will be measured in ‘Long Ton’ otherwise known as the ‘Imperial ton’. It will be shortened to ‘ton’ for ease, with a metric conversion alongside.
Transport Schematic of the FV4004 dated 4th November 1952. This shows the various lifting and tie-down points for vehicle and railway loading. Photo: Ed Webster
Armament
Had the FV4004 reached production, it would have been armed with the ‘Ordnance Quick-Firing (QF) 120 mm Tank, L1’. However, at the time of testing, it was not yet known by that designation. It was simply designated the ‘QF 120mm’, as it was still in the late stages of development. The weapon had only undergone its first live-fire tests in May-June 1951.
Weighing in at 2.9 tons (3 tonnes) with a length of 24.3 feet (7.4 m), it was a monstrous weapon. It existed in two forms: L1A1 and L1A2. The A1 and A2 were basically identical, other than two minor alterations. The A2 was threaded for a break at the muzzle end (pictures of a muzzle break fitted to this gun are scarce). There was also a difference in the bore evacuator (fume extractor) placed halfway down the barrel. On the A1, it was rather small and narrow, while on the A2, it was much thicker in diameter. At the breech’s end, on the left and right of the gun, were large buffers to manage recoil. Much of the turret’s internal volume would have been occupied by the large breech block, making it a tight squeeze for the three turret crew.
In the FV4004, the 120 mm was partially stabilized. To quote report WO 194/300: “Part stabilised in elevation only, for gun holding but not for fire control.” This has not been confirmed, but this is likely referring to a ‘carry mode’ (it should be noted this theory is supported by noted Conqueror expert and author Bob Griffin). This mode was a safety measure shared with the FV214. Once the tank passed a certain speed, the gun was automatically disconnected from the elevation system. The idea behind this ‘carry mode’ was that it put less stress on the gun cradle if the 2.9 ton gun was not locked into the system as the tank negotiated terrain. This effectively meant that the gunner was just along for the ride, having no control over the free-floating gun. As the vehicle would not be firing on the move, this was not seen as an issue. Once the vehicle halted, the gunner would be able to regain control.
The FV4004 with turret traverse to the rear for travel. The 24.3 foot (7.4 m) long L1A1 gun is resting in the gun crutch or ‘travel lock’. Photo: Ed Webster
For long road drives or carriage via road haulage or railway transport, a new gun crutch ‘travel lock’ was needed. It would appear that the crutch was taken straight from the Conqueror. It was retro-fitted to the right-rear corner of the engine deck. The turret would be traversed to the rear for travel.
Just two types of ammunition types were available to the 120 mm: Armor-Piercing Discarding Sabot (APDS) and High-Explosive Squash Head (HESH). Both ammunition types were ‘two-stage’, meaning the shell was loaded separately from the propellant. The gun was loaded manually by the loader. It was not the easiest of tasks, as the projectiles were large and cumbersome. The APDS projectile weighed in at 21.4 pounds (9.7 kg), while the HESH shell weighed in at 35.3 pounds (16 kg). The gargantuan brass propellant cases were equally hefty, with the APDS case weighing in at 60.9 pounds (27.6 kg), and the HESH’s weighing in at 41.5 pounds (18.8 kg). The APDS round had a muzzle velocity of approximately 4,700 fps (1,433 m/s) and could penetrate up to 15.3 inches (390 mm) of flat steel armor – or 120 mm (4.7 in) of 55º angled steel armor – at 1,000 yards (914 m). The HESH projectiles had the advantage of consistent effectiveness regardless of the target range. The shell, which had a velocity of 2,500 fps (762 m/s), created effective spalling on armor of up to 4.7 inches (120 mm) thick, angled at 60º. It also served as a dual-use round just as capable of engaging enemy armor as a high-explosive round against buildings, enemy defensive positions, or soft-skinned targets.
Ammunition of the Conqueror: (L to R) Armor-Piercing Discarding Sabot (APDS), High-Explosive Squash Head (HESH), propellent case. Photos: Bob Griffin
Due to the large size of the ammunition, a rather small number of 20 rounds would be carried, divided between the two types. A total of 11 ‘ready-rounds’ were stowed in the turret, while the rest of the ammunition was placed next to the driver.
To the left of the main gun was the standard 30 Cal. L3A1, otherwise known as the Browning M1919A4, coaxial machine gun. To keep the coaxial fed, fifteen 250-round boxes of 30 Cal. (7.62 mm) ammunition would be carried.
The best summary of the FV4004’s design – known as the ‘Centurion 120mm’ in the early stages of development – is provided by the head of the project, Colonel E. H. Tinker:
“In producing the Centurion 120 mm my intention was to equip regiments at the earliest possible time with a proportion of heavy gun tanks capable of defeating the heaviest armour at long ranges. I regard this prolicy as being of overiding importance and have therefore accepted the disadvantages of silhouette and the small number of rounds carried, fully realising the implication. I feel that the appearance of this tank with its large gun and turret gives an exaggerated impression of tactical unsuitability. In fact, the height of the Centurion 120mm is only 10” greater than the [Centurion] Mk.III. It is possible that actual field trials will prove first impressions to have been over-pessimistic.”
– Col. E. H. Tinker, 12/5/52
Trials
A small number of turrets were constructed to undergo live fire-from and fire-at tests. Remarkably, for the fire-at tests – due to lack of available L1 guns – the turrets were fitted with leftover 8.8 cm Kw.K. 36 L/56 guns from the German Tiger I. The turrets were subjected to fire from both 6-pounder and 17-pounder guns, primarily to test the armor protection, but also to test the strength of the gun mounting equipment. The mantlet was found to be immune to the 17-pounder’s Armor-Piercing Capped Ballistic Capped (APCBC) rounds, however, hits to the turret face itself – while still preventing penetration – resulted in internal spalling. This was also found to be the case with machine gun rounds fired at the sides of the turret.
Trial turret fitted with an old 8.8 cm KwK 36 gun from the notorious Tiger. Note the weights added to the end of the barrel. Photo: Ed Webster/Armoured Archives
At least two test bed vehicles were used for the tests, coming from stocks of older reserve Centurions. One hull, ‘Hull Number 03ZR06’, likely recycled from an old Mk.II’s hull Armored Recovery Vehicle (ARV), was used for mounting tests. It was fitted with a nearly complete wooden mock-up turret and gun. This was later replaced with a soft steel version. The second vehicle, ‘Hull Number 07BA67’, was used for fire-from trials.
Two 120 mm guns were acquired from Royal Arsenal, Woolwich. Although the base vehicle was far lighter than the upcoming FV214 Conqueror, it was still found to be a suitably stable mount for the 120 mm gun, which retained its accuracy firing both APDS and HESH up to 2,000 yards (1,800 m). It did, however, create a lot of obscuration – smoke, dust, debris from the muzzle blast – upon discharge, hindering the ability to monitor the ‘fall of shot’ or strike on target.
Wooden mock-up turret and 120 mm L1 on Centurion hull 03ZR06. Photo: Ed Webster
The wear on the suspension was also extensively tested. The overall weight change would be relatively minor, projected at 50 tons battle-ready, much the same as the standard Centurion Mk.III. For suspension tests, Centurion ‘Hull Number 03ZR01’ was selected. The turret was stripped back, then weighted to simulate the projected weight and match the center of gravity of the FV4004’s turret. There was considerable weight transfer between the front and rear suspension units as the turret rotated. It was the opinion by many that the Centurion chassis had reached its load limit at 50 tons (50.1 tonnes).
The running trials proved that the Centurion’s chassis was a suitable mount, but the altered center of gravity did produce increased wear on the suspension, as this report extract highlights:
“The trial has shown that the Centurion suspension, when fitted to F.V.4004, may be expected to give reasonably satisfactory service. It is apparent that there is not much margin of strength in bump stops and springs, etc. May need to be renewed more frequently. Road wheels also may be expected to have a somewhat shorter life than normal.”
– Report No. F.T.1970: ‘FVPE Automotive Wing Report On Condition of the Suspension of a Centurion Tank Weighted to Represent F.V.4004’, C. V. Cleare, 15/4/52
Tactical Application
Production was planned to commence in early 1952. By April 1953, it was expected that at least 50 FV4004s would be ready to enter service, a year earlier than the FV214, of which 50 were projected to be ready by April 1954. This initial 50-vehicle batch would be deployed with the Armoured Regiments or Divisions of the British Army Of the Rhine (BAOR) stationed on the frontline in West Germany. Squadrons would be allocated 9 vehicles each.
The felt need of this vehicle should not be understated. Military heads wanted a 120 mm armed vehicle in the field as soon as humanly possible. Perhaps, the Ministry of Supply’s Fighting Vehicles Division’s Development Progress Report No. 30, Nov 1951 – Apr. 1952, exemplifies the urgency:
“There are very sound reasons for putting the 120mm equipment in the Armd Regt, as it is impossible to tell at what stage in any battle the JS.3 [IS-3] – or indeed an improved version developed since 1945 – may be met. It is an insurance and in my view we cannot afford to take the risk of having our Armd Regts ‘seen-off’ by a few of these heavy tanks…”
– Col. E. H. Tinker, 12/4/52
As well as physically, the FV4004 would have taken the place of the FV214 tactically speaking, should the Cold War suddenly have become ‘hot’. Its role on the battlefield would likely have been much the same, filling a support role to other vehicles, rather than striking out on its own – designed to destroy enemy tanks from afar, covering the advance of the lighter 20-pounder- armed Centurions. The tank’s relatively light armor would also necessitate this application. In offensive operations, the vehicle would likely be placed in overwatch positions and fire over the heads of the main force as it advanced. In defensive operations, FV4004 would again probably take an overwatch role, but this time from key strategic positions to meet an advancing enemy.
Brothers in arms: a Centurion Mk.III alongside a Conqueror Mk.I. The FV4004 would have likely fulfilled the same role on the battlefield as the coming Heavy Tank. Photo: Profile Publications
Conway to ‘Gone-way’
In the end, the project ended without the vehicle entering service. The war with the Soviet Union never happened, and, come 1955, the Conqueror itself was ready to enter service. There was now no gap to fill. Even so, the Conqueror would only last in service for 11 years, being retired in 1966. Years later, it was also found that the fear inspired by the USSR’s IS-3 to the Western Allies in 1945 was largely overblown. It was not produced anywhere near the numbers feared and did not last long in frontline service. It would come to face combat in the Middle East during the Six-Day War of 1967, where its failings were made apparent to the public.
Of the two almost complete vehicles, only one now survives. It is located in the Vehicle Conservation Center at The Tank Museum, Bovington. Having been on static display outside for several years, it is in a rather badly deteriorated state.
The lone surviving FV4004 sat inside the Vehicle Conservation Center (VCC) at The Tank Museum, Bovington pictured in 2021. After years at the mercy of the elements, it is in a rather sorry state. Photo: Wikimedia Commons
The FV4004 was not the only Centurion-based ‘Heavy Gun Tank’ project under development at this time. With a similar goal, the other project – designated FV4005 ‘Centaur’ – was aimed at bringing the gargantuan 183 mm L4 gun to the field, while its intended mount, the FV215 Heavy Gun Tank, was in development. In the same fashion, the existing Centurion was selected as the base of the project, with a new turret added to hold the gun.
Using much of the same components, the FV215 would have followed the FV214 Conqueror into service. As it turned out, it did not pass mock-up stages, although the gun was built and test-fired numerous times. Like the Conway, mock-ups and trial turrets were produced and put through their paces.
The FV4005 during trials. This vehicle, the turret at least, also survives at The Tank Museum and is currently undergoing restoration. Photo: Photo: The Dark Age of Tanks, David Lister. Colorized by Jaycee “Amazing Ace” Davis.Representation of the FV4004 early prototype. It has the test barrel mounted and none of the stowage bins that would later be added.Representation of what the FV4004 may have looked like if it had entered service. The turret has had numerous stowage bins added, and the vehicle is armed with the intended L1 120mm Gun.The FV4004 with the 120mm gun in the travel lock. With the turret located we can see the raised commanders cupola in the turret roof.
These illustrations were produced by Ardhya Anargha, funded by our Patreon Campaign
Specifications
Dimensions (L-W-H)
25ft 7in x 11ft 1in x 10ft 6in
(7.82 x 3.39 x 3.2 m)
Total weight
50 tons (50.1 tonnes)
Crew
4 (driver, gunner, commander, loaders)
Propulsion
Rolls-Royce Meteor; 5-speed Merrit-Brown Z51R Mk.F gearbox 650 hp (480 kW), later BL 60, 695 bhp
Hull (front): 3 in (76mm) @ 60º
Turret (front): 5 3/16 in (132 mm) @ 19°
Turret (cheeks): 3 ¾ in (95 mm)
Turret (sides): 1 ⅞ in (48 mm)
Turret (rear): 1 3/16 inches (30 mm)
Turret (roof): 0.6 in (17 mm)
Sources
This article was produced with the assistance of Armoured Vehicle Archivist, Ed Webster.
WO 194/300 ‘FVRDE, Project Co-Ordination Tracked Vehicles Branch Report – ‘FV4004, 120mm, GUN TANK ‘CONWAY’ ‘, L. C. Monger, 19/5/58, National Archives
WO 291/1416 ‘Army Operational Research Group, Memorandum No. E.13: Tank Effectiveness, Conqueror, Conway and Charioteer’, A. V. Longman, June 1954, National Archives
Ministry of Supply, FVRDE, Report No. AR 145: ‘Firing Trials with the 120mm Gun in ‘Conway’ – FV4004’, C. J. Wieland, 14/12/53, National Archives
Fighting Vehicles Proving Establishment (FVPE), Report No. F.T.1970: ‘FVPE Automotive Wing Report On Condition of the Suspension of a Centurion Tank Weighted to Represent F.V.4004’, F. G. L. Coates, 9/4/52
Fighting Vehicle Design Establishment (FVDE), Report No. F.T.1970: ‘FVPE Automotive Wing Report On Condition of the Suspension of a Centurion Tank Weighted to Represent F.V.4004’, C. V. Cleare, 15/4/52
Ministry of Supply, Fighting Vehicles Division, Development Progress Report No. 28, April 1951.
Ministry of Supply, Fighting Vehicles Division, Development Progress Report No. 29, October 1951
Ministry of Supply, Fighting Vehicles Division, Development Progress Report No. 30, Nov 1951 – Apr. 1952
Simon Dunstan, Modern Combat Vehicles 2: Centurion, 1980
Rob Griffin, Conqueror, Crowood Press, 1999.
Osprey Publishing, New Vanguard #68: Centurion Universal Tank 1943-2003, 2003
Pen & Sword Books Ltd., Images of War Special: The Centurion Tank, Pat Ware, 2013
Haynes Owners Workshop Manual, Centurion Main Battle Tank, 1946 to Present, 2017
David Lister, The Dark Age of Tanks: Britain’s Lost Armour, 1945–1970, Pen & Sword Publishing, 2020
Our own representation of the Wacky Races No. 6 car, The Army Surplus Special. Illustrated by Pavel Alexe, funded by our Patreon campaign
United States of America (1968)
Wacky Racer
In 1968, Hanna-Barbera, the classic cartoon producer of The Flintstones, Topcat, and The Jetsons, – released Wacky Races, a Saturday morning cartoon centered around eleven unique cars with quirky drivers competing in road rallies across the United States to be named “World’s Wackiest Racer”. The cartoon ran for one season between September 1968 and January 1969, with a total of 17 episodes, each consisting of two separate stories.
The show is most well known for that terrible two-some, Dick Dastardly and his dog Muttly in the ‘00’ car ‘Mean Machine’. However, one of the more interesting vehicles – at least to the military-minded – is Number 6, ‘The Army Surplus Special’, manned by Private Meekly (Paul Winchell) and Sergeant Blast (Daws Butler). As is the theme of Wacky Races, this vehicle consists of a rather far-fetched design, being some kind of half-track/tank hybrid.
That being said, and as far-fetched as it sounds, there are some surprising real-world parallels that can be drawn to try and dissect this ‘Wacky Racer’.
Disclaimer: quite clearly, this vehicle and its premise are quite ridiculous. Needless to say, this subject should be treated with an element of tongue-in-cheek, especially when it comes to the absolutely bonkers abilities and equipment employed by this vehicle. One must remember this is a vehicle from a Cartoon, so ‘Cartoon Laws of Physics’ and ‘Rule of Cool’ apply.
Representing a true motor pool mash-up, the No. 6 racer, ‘Army Surplus Special‘ commanded by Sergeant Blast (voiced by Daws Butler) in the turret, driven by Private Meekly (voiced by Paul Winchel) in the Cab. Photo: Hanna-Barbera.
Wacky Races
Directed and produced by William Hanna and Joseph Barbera, Wacky Races has something of a cult following to this day. The show was based on the 1965 film The Great Race, and was initially produced to be part of a live television game show where contestants would bet on the outcome of the race. This concept fell through, and so it became a stand-alone venture.
The Wacky Races logo. Image: Hanna-Barbera
As well as the aforementioned characters, there was a whole slew of other ‘wacky’ characters and vehicles. These included:
Car 1: The Slag Brothers, Rock and Gravel in the Boulder Mobile.
Car 2: The Gruesome Twosome – Tiny “Big Gruesome” and Bela “Little Gruesome” in the Creepy Coupe
Car 3: Professor Pat Pending in his Convert-a-Car
Car 4: The Red Max in the Crimson Haybaler
Car 5: Penelope Pitstop in the Compact Pussycat
Car 7: The Ant Hill Mob – Clyde, Ring-A-Ding, Rug Bug Benny, Mac, Danny, Kirby and Willy, in the Bulletproof Bomb
Car 8: Lazy Luke and Blubber Bear in the Arkansas Chuggabug
Car 9: Peter Perfect in the Turbo Terrific
Despite being a highly successful show, it would only last that one season. Wacky Races was among a purge of cartoon shows that occurred in the late 1960s and early 1970s due to parental protests over cartoon violence. Still, many of the characters introduced in Wacky Races would go on to star in their spin-off shows.
Promotional image showing some of the Wacky Racers. The Army Surplus Special is bringing up the rear. Image. Hanna-Barbera
Motor Pool Mash-Up
Trying to address this vehicle in any kind of realistic sense is difficult, to say the least. Nonetheless, maximum effort shall be applied.
Beholder of an unfortunate acronym, the ‘Army Surplus Special’ is a hybrid vehicle that is half tank, half jeep, forming a cut-and-shunt half-track. However, it is not a true half-track, as there are no front road wheels, only a large roller drum. There is a small set of track units at the rear end. The vehicle is driven by Private Meekly in the jeep-esque front end of the vehicle, while it is commanded by Sergeant Blast from the tank-derived turret at the rear, which sits atop a large armored box, atop the track units.
The Crew of ‘No. 6’, The Army Surplus Special, Private Meekly (Driver – right) and Sergeant Blast (Commander – left). Image: Hanna-Barbera
Being operated by military personnel, it is reasonable to suggest that this vehicle was assembled at a motor pool (the maintenance hub of military bases) with spare (surplus) parts. It certainly has the appearance of being roughly thrown together, as it seems to be held together by riveted metal brackets. This is at least true in the connection between the jeep front and tank rear. The turret is vaguely Sherman-esque, while the tracks could well be the type used on the M3-series half-tracks. It is not too much of a stretch to suggest that parts of these would have been plentiful in the late 1960s. The vehicle also features “bazooka-boosters’ attached to the flanks, providing added propulsion.
While this vehicle is absurd in a realistic sense and its components are only vaguely reminiscent of real-world examples, it is worth highlighting some of the individual parts.
Half-Tracks
Half-tracks originated in the USA in the late-19th century, evolving from log-haulers of the timber industry. The concept was soon adopted by the world’s militaries, including the US. Major powers, such as Germany and France, also developed the vehicle type. The thinking behind the half-track was that it would have the cross-country capabilities of a tank and the handling/steering and cost of a wheeled vehicle. With the weight spread over the track system, they could carry relatively heavy loads for their size.
The American M3 Half-Track. Photo: The National WWII Museum
In the US, the most iconic half-track was the Half-Track Car M3, which served in multiple capacities during World War Two, from troop transports to tank destroyers, to self-propelled anti-air guns and engineering vehicles. During the war, they would serve numerous countries, such as Great Britain, Canada, and the Soviet Union (USSR). Post-war, it was exported to even more countries, either sold off or as part of military aid. As a result, they ended up in Israel, Argentina, and India, among many others. In the service of smaller nations, such as Zaire, they were still in service in the 1980s. Amazingly, some are still in use in Mexico and the Dominican Republic.
The suspension of the Surplus Special consists of two road wheels and two larger wheels. Which one of these is the drive wheel cannot be identified. If it is supposedly an M3 track system, the upper front wheel would be the drive wheel. The suspension has the rather ridiculous ability of being able to ‘tip-toe’ on its tracks. They effectively rotate down vertically so only a wheel-end is in contact with the ground. This can either be done with no extension or an absurdly long extension allowing to cross deep canyons. This is seen in Episode 2, Part 2: ‘Beat the Clock to Yellow Rock’, and Episode 8, Part 2: ‘The Wrong Lumber Race’.
Left, the Surplus Special in Ep. 2, Pt. 2. Right, in Ep. 8, Pt. 2. Both show the extents of the ‘tip-toe’ ability. Images: Hanna-Barbera
Also, when in need of a boost, the vehicle can employ ‘GI Power’, where Pvt. Meekly slots himself into the tracks and runs them like a hamster in a wheel. Not that it would need to be said, but there is no real-world comparison to this and it is quite ridiculous to suggest a single man could increase the tractive effort of a combustion engine (needless to say, survive the experience). Nonetheless, this appears in Episode 6, Part 2: ‘The Speedy Arkansas Traveler’.
Roller Drum
The large, red roller on the front of the Army Surplus Special fills the role of the front steering wheels. This presumably means that the tank relies on traditional tank ‘skid-steering’. While its size is excessive, the roller drum might also suggest M3 half-track lineage. Some models of M3 featured an ‘unditching roller’ attached to the front bumper, designed to allow the vehicle to push itself up the opposite bank of a ditch, rather than dig its bumper in and get stuck.
Another type of roller equipped on tanks was a ‘mine roller’. This concept dates back to pre-Second World War. It consists of a large heavy drum suspended from the front of an armored vehicle, usually a tank or dedicated engineering vehicle. Used in areas suspected of being mined, the heavy roller would apply pressure to the ground, setting off any pressure-triggered mines. This equipment is still used today.
Left, an M32B1 with the T1E1 “Earthworm” device. Right, M3 half-track with ‘unditching roller’. Photos: weaponsparade.com & Military Trader, respectively
Other than acting as a front wheel, the roller does not play a large role in the crew’s attempts at winning a race. In typical cartoon fashion, of course, it does have the ability to squash competitors into paper-thin sheets without killing them. This trope is seen several times throughout the season.
Turret
The turret of the Army Surplus Special is vaguely M4 Sherman-esque, but lacks enough detail to say what it is for sure. If anything, its shape is more reminiscent of a tea or coffee pot (in Ep. 6, Pt. 1, ‘Rollercoaster to Upsan Downs‘, the crew even resorts to ‘Perculator Power’ to gain speed), with a short gun at the front and a single central hatch in the roof. The turret is capable of a full 360° traverse, and the gun seems to have a decent vertical traverse arc. If the turret is meant to be Sherman-derived, the gun could be a 75 mm or 76 mm gun, or a 105 mm Howitzer. Given its length, it is more likely based on the 75 mm or 105 mm.
The Surplus Special uses ‘Perculator Power’ to gain speed in Ep. 6, Pt, 1 “Rollercoaster to Upsan Downs”. It is an exercise in futility to even try and explain how this is supposed to work. Photo: Hanna-Barbera
The gun is used numerous times during races, in both anger (firing at other racers) and for other means. Most notably, it is often used for a quick boost using Newton’s law – eg. the recoil provides some propulsion. It would also appear that Private Meekly has access to gunnery controls, as evidenced by Episode 1, Part 2: ‘Creepy Trip to Lemon Twist’, when he mistakes an order from Sgt. Blast to “shoot”.
For ammunition, the Surplus Special seems to be equipped with standard High-Explosive (HE) shells, but also has a ‘bubblegum shot’ that can be used to get opponents quite literally stuck in their tracks. This was seen in Episode 8, Part 1: ‘Hot Race at Chillicothe’, where Sgt. Blast fired it at a pursuing Professor Pat Pending. The Professor deflects it back at the Surplus Special, covering them in a giant, popped bubblegum bubble.
Left, the Surplus Special firing its gun at the ‘Arkansas Chuggabug’ after being overtaken. Right, Sgt. Blast fires a ‘bubblegum shot’ at Prof. Pat Pending. Photo: Hanna-Barbera
Bazooka Boosters
On each side of the tank-ish rear end are what appears to be a set of M1 Bazooka anti-tank weapons. In the cartoon, these are used as rocket boosters that use short burns to give the vehicle a speed boost. This simply would not work as the Bazooka, by design, is a recoilless weapon designed to propel a rocket projectile at a target.
While the use of Bazookas as boosters is pure fiction, the concept of ‘rocket-propelled’ tanks is not a complete fallacy.
During the Cold War, the Soviet Union (USSR) experimented with rocket-propelled tanks as a means of quickly getting a tank moving should it become stuck on difficult terrain, allowing an advance of forces to carry on. There is surviving footage of a test of these rockets mounted on a T-54/55, but presumably, this would have a universal fitting for any tank or armored vehicle. The program never progressed to adoption, likely due to cost and difficulty controlling the rockets. There are reports that there was a similar test utilizing the BMP-1 Armored Personnel Carrier (APC), where the personnel bay was filled with a couple of jet engines. Details of this experiment are scarce, unfortunately.
A clip from the footage of the Soviet T-54/55 being tested with rocket engines. Photo: Popular Mechanics
Race Standings
Unfortunately for the Number 6 team, they did not have the greatest racing career. Of 34 races, Pvt. Meekly and Sgt. Bash in their Surplus Special only won three races. These victories were seen in Episode 4, Part 2: ‘Real Gone Ape’, Episode 8, Part 1: ‘Hot Race at Chillicothe’, and Episode 16, Part 1: ‘The Ski Resort Road Race’.
To look at it in a realistic sense, it is quite remarkable that a half-tracked vehicle constructed from ex-military vehicle parts could come in any position other than last. The vehicle’s engine is never identified, it certainly would not be the 148 hp White 160AX of the M3 Half-Track or any of the litany of engines found on the M4 Sherman, be it the original 350 hp Continental Radial engine, 450 hp Ford GAA V8, or notorious 370 hp Chrysler ‘Multi-bank’.
The Surplus Special crosses the finish line in 1st place, Ep. 8, Pt. 1: ‘Hot Race at Chillicothe’. Image: Hanna-Barbera
Conclusion
Despite only running for one season, Wacky Races, like most classic Hanna-Barbera productions, is still loved by many and is considered a classic cartoon. In terms of the ‘Army Surplus Special’, it simply was not practical in a real-world sense. It would be a nightmare to steer, would be top-heavy, and an all-around danger to anyone involved in racing against it, not least because it still has a live cannon!
There is no real-world comparison to this vehicle, however there is a real-life replica of it. The show was extremely popular in Great Britain. So much so that at the annual Goodwood Festival of Speed, life-size replicas of the entire Wacky Races roster are displayed. A new one was revealed annually for a time, with the last car being Number 7, ‘Ant Hill Mob’s Bulletproof Bomb’, unveiled in 2008.
The real-life replica of ‘The Army Surplus Special’ shown at the Goodwood Festival of Speed in the UK. Photo: Wikimedia Commons
In recent years, Wacky Races has had something of a resurgence. Between 1991 and 2008 there were a series of video games. Also, in 2016, DC Comics released a ‘Mad Max’ style reimagining of the cartoon. Running for just 6 issues, it brought back characters such as Sgt. Meekly and Pvt. Blast, but put them in far more realistic, brutalist vehicles.
Our own representation of the Wacky Races No. 6 car, The Army Surplus Special. Illustrated by Pavel Alexe, funded by our Patreon campaign
‘Wacky Races’, William Hanna and Joseph Barbera, Hanna-Barbera Productions (1968 – 1969)
Michael Mallory, Hanna-Barbera Cartoons, 1999, Hugh Lauter Levin Associates
R. P. Hunnicutt, Half-Track: A History of American Semi-Tracked Vehicles, 2001, Presidio Press
R.P. Hunnicutt, Sherman: A History of the American Medium Tank, 1978, Presidio Press wackyraces.fandom.com www.popularmechanics.com
Vikings and their longships terrorized the coasts of Europe between the 8th and 11th centuries, setting sail from Scandinavia, but more commonly Norway. Norway’s military (the Forsvaret) has not forgotten its cultural tradition and heritage. From Valhalla to Ragnarök, Viking tradition, although not officially recognised, runs through the Norwegian military, with its strongest presence found in the Tank Battalions of the Hæren (Norwegian Army). While Denmark and Sweden are also nations with a strong Viking heritage, it would appear this concept of tank naming and the use of mythic icons is something unique to Norway.
Even today, many Viking traditions are carried on. For example, the Officers of Norwegian troops stationed in Afghanistan would often give their men morale-boosting speeches ending in them all yelling “Til Vallhall!”, literally meaning “To Valhalla!” (although this did prove highly controversial). This Viking culture has also become a tradition among the Norwegian tank battalions, with some units or branches using Norse icons as emblems. The Kavalerieskadronen (Armored Cavalry), for example, uses a blue emblem depicting Odin, one of the most powerful of the Norse Gods, on horseback with his two ravens. Tanks of the Telemark Bataljon are identified by their Viking Longship standard, and a white longship motif applied to their vehicles.
Such iconology has also trickled down to a personnel level, with individual tank troops naming their vehicles after Norse Gods and Deities, or using the Old Futhark language (Norse Runes) in naming.
Leopard 2A4NO of the Telemark Bataljon. Note their Longship emblem. Photo: Broń Pancerna, Flickr
The use of Viking Iconology or images from the Norse mythos seems to be quite unit specific. For instance, 2 Stridsvogneskadron, Panserbataljonen (2nd Tank Squadron, Armoured Battalion) uses a red emblem depicting the head of an ‘Armored Dragoon’, representing the cavalry roots of the Norwegian tank arm.
Leopard 2A4NO ‘URD’, of 2 Stridsvogneskadron, Panserbataljonen. Note the red ‘Armored Dragoon’ emblem above the name. ‘URD’ refers to ‘Urðr’, one of three mythological maidens, this one representing fate. Photo: forsvaret.no
Heritage
The origin of this tradition in the Norwegian military likely grew from the increased sense of national pride that built up as a consequence of the German occupation during the Second World War. The state and media would use the sentence “Aldri mer 9. April” throughout the Cold War, which means “Never again, 9th of April”, referring to the date Norway was invaded by Nazi Germany, the 5 year-long occupation began.
“Historically, Norwegian military units have included Viking symbols and Norse-related names in unit patches and on vehicles and planes. Even Norwegian squadrons operating under the RAF-umbrella during World War Two included Norse mythos names on some of their planes and symbols in the squadron patches.”
– Dag Rune Nilsen, former tanker of Panserverneskadron, Brigade Nord.
There were, of course, Norwegian sympathisers to the Nazi cause during the war, inspired by one of the most famous collaborators of the War, Vidkun Quisling, leader of the Norwegian Fascist party and origin of the term ‘Quisling’ – a traitor who collaborates with an enemy force occupying their country. Many Norwegians became indoctrinated into the Waffen SS. This led to the raising of outfits like the infamous 5th SS Panzer Division ‘Wiking’ in January 1941 and the ‘Norwegian Legion’ (Den Norske Legion, Freiwilligen-Legion Norwegen) in June 1941. While the ‘Norwegian Legion’ was made up completely of Norwegian volunteers, ‘Wiking’ was formed from volunteers from not only of the Scandinavian countries (Denmark, Finland, Norway), but also Belgium and The Netherlands as well. Both the Legion and Wiking would serve on the Russian front, however, the Legion would be stood-down in 1943. Wiking would fight through the remainder of the War, surrendering to American forces in May 1945. To recruit Norwegian men to their cause, the Germans played heavily on Norway’s Viking past, using Viking iconology in their recruitment posters, and even in regimental rings or medals. Norwegian men that had joined the SS faced persecution after the War and were labeled as traitors. Many were also put on trial.
Norwegian SS recruitment posters. Note that the posters play on Norway’s Viking past. Source: warhistorynetwok (left) & pinterest (middle & right)
With the dawn of the Cold War, Norway once again faced invasion, this time from its neighbor, the Soviet Union, with which it shared a northern border. “Aldri mer 9. April” became a countrywide call for the military to be combat-ready, and willing to defend the country to the last man – to die before they allowed their country to slip back into an occupation. The Nazi occupation was a harsh lesson for the Norwegian people, and they did not take the experience lightly. This sense of defending their nation, no matter the cost, was the foundation of Norwegian military ethos for the next 50 years.
Viking Tankers
The Norwegian Military borrowed iconology from their infamous warrior ancestors, the Vikings. However, the state have never officially approved of publicly embracing or glorifying war and its disturbing sides, which was a part of the Viking ‘religion’. This ‘religion’ followed the sentiment, in Norse paganism, that dying with glory in battle would guarantee you passage to Valhalla, the sacred halls of the gods where you would fight, drink and enjoy the afterlife with comrades that had died alongside you in battle. In recent times, the officers in Afghanistan using this ancient heritage as a weapon to boost morale in Norwegian forces faced backlash in the media, as it was a dangerous concept to glorify combat and war in such a manner. Regardless, this tradition lives on in the hearts and minds of a part of the Norwegian soldiers, whether it be the symbolism employed in the combat divisions of Norway, or in the morale of the soldiers themselves.
Leopard 2A4NO ‘Allfader’ (rear) and ‘Arvaker’ (front). ‘Allfader’ is a reference to the God Odin, the ‘all father’. ‘Arvaker’ is a reference to Árvakr, one of two mythical horses that pull the sun across the sky. Photo: Military Armament
The first application of a mythological icon on Norge tanks would appear to be in the late 1940s or early 1950s. Starting straight after the end of WW2 – and the Nazi occupation – Norway began to raise a fleet of M24 Chaffee light tanks, thanks to aid from the USA. Eleven of these were stationed at Sola airfield (South-east Norway) in defense of the airstrip (part of the national effort to defend Norway’s various airfields). The tanks of this unit – known as the ‘Stridsvogneskadron Sola’ – were adorned with emblems depicting Odin on horseback with his two Ravens. This would later go on to be used heavily by the Kavalerieskadronen (Armored Cavalry).
M24s of Stridsvogneskadron Sola. The Odin emblem is just visible on the turret sides. Photos: National Archives of Norway CC BY-SA 4.0 & Hans Thostensen, Stavanger City Archives, respectively
Unfortunately, from here, it is currently impossible to track how and when new symbols or naming systems began to be put into use. Since then, however, numerous other examples have appeared. It is from this point onwards, that tank crews also began to adorn their vehicles with names from the Norse Mythos. It was not all about Vikings however, as the following quote describes:
“During my time in the Armed Forces, the trend was to name the vehicles after cavalry horses from the past. I believe that this was actually a “rule”. The names could be found in the old records of the individual horses.”
– Dag Rune Nilsen, former tanker of Panserverneskadron, Brigade Nord.
Further Examples
Leopard 2A4NO of 2 Stridsvogneskadron, Panserbataljonen. This tank has the words “Bitit Fyrst” written on the sponson in Old Norse Futhark runes (Viking text). Translated, the words mean “Bite/Strike First”. This is also the motto of the ‘Panserbataljonen’. Photo: svt.se.Leopard 1A5NO of the Kavalerieskadronen (Armored Cavalry), part of the Panserbataljonen. Their blue emblem depicts Odin on horseback with his two Ravens. Here it can be seen applied to the plated welded over the old range-finder position. Photo: Broń PancernaCV9030N “Ragnarokk” deployed in Afghanistan. “Ragnarokk” is an alternate spelling of Ragnarok, and refers to a series of catastrophic events, the doomsday of the Gods, foretold to lead to the death of the great Norse figures, such as Odin, Thor, Loki, and others. Photo: Wikimedia CommonsLeopard 2A4NO ‘Hærfjotur’. Hærfjotur was a Valkyrie from the Norse Mythos. The Valkyries were sent by Odin to watch over Wars and Battles to decide who would die, and would take the dead to Valhalla. Photo: Pinterest.Leopard 1A5NO ‘YMER’ of the Kavalerieskadronen (Armored Cavalry). ‘Ymer’ is a reference to the Ice Giant ‘Aurgelmir’, one of the first living beings in Norse Mythology. Photo: Broń PancernaPatria (Sisu) XA-203 ‘NȦGRINDER’ of the Telemark Bataljon. ‘Någrinder’ is a reference to the realm of the dead in Norse Mythos. It is a gate through which the damned pass. Photo: Tankograd Publishing.M109A3GN ‘Hårdbard’. ‘Hårdbard’ is a character from the Norse Mythos who once denied Thor passage to the realm of the Gods, Asgard. Photo: Tankograd Publishing
Other Examples
It must also be said that the Norwegian Army is not the only nation to apply such mythical names or legendary historical references to their tanks or armoured vehicles. Perhaps the most famous application of Norse God names to a military vehicle are the monstrous Karl-Gerät Mortars used by the Germans in the Second World War. This is not a surprise as Germanic mythology is largely based in Norse origins. Six of the seven Mortars built were named Baldur (formerly Adam*), Wotan (formerly Eva*), Thor, Odin, Loki, and Ziu. Baldur was a god of light, while Wotan was an alternate name for Odin. Loki was the Norse god of mischief and Ziu (Germanic name for Týr) was the god of War and Law.
*Referring to the biblical Adam and Eve
540 mm Karl-Gerät 041 ‘Loki’. Photo: Pinterest
Another example is Irish. In the early 1950s, the Irish Army purchased 4 Churchill tanks from Great Britain. In the early years of their service, they were all named after characters in Irish Celtic Mythology, with Ḋiarmuid (a warrior) and Fionn (a hunter) being a couple of examples. There is also a Greek example, although it is not mythical. Starting in 1981, a series of ELVO Armored Personnel Carriers (APCs) have been named ‘Leonidas’ after the legendary Spartan king that led ‘the brave 300’ into battle at Thermopylae in 480 BC.
Conclusion
This topic is a highly questionable one. Whether using ancestry as a weapon of morale versus the glorification of war is a highly complex and difficult point of debate. Traditional ties to a home country and its ancestry can be seen as a boon to some, but under the wrong circumstances can lead to the glorification of war and its horrible sides. Something today’s militaries are keen to avoid.
The Norwegian effort in Afghanistan came under scrutiny under what’s called today “The Alfa-Case”, where the male-magazine Alfa posted interviews about the Norse warrior culture and pictures in their magazine in 2010. This sparked large controversy as officers and soldiers that were interviewed glorified combat, citing it as “Better than sex”. This is even more controversial, as Norway’s mission in Afghanistan was not a ‘war’ mission, but a ‘peace’ mission.
As this went public, the at-the-time defense minister Grete Faremo and the Chief of Defense Harald Sunde put their foot down and referred to it as “Unacceptable attitudes” in reference to the warrior culture that started to grow in the Norwegian Afghan Mission. The sparking questions of ethics and uncultured behavior in the military was taken very seriously and the military started a Board of Ethics committee to combat such behavior in the military, as it put Norwegian soldiers at risk. Some rumors about soldiers seeking firefights in Afghanistan, have yet to be clarified whether true or not.
An article by Mark Nash and Steffen Hjønnevåg.
A Stridsvogn M24 of Stridsvogneskadron Sola. The emblem on the turret side is one still commonly used in the Kavalerieskadronen (Armoured Cavalry), and is a representation of the Norse God Odin and his Ravens. Illustration produced by Ardhya Anargha, funded by our Patreon campaign.
Leopard 2A4NO of 2 Stridsvogneskadron, Panserbataljonen. This tank has the words “Bitit Fyrst” written on the sponson in Old Norse Futhark runes (Viking text). Translated, the words mean “Bite/Strike First”. This is also the motto of the ‘Panserbataljonen’.
CV9030N “Ragnarokk” deployed in Afghanistan. “Ragnarokk” is an alternate spelling of Ragnarok, and refers to a series of catastrophic events, the doomsday of the Gods, foretold to lead to the death of the great Norse figures, such as Odin, Thor, Loki, and others.
These two illustrations were produced by Pavel Alexe, based on work by David Bocquelet
United Kingdom (1960s)
Experimental Turret – 3 Built
In recent years, thanks largely to erroneous publications and popular video games such as ‘World of Tanks’ and ‘War Thunder’, a comedy of errors has surrounded the history of the officially named ‘Centurion Mantletless Turret’. This redesigned turret – intended for installation on the Centurion – is often incorrectly identified as the ‘Action X’ turret, with the X being the Roman numeral for 10. It is also known as the ‘Action Ten’ or simply as ‘AX’. In turn, vehicles fitted with the turret, such as the intended Centurion, then have a false suffix attached to them, ‘Centurion AX’ being an example. There is also a false belief that the turret is associated with the FV4202 project, however as we will see, this is not the case.
But what is the truth behind the awkwardly titled ‘Centurion Mantletless Turret’? (for ease this will be shortened to ‘CMT’ throughout the article) Unfortunately, that is currently a hard question to answer, as much information surrounding the turret and its development has been lost to history. Thankfully, due to the efforts of amateur historians and Tank Encyclopedia members Ed Francis and Adam Pawley, some fragments of its story have been recovered.
The first falsehood to tackle is the name ‘Action X’. The name ‘Action X’ appeared in a book published in the early 2000s after the author cited seeing the name written on the back of a photo of the turret. What he fails to mention is that this was written in the 1980s, and does not appear in any official material.
The ‘Centurion Mantletless Turret’ mounted on a Centurion chassis during trials. Photo: The Tank Museum.
Development
By the late 1950s, early 1960s, the FV4007 Centurion had been in service for over 10 years and had already proved to be a reliable vehicle, highly adaptable, and well-liked by its crews. In those 10 years of service, it had already been in use with two types of turrets. The turret of the Mk.1 Centurion was built to mount the famous 17-Pounder gun. It was roughly hexagonal with a gun mantlet on the leading edge. This gun mantlet did not run the entire width of the turret, but to the left-hand side was a step in the turret face with a large bulbous blister mount for a 20 mm Polsten cannon. The Centurion Mk.2 brought with it a new turret. While still roughly hexagonal, the large bulbous front was changed to a slightly narrower casting, with a mantlet that covered most of the turret face. The 20 mm Polsten mounting was also removed. Large stowage boxes were added to the outer circumference of the turret and gave the tank its instantly recognizable appearance. This turret would stay with the Centurion for the rest of its service life.
Left, a Mk.1 Centurion with the original turret, note the 20 mm Polsten mount. Right, a Mk.3 Centurion with the second turret type, this became the de facto Centurion turret. Photos: Quora & The Tank Museum, respectively
The FV4201 Chieftain was also in development in the early 1960s, and well on its way to becoming the British Army’s next frontline tank. The Chieftain featured a new mantletless turret design. The mantlet is a piece of armor at the breach end of the gun barrel that moves up and down with the gun. On a ‘mantletless’ turret, the gun simply protrudes through a slot in the turret face. With the Centurion proving to be a great export success, it was hoped the Chieftain would follow suit. The Chieftain was, however, expensive.
This would appear to be where the story ‘Centurion Mantletless Turret’ comes in. Evidence suggests that the turret was developed alongside the Centurion and Chieftain, as a means of creating a method for poorer countries to upgrade their Centurion fleets if they could not afford to invest in the Chieftain.
The last surviving ‘Centurion Mantletless Turret’, as it sits today in the car park of the Tank Museum, Bovington, UK. Photo: Adam Pawley
Overview
The design was quite different from the standard Centurion design, but it remained somewhat familiar to existing Centurion operators, foreign or domestic, making the transition easy on potential crews. A large sloped ‘forehead’ replaced the mantlet of the standard turret, with sloping cheeks replacing the vertical walls of the original. The coaxial Browning M1919A4 machine gun was moved to the top left corner of the ‘forehead’, with the aperture of the coaxial gun surrounded by 3 raised ‘blocks’ in the cast armor. The machine gun was connected to the main gun via a series of linkages.
Left, the cheek of the CMT. Right, the cheek of the standard Centurion turret. Photos: Adam Pawley
The gun mount was designed to be adaptable and could carry either the Ordnance 20-Pounder (84 mm) gun or the more potent and infamous L7 105 mm gun, making it ideal for operators of both guns. The gun would pivot on trunnions placed in the slightly bulbous turret face, the location of which is identified by welded ‘plugs’ visible in the turret cheeks. The gun would be aimed via a unity sight that emerged from the turret roof, in front of the Commander’s cupola.
One of the things that the mantlet helps to protect from is shrapnel and debris entering the fighting compartment through the gun mount. In this mantletless design, plating was installed on the inside of the turret to ‘catch’ any fragments that made it through.
The face of the mantletless turret showing the aperture for the main gun. The frame around the aperture is a mounting point for a canvas cover. On the right is a close up of the coaxial machine gun position. Photos: Adam Pawley
Internally, the layout of the turret was pretty standard, with the loader on the left, gunner front right, and the commander behind him in the right rear corner. The decision of what cupola would be equipped on the turret would likely have fallen to the end-user. For the trials, the turret was predominantly equipped with a ‘clam-shell’ type cupola – possibly a version of the Commander’s Cupola No.11 Mk.2. It had a domed two-piece hatch and around 8 periscopes and there was a mounting point for a machine gun. The loader had a simple flat two-piece hatch and a single periscope at the front left of the turret roof.
On the left, the roof of the Mantletless Turret. The cupola is missing from this surviving example at The Tank Museum, Bovington, as is the unity gunsight which would be present in the rectangular slot in the foreground. On the right is the No. 11 Mk.2 Cupola, while it is not the model used on the Centurion Turret, it is an example of a ‘clamshell’ cupola. Photos: Adam Pawley & Richard Stickland, respectively
The turret bustle stayed the same basic shape, with mounting points for the standard bustle rack or basket. A feature carried over from the standard turret was a small circular hatch in the left turret wall. This was used for loading in ammunition, and throwing out spent casings. On both the left and right turret cheeks, there were mounting points for the standard ‘Discharger, Smoke Grenade, No. 1 Mk.1’ launchers. Each launcher featured 2 banks of 3 tubes and were fired electrically from inside the tank. The typical Centurion turret stowage bins were also installed around the outside of the turret, although they were modified to fit the new profile.
Unfortunately, most of the armor values of the turret are currently unknown, although the face is around 6.6 inches (170 mm) thick.
Centurion fitted with the Mantletless Turret undergoing trials in the 1960s. Note the unity sight emerging from the top left of the turret roof, in front of the cupola. Also note the 105 mm L7 gun. Photo: The Tank Museum
Not an FV4202 Turret
It is a common misconception that the ‘Centurion Mantletless Turret’ and the turret of the FV4202 ‘40-ton Centurion’ prototype are one and the same. The FV4202 was a prototype vehicle developed to test many of the features that would be employed on the Chieftain. However, these turrets are not the same. While they are extremely similar, there are noticeable differences.
The ‘Centurion Mantletless Turret’ on the left, with the FV4202 turret on the right. The differences are quite noticeable in these shots. Photos: Adam Pawley & fighting-vehicles.com, respectively.
The CMT is far more angular in its geometry compared to the FV4202 turret, which has a much rounder design. The cheeks of the CMT are straight angles where the FV4202 is curved. The trunnion holes on CMT are both in a downward angled section, while on the 4202 the slope is facing up. The armor ‘blocks’ around the coaxial machine gun are also shallower on the FV4202. It would also appear that the gun was mounted slightly lower in CMT. It is not clear as to whether there are any internal differences.
While the turrets are not identical, it is evident that they do share a similar design philosophy, both being mantletless designs with a similar placed coaxial machine gun.
Trials
Just three of these turrets were built, all of which took part in trials undertaken by the Fighting Vehicle Research and Development Establishment (FVRDE). Two turrets were mounted on a regular Centurion chassis and put through a series of tests. The remaining one was used for gunnery trials. While info on most of the tests has disappeared, details of the gunnery trial that one of the turrets – casting number ‘FV267252’ – underwent in June 1960 at the request of the ‘Turret’s and Sighting Branch’ are available.
The turret was subject to fire from rounds as small as .303 (7.69 mm) and .50 Caliber (12.7 mm), through 6, 17 and 20-Pounder rounds, as well as 3.7 in (94 mm) rounds. Both Armor-Piercing and High-Explosive rounds were fired at the turret. The results of the test are displayed below in an extract from the report ‘Trials Group Memorandum on Defensive Firing Trials of Centurion Mantletless Turret, June 1960’.
The full 1960 report on the ‘CMT’ can be found HERE
Conclusion
Of the 3 built, just one of the turrets – casting number ‘FV267252’ from the 1960 report – now survives. It can be found in the car park of the Tank Museum, Bovington. One turret has disappeared, while the other is known to have been destroyed in further firing trials.
Large chunks of the history of the Mantletless Turret remain missing, unfortunately, and the history we do know has been twisted and contorted. The name ‘Action X’ will no doubt continue to plague this turret for years to come, thanks in no small part to Wargaming.net’s ‘World of Tanks’ and Gaijin Entertainment’s ‘War Thunder’ online games. Both have incorporated a Centurion equipped with this turret into their respective games, identifying it as the ‘Centurion Action X’. World of Tanks is the worst offender, however, as they have also mated the turret with the hull of the FV221 Caernarvon and created the entirely fake ‘Caernarvon Action X’, a vehicle that never existed in any form.
Left, the Centurion ‘Action X’ as it is represented in War Thunder. Right, the fake Caernarvon ‘Action X’ in World of Tanks. Photos: Gaijin Entertainment & Wargaming.net, respectively.
Centurion fitted with the Mantletless turret equipped mounting the L7 105mm gun. Illustration produced by Ardhya Anargha, funded by our Patreon campaign.
United Kingdom (1950-1957)
Heavy Self-Propelled Anti-Tank Gun – 3 Built (1 Stage 1, 2 Stage 2)
In the late 1940s, the British War Office (WO) was concerned that – after the debut of the IS-3 in 1945 – the Soviet Union would continue to develop heavily armored tanks. As such, the War Office filed a requirement for the development of a gun capable of defeating a 60-degree sloped plate, 6 inches (152 mm) thick, at up to 2,000 yards (1,830 meters), and a suitable vehicle to carry it.
This requirement led to the development of the ‘Ordnance, Quick-Firing, 183 mm, Tank, L4 Gun’, the largest purpose-built anti-tank gun to have ever been created. It was intended that this gun would be mounted on a new ‘Heavy Gun Tank’ based on the FV200 series chassis. This was designated the ‘Tank, Heavy No. 2, 183 mm Gun, FV215’.
A project was also launched to find a way to get the gun into action quickly on an existing hull. This could then be constructed quickly should the Cold War turn hot before the FV215 was ready.
This is where the FV4005 project comes in.
The FV4005 Stage 2, also unofficially known as ‘Centaur’. The two visible crew members give an idea of the scale of the gun. Photo: The Dark Age of Tanks, David Lister. Colorized by Jaycee “Amazing Ace” Davis.
The Quest for Firepower
The development of the L4 started in 1950, and was aimed at increasing the firepower of the ‘Heavy Gun Tanks’. This was a uniquely British designation that was not governed by tank weight, but the size of the gun. A requirement was formulated for a tank armed with a gun capable of defeating a 60-degree sloped plate, 6 inches (152 mm) thick, at up to 2,000 yards (1,830 meters), a feat impossible even for the powerful 120 mm L1 gun of the FV214 Conqueror. By 1950, Major General Stuart B. Rawlins, Director General of Artillery (D.G. of A.) had concluded that there was no gun available with that level of ballistic performance and an investigation was launched. Initially, the British Military looked at the development of a 155 mm gun that would be standardized with the USA. However, even this lacked the required punch and, as such, 6.5 and 7.2 inch (165 and 183 mm respectively) High-Explosive Squash Head (HESH) shells were looked at.
At this time, the British Army came to the conclusion that a ‘kill’ did not necessarily mean the complete destruction of an enemy vehicle, and just damaging it was enough to take it out of action was enough. For example, a blown-off track is seen as a kill as it took the enemy vehicle out of action; today this is known as an ‘M’ (Mobility) kill. A ‘K’-Kill would be the destruction of a vehicle. The term used for this method at the time was ‘disruption not destruction’. The 6.5 in/165 mm HESH was not thought to be powerful enough to ‘kill’ a heavily armored target in this manner unless it hit bare armor plate. Attention, therefore, turned instead to the larger 7.2 in/183 mm shell which – Maj.Gen. Rawlins thought – would be powerful enough to render the target inoperable, and therefore ‘kill’ it, wherever it impacted.
The monstrous 183 mm L4 installed in the open-turret of the FV4005 ‘Stage 1’. The location appears to be ‘Workshop 5’ (the so-called ‘secret shed’ at Elswick) Photo: Ed Francis
The projected gun was designated the 180 mm ‘Lilywhite’. The background of this name is unknown. It may be an interpretation of the ‘Rainbow Code’ used by the WO to identify experimental projects. The ‘Red Cyclops’ flame gun attachment for the FV201, and the ‘Orange William’ experimental missile are examples of this. If this was the case, however, the name should be ‘White Lilly’. It may even simply be named after a Lieutenant Colonel Lilywhite of the Royal Army Ordnance Corps. It must be said that this is all speculation, and no evidence currently exists to support the theory.
It was not until December 1952 that the designation of the gun was officially updated to 183 mm. The design of the gun was accepted and was serialized as the ‘Ordnance, Quick-Firing, 183 mm, Tank, L4 Gun’. In reality, only the HESH shell underwent further development and the number of charges was dropped to one. The 183 mm L4 became one of the largest and most powerful tank guns in the world.
Background of the Project
From the start, the FV215 was the intended mount for the 183 mm gun, with development starting around the same time as the gun in 1950. The vehicle was based on the FV200 series chassis, with similarities to the FV214 Conqueror. The turret, however, was moved to the rear of the vehicle. The turret was capable of full 360-degree traverse, but it had a limited firing arc due to the size and power of the gun. This ‘Heavy Gun Tank’ would take a while to develop, so, in November 1950, the WO filed a requirement for a stop-gap vehicle capable of carrying the weapon into service should hostilities erupt before the completion of the FV215. A similar connection can be found with the Conqueror and the FV4004 Conway.
A developmental image of the ‘Tank, Heavy No. 2, 183 mm Gun, FV215’ – the intended carrier of the 183 mm L4 Gun. Photo: Rob Griffin, Conqueror
Following the end of General Rawlins’ investigation, and with some degree of urgency to get the 183 mm gun into service as quickly as possible, a carrier design was finalized, as this extract from a 1951 ‘AFV Development Report’ describes:
“A limited traverse, lightly armoured S.P. mounting based on the Centurion hull and weighing some 50 tons[*]. This would be known as F.V.4005 and could be in production by December 1952. Because of the use of parts in existing production, it was considered that quick limited production could be achieved. It was also clear that much would be learned about the hitherto unknown art of mounting so large a gun as an S.P. mounting.”
*50 long tons. Long tons are a unit of mass unique to the United Kingdom; for ease, it will be shortened to ton when used again. 1 long ton is equal to about 1.01 metric tonnes, or 1.12 US ‘Short’ tons.
The design of the vehicle would be held in limbo, ready to go into production if necessary. This stopgap vehicle would be based on the Centurion of the FV4000 series, with the original turret removed. The vehicle would go through two ‘Stages’ or ‘Schemes’. ‘Stage 1’ was built to test the gun and its mount on the Centurion chassis. The ‘Stage 2’ was a finalized design and would be the production standard. The vehicle was given the designation of ‘Heavy Anti-Tank, SP, No. 1’ – ‘SP’ standing for ‘Self-Propelled’. Officially, the FV4005 was never given the traditional British ‘C’ name such as the FV4101 Charioteer and FV4004 Conway before it. However, extensive account files of Vickers Ltd. from 1928 to 1959, shed some light on what it may have been. This particular extract – graciously provided by researcher Ed Francis – is from December 1952:
“Design and manufacture of equipment for mounting 180 mm gun on “CENTAUR” Tank – FV4005. Trials have now been carried out at Ridsdale and certain modifications to design have been found necessary… ”
In total three prototypes were ordered – a single Stage 1, and two Stage 2s. The FV4005 would fill the role of a ‘Heavy Gun Tank’. As such, the vehicle would engage targets from long-range, firing over the heads of attacking lighter tanks.
The Centurion Hull
The Centurion was chosen as the basis for this vehicle and three Mk.3 hulls were removed from service for the prototype development. Other than the removal of the turret and various small additions, the hull would remain mostly unaltered. Armor on the hull remained the same thickness, with about 3 inches (76 mm) at roughly 60 degrees on the front slope. A 650 hp Rolls-Royce Meteor petrol engine, located at the rear of the vehicle, propelled the tank. The Centurion used a Horstmann style suspension, with 3 bogies per side carrying 2 wheels each. The drive sprocket was at the rear with the idler at the front. The driver was located at the front right of the hull.
The Centurion Mk.3. The FV4005 prototypes were based on the hulls of Mk.3s. Photo: super-hobby
Details of the 183 mm L4
Just a small number of the ‘Ordnance, Quick-Firing, 183mm, Tank, L4 Gun’ were built, but it is unclear just how many. Records suggest at least 12 were built. Unfortunately, the exact length of the 183 mm gun is currently unknown, but it was somewhere in the region of 15 feet (4.5 meters) long. It was fully rifled with a large ‘bore-evacuator’ (fume extractor) placed roughly half-way down its length. The gun alone weighed 3.7 tons (3.75 tonnes).
High-Explosive Squash Head (HESH) was the only ammunition type to be produced for the 183 mm gun. Both the shell and the propellant case were of gargantuan proportions. The shell weighed in at 160 lbs. (72.5 kg) and measured 29 ¾ inches (76 cm) long. The propellant case weighed 73 lbs. (33 kg) and measured 26.85 inches (68 cm) long. The case contained a single charge that propelled the shell to a velocity of 2,350 fps (716 m/s). When fired, the gun produced 86 tons (87 tonnes) of recoil force and had a recoil length of 2 ¼ feet (69 cm).
Artist’s representation of the 183 mm HESH shell and its propellent case, in scale with a 6 foot (1.83 meter) man, based on recorded dimensions. The markings and colour of the shell are purely speculative but are based on British markings of the time. Image produced by Tank Encyclopedia’s Mr. C. Ryan.
HESH shells have an advantage over regular kinetic energy rounds as their effectiveness does not decrease with distance. This shell works by creating a shockwave on detonation. Once this wave reaches a void, it reflects back. The point at which the waves cross causes tension feedback which rips apart the plate, carrying a scab with approximately half the kinetic energy forwards, scattering shrapnel around the interior of the target. Test firing of the L4 against a Conqueror and a Centurion proved how powerful the round was. In two shots, the 183 mm HESH shell blew the turret clean off the Centurion, and split the mantlet of the Conqueror in half. HESH could also serve as a dual-use round just as capable of engaging enemy armor as for use as a high-explosive round against buildings, enemy defensive positions, or soft-skinned targets.
Stage 1
In a 1951 Ministry of Supply: Fighting Vehicle Division ‘AFV Development Report’ – regarding the development of an AFV mounting of the 183 mm gun – the ‘Stage’ or, ‘Scheme 1’ is described as such:
“Embodies a concentric recoil system in a mounting in trunnions on an undercarriage, the whole of which rests on the existing turret race rings. No crew protection is provided and one prototype only will be made to obtain experience of firing such a large gun from the Centurion hull.
It is anticipated that although all round traverse will be possible, firing will be confined to a limited angle forward on either side of the fore and aft line.
Prototype should be completed by 31st December, 1951”
The Stage 1 was built as a test vehicle, as such, it lacked a few components. On the Stage 1, a bespoke platform was constructed that was installed over the original turret ring. This platform was a solid floor, did not incorporate a basket, and was not, in any way, enclosed. The L4 gun was installed in a rigid mount and was completely fixed in elevation. The platform was capable of full horizontal traverse, but firing would be restricted to a limited arc over the front and rear of the vehicle. As mentioned in the report, the gun used a concentric recoil system. This utilized a tube placed around the breech end of the barrel, acting as a space-saving alternative to traditional recoil cylinders.
Two down view of the FV4005 ‘Stage 1’ at ‘Workshop 5’. Note the concentric recoil system at the breech end of the gun, and the gunner’s seat on the left of the gun. Photos: The Tank Museum, Bovington
Space on the platform was limited, as such, there were only positions available – presumably – for the gunner and loader. The gunner was seated on the left of the gun in a well-padded seat complete with a back-rest. Behind him was a large rack for ammunition stowage. The fact that the gun was fixed in elevation allowed the installation of a mechanical ‘loading assist’ device to help the loader handle the combined 233 lb (105.5 kg) weight of the ammunition by aligning it with the breach. This was not an automatic loader as it lacked a rammer. There was no seat for the loader. The driver’s position – the front right of the hull – was unchanged.
A look at the breach end of the L4 and with the ammunition rack on the left, and the ‘loading assist’ on the right. Photo: The Tank Museum, Bovington
The only other changes to the Centurion hull were the addition of a large recoil spade at the rear and a large folding travel lock or ‘gun crutch’ to use the British term. The spade was used to transfer recoil forces from the chassis directly to the ground, easing the strain on the suspension. When the vehicle was in position, it would be lowered to the ground. When the gun was fired, the spade provided a back-stop by digging into the ground.
Rare image of the ‘Stage 1’ traversing a vehicle-deployed bridge. Note the large ‘gun crutch’. Photo: Ed Francis
The ‘Stage/Scheme 1’ was subjected to numerous firing trials. Despite some issues with the concentric recoil system, the trials were a general success. Work then progressed to the ‘Stage/Scheme 2’ vehicle.
Stage 2
In the same 1951, Ministry of Supply: Fighting Vehicle Division ‘AFV Development Report’, the ‘Stage/Scheme 2’ was described as the following:
“Embodies two conventional recoil systems with a hydropneumatic recuperator and an independent run out control. Undercarriage similar to above [Stage 1] but of fabricated construction.
A superstructure for crew protection will be provided but weight considerations will preclude more than a limited degree of splinter protection.
A sight is being designed in which the body is fixed with relation to the gun mounting, and internal moving parts apply angle of sight, target elevation and correction for trunnion tilt. The range scale is visible in the sight eyepiece.
Layout designs have been prepared and details will be completed shortly.
A prototype should be available by March, 1952.”
The Stage 2 was built closest to what a production version of the FV4005 would consist of. As such, a number of changes were made between the two Stages. The biggest change was the design and construction of a fully enclosed turret to the form of little more than a large box. The loading assist for the loader was also deleted, and the concentric recoil system was replaced by a hydropneumatic type.
Original blueprint of the FV4005 ‘Stage 2’. Photo: Ed Francis
The turret was welded and fabricated from ½ inch (14 mm) thick steel and was there to protect the crew from small arms fire and shell splinters. As this was intended to be a second line vehicle that would keep out of the range of enemy AFVs, the FV4005 did not need really thick armor. Also, with the addition of this impressive gun, the chassis and engine could not take any extra weight. The turret was split into two parts: a sloped face and a completely boxed rear end. The turret face was mantletless, with a large face-plate angled at a very shallow angle. The cheeks were also slightly angled. These angled sections terminated in completely vertical turret walls and a flat roof. The roof stepped up as the rear section of the turret was taller and box-like, with external structural ridges. Internally, this rear section was where the ammunition was stowed against the walls. In total, 12 rounds were carried.
There were two hatches on the roof and one large door on the rear. The roof hatches were two-piece and, in front of them, were two single periscopes installed in the turret roof. The large rear door was used for crew access, but it was also used for ammunition resupply via a winch and rail. Charges would be placed on the rail and then winched into the turret. Turret crew would consist of four men including the gunner and commander. As the loading assist of the Stage 1 was deleted on the Stage 2, two loaders were required. One loader would handle the charge, the other the projectile.
A view of the large door at the rear of the turret showing the resupply rail. Note also the breech just visible inside the turret. Photo: Ed Francis.
On the turret face, to the left of the gun, was a large square bulge. This was the housing for the primary gun sight. The particulars of this sight are unknown, however, there is a suggestion that it was based on the TZF-12A of Panther fame. This, however, cannot be corroborated. While the turret was capable of full 360 degrees horizontal traverse, firing was limited to a limited arc over the front and rear of the vehicle. This was a safety feature necessitated by the power of the gun.
Like the Stage 1, the Stage 2 featured a recoil spade installed at the rear of the vehicle. However, on the Stage 2, a hand-cranked winch was installed on the rear of the vehicle to lower the spade.
Rear view of the FV4005 Stage 2 showing the recoil spade and winch above it. Photo: Ed Francis
Like the Stage 1, the Stage 2 went through a number of firing trials. Where the Stage 1’s concentric recoil system suffered some faults, the Stage 2’s more typical hydro-pneumatic system operated without issue. In total, 150 rounds were fired during the tests at Ridsdale, Northumberland. In a 1955 Fighting Vehicle Division ‘AFV Development Liaison Report’ of the Ministry of Supply it is stated that: “General functioning [of the Stage 2] has proved satisfactory”.
Fate
Despite the general success of the project, the FV4005 suffered much the same fate as the FV215. The feared Soviet heavy tanks, like the IS-3, which these vehicles were designed to defeat, were not being made in the massive numbers expected, indicating a shift in policy to lighter, more maneuverable, and more lightly armored tanks. The need for ‘Heavy Gun Tanks’ like the Conqueror, FV215 and the FV4005 stand-in, from this perspective, was simply becoming absent. Other changes were also taking place as technology-wise, larger caliber guns with their huge ammunition were becoming obsolete by improved anti-armor performance of smaller guns and by the appearance of a new generation of accurate Anti-Tank Guided Missiles (ATGM).
The dismounted turret of the FV4005 Stage 2. Photo: Ed Francis
The FV4005 project was officially canceled in August 1957, around the same time as the FV215. The three constructed prototypes were divided between various establishments. The Stage 1 was given to the Shoeburyness Proof and Experimental Establishment where the turret was removed and the Centurion hull returned to service. One Stage 2 was offered to the Royal Military College for Science, while the Fighting Vehicle Research and Development Establishment (FVRDE) kept the other Stage 2. The Centurion chassis were also likely returned to service. At some point, one of the turrets found its way to The Tank Museum, Bovington, where it sat alone for a number of years before being mated with a spare Centurion hull owned by the Museum. The vehicle used to sit as a ‘Gate Guardian’ outside the museum, alongside a Sherman Grizzly. Currently, the FV4005 is not at Bovington however and is under restoration.
The FV4005 Stage 2 ‘Gate Guardian’ as it stands today at the entrance to The Tank Museum, Bovington. Photo: warspot.ru
Illustration of the FV4005 Stage 1 with the open top gun platform, produced by Pavel Alexe.
Illustration of the FV4005 Stage 2 with enclosed turret, produced by Pavel Alexe, based on work by David Bocquelet.
Both Illustrations were funded by our Patreon campaign.
Specifications (Stage 2)
Dimensions (L-W-H)
7.82 (without gun) x 3.39 x 3.6 m
(25’7″ x 11’1″ x 11’8”)
Total weight
50 tons
Crew
5 (driver, gunner, commander, x2 loaders)
Propulsion
Rolls-Royce Meteor; 5-speed Merrit-Brown Z51R Mk.F gearbox 650 hp (480 kW), later BL 60, 695 bhp
United Kingdom (1954)
Mine Clearing Flail Tank – Approximately 42 Built
Some of the most important vehicles to hit the beaches of Normandy on D-Day, 6th June 1944, were ‘Hobart’s Funnies’ of the 79th Armoured Division, Royal Engineers. These vehicles – named after the 79th’s Commander, Major-General Percy Hobart – were specialist variants of armored vehicles, all with a specific role to fill. One of the most successful of the ‘Funnies’ was the Sherman Crab.
The Sherman Crab was a mine-clearing variant of the Sherman V (M4A4 to the Americans). It utilized a powerful flail suspended from a frame at the front of the tank. This flail consisted of a large drum with multiple long chains attached to it. Spun at high speed, the chains beat the ground, either blowing up mines where they sat, ripped them from the ground, or beat them into deactivation. The Crab served admirably for the remainder of the Second World War. After the War, however, and with the removal of the Sherman from British Service, designers began to look for a new flail vehicle based on a new, British-built chassis.
Initially, consideration was given to making a flail variant of the FV200 series of universal tanks, then in development as a replacement for the Centurion. However, when the development of the FV200 was canceled, the flail version went with it. As such, designers turned to an old faithful – the Churchill, a heavy and obsolete vehicle available in large numbers, and cheap.
What would emerge from this became known as the FV3902 Churchill Flail, or as it is more commonly known, the ‘Toad’. Entering service in 1954, the Toad featured one of the most powerful mine flails ever created and became one of the last Churchill types to see service – albeit in a training capacity – with the British Army. It is in the Army that the vehicle gained the name ‘Toad’. Quite why is a mystery, although it may just be because it is a rather ugly vehicle – depending on the eye of the beholder, of course.
A brand new FV3902 ‘Toad’ fresh off the assembly line. The size of the flail drum is quite apparent. Photo: Wheels & Tracks #20, Apr. 1987
Development
The Flail tank was originally thought up in 1942 by a South African officer named Capt. Abraham du Toit. The first flail tank to be used by the British Army was the Matilda Scorpion. This consisted of a basic frame carrying the flail drum mounted on the front of the tank. The drum was propelled by a separate engine mounted on the side of the tank. Development of flail tanks would continue to evolve throughout the War, before culminating in the famous Sherman Crab. The Crab was a more advanced, purpose-built variant, compared to the rather haphazard construction of the Matilda Scorpion. The flail was now carried by a purpose-built frame that could elevate or depress as required. The Crab did not require a secondary engine, as the flail was driven by the tank’s own power plant by a power take-off. A key feature of both the Matilda Scorpion and Sherman Crab was that they were to remain combat effective as they kept their turrets and main guns although they would usually have to operate with the turrets reversed in order to prevent damage when ‘flailing’ its way through a minefield.
The famous Sherman Crab, a valuable asset on the invasion beaches of D-Day in 1944. This is a surviving example, found at The Tank Museum, Bovington, UK: Photo: Author’s own.
By 1945, the development of Britain’s next generation of tanks was well underway. Immediately after WW2, the War Office (WO) reviewed the future of the British Army’s tank arm. In 1946, they did away with the ‘A’ designator used on tanks such as the original Churchill (A.22). The ‘A’ number was replaced by the ‘Fighting Vehicle’ or ‘FV’ number. This resulted in vehicles of the Churchill family becoming members of the ‘FV3900’ series. In an attempt to streamline the tank force and cover all the bases, it was decided that the military needed three main families of vehicles: the FV100, the FV200, and FV300 series. The FV100s would be the heaviest, the FV200s would be slightly lighter, and the FV300s would be lightest. All three projects were almost canceled due to the complexity that would’ve been involved in producing the respective series. In the end, both the FV100 and FV300 series were canceled. The FV200 hung on in its development, however, as it was projected that it would eventually replace the Centurion.
Many variants of the FV200 were planned, including gun tanks (such as the FV201, previously known as the A.45), flame throwers, recovery vehicles, and even a flail tank. This vehicle was to be designated FV216 but, unfortunately, there is no indication of what this vehicle would have looked like. In 1949, the FV200 series of common vehicles were canceled in favor of the Centurion, taking the FV216 with it. A few FV200s were built, however, these being the FV214 and FV221 Gun tanks, and the FV219/FV222 recovery vehicles.
The Churchillian Choice
With the cancelation of the FV200, and no plans to convert the Centurion, designers were left wanting. Eventually, they chose to adapt the hull of the Churchill, specifically the Mk.VII. The Churchill Mk.VII was the last big upgrade to the Churchill gun-tanks. Like all Churchills, it was built by Vauxhall Motors, based in Bedfordshire. This version – sometimes termed the ‘heavy Churchill’ or ‘A.42’ – saw the addition of a new turret design and thicker hull armor up to 6 inches (152 mm) thick. It was powered by the same 350 hp Bedford 12-cylinder, 4 stroke, water-cooled, horizontally opposed, petrol engine as all Churchills, which propelled the vehicle to a rather lackluster 15 mph (24 km/h). The Mk.VII used the standard Churchill suspension of individually sprung road wheels with a rear-mounted sprocket wheel. One of the more famous conversions of the Mk.VII was the Crocodile flamethrower tank. It was also the basis of the post-war version of the AVRE, the FV3903.
The standard Churchill Mk.VII. Photo: Wikimedia commons
The Mk.VII was chosen for a few main reasons:
There was a large number of hulls available. Production of the Mk.VII Churchill did not cease until after the Second World War, in October 1945. As a result, large numbers of brand-new tanks were simply lying in storage unused.
This vehicle would be employed by the Royal Engineers (RE). Thanks to vehicles such as the Churchill AVRE and Churchill ARK, the Engineers were familiar with the type, making driver training and maintenance far easier.
The Churchill was obsolete. So, rather than carve up the newer front-line Centurion, it made sense to cannibalize an older vehicle. Despite the obsolescence, it must be said that the Crocodile variant of the Churchill did serve in the Korean War.
At a glance, the Churchill may not seem a wise choice for a mine-clearing vehicle. This was due to the position of the driver in the front of the hull and the fact that – during WW2 – the Churchill proved to be vulnerable to mine damage, especially the hull floor. Tests were mounted to assess this by towing a Mk.VII Churchill over mines. The detonations highlighted weaknesses in the weld seams which split open. This fault was dealt with by strengthening and reinforcing the welds. In between and behind the ‘horns’ of the track, the driver had extremely poor visibility. Adding a flail to the front hindered his vision even further due to how low he sat in the hull. This necessitated the raising of the driver’s position, however, this had regressive consequences. One of the most valuable features of both the Scorpion and Crab vehicles was that they retained their turrets and armaments. By raising the Driver’s position – and with it, the superstructure – there was no room for a turret. The tank has now lost its ability to defend itself, or act as a gun-tank when so required.
Schematic of the FV3902. Image: Wheels & Tracks #20, Apr. 1987
Another point of regression was down to the Churchill’s lack of horsepower. The Crab made powering the flail unit far less complicated by using a power take-off from its own engine to propel the flail. However, the Churchill’s Bedford ‘twin-six’ 12-cylinder petrol engine was not powerful enough to begin with, without propelling an extra component. As such, like the Scorpion, a secondary engine was to be installed to drive the flail.
With these considerations, a design was finalized as the FV3902. It would end up being one of the most extensive adaptations of the Churchill ever devised. The design of the vehicle would revolve around a large flail assembly suspended from the front of the hull and driven via a secondary engine. Large springs in cylindrical housings were installed on the hull sides to act as a counter-balance for the flail. The secondary engine would be placed behind the 2-man crew compartment at the front of the new armored superstructure. When not in use, and for travel, the flail assembly could be folded back over the superstructure of the vehicle. The rear of the vehicle would also include an automatic safe lane marker system contained in a long box, a relatively advanced feature at the time.
The first FV3902 prototype, Reg. 34 ZR 36, with flail assembly in the stowed position. It is seen here on the back of an Antar tank transporter at the British Railway Workshops in Horwich. Photo: Wheels & Tracks #20, Apr. 1987
The Cumberland-based Distington Engineering Company was contracted to produce schematics and act as the overseer of the entire project. Two other firms were also brought on; Robinson and Kershaw Ltd. and British Railway Workshops (BRW). Robinson and Kershaw, based in Dukinfield, would be responsible for the modification of the hulls and the fabrication of the new superstructure. BRW, based in Horwich, was responsible for the mechanical equipment and fitting of the flail assembly. Between them, 42 Toads would be built, comprising 2 Prototypes, 6 interim/pre-production models, and 34 service vehicles.
Prototypes and Interim Models
The first FV3902 prototype was completed at the Horwich Works in April 1954. For the most part, this was identical to what would become the production model, however, it did differ in one respect. On this pilot model, a hydraulic system was installed. It was placed in the secondary engine bay and was driven by a take-off from the secondary plant. The hydraulics had three purposes. Firstly, it would power a winch system used to raise and lower the flail boom. Secondly, it would retract the lane marker system at the rear of the vehicle. Lastly, it would power a contouring device that would keep the flail at the same constant height while deployed, no matter how rough the terrain. Prototype 2 followed in about September the same year. This featured a worm-drive for the retraction of the boom and a sensor system for contouring. Both No. 1 and No. 2 prototypes used multiple springs in the counterbalance cylinders on the sides of the hull.
The prototype vehicles were followed by 6 interim, pre-production models built between April and July 1955. The pre-production versions carried some different features to the prototypes, some would be carried over to the production versions, some would not. Retraction equipment for the lane marker system was removed, meaning it would be permanently carried in the deployed position. The same applied to the flail boom. It was still possible to fold the boom back, but this was now a matter of cables and brute force. Inside the counterbalance cylinders, the multiple springs were replaced by single, concentric springs. Another addition was a ‘splash board’ placed across the track ‘horns’ at the front of the tank. This would help to control the amount of debris being thrown up by the flail. Also, fuel for the flail engine was now drawn from a separate fuel tank. An electromagnetic ‘station-keeping’ device was also installed – basically a rudimentary guidance system that would keep the vehicle on a straight path.
On the left, FV3902 No. 1, identified by the hydraulics and cables of boom retraction gear. On the right, FV3902s having their flails fitted at Horwich. The vehicles at the front are Interim Models. Photos: Ed Francis & Wheels & Tracks #20, Apr. 1987, respectively
Overview of the Production Model
Production models of the FV3902 began to be delivered in January 1956. At 56 long tons* (56.8 tonnes), the Toad was 14 tons (14.22 tonnes) heavier than the standard Mk.VII, and was one of the heaviest of the Churchill-based vehicles. It was even heavier than the Centurion by around 4 tons (4.06 tonnes). As a result of the increased weight, the already slow 15 mph (24 km/h) top speed of the Churchill was reduced to 12.7 mph (20 km/h). The vehicle’s dimensions also changed quite dramatically. While the basic length and width of the hull remained the same at 24 ft 5 in (7.44 m) long and 10 ft 8 in (3.25 m) wide, the new components added a lot of girth. With the addition of the boom arms of the flail, the width increased to 13 ft 6 in (4.11 meters). With the addition of a splashboard between the track ‘horns’ and the lane marker system at the rear, the length increased to 26 ft 3 ½ in (8 meters). With the flail deployed, this jumped to 37 ft 2 ¾ in (11.34 meters). Height wise, the new superstructure increased height to 8 ft 7 in (2.61 meters), only a few inches more than the original 8 ft 2 in (2.49 meters). With the flail in the stowed position, the height jumped to 12 ft 4 in (3.75 in).
*Long tons are an archaic measurement used in the UK – for ease, it will be shortened to ‘ton’. 1 long ton is equal to about 1.01 metric tonnes, or 1.12 US ‘Short’ tons.
The Churchill Toad alongside its predecessor, the Sherman Crab. The size difference between the two is plainly apparent, although the Toad is still shorter in height than the Crab. Photo: Haynes Publishing/The Tank Museum.
The Fastest Flail in the West
The huge flail designed for the FV3902 was, and still is, one of the most powerful chain-flails ever mounted on a vehicle. Equipped on the Toad, it required its own engine. Unlike the Scorpion predecessor, the engine would not be placed outside of the hull, rather it would be built into the new superstructure. The engine chosen was the Rolls-Royce M120 water-cooled, petrol-injection engine, a derivative of the Rolls-Royce Merlin engine famous for powering the British Spitfire and American Mustang fighter aircraft of World War 2. Versions of this engine were also used in the Cromwell, Centurion, and Conqueror tanks, among others. This particular version produced 650 hp, and was placed in the rear of the new superstructure in lengthwise orientation, behind the crew compartment. The clutch and drive end faced towards the front of the tank. The engine bay also housed the fuel and lubrication tanks, as well as the ventilation and air cleaning systems for both engines. Cooling air was drawn in through a large panel of louvers on the rear of the superstructure. After passing over the engine, It was vented through large fan and radiator systems located on the sides of the hull. Access to the engine bay was granted by 4 large, interlocking plates on the roof. Exhaust from the secondary engine was carried along pipes mounted atop the fenders, just above the typical Churchill air-intakes for the Bedford engine (the main engine exhaust pipes remained on the engine deck).
A modified hull fabricated by the Distington Engineering Company arrives at Horwich for the installation of the flail assembly. Note the new superstructure and large radiators on the side. At the rear, the large louvers of the air intake can be seen. Photo: Wheels & Tracks #20, Apr. 1987.
The flail was carried by two large arms, approximately 10 feet (3 meters) in length that were attached to large pivot points on the sides of the hull. Large cylindrical housings placed towards the rear of the hull were placed on the hull sides as well. These were slightly smaller than those of the prototype and interim vehicles and also sat higher to grant better ground clearance. They were still large at around 4 feet (1.2 meters) long and just over a foot (30 cm) in diameter. They were not too dissimilar to the piston housings found on steam locomotives – not a surprise considering the manufacturers. Like the interim vehicles, they contained large concentric springs connected to long rods which were, in turn, connected to the pivot hubs of the flail arms. These acted as counterbalances for the large flail rig. On the production models, the contouring device was removed, meaning there was now no need for the Hydraulics. Instead, the arms would rest on large skids with built-in steel caster wheels. The skids would glide over soft ground while the casters would role on hard surfaces. These casters would also swivel so the vehicle could still pivot with the boom deployed. It was found in tests that even if the skids were blown off by mine detonation, the counterbalance springs were strong enough to keep the boom rigid on their own.
A look at the immense counter-balance spring housing and supporting rod on the left of the vehicle. Photo: Toadman’s Tank Pictures
To drive the flail, power would be taken forward from the Rolls-Royce engine via a dog clutch into a bevel gearbox in the nose of the tank, under the crew compartment. The drive passed into the pivot mount of the left boom arm to a second bevel box and driveshaft within the arm. Because of this, the left arm was noticeably thicker than the right. Yet another bevel box was located at the flail hub, which transferred power to a drive shaft that ran the length of the flail drum to an epicyclic reduction final drive at the opposite hub.
This shot a Toad under construction at Horwich shows the internal drive shaft installed in the left flail arm. Note also, the eyelets for the flail chains. Photo: Wheels & Tracks #20, Apr. 1987
The 650 hp engine would revolve the drum clockwise at 150-revolutions per minute. The drum itself was about 11 feet (3.3 meters) wide, about 20 inches (50 cm) in diameter and consisted of two hemispherical halves that were bolted together over rubber drive bands. Sixty eyelets were welded to the drum for attachment of the flail chains. These chains were about 4ft 10 in (1 ½ meter) long and terminated in a large ‘bob’ or ‘element’ weighing 2 ½ lbs (1.13 kgs). These ‘bobs’ consisted of large diamond-shaped clubs on the early vehicles, while simple solid balls would be used on the production models. Rotating at 150 rpm, the chains would be traveling at around 61 ½ mph (99 km/h), meaning each of 2 ½ lbs/1.13 kg ‘bobs’ would be impacting at 5.5 x 10 to the power 9 Joules per strike.
While it was designed to detonate mines, the flail could also be used for light obstacle clearance. The spinning chains would have no trouble tearing through hedgerows (known as ‘bush-bashing’) or barbed wire. On the interim vehicles, cutters, and deflector plates were installed below the boom arms to stop debris – particularly barbed wire – getting caught up in the tracks. These were not installed on the production models as they interfered with the skids. The flail was not to be started unless the vehicle was in motion, otherwise, a large trench would be dug in front of the tank. When flailing, the vehicle moved at just 2 mph (3 km/h). Spare chains would be stowed on the engine deck, at the rear of the vehicle.
The boom on an interim vehicle is held aloft, note the length of the chains that terminate in the solid metal, 2 ½ lb (1.13 kg) balls, or ‘bobs’. This particular vehicle is equipped with large deflectors under the arms, not a feature carried on to the production model. Photo: Wheels & Tracks #20, Apr. 1987
When not in use, and for travel, the boom arm had the ability to be folded back over the superstructure of the Toad, where it came to rest on horn-like protrusions emerging from the sides of the secondary engine compartment. The folding of the boom shortened to the overall length of the vehicle by about 10 feet (3 meters). While early versions used either hydraulic or cable systems to mechanically hoist the boom up and back, the production model was devoid of these and as such, and a manual method was employed. Carried on the splashboard were two cables of 50 and 100 feet (15 & 30 meters). These would be attached to an extra eyelet on the flail drum, trailing in front and behind the vehicle. A cable guide placed on the hull roof between the crew hatches was also installed. This was attached as required and was otherwise stowed on the splashboard. Should a friendly tank be available, it was possible for it to physically pull up or lower the boom into the required position. Alternatively, if there was a handy immovable object present – like a tree for instance – the cables could be attached and the vehicle would perform the task itself by slowing moving forwards or backward. Deployable ground anchors were also available for this purpose. A safety lockout was installed to prevent the flail drum spinning in the travel position – for obvious fatally messy reasons.
Left, side view of the single surviving Toad with the boom in the travel position. Right, a head-on view of the vehicle. Note the cable stowage on the splashboard and the cable guide on the roof between the crew positions. Photo: Toadman’s Tank Pictures
Lane Marker System
The Churchill Toad was equipped with a sophisticated flag marker system, housed in the large box overhanging the rear of the vehicle. For the time, it was a rather ingenious and complex system, and it was one of the first purpose-built units.
The box housed 59 marker poles on an endless chain. The chain was driven from the left final drive via an external rod. The flags were automatically dispensed every 50 feet (15 meters) with a maximum markable distance of 968 yards (885 meters). The markers were propelled by a .303 caliber blank cartridge at the top of each pole. An automatic hammer in the outer edges of the box fired blank. A long spike would emerge from the compact flag as it was propelled into the ground. The pole then telescoped up, extending to four times its stowed length. The poles were painted red and yellow. If the vehicle was clearing solo, both sides would fire. If two vehicles were operating side by side, the driver could select which side fired, be it left or right. Assuming they could be retrieved, the markers were reusable.
Triple view of the lane marker system. Left, the rod that drives the system via the left final drive is visible. Middle, one can see just how wide the system is. Right, a look inside at the cups that hold the markers. Photos: Toadman’s Tank Pictures
Crew Compartment
The crew compartment was located at the front of the tall new superstructure built atop the front of the Churchill chassis. A large, sloping, 5 ½ inch (140 mm) thick front plate stretched from the bottom of the bow to the compartment roof. This protected the crew compartment from mine explosions or errant flail links and, to a certain degree, enemy gunfire. The splash board was placed roughly midway on the plate, stretching across the track horns. The board was made of thin sheet metal and mounted on a frame, which in turn rested on two long supports rooted to the bottom of the bow. The sloping front plate featured 12 smoke grenade launchers, consisting of 4 banks of 3 tubes. Two banks were angled off to the left, the other two to the right.
‘34 ZR 92’ here is a production model nearing completion at Horwich. Note the sloping forward plate with smoke grenade launchers, and the large splashboard with cable and cable guide stowed upon it. Photo: Wheels & Tracks #20, Apr. 1987
A small, two-man crew operated the Toad, consisting of the commander and the driver. Located on the right, the driver’s controls were much the same as the standard Churchill with a few new additions to control the flail, such as a hand throttle and clutch control. He had a single-piece circular hatch above him with padding on the inside. For vision, when ‘buttoned-up’, he had two periscopes that protruded from the compartment roof, just in front of the hatch. Sat to his left was the commander who sat under a derivative of the No. 1 Mk.2 Allround Vision Cupola with 7 pericopes placed around the circumference. The cupola featured a two-piece ‘clam-shell’ style hatch that opened to the left and right. As the circular hatches in the hull sides of the standard Churchill were welded over to make room for the boom pivots, the room hatches were the only way in and out for the two crew members.
Views of the crew positions with the driver’s (left) and commanders (right), underneath are the internal views of the respective positions. Photos: Toadman’s Tank Pictures (top) & Haynes Publishing (bottom)
Other Details
The vehicle was covered in ample stowage points. Stowage bins covered the outer walls of the superstructure. There were two large bins on the left and right wall, with the rearmost bin double the size of the forward bin. These would be used for both the personal items of the crew, but also for spare chains and other vehicle-related items. Spare track links were carried on the air intakes on the hull sides, while tarps and netting would be bound upon the splashboard. Pioneer tools (shovels, pickaxes) were stowed on the fenders at the rear.
Headlamps were placed on top of the track fenders at the front of the vehicle, just underneath the splashboard. Not the best of locations in hindsight, as these would surely be blown off or damaged during flailing.
Left, the large stowage bins on the right of the superstructure. Middle, track link stowage on the air intake. Right, one of the fender-mounted headlights. Photos: Toadman’s Tank Pictures.
Conclusion
At the point the Toad was developed, the Churchill was about 12 years old. Yet the use of the hull proved that the reliability and hard-wearing nature of the vehicle was still valued. Alongside the FV3903 AVRE and the Mk.II ARV – which was also deployed in the Korean War – the Toad would be one of the very last uses of the Churchill tank in the British Army.
A Toad in operation ‘bush-bashing’. Photo: Wheels & Tracks #20, Apr. 1987
The Churchill Toad was posted to units of the Royal Engineers, but would never get a chance to chew up a battlefield in a combat situation. However, it would go on to be used in training exercises. The vehicle was also tested in beach assault scenarios where it would be launched from a landing ship and wade onto the beach. These tests would regularly take place at Instow in North Devon. For the tests, it was equipped with wading extensions to the air intakes. With the intakes fitted, the flail boom could not be retracted, so the vehicle would wade in with it deployed.
A Toad taking in part in beach assault tests. Note the wading extensions on the air intakes. Photo: David Payne.
During the Cold War, other anti-mine technologies developed during WW2, such as rollers, ploughs, and line charge launchers, continued to evolve, while flails somewhat fell out of favor. Although the Toad was by no means the last of its kind.. Various types of flail vehicles are still in use by militaries around the world today, such as the German M48-basedKeiler – developed in the 1970s, and the British Aardvark Area Mine Clearing System (AMCS) – developed in the 1980s. As well as serving in military operations, they are also often used for United Nations land mine clearing missions.
Only one Churchill Toad survives today, ‘35 ZR 10’, with the designation “4A”, and it has been on quite a journey. For many a year, it sat on various Army Bases open to the elements and rotting. Between 2006 and 2008, RR Services in Kent, England began a long process of restoring the vehicle. After an extensive restoration, the now fully operational vehicle was unveiled on 16th May 2008 and demonstrated before an audience. As a safety precaution, the chains were shortened, and the flail was run at half-speed. It was then handed over to the late Jacques Littlefield, of the famous Littlefield Armor Collection or ‘Military Vehicle Technology Foundation (MVTF)’ in Portola Valley, California, USA.
The Toad arrived at RR Services for restoration in 2008. Note that the vehicle is painted in some kind of desert colours although there is no information available to suggest it was ever taken to a desert. Photo: milweb.net
This vehicle was part of the Littlefield Collection until Mr. Littlefield’s untimely death in 2009, after which the collection began to be sold off. On Saturday, July 12, 2014, the Toad was put on the auction block. The winning bid of US$80,500 went to the Australian Armor and Artillery Museum of Cairns, where it continues to stand on display today.
The Toad on display at the Australian Armor & Artillery Museum, Cairns. Photo: David Barlow
The ‘Toad’ in flailing position. With the boom extended, the vehicle was 37 ft 2 ¾ in (11.34 meters) long. The large spring cylinders support the flail when it is deployed.
The ‘Toad’ with the flailing drum in the ‘transport’ position. This allows the vehicle to move around relatively unhindered. Although, its 56 long ton* (56.8 tonne) weight did make it very sluggish.
These illustrations were produced by Ardhya Anargha, funded by our Patreon campaign.
Churchill Toad specifications
Dimensions (L-W-H)
9.38 x 4.01 x 3.20 m (30’7” x 13’2” x 10’5”)
Total weight
54 tons
Crew
2 (Driver and Commander)
Propulsion (Tank)
Bedford twin-six petrol, 350 hp (261 kW) at 2,200 rpm
The British FV214 Conqueror Heavy Gun Tank was developed in the early 1950s in answer to the increasingly hostile Soviet Union, and its newly developed heavily armored tanks, such as the IS-3. The 120 mm gun-armed Conqueror was the first and last Heavy Gun Tank produced and operated by the British Army. It had a short service life of just 11 years, from 1955 to 1966. While the Conqueror was based on a hull that was designed to be adaptable, no Self-Propelled Gun was ever built using this hull.
Decades later, the popular online game World of Tanks (WoT) – published and developed by Wargaming (WG) – was preparing a new British tank line. Due to poor research or possibly completely intentionally, the top of the artillery tech tree appeared as the ‘Conqueror Gun Carriage’ or ‘GC’, a completely fictional adaptation of the Conqueror chassis which utilizes an archaic 9.2 inch (234 mm) ‘siege gun’ placed in a fixed superstructure.
That being said, elements of this tank did exist in one form or another.
The Conqueror Gun Carriage (GC) as it is presented in World of Tanks. Image: Wargaming.net
The WoT Representation
A small ‘History’ is provided for this vehicle by Wargaming:
“A proposal to mount a 234-mm howitzer on the chassis of the Conqueror. The power unit was placed in the front. Existed only in blueprints.”
– WoT Wiki Extract
Despite not being given its ‘Fighting Vehicle (FV)’ number, the Conqueror GC is presented as a vehicle of the FV200 series produced in the early 1950s, in the early years of the Cold War. The FV200s date back to the final stages of the Second World War, when the British War Office (WO) was looking for a ‘Universal Tank’. The ancestor of today’s Main Battle Tanks (MBTs), the idea of the Universal Tank was that one chassis would spawn many variants, thus reducing costs, development and making maintenance and supply far easier. The first in the series was the FV201. Despite a long development period, the FV201 project was canceled in 1949, with development moving onto the FV214 Conqueror. As such, only four vehicles of the FV200 series were ever produced and entered into service. These were the FV214 Conqueror and FV221 Caernarvon gun tanks, and the FV219/FV222 Conqueror Armoured Recovery Vehicles (ARVs).
The ‘Conqueror GC’ as it appears in ‘World of Tanks’. While clearly fake, the vehicle is based on a real chassis. Photo: Wargaming.net
Self-Propelled Gun (SPG) variants of the FV200 were planned. These were based on the FV201. The SPGs were designated the FV206 and FV207. The FV206 was classed as ‘Self-Propelled Medium Artillery’ while the FV207 was ‘Self-Propelled Heavy Artillery’. While it is unknown what gun the FV206 would have used, it is known that the FV207 was to mount a 155 mm howitzer. Neither of these vehicles made it further than plans, and no drawings of them exist today.
A representation of the FV207 exists in World of Tanks, but as no official documents remain, it is hard to believe that this representation is in any way accurate. Neither the ‘blueprints’ mentioned in WG’s claim to the historicity of the vehicle ‘Conqueror Gun Carrier’ nor this FV207 have ever been publicly presented either. The FV207 appears to be based solely on the real FV3805 instead. Either way, there is no way to confuse the alleged and invented FV207 with an even more invented Conqueror GC.
The FV201-based FV207 as it appears in World of Tanks. Image: Wargaming.net
Cold War British SPGs
For much of the Cold War, the Royal Artillery – the part of the British Army responsible for this kind of vehicle – relied on one Self-Propelled Gun, the FV433 Abbot. The Abbot was built on the hull of the FV432 Armoured Personnel Carrier (APC) and was equipped with a 105 mm Howitzer in a fully traversable turret. The Abbot appeared in the late 1950s, but before this was in development, there were experiments with other SPG designs.
After the Second World War, the United Kingdom was still using the Sexton as its primary SPG. A long development program was launched to find a replacement and, while ultimately resulting in the Abbot, other vehicles also went through development. The design that came closest to completion was the BL 5.5 inch howitzer-armed FV3805 which was based on the Centurion. While this made it to prototype trials, it never entered service. The Abbot would serve as the UKs front line SPG until the early 1990s, when it was finally replaced by the 155 mm gun-armed AS-90.
Left, the FV433 Abbot and, right, the experimental Centurion-based FV3805. Photos: Author & Ed Francis
In-Game Design of the ‘GC’
‘Gun Carriage’ is a uniquely British term used to describe Self-Propelled Guns (SPGs). Although this fake one is labeled as being based on the FV214 Conqueror, the layout of the hull suggests that it is actually based on the FV215. The FV215 never entered service, but it was designed to be the Conqueror’s replacement and, while sharing many components, had a narrower hull, a rear-mounted turret, and a centrally mounted engine. This layout is shared by the fake ‘GC’ with a fixed fighting compartment at the rear and centrally mounted engine.
The FV214 Conqueror (left) and its intended replacement, the FV215 (right). Photos: Author & Tankograd Publishing respectively
This fixed compartment, or casemate, holds the 9.2 inch main armament. The design of the compartment seems to take a lot of cues from the FV3805, featuring the same cylindrical, ‘limited traverse turret’ and a similar layout of periscopes, sights, and hatches. There is also a large hatch and recoil spade installed on the rear of the vehicle. Real SPGs, as they are operated in pre-arranged fixed positions, usually operate with the large rear hatch, or ‘tail-gate’, open. It provides easy access for resupplying ammunition during a fire-mission and also, by being open to the elements, provides ventilation by letting smoke and fumes from the gun escape. The spade is used to transfer recoil forces from the chassis directly to the ground, easing the strain on the suspension. When the vehicle was in position, it would be lowered to the ground. When the gun is fired, the spade provides a back-stop by digging into the ground.
Left, the real FV3805 prototype. Right, the fake Conqueror GC. Note how similar the casemates are, as well as the layout of hatches and periscopes/sights. It is likely that the game designers took a lot of inspiration from the real vehicle. However, they added one more hatch than they needed to. The hatch closest to the gun, on the wall of the casemate, was for the driver of the FV3805. The hatch is also present on the ‘GC’, but as the driver is in the hull, this would be redundant. Images: Ed Francis & Wargaming.net respectively
Armor on the hull is listed as 130 mm (5.11 in) for the front of the hull, 50.8 mm (2”) on the sides, and 76.2 mm (3”) on the rear. This is not too far off the armor thicknesses of the Conqueror, however, it is tricky to pin-point the exact thickness of the hull armor due to conflicting sources. The upper hull was between 4.7 and 5.1 inches (120 – 130 mm) thick, sloped at 61.5 degrees from vertical. This would give an effective thickness of either 11.3 or 12.3 inches (289 – 313 mm). Side armor was 2 inches (51 mm) thick. This is not the same for the more similar FV215 however, with planned thicknesses of 4.9 inch (125 mm) sloped at 59 degrees on the upper glacis and just 1 ¾ (44.5 mm) on the sides and rear.
The crew is also closer to that of the FV215, being made up of a 5-man team. This consists of the commander, gunner, driver, and 2 loaders. It must be said though, that two loaders would be expected in a vehicle such as this due to the scale of ordnance. As with all FV200s, the driver of this fake SPG sits at the front right of the hull.
Mobility
Despite the closer similarity to the FV215 which would have used a Rover engine, this fictional SPG is listed as having the same engine as the Conqueror, consisting of the Rolls-Royce Meteor M120. This was a water-cooled, petrol-injection engine developing 810 horsepower at 2,800 rpm. It was a derivative of the Rolls-Royce Merlin engine, famous for powering the British Spitfire and American Mustang fighter aircraft of World War 2. In-game, this propels the SPG to a top speed of 34.3 km/h (21 mph) forwards, and 10 km/h (6 mph) in reverse.
The Rolls-Royce Meteor M120 engine installed in the Conqueror. User Handbook for Tank, Heavy Gun, Conqueror Mk.1 & 2 – 1958, WO Code No. 12065
The Horstmann suspension of the ‘GC’ is one of the accurate parts of this vehicle. On the FV200s, the suspension system had 2 wheels per-bogie unit. The wheels would be made of steel, measuring approximately 20 inches (50 cm) in diameter, and constructed from 3 separate parts. These consisted of an outer and inner half, with a steel rim in contact with the track. Between each layer was a rubber ring. The Horstmann system consisted of three horizontal springs mounted concentrically, guided by an internal rod and tube. This allowed each wheel to rise and fall independently, although the system did struggle if both wheels rose at the same time. Four bogies lined each side of the hull of the vehicle, giving it 8 road-wheels per side. There would also be 4 return rollers, 1 per bogie. The drive sprockets were relocated at the rear of the running gear, with the idler wheel at the front.
Left, a schematic drawing of the Conqueror’s four Horstmann suspension bogie units. Right, this view of a Mk.2 Conqueror being unloaded from a flatbed trailer shows how the suspension actuates. Sources: User Handbook for Tank, Heavy Gun, Conqueror Mk.1 & 2 – 1958, WO Code No. 12065 & Rob Griffin
Archaic Armament
One of the most illogical choices in the design of this spurious gun carriage is its armament consisting of the BL 9.2 Inch Howitzer Mk.II. The BL (Breech Loading) 9.2 inch (234 mm) Howitzer was a ‘heavy siege howitzer’ designed in 1913. It saw service with the Royal Artillery in the First World War as a counter-battery weapon.
Period line-drawing of the BL 9.2-inch Howitzer Mk.II. Image: Landships.info
In its day, this howitzer was an extremely powerful weapon, firing a high explosive shell that weighed up to 290 pounds (130 kg). These shells could vary from 28 to 32 inches (71 – 81 cm) long, with a High-Explosive (HE) payload – of either Amatol, Lyddite, or Trotyl (TNT) – weighing anywhere from 25 – 40 pounds (11 – 18 kg). There were two versions of the 9.2-inch howitzer – the Mk.I and the Mk.II. It is the Mk.II that was chosen for this fake SPG.
Artist’s representation of the 28 & 32 inch (71 – 81 cm) long shells of the 9.2-inch (234 mm) Howitzer showing their scale against a 6-foot (1.83 m) man. Produced by Tank Encyclopedia’s own Mr. C. Ryan.
With a 13 ft 3 in (4 m) barrel, the Mk.II appeared in late-1916 in response to a request for greater range. The Mk.I had a range of 5.7 miles (9.2 km) while the Mk.II had an increased range of 7.9 miles (12.7 km) with a muzzle velocity of 1,600 ft/s (490 m/s). The complete gun weighed around 6 long tons* (6.1 tonnes) and had a maximum elevation of 55-degrees. The in-game depiction limits it to 45 degrees, probably due to internal space limitations. On this fake SPG, the gun is mounted in a thinly armored cylindrical housing – known as a ‘limited traverse turret’ – that gives it a horizontal traverse arc of 60 degrees. The exposed parts of the gun, such as the recoil-buffer, are also covered in a representation of protective armor.
*Long tons are a unit of mass unique to the United Kingdom; for ease, it will be shortened to ton. 1 long ton is equal to about 1.01 metric tonnes, or 1.12 US ‘Short’ tons.
Just over 500 BL 9.2-inch Howitzers were produced. While there is no question that it was a powerful weapon, the howitzer would have been completely obsolete in the early-Cold War era that this vehicle is set in. The weapon was officially retired during the Second World War, and was replaced by much more accurate and advanced weaponry.
Head-on view of the Conqueror GC showing the large Howitzer in its armored cylindrical ‘limited traverse turret’. Note also the armor wrapped around the recoil buffer and the area above the barrel. Image: Wargaming.net
God Save the Truth
The Conqueror Gun Carriage is, without doubt, a fake vehicle. It is not the worst of Wargaming’s fake tank crimes, as at least a few of the components used in its design did exist in one form or another. In reality, there would not have been a need for this ‘Gun Carriage’. Had there been a need, it is highly unlikely that designers would turn to an almost-antique weapon to arm it, especially as the gun was officially retired almost 10 years before this vehicle would have ‘existed’.
Rear-view of the Conqueror GC showing the recoil-spade and rear ‘tailgate’. Image: Wargaming.net
Illustration of the fake Conqueror Gun Carriage (GC) produced by Ardhya Anargha, funded by our Patreon campaign.
Kingdom of Norway (1946-1990s)
Light Tank – 141 Operated
The Second World War was rough for Norway. Falling to German invasion in April 1940, the country suffered 5 long years of occupation which only ended with the surrender of Nazi Germany in May 1945. Following this, Norway had to rebuild its military from the ground up. Luckily, after their surrender, the German Wehrmacht left behind vast stocks of equipment. This included rifles, machine guns, anti-tank guns, tools, and even some aircraft, all of which were adopted by the Norwegian Military (Forsvaret, Eng: “The Defence”).
A small number of tanks were also among the equipment left behind, a mix of various types of Panzer III and StuG IIIs. These were mostly of poor condition, however, so they went straight into storage. Fortunately for the Norwegian Military, the United States were keen to keep their European allies strong in the face of an increasing threat from the Soviet Union. As such, in 1946, Norway received 17 M24 Chaffees from the United States.
The Chaffee would give the Norwegian Army (Hæren) their first taste of operating a relatively modern armored vehicle, having not had a tank to operate since the single L-120 ‘Rikstanken’ of the late 1930s. Eventually, Norway would operate a total of 141 Chaffees and, through upgrades, would keep them in service until the early 1990s.
Norse Chaffee on Maneuvers in the 1950s. Photo: Pinterest
The M24 Chaffee
The M24 Chaffee, named after Army General Adna R. Chaffee, entered service in 1944, largely replacing the M3 and M5 Stuarts. It was a small tank, at 16 foot 4 inches (5.45 m) long, 9 foot 4 inches (2.84 m) wide, and 5 foot 3 inches (2.61 m) tall. It was also light at just 20.25 tons (18.37 tonnes). Armor on the vehicle was ¾ inch to 1 ½ inch (19 – 38 mm) thick. It was armed with the 75 mm Lightweight Tank Gun M6. It was operated by a 5 man crew, consisting of the commander, gunner, loader, driver and assistant driver/radio operator.
It was a very maneuverable vehicle, powered by twin Cadillac 44T24 8 cylinder petrol engines producing 220 hp combined. The transmission and drive wheels were located at the front of the vehicle. The Chaffee rolled on 5 paired roadwheels attached to a torsion bar suspension. The fifth road wheel was attached to the idler wheel at the rear of the running gear. This is because the idler was of the compensating type, meaning it was attached to the closest roadwheel by an actuating arm. When the roadwheel reacted to terrain, the idler was pushed out or pulled in, keeping constant track tension.
Armament consisted of the 75 mm Lightweight Tank Gun M6 which had a concentric recoil system (this was a hollow tube around the barrel, a space-saving alternative to traditional recoil cylinders). Variants of this gun were also used on the B-25H Mitchell Bomber, and the T33 Flame Thrower Tank prototype. The gun had a muzzle velocity of 619 m/s (2,031 ft/s) and had a maximum penetration of 109 mm. The elevation range of the gun was around -10 to +13 degrees. Secondary armament included the coaxial .30 Cal (7.62 mm) Browning M1919 Machine Gun, and the .50 Caliber (12.7 mm) M2 Browning Heavy Machine gun which was mounted on the rear of the turret roof.
Norwegian M24 Chaffee of Stridsvogneskadron Sola – the airstrip defense force based at Sola airfield. Photo: National Archives of Norway CC BY-SA 4.0
Norsk Chaffees
Norway received its first Chaffees after the Second World War, when US troops stationed in the country left the Norwegians 17 M24s when they withdrew. Further military aid came from the US under the ‘MAP’, starting in 1946. The ‘Military Aid Program’ benefited the war-ravaged countries of the Second World War by providing them the means to rebuild their military and defenses. Other countries that benefited from the MAP included France, Portugal, and Belgium, but also former enemy nations such as West Germany and Japan. The initial 1946 delivery was sent directly to Trandum leir, a Norwegian Army Camp (now closed) near Ullensaker.
Part of the M24 fleet based at Trandum in the early 1950s. Photo: digitalmuseum.no
In 1949, Norway and the West became an even more united front. In April, the North Atlantic Treaty was signed, and NATO was born with Norway a founding member. As it shared a border with the Soviet Union, it was seen as a crucial partner. With this close proximity to the potential enemy, invasion was expected. The focus of the Norwegian military at this time was defending its strategically important airfields. For this, three Dragoon Regiments were created; ‘DR 1’, ‘DR 2’ and ‘DR 3’. These were split between various airfields. These included Gardermoen, Eggemoen, Sola, Fornebu, Værnes, and Bardufoss. To give an idea of the strategic importance of some of these airports, Gardermoen was located near Oslo, the capital of Norway, and was the main base of the Luftforsvaret (Royal Norwegian Airforce). Sola, located on Norway’s south-eastern coast, was an important link with the western Allies. Værnes, located roughly in central Norway, allowed transit to the North and South of the country.
3 of the 11 M24s operated by Stridsvogneskadron Sola at Kjevik at a 1950 defense summit. Photo: Hans Thostensen, Stavanger City Archives.
Initially, the garrison forces were equipped with recycled Panzer IIIs and StuG IIIs left behind by the surrendering German forces. In Norwegian service, these were called Stridsvogn KW-III and Stormkanon KW-III, respectively. Due to a lack of available M24s, the garrison forces were equipped mostly with these aging vehicles. Thanks to the birth of NATO, however, Norway began to receive more military aid, and the number of M24 Chaffees available to the Army vastly increased. By 1951, the entire KW-III force had been replaced by the plentiful Chaffees. As a result, all airport garrison dragoon regiments were re-armed with the Chaffee*. Norway received its last Chaffee in 1955; however, MAP did not just provide tanks. Through this program, the Norwegians received 300 fighter aircraft, 8,000 vehicles of various types, 800 field guns, and 100,000 tonnes (110,200 tons) of ammunition.
*A detailed article on M24s at the Sola airstrip can be found in the Jan. 2017 issue of the Norwegian Museum Magazine
Norwegian Chaffees also had a royal connection. From 1955 to 1957, Prince Harald (now King Harald V) served in a Chaffee crew during his conscription years in the Norwegian Armed Forces.
Prince Harald stands before his M24 Chaffee in the late 1950s. Photo: Reddit
The M24s gave the Hæren excellent service for many years, but come the late-1960s, the M24 was obsolete, and an upgrade program began. This resulted in the NM-116 and NM-130. Four unmodified M24s were given to the Heimevernet (the Norwegian Home Guard) which operated them well into the late 1970s. Any leftover vehicles were either sent to the ranges, or placed into storage.
A Heimevernet Chaffee in the late-1970s. Photo: modellnorge.no
The majority of tanks that remained after their retirement from the Heimevernet were either scrapped or sent to military firing ranges. A small number of vehicles – exact amount unknown – were used as static coastal defenses. For this, their turrets were removed and placed on concrete plinths. When not in use, the turrets were covered with a camouflaged metal ‘shed’ to keep them concealed. When needed, the ‘sheds’ were raised via hydraulics. In a fashion similar to the KW-III turret placements at Ft. Bjørnåsen, these turrets were part of a larger bunker system. An example of this is a bunker system was located in Harstad, in the far north of Norway. The turrets remained in place until the end of the Cold War (early-1990s), after which they started to be removed. The last use of the standard Chaffee came in 2002, when it featured in a rather risqué Norwegian mineral water commercial.
The removal of the turrets from Harstad in northern Norway. Photos: Dag Rune Nilsen
By the late-1960s, the Chaffee was getting a little bit long in the tooth. Naturally, the Forsvaret began looking for a way to increase the lethality of their tank arm. At this time, however, Norway was not the richest of countries so, instead of spending millions of Kroner on a new vehicle, they chose to upgrade the Chaffee. The Oslo based company of Thune-Eureka A/S was chosen to develop the upgrades, which incorporated a new 90 mm main gun, a new, more powerful engine, a new transmission, and various other modernizations.
Pre-production model of the NM-116 Panserjager. Photo: reddit
The upgrade program centered around a new main armament, consisting of a French D/925 Low-Pressure 90 mm gun. Firing a Hulladingsgranat M62 High-Explosive Anti-Tank (HEAT) round, the weapon was capable of defeating up to 320 mm (12.6 in) of armor, a vast improvement over the M24s original 75mm gun. This was complimented by a new coaxial Browning .50 cal (12.7 mm) machine gun, and a laser range-finder placed over the barrel. The main automotive upgrade was the replacement of the original engine with a new Detroit Diesel 6V-53T. Other, smaller modifications included a new Leopard 1-style rubber-pad track, a new sprocket wheel, new radios, and German-made smoke dischargers.
This upgraded vehicle, now designated NM-116, entered service in 1975. With the new upgrades came a new role. The upgraded Chaffee went from being a light tank, to a tank destroyer, hence ‘Panserjager’. The NM-116 was an ‘ambush predator’, and would use its small size and good maneuverability to outflank the enemy, engage, and then withdraw along pre-arranged lanes of engagement. The NM-116 was a successful conversion, but by the end of the Cold War in the early 1990s, the tank was becoming obsolete. Its gun simply did not have the penetrative power to combat modern armored fighting vehicles. This led to the NM-116 receiving the nickname ‘Pansernager’, literally meaning ‘Armor Nibbler’ due to the weapon’s lack of killing power. Nevertheless, the tank served the Norwegian Army well for 18 years, finally being retired in 1993.
NM-116s and crews in the Norwegian mountains on exercise, late-1980s. Photo: Dag Rune Nilsen.
To support the new NM-116, it was also decided that a new Armored Recovery Vehicle (ARV), or ‘Bergepanser’, be developed. For this, four Chaffees were separated from the NM-116 project. The conversion work to turn the vehicles into ARVs was undertaken by Kvaerner Eureka AS. The four Chaffee hulls went through the same automotive upgrades as those being upgraded to NM-116 standard. The turrets, however, were completely removed and replaced with a large crane. A small dozer blade was also installed on the vehicle’s lower glacis.
The NM-130 Bergepanser. Photo: Dag Rune Nilsen
This ARV was designated the NM-130 Bergepanser. The large pivoting crane was telescopic and could be raised or lowered by a hydraulic ram. It had a 2 to 7 tonne (2.2 – 7.7 ton) capacity, with integral 19-tonne (21 ton) capacity winch. The crane had a relatively low lift capacity as it was not designed to lift an entire vehicle, rather just its components. The 2-7 tonnes lift capacity was more than enough to hoist the NM-116’s Detroit Diesel engine which weighed just 600 kgs (1323 lbs). It was necessary that the cable have quite a high tensile strength so it could tow or retrieve the NM-116. For this, the cable was threaded through fairleads (a device that guides a line, rope or cable) placed behind the winch drum. This allowed the vehicle to tow vehicles behind it. To do this though, the crane would have to be traversed 180 degrees. The NM-130’s dozer blade performed three main roles: light earthmoving operations/obstacle clearance, support during lifting operations, and anchorage when winching.
The Bergepanser entered service around the same time as the NM-116 and left service with its tank-killing brother in the early 1990s. There is a possibility that it stayed on in service a little longer to serve Norway’s fleet of M48s and Leopard 1s, but concrete evidence of this cannot be found.
NM-130 Bergepanser with crane at full erection. Photo: hestvik.no
Conclusion
The Chaffee gave the Norwegian Army one of its earliest experiences in the operation of relatively modern armor after the Second World War, and served as its primary tank for many years. In total – thanks to the NM upgrade programs – the M24 gave the Hæren approximately 47 years of service, making it one of Norway’s longest-serving armored vehicles. This is surpassed only by the now 56 years of the M113 which – again thanks to upgrade programs – has remained in Norse service since around 1964.
Not many unmodified Norwegian Chaffees remain, however, there are a few. In the late-90s, early-2000s, the Norwegians began removing the Chaffees from their ranges and storage. A few vehicles went to Museums around Norway, but Museums around the world also began buying them and restoring them for display. An example of such a vehicle can be found at The Museum of the American G.I. in College Station, Texas, USA. The vehicle has since been restored to a fully operational condition.
The Chaffee of the Museum of the American GI, an ex-Norwegian army vehicle. Photo: Michael Kellet, americangimuseum.org
A Stridsvogn M24 of Stridsvogneskadron Sola. The emblem on the turret side is one still commonly used in the Kavalerieskadronen (Armoured Cavalry), and is a representation of the Norse God Odin and his Ravens. Illustration produced by Ardhya Anargha, funded by our Patreon campaign.
Kingdom of Sweden/Kingdom of Norway (1938)
Light Tank – 1 Operated
Even into the 1930s, Norway was not one of the more industrially advanced countries in Europe. As such, Norway was a relative latecomer to the idea of mechanizing its armed forces. It was not until the mid-1930s that the Royal Norwegian Army (No: Hæren) began to express an interest in Armored Fighting Vehicles. It was around this time that it developed its first armored vehicles – 3 improvised armored cars built on commercial truck chassis. By 1936 though, the Army was looking for something a little tougher. The Army became interested in the L-120, a prototype light tank in development by its fellow Scandinavian neighbor, Sweden. While the L-120 – built by Landsverk – would not become a success in Sweden, 1 prototype hull was purchased by and delivered to the Norwegians.
The tank was delivered without a turret, leaving the Hæren to build a basic one of its own design, equipped with a machine gun. The L-120 was Norway’s first-ever tank and would be known by many names, including ‘Kongstanken’ (Royal Tank) and ‘Norgestanken’, (Norwegian Tank); however, it is most popularly known as the ‘Rikstanken’ (The National Tank).
In Norwegian service, the tank would never see combat. Although it was used in training in 1938 and 1939, it was left in storage when the German Army invaded in April 1940. After the invasion and subsequent occupation, the vehicle remained in storage. By war’s end, however, the tank had disappeared.
The L-120 ‘Rikstanken’. This photo is quite rare in that it is one of the only photos showing the machine gun installed in the turret. Photo: Wikimedia commons
What’s in a Name?
According to the Forsvarsmuseet (Norwegian Armed Forces Museum) in Oslo, the names given to the L-120 have some interesting history in their own right. The names ‘Norgestanken’ and ‘Kongstanken’ were actually double entendres. In Norwegian, the word ‘tanken’ means both “the tank” and “the thought”. The noun ‘Norgestanken‘ can therefore also mean ‘The Norway thought’, an old nationalistic term for the idea of an independent Norway – Norway had only gained independence from Sweden in 1905. ‘Kongstanken’ can also mean “the royal thought”, and can signify grand, bold, or idealistic thinking. This generation of Norwegians remembered the struggle for independence, so it is easy to see why so much reverence was placed in the name.
In 1936, the Swedish Military was looking to replace the Stridsvagn m/21-29 and Stridsvagn m/31. A requirement was put out for two new tanks, one armed with a 37 mm gun, and a lighter vehicle armed only with machine guns. Landsverk would design two vehicles to fill these roles, the L-60 and the L-120. The L-60 would fill the medium tank role, and would later enter service as the Strv m/38. The L-120 was under consideration for the role of the light tank. At least 3 prototypes were built, each with slight differences, mostly regarding the design of the radiator grills and the design of the driver’s hatch. Design-wise, the L-120 was extremely similar to the previous L-100 light tank concept. The design was typically Swedish, being quite a narrow vehicle, with a hull that sloped to the rear, and a large diameter sprocket wheel at the front of the running gear. The L-120 has a claim to fame in that it is one of the first-ever tanks to feature a torsion bar suspension.
One of the L-120 prototypes complete with a machine gun-armed turret. It has some differences compared to the Norwegian example, in particular the vent on the hull side and the design of the driver’s hatch. Photo: landskrona
By 1937, two prototypes had been produced, and by May were taking part in trials. The trials highlighted that their engines left them underpowered, and they were extremely unreliable. As a result, the Swedes canceled development of the L-120, with the military instead opting for the Czechoslovakian-built AH-IV tankette.
Norwegian Purchase
Despite the tank’s failures in the eyes of the Swedish military, the Norwegians expressed interest in the L-120 to see whether it would be compatible with their dragoon and cavalry units. Initially, the Norwegian Army was granted a budget of 20,000 Kroner. However, the shipping costs of a complete tank would have risen to 50,000 Kroner due to the weight. As a result, the vehicle was shipped in a stripped-down condition without armor plating, a turret, or any armament. The Norwegian Army took delivery of this basic tank hull in 1938.
The L-120 that would make it to Norway. Note the differences to the vehicle pictured above. The date and location are unknown, but as the turret is different to that used on the example sent to Norway, this may well be the prototype under trials in Sweden. Photo: Wikimedia Commons
Overview of the ‘Rikstanken’
Unfortunately, not much information regarding this L-120’s unique specifications survive today, but there are fragments that can be retrieved. The L-120 weighed between 4 and 4.5 tonnes (4.4 – 4.9 tons), measured 4 meters (13 ft 3 in) in length and was about 1.7 meters (5 ft 8 in) wide. With the original turret, it measured 1.65 meters (5 ft 4 in) in height. Propulsion was provided by an 85 hp, 6 cylinder Volvo Type DC – presumably, petrol – engine, reportedly taken from the Volvo LV93 series of commercial trucks. This ran through a 5 speed (4 forwards, 1 reverse) gearbox, also apparently taken from the LV93 truck. The engine was located at the rear of the tank and powered the forward-mounted sprocket wheels, propelling the vehicle to a top speed of about 50 km/h (31 mph). The running gear consisted of 4 split, spoked, and rubber-tired road wheels per side on a torsion bar suspension. There was a larger diameter, spoked trailing idler wheel at the rear, and the return of the track was supported by two return rollers. The track was of quite a short pitch, and quite narrow at about 15 cm (5.9 in) wide.
This photo of one of the L-120 prototypes during trials grants a clear view of the vehicle’s running gear. This is not the example sent to Norway and is one of the other two vehicles, identified by the large grill on the hull side. Photo: ftr.wot-news.com
The L-120 hull that made it to Norway was unique in appearance compared to the other prototypes. The front of the vehicle was dominated by a large sloping upper plate that extended back to the turret ring. There is a suggestion that the tank was delivered without armor, and as such, iron plates were installed on the vehicle. This cannot be corroborated at the time of writing, however. The sides of the hull also sloped inwards. A simple box-like hood was added over the driver’s position, placed slightly to the left of the centerline. Three simple vision ports in the hood provided vision for the driver, one of only a two-man crew. The steering tillers were also reportedly missing when the vehicle arrived, leading to their replacement with a steering wheel. This is another detail that currently can not be corroborated.
The other crew member was the commander/gunner who would be located in the turret. As the vehicle arrived without a turret, the Norwegians had to fabricate their own. They came up with a simple cylindrical turret with a flat roof and a single-piece hatch. This seems to be quite crude in nature and simply hinges backward at a crease in the middle of the roof plate. The only way the commander could see out effectively would be to operate head out, as there do not appear to have been any vision devices in the walls or roof of the turret. However, in some of the surviving photos, it would appear that there may be simple slits cut into the sides of the turret. Considering the rudimentary nature of the turret, it must be assumed that horizontal traverse was manual, but whether this was by gearing or brute force is unknown. It is also unknown how thick the metal used to fabricate the turret was, and whether it made it taller or shorter than the original turret.
A post-invasion photo of the ‘Rikstanken’ with a posing German soldier. Note the sloping upper plate, square hood for the driver and the round aperture in the turret ‘face’ for the machine gun main armament. Photo: armed-conflicts.com
For armament, the Norwegians installed an American made Colt M/29 ‘Mitraljøse’ (heavy machine gun) in a simple circular cut out in the ‘face’ of the turret. This weapon was a Norway-specific version of the Colt MG38, the export version of the Colt M1928, which in turn was an export version of the famous Browning M1917. It was chambered in the Norwegian 7.92 x 61 mm round, and remained a water-cooled, recoil-operated machine gun, and had a rate-of-fire of 590 rounds-per-minute. This gun was a sensible choice, as it was the most plentiful – perhaps only – heavy weapon in service with the Norwegian Army at this time, with around 1,800 in operation.
Norwegian troops operating an M/29 at Narvik in 1940. It should be noted that this is a reversed image as the M/29 feeds from the left, not the right. Photo: Wikimedia Commons
Other details on the vehicle include simple headlights on the fenders over the sprocket wheels, the exhaust pipe on the right rear fender, a larger stowage box on the left rear fender, and pioneer tools (pickaxes, shovels, etc) stowed around the back end of the vehicle.
Service
The service history of the ‘Rikstanken’ can be described as patchy at best. What remains are a series of fragments, mostly consisting of second- or even third-hand accounts.
Between 1938 and 1939, the L-120 was predominantly used in training exercises alongside the cavalry and the 3 improvised armored cars. All 4 vehicles were passed around the cavalry and dragoon units so they could all train with and gain experience operating with armor. As part of the cavalry, the tank received the number ‘PV-1’, which was painted on both of the fenders over the sprocket wheels. It would appear that the tank was predominantly based at Gardermoen, just North of Oslo, at the base of the 1st Dragoon Regiment.
Two shots of the L-120 with – what appears to be – Norwegian troops. On the left we can see the tank, possibly at Gardermoen, between 1938 and 1939. Note the ‘PV-1’ stenciled onto the fender. On the right, we can see the tank in a poor state, buried in snow, with the rear plate missing. Note the exposed engine. Photo: armedconflicts.com
It would appear that the mechanical issues that emerged during the Swedish trials once more reared their heads during Norway’s time operating the vehicle. The Norwegians also came to the conclusion that the engine was far too underpowered. There were also brake issues, once reportedly causing the vehicle to crash into a tree. A Colonel by the name of Christopher Fougner – Commander of the 2nd Dragoon Regiment, was of the opinion that the tank was a waste of money and time, reportedly stating that the only working tank the Norwegian Army would ever see would belong to an attacking enemy. This is ironic considering the events that would transpire just a couple of years later, in 1940.
April 1940 would, of course, bring the invasion of Norway by Nazi Germany, and subsequent occupation. The L-120’s role in the invasion is, again, uncertain. There is a possibility that the tank did see some action in defense of Norway, but it would appear this was not the case. Even so, its ability to combat the more advanced Panzers of the Wehrmacht is highly questionable, although it may have done well against infantry. However, it seems more likely that the tank – along with the armored cars – were left at the Gardermoen base when the garrison forces left to face the invaders. Indeed, there are many post-invasion photos of German troops posing with the vehicle to suggest this.
The ‘Rikstanken’ onboard a ship. Quite why it is on a ship, where it is going, or why, is unknown. Note the large stowage box and pickaxe at the rear. Photo: armedconflicts.com
This, unfortunately, is where the trail runs cold. It is unknown what happened to the vehicle during the duration of the occupation, or whether it survived to the end of the war. Nothing is thought to remain of the vehicle today.
Conclusion
Successful or not, the L-120 ‘Rikstanken’ is an important vehicle in Norway’s military history. Despite the mechanical issues, it gave the Norwegian Army their first experience in the operation of a tank.
The ‘Rikstanken’ in a rather poor state with posing German soldiers. Photo: armedconflicts.com
It was not until the end of the War, and the Nazi occupation, that the Norwegian Army would gain more advanced armored vehicles. The surrendering German Army left behind swathes of equipment, including Panzer III medium tanks and StuG III assault guns, which would be pressed into service as the Stridsvogn and Stormkanon KW-III, respectively. Norway would also receive a small number of the American built M24 Chaffee light tank, which would serve them into the later years of the Cold War.
Landsverk 120 (L-120). In Norwegian service, it was known as the ‘Rikstanken’ meaning ‘National Tank’. It was fitted with an improvised turret mounting an M/29 machine gun. The grey color is speculative as it is unknown what color the vehicle would have been. This illustration was produced by Ardhya Anargha, funded by our Patreon campaign.
The need for a heavily armed tank was highlighted for the British Army in 1945, when the Soviet Army unveiled its newly developed heavy tank – the IS-3 – at the Berlin Victory Parade. The Armies of Britain, France, and the USA realized they had nothing to counter this new threat. In later years, the IS-3 would prove to be a far less threatening tank than originally thought. At the time, however, these armies were concerned. In response, the US would develop the M103 while the French would experiment with the AMX-50. Great Britain would develop the FV214 Conqueror and FV215 Heavy Gun Tanks.
Decades later, the popular online game World of Tanks (WoT) – published and developed by Wargaming (WG) – was preparing a new British tank line. Due to poor research or possibly completely intentionally, the top of the tree appeared as the Heavy Gun Tank FV215b, a fictional marriage of a FV215 chassis with the FV214 turret and gun with a fictional engine. Fortunately, Wargaming has withdrawn this fake vehicle, although they replaced it with an equally questionable one.
That being said, elements of this tank did exist in one form or another, so those shall be explored.
In-game render showing a profile view of the FV215b. Image: Wargaming.net
The WoT Representation
A small ‘history’ is provided for the vehicle by Wargaming:
“A proposed plan for a heavy tank based on the Conqueror Mk. II. Unlike the production model, this modification featured rear placement of the fighting compartment. Never saw production or service.”
– WoT Wiki Extract
The FV215b is presented as a vehicle of the FV200 series. The FV200s date back to the final stages of the Second World War, when the British War Office (WO) was looking for a ‘Universal Tank’. The ancestor of today’s Main Battle Tanks (MBTs), the idea of the Universal Tank was that one chassis would spawn many variants, thus reducing costs, development and making maintenance and supply far easier. The FV215b is also presented as a variant of the planned FV215, or to give its officially long-winded title, the ‘Tank, Heavy No. 2, 183mm Gun, FV215′. This tank was set to be the replacement of the FV214 Conqueror (Tank, Heavy No. 1, 120mm Gun, FV214).
In-game render of the FV215b showing a top-down view. Image: Wargaming.net
Reality: Heavy Gun Tanks
The term ‘Heavy Gun Tank’ is a uniquely British designation. It refers to the size and power of the gun, not the size and weight of the tank. Heavy Gun Tanks were specifically designed to destroy enemy tanks and/or fortified positions.
Tank, Heavy No. 1, 120 mm Gun, FV214 Conqueror. The Conqueror was Britain’s answer to the Soviet IS-3. It served from 1955 to 1966. Photo: Author’s own
The Conqueror was the first and only ‘Heavy Gun Tank’ that Britain would build and put into active service. Based on the FV200 chassis, the Conqueror was an imposing vehicle. It measured 25 feet (7.62 meters) long – not including the gun, 13.1 feet (3.99 meters) wide and 11 feet (3.35 meters) tall. It weighed 65 long tons* (66 tonnes), had armor up to 13 inches (330 mm) thick and was armed with the powerful L1 120 mm gun. Firing Armor-Piercing Discarding Sabot (APDS) rounds, this gun was able to punch through up to 17.3 inches (446 mm) of 55-degree angled steel armor at 1,000 yards (914 meters). Entering service in 1955, the Conqueror had a short service life, being retired in 1966 after just 11 years of service. It was replaced by the FV4201 Chieftain.
*Long tons are a unit of mass unique to the United Kingdom; for ease it will be shortened to ton. 1 long ton is equal to about 1.01 metric tonnes, or 1.12 US ‘Short’ tons.
The next step would have been the FV215. This was in development just as the Conqueror entered full-scale production. This vehicle used a modified chassis that was slightly narrower than the FV214 at 12 feet (3.6 meters) compared to 13.1 feet (3.99 meters). The FV215 would also have had a rear-mounted turret, and would have been equipped with a powerful L4 183 mm Gun. To accommodate the rear-mounted turret, the powerplant was moved to the center of the vehicle. It would appear that this fake ‘FV215b’ is based on the hull of the real FV215.
‘Tank, Heavy No. 2, 183mm Gun, Fv215’, the planned replacement for the FV214. Developed in the early 1950s, it was armed with the powerful L4 183 mm Gun. It never entered service. Photo: Rob Griffin, Conqueror
In-Game Design of the FV215b
The ‘FV215b’ is basically a rear-turreted Conqueror, although it is based on the real FV215 chassis as stated above. There was never a ‘b’ variant of any description planned for the FV215. In-game specifications record the vehicle as weighing 70 tonnes or 68 long tons. This is heavier than both the FV214 and the real FV215 by about 4 long tons (4.06 tonnes). Hull armor is listed as 152.4 mm (6 inches) on the front, 101.6 (4 inches) on the sides, and 76.2 (3 inches) on the rear. This is nowhere near accurate. On the real FV215 hull, armor was planned to be 4.9 inch (125 mm) sloped at 59 degrees on the upper glacis and just 1 ¾ (44 mm) on the sides and rear.
Despite errors like this, the FV215b does share some accurate parts of its design with both the FV214 and FV215 respectively. These include the 4-man crew (commander, gunner, loader, driver), Horstmann suspension system, the turret and integral ‘Fire Control Turret’, and the 120 mm L1 gun.
In-game render of the FV215b. Image: Wargaming.net
Engine
In-game, the FV215b is equipped with the Rolls-Royce Griffon. This is, in reality, an aircraft engine. While Rolls-Royce aero engines have been adapted for use in armored vehicles, there is no evidence at all to suggest that there was ever a plan to make an AFV variant of the Griffon. An example of a converted Rolls-Royce aero engine is the Meteor – as used in the Conqueror. This was an adaption of the Merlin, an engine famous for powering the British Spitfire and American Mustang fighter aircraft of World War 2.
The Griffon was a 37-liter, 60-degree V-12, liquid-cooled engine. It was the last V-12 aero engine built by Rolls-Royce, with production ceasing in 1955. It was used on such aircraft as the Fairey Firefly, Supermarine Spitfire and Hawker Sea Fury. The engine produced over 2,000 hp in its plane configuration, but in game it is listed as producing just 950 hp. This is not far fetched, as converted aero-engines were often de-rated for use in armored vehicles. Meteor is an example of this. As the Merlin, it produced up 1,500 hp depending on the model. When de-rated as the Meteor, it produced just 810 horsepower.
The Rolls-Royce Griffon V-12 Aero-engine. Photo: Wikimedia Commons
The real FV215 was set to be propelled by the Rover M120 No. 2 Mk.1 producing 810 hp and propelling the vehicle to a top speed of just under 20 mph (32 km/h). In this fake tank, the installed Griffon engine is recorded as propelling the vehicle to a top speed of 21 mph (34 km/h). While faster than the real FV215, this is the same top speed as the Conqueror which was propelled by a less powerful engine. As with the real FV215, the engine is mounted centrally, separating the Driver (located in the right front corner of the hull) from the rest of the crew in the turret.
Suspension
The Horstmann suspension of the FV215b is one of the accurate parts of this vehicle. It has been used on all the FV200s including the Caernarvon and Conqueror, but also on the Centurion. On the FV200s, the suspension system had 2 wheels per-bogie unit. The wheels would be made of steel, measuring approximately 20 inches (50 cm) in diameter, and constructed from 3 separate parts. These consisted of an outer and inner half, with a steel rim in contact with the track. Between each layer was a rubber ring. The Horstmann system consisted of three horizontal springs mounted concentrically, guided by an internal rod and tube. This allowed each wheel to rise and fall independently, although the system did struggle if both wheels rose at the same time. Four bogies lined each side of the hull of the vehicle, giving it 8 road-wheels per side. There would also be 4 return rollers, 1 per bogie. The drive sprockets were relocated at the rear of the running gear, with the idler wheel at the front.
Left, a schematic drawing of the Conqueror’s four Horstmann suspension bogie units. Right, this view of a Mk.2 Conqueror being unloaded from a flatbed trailer shows how the suspension actuates. Sources: User Handbook for Tank, Heavy Gun, Conqueror Mk.1 & 2 – 1958, WO Code No. 12065 & Rob Griffin
Turret & Armament
Both the turret and main armament of the FV215b were taken straight from the FV214 Conqueror.
The main armament of the FV215b consists of the 120mm L1A1 ‘A’ gun. While there were two versions of the 120 mm Gun – the L1A1 and L1A2 – there was never an ‘A’ subvariant. Maximum penetration in-game is listed as 326 mm (12.8 inches).
To give it its full name, the ‘Ordnance, Quick Firing (QF), 120 mm Tank, L1 Gun’ was an extremely powerful weapon with dimensions to match. Muzzle to breach, it measured 24.3 ft (7.4 m) and alone weighed 2.9-tons (3 tonnes). The gun was designed to fire both Armor-Piercing Discarding Sabot (APDS) and High-Explosive Squash Head (HESH) ammunition. The in-game penetration of 326 mm is far lower than that of the real gun. Firing the APDS round at a muzzle velocity of 4,700 fps (1,433 m/s), the L1 could penetrate up to 17.3 inches (446 mm) of 55-degree angled steel armor at 1,000 yards (914 meters). Elevation is listed as +15 to -7 degrees. This is accurate to the Conqueror, although a limiter prevented the gun from depressing past -5 degrees.
The impressively long 120 mm L1 gun, seen here on a surviving Conqueror Mk.2. Photo: Author’s own
The turret is a fairly accurate representation of the one designed for the FV214 Conqueror. Even so, the armor values are way off. In game, it is listed that the turret is protected by 254 mm (10 inches) of armor on the face, 152.4 mm (6 inches) on the sides, and 101.6 mm (4 inches) on the rear. In reality, it is hard to pin-point the exact armor thicknesses on the Conqueror’s turret, thanks largely to conflicting sources. We do know that armor on the turret was between 9.4 – 13.3 in (240 – 340 mm) sloped at 60 degrees on the face, with a 9.4 in (239 mm) mantlet. The sides were 3.5 inches (89 mm) thick, while the rear was 2 inches (51 mm) thick.
A couple of features unique to the Conqueror turret also remain present. One of these is the Fire Control Turret (FCT) – located at the rear of the turret. This replaces the traditional commander’s cupola, and is a self-contained unit that can rotate independently of the main turret. The FCT features an integral range-finder for use by the commander. He would scan around looking for targets, range it, and then pass the data onto the gunner who would then engage.
The other feature is the hatch on the right wall of the turret. This hatch is the ejection port for spent main-gun casings. They were ejected from the turret via the troublesome ‘Mollins gear’, a piece of equipment that frequently broke down on the Conqueror.
In-game render of the FV215b showing the rear-mounted turret. Image: Wargaming.net
99.9% Non-Existent
The FV215b is, without a doubt, a fake vehicle. It is not the worst of Wargaming’s fake tank crimes, as many of the components used in its design did exist. In reality, there would not have been a need for this tank. The real FV215 was designed to replace the Conqueror and have more firepower, so a tank created by mating the FV215 and FV214 would have been completely pointless.
The Tank was introduced to ‘World of Tanks’ in 2014 just to fill the British ‘Tier X’ heavy tank role. In 2018, it was replaced by another less-than-authentic tank, the ‘Super Conqueror’, at least on PC. The FV215b remains in the console and Blitz versions of the game.
Quite remarkably, this photo of a Mk.1 Conqueror with the turret traversed over the engine deck has often been mistaken for an FV215b. Such mis-identifications are a clear result of Wargaming introducing fake tanks and trying to pass them off as real. Photo: Profile Publications
Illustration of the fake FV215b Heavy Gun Tank produced by Ardhya Anargha, funded by our Patreon campaign.
United Kingdom (1950-1957)
Heavy Gun Tank – 1 Mock-up & Various Components Built
Viewing the public debut of the Soviet Union’s IS-3 heavy tank at the Berlin Victory Parade of September 1945, the Western powers – including Great Britain – were shocked. As heads of the British, American, and French Armies watched these machines clatter down the Charlottenburger Chaussee, they saw the shape of a new generation of heavy tanks. From the exterior, the IS-3 was a tank with well-sloped and – apparently – heavy armor, a piked nose, wide tracks, and a gun at least 120 mm in caliber. At least in appearance, this was superior to anything being fielded by the other victorious Allied powers at the time.
The respective officials knew that they had nothing in their arsenal capable of potentially combatting this menacing tank that was now in service with an increasingly aggressive USSR. In response, the militaries of these countries began to develop heavy tanks that – they hoped – would be able to combat the IS-3. The United States would develop the M103 heavy tank, while the French experimented with the AMX-50. Britain went in a different doctrinal direction and created a ‘Heavy Gun Tank’. This was a uniquely British designation that was not governed by weight, but the size of the gun. This vehicle was based on the experimental FV200 ‘Universal Tank’ chassis and given the official and somewhat long-winded title of ‘Tank, Heavy No. 1, 120 mm Gun, FV214’. This vehicle would be better known as the ‘Conqueror’.
Weighing in at 65 long tons* (66 tonnes) with armor up to 13.3 in (340 mm) thick, the Conqueror was one of the largest and heaviest tanks Britain would ever field. Like the M103 and AMX-50, the Conqueror was armed with a powerful 120 mm Gun, specifically the ‘Ordnance, Quick-Firing, 120mm, Tank, L1 Gun’. This gun could punch through an impressive 17.3 inches (446 mm) at 1,000 yards (914 meters) firing Armor Piercing Discarding Sabot (APDS) ammunition. This was more than enough to combat the IS-3 but, at the time, this was unknown to the British War Office (WO). As such, even greater firepower was investigated.
What followed was the FV215. With its monstrous, 183 mm gun, this vehicle has become something of a legend among enthusiasts of a particular age, largely due to a popular video game. Unfortunately, this has meant a number of falsehoods have been spread about the vehicle. This article will highlight the truth behind this uniquely British vehicle.
*As this is a British vehicle, mass will be measured in ‘Long Ton’ otherwise known as the ‘Imperial ton’. It will be shortened to ‘ton’ for ease with a metric conversion alongside.
An original half-photo, half-drawn representation of the FV215 and its monstrous 183 mm gun. The addition of smoke launchers, radio antenna, headlamps, and other small details suggest that this was a finished design, and it is the closest representation of what the finished vehicle may have looked like. Photo: Rob Griffin, Conqueror
The FV200 Series
In the aftermath of the Second World War, the War Office reviewed the future of the British Army’s tank arm. In 1946, it did away with the ‘A’ designator used on tanks such as the Churchill (A.22) and Comet (A.34). The ‘A’ number was replaced by the ‘Fighting Vehicle’ or ‘FV’ number. In an attempt to streamline the tank force and cover all the bases, it was decided that the military needed three main families of vehicles: the FV100, the FV200, and FV300 series. The FV100s would be the heaviest, the FV200s would be slightly lighter, and the FV300s would be the lightest. It should be noted that the rest of the FV series 400, 500 etcetera were not in weight order although these first 3 serials were. All three projects were almost canceled due to the complexity that would have been involved in producing the respective series. In the end, both the FV100 and FV300 series were canceled. The FV200 hung on in its development, however, as it was projected that it would eventually replace the FV4007 Centurion.
The FV200 series included designs for vehicles that would fill various roles ranging from a gun tank to engineering vehicles and Self-Propelled Guns (SPGs). It was not until later years that the other uses of the FV200 chassis were explored, such as with the FV219 and FV222 Armoured Recovery Vehicles (ARVs). The first of the FV200 series was the FV201, a gun tank that started development in 1944 as the ‘A.45’. This tank weighed around 55 tons (49 tonnes). At least two or three FV201s were built for testing, but the project went no further than that. Work on the project ceased in 1949.
The FV201 (A.45) test vehicle with Centurion turret and 17-Pounder gun. Photo: Tankograd Publishing
Background
As the ‘Heavy No. 2’ part of its designation implies, the FV215 was intended to be a follow up to the FV214 Conqueror – ‘Heavy No. 1’. The vehicle was also known as the ‘FV215, Heavy Anti-Tank Gun, SP’ (SP: Self Propelled). The project started life in mid-1949, and was aimed at increasing the firepower of the ‘Heavy Gun Tanks’. A requirement was formulated for a tank armed with a gun capable of defeating a 60-degree sloped plate, 6 inches (152 mm) thick, at up to 2,000 yards (1,828 meters), a feat impossible even for the powerful 120 mm L1 gun of the FV214. By 1950, Major General Stuart B. Rawlins, Director General of Artillery (D.G. of A.) had concluded that there was no such gun available with that level of ballistic performance. Initially, the British Military looked at the development of a 155 mm gun that would be standardized with the USA. However, even this lacked the required punch and, as such, 6.5 and 7.2 inch (165 and 183 mm respectively) High-Explosive Squash Head (HESH) shells were looked at.
‘Tank, Heavy No. 1, 120 mm Gun, FV214 Conqueror’. The FV215 – ‘Heavy No. 2’ – was a follow up to this tank. This is a surviving Mk.2 Conqueror known as ‘William’ and can be found at the Wight Military & Heritage Museum, Isle of Wight, UK. Photo: Author’s own.
At this time, the British Army was of the non-doctrinal opinion that a ‘kill’ did not necessarily mean the complete destruction of an enemy vehicle. For example, a blown-off track was also seen as a kill as it took the enemy vehicle out of action; today this is known as an ‘M’ (Mobility) kill. A ‘K’-Kill would be the destruction of a vehicle. The term used for this method at the time was ‘disruption not destruction’. The 6.5 in/165 mm HESH was not thought to be powerful enough to ‘kill’ a heavily armored target in this manner unless it hit bare armor plate. Attention therefore turned instead to the larger 7.2 in/183 mm shell which – Maj.Gen. Rawlins thought – would be powerful enough to render the target inoperable, and therefore ‘kill’ it, wherever it impacted.
The projected gun was designated the 180 mm ‘Lilywhite’. The background of this name is unknown. It may be an interpretation of the ‘Rainbow Code’ used by the WO to identify experimental projects. The ‘Red Cyclops’ flame gun attachment for the FV201, and the ‘Orange William’ experimental missile are examples of this. If this was the case, however, the name should be ‘White Lilly’. It may even simply be named after a Lieutenant Colonel Lilywhite of the Royal Army Ordnance Corps. It must be said that this is all speculation, and no evidence exists to support the theory.
It was not until December 1952 that the designation of the gun was officially updated to 183 mm. The design of the gun was accepted and was serialized as the ‘Ordnance, Quick-Firing, 183 mm, Tank, L4 Gun’. The 183 mm L4 became one of the largest and most powerful tank guns in the world. With the gun developed, the rest of the vehicle had to be designed around it. It is estimated that the vehicle would have cost between £sd44,400 and £sd59,200 (£1,385,662 – £1,847,549 in today’s Pounds) per unit.
The FV215 in Detail
Overview
Based on the Conqueror adaption of the FV200 chassis, the hull of the FV215 would have shared some similarities. For example, the hull would have been 25 feet (7.62 meters) long. It would have been slightly narrower than the FV214 at 12 feet (3.6 meters) compared to 13.1 feet (3.99 meters). With a planned height of 10.6 feet (3.2 meters), the FV215 would have been slightly shorter than the FV214. Unladen, the vehicle would weigh 61 tons (62 tonnes) while being in ‘battle order’ – i.e. fully equipped – would have seen the weight climb to 65 tons (66 tonnes).
The FV215 would have been operated by a 5-man crew consisting of the commander (turret left), the gunner (turret front right), two loaders (turret rear), and the driver (hull front right).
Photo of a scale model of the FV215 taken as part of the Fighting Vehicle Research & Development Establishment (FVRDE) report. Photo: Ed Francis
While the basic chassis and running gear remained the same as the FV214, the layout of the rest of the vehicle was completely changed. Three turret layouts were considered – front, middle, and rear. A rear-mounted turret was chosen as was considered more advantageous to balance. The power plant was also moved to the center of the vehicle.
The driver remained at the front right of the hull. Like on the Conqueror Mk.2, he had a single periscope – in this case, a No. 16 Mk.1 periscope with a 110° field-of-view – mounted at the top of the upper-glacis plate for vision. He would have had a large hatch above his head that would pop up and swing to the right. As with the FV214, two traditional tiller bars would have been used to operate the vehicle. Also, the driver’s seat could be placed at various heights and positions, allowing the driver to operate head-out or under the protection of a closed hatch. Extensions atop the tiller bars would allow easy operation when driving head out.
Photo of the full-scale mockup vehicle showing the open hatch of the driver’s position. Note also the pericope in the upper glacis. The purpose of the hatch beside the driver’s is unknown. Photo: Ed Francis
The glacis is listed as being a 4.9 inch (125 mm) thick steel plate, sloped at 59 degrees. Side armor was to be 1 ¾ inch (44 mm) thick plus the 6 mm thick ‘bazooka plates’ added over the running gear. The floor would have been 0.7 inches (20 mm) thick, with an extra 0.6 inch (16 mm) ‘mine plate’ installed below the driver’s position. The roof of the hull would have been 1 ¼ inches (32 mm) thick.
Turret
Mounted at the rear of the hull, the new turret was large and boxy. Unlike the Conqueror’s cast turret, the FV215’s turret was to be of welded construction. Existing dimensions list the turret as 12 feet (3.6 meters) wide sitting on a 95 inch (2.4 meter) diameter turret ring. Overall, the turret would have weighed 20 tons (20.3 tonnes). Unfortunately, the exact thickness of the turret armor is unknown as records list the turret face only as “will protect from a 100 mm gun in a 30-degree arc”. The rear of the turret and the roof would have been 0.6 inches (17 mm) thick.
Another view of the FV215 scale model showing the turret at the rear of the vehicle. Photo: Tankograd Publishing
A feature carried over from the Conqueror was the rangefinder. On the FV215, this would have been used by the gunner, not the commander as with the FV214. This was placed laterally across the front of the turret roof, and was made by the York-based company of Cook, Throughton & Simms. The rangefinder had a 6 foot (1.8 meter) sight-base and used the ‘coincidence’ method of ranging. This method consists of laying two images on top of each other. When the two images completely overlap, the range measurement is taken. This information is then used by the gunner to accurately range the gun.
The commander – located on the left of the turret – would have been equipped with a large rotating cupola designated the ‘Cupola, Vision, No. 5’ mounting a ‘Sight, Periscope, AFV, No. 11’ along with a ‘Periscope, Tank No. 20’ and ‘No. 21’ providing an uninterrupted view of 140 degrees. A collimator was also provided that would display the view of the gunner’s main sight.
Internal view of the full-scale FV215 mockup showing the Commander’s position and instruments. Photo: Ed Francis
Two smoke dischargers, presumably the ‘Discharger, Smoke Grenade, No. 1 Mk.1’ as on the Conqueror, would have been placed on the sides of the turret. Each launcher featured 2 banks of 3 tubes and were fired electrically from inside the tank. Atop the roof, on the hatch for the two loaders, was an air-defense mounting point for a machine gun. This was set to be a .50 Cal (12.7 mm) Browning M2 heavy machine gun – known simply as the .5 Browning in British service. This was an uncommon choice for British vehicles of this era. The machine gun could elevate to +70 degrees and depress 5 degrees. Four boxes totaling 950 rounds were carried for the .50 Cal.
Armament
The ‘Ordnance, Quick-Firing, 183mm, Tank, L4 Gun’ was one of the only parts of the FV215 that was built and tested. A small number of the guns were built, but it is unclear just how many. Records suggest at least 12 were built. In an effort to get it into service before the development of the FV215 had finished, the W.O. explored the idea of mounting it on the Centurion chassis. This resulted in the development of the experimental FV4005, a vehicle that would have been rushed into production should the Cold War have turned hot. A similar connection can be found with the Conqueror and the FV4004 Conway. Unfortunately, the exact length of the 183 mm gun is currently unknown to the author, but it was somewhere in the region of 15 feet (4.5 meters) long. It was fully rifled with a large ‘bore-evacuator’ (fume extractor) placed roughly half-way down its length. The gun alone weighed 3.7 tons (3.75 tonnes) while its mount weighed 7.35 tons (7.4 tonnes). Although the turret was capable of full 360-degree traverse, firing was physically limited to a 90-degree arc – 45 degrees over the left and right of the vehicle. It could also fire directly to the rear. A safety lockout prevented the gun from firing over the ‘broadside’ position. The gun would have a vertical traverse range of +15 to -7 degrees, however, it is unclear whether – as with Conqueror – it would have been fitted with a limiter that halted it at -5 degrees.
The Ordnance, Quick-Firing (QF), 183mm, Tank, L4 Gun. Here it is mounted on the Centurion-based FV4005, a stop-gap vehicle designed to bring the 183mm into service quickly should the Cold War turn hot. The two visible crew members give an idea of the scale of the gun. Colorized by Jaycee “Amazing Ace” Davis. Photo: The Dark Age of Tanks, David Lister
The gunner sat on the left of the gun, in front of the commander. This was unusual for British tanks as it was more common for the gunner to be located on the right of the gun. He had hand controls for elevation and traverse, both of which were electrically powered. Duplicate controls were also available to the commander, but only the gunner was equipped with manual backups. The elevation controller also featured triggers for the main gun and coaxial machine gun. The gunner would aim the main armament via the ‘Sight, Periscope, AFV, No. 14 Mk.1’.
High-Explosive Squash Head (HESH) was the only ammunition type to be produced for the 183 mm gun. Both the shell and the propellant case were of gargantuan proportions. The shell weighed in at 160 lbs. (72.5 kg) and measured 29 ¾ inches (76 cm) long. The propellant case weighed 73 lbs. (33 kg) and measured 26.85 inches (68 cm) long. The case contained a single charge that propelled the shell to a velocity of 2,350 fps (716 m/s). When fired, the gun produced 86 tons (87 tonnes) of recoil force and recoil length of 2 ¼ feet (69 cm).
Artist’s representation of the 183 mm HESH shell and its propellent case, in scale with a 6 foot (1.83 meter) man, based on recorded dimensions. The markings and color of the shell are purely speculative but are based on British markings of the time. Image produced by Tank Encyclopedia’s Mr. C. Ryan.
HESH shells have an advantage over regular kinetic energy rounds as their effectiveness does not decrease with distance. This shell works by creating a shockwave on detonation. Once this wave reaches a void, it reflects back. The point at which the waves cross causes tension feedback which rips apart the plate, carrying a scab with approx half the energy forwards, scattering shrapnel around the interior of the target. Test firing of the L4 against a Conqueror and a Centurion proved how powerful the round was. In 2 shots, the 183 mm HESH shell blew the turret clean off the Centurion, and split the mantlet of the Conqueror in half. HESH could also serve as a dual-use round just as capable of engaging enemy armor as for use as a high-explosive round against buildings, enemy defensive positions, or soft-skinned targets.
This oversized ordnance is the reason the vehicle would be manned by two loaders. Between them, they could achieve a rate of 2 to 2 ½ rounds per minute. Also, due to its size, ammunition stowage was limited to just 20 rounds. Twelve of these would have been ‘ready-rounds’ stowed in the turret against the interior of the walls.
Photo looking inside the full-scale mockup of the FV215. Here we can see the ammunition stowage on the right interior wall of the turret. Photo: Ed Francis
The size and power of the gun were also why the rear-turret design was chosen for the FV215. Because of its – estimated – 15 foot length, the gun would overhang the front of the vehicle considerably should it have been placed in a centrally mounted turret. This could lead to the gun being buried in the ground when approaching or descending steep inclines, fouling the barrel. Having the gun at the rear also made the vehicle a more stable firing platform as the front half of the vehicle acts as a counterweight to the recoil force, preventing the vehicle from tipping too far backward.
As well as the roof-mounted machine gun, secondary armament consisted of a coaxial L3A1 .30 cal (7.62 mm) machine gun – the British designation of the US Browning M1919A4. This was not coaxial in the traditional sense, as it was not integral to the main gun mount. Rather, the machine gun was placed in a blister, cast into the roof with the range-finder and located on the top-right corner of the turret. The L3A1 had the same vertical traverse range as the main gun at +15 to -5 degrees. Six boxes totaling 6,000 rounds were carried for the ‘coaxial’ machine gun.
Mobility
While the Conqueror was equipped with the Rolls-Royce Meteor M120 petrol engine, it was planned that the FV215 would use the Rover M120 No. 2 Mk.1. This 12-cylinder, water-cooled petrol engine produced 810 horsepower at 2,800 rpm. This would have propelled the vehicle to a top speed of 19.8 mph (32 km/h). A Merritt-Brown Z5R gearbox would also be installed, providing 5 forward gears and 2 reverse. Due to the turret being relocated to the rear of the vehicle, the power plant was placed centrally in the hull, separating the driver’s compartment from the fighting compartment. The engine was also placed 6 inches (15 cm) off the centerline, but whether this was to the left or right is unknown. The exhaust pipes would emerge from the sides of the hull roof, just in front of the turret and terminate in large trumpet-like tubes. The reason for these are unknown. The Rover engine would be fed by 250 UK gallons (1,137 liters) of fuel. As with the Conqueror, a small, auxiliary 4-cylinder petrol engine was provided to drive a generator that would supply the vehicle with electrical power, with or without the main engine running.
An original schematic of the FV215 from the 1950s. Note the centrally-placed engine. Source: The Tank Museum
Like the FV201, Centurion and Conqueror before it, the FV215 was set to utilize a Horstmann suspension system with 2 wheels per-bogie unit. The wheels were made of steel, measuring approximately 20 inches (50 cm) in diameter, and constructed from 3 separate parts. These consisted of an outer and inner half, with a steel rim in contact with the track. Between each layer was a rubber ring. The idea behind this was that it would be more efficient on the rubber and would not need to be replaced as often. The Horstmann system consisted of three horizontal springs mounted concentrically, guided by an internal rod and tube. This allowed each wheel to rise and fall independently, although the system did struggle if both wheels rose at the same time. Four bogies lined each side of the hull of the vehicle, giving it 8 road-wheels per side. There were also 4 return rollers, 1 per bogie. The advantage of using bogies lies in maintenance and crew comfort. Having externally mounted bogies means there is more room inside the tank and also, should the unit become damaged, it is relatively easy to remove it and replace it with a new unit.
Left, a schematic drawing of the Conqueror’s four Horstmann suspension bogie units. Right, this view of a Mk.2 Conqueror being unloaded from a flatbed trailer shows how the suspension actuates. Sources: User Handbook for Tank, Heavy Gun, Conqueror Mk.1 & 2 – 1958, WO Code No. 12065 & Rob Griffin
Despite the engine being repositioned, the drive sprockets remained at the rear of the running gear, with the idler wheel at the front. Going by the pre-production imagery, it would appear the spoked idler of the FV214 was replaced with a solid wheel. The track was 31 inches (78.7 cm) wide and had 102 links per side when new. The suspension gave the vehicle a ground clearance of 20 inches (51 cm), and the ability to climb a 35 inch (91 cm) vertical object. It allowed the tank to cross trenches up to 11 feet (3.3 m) wide, negotiate gradients up to 35 degrees, and ford water obstacles up to 4.5 feet (1.4 m) deep without preparation. The vehicle had a turning circle of 15 – 140 feet (4.8 – 42.7 m respectively) depending on gear selection. It could also pivot or ‘neutral’ steer on the spot with each track turning in opposite directions.
So Close, Yet So Far
In 1951, the company of Vickers had filed a report on the concept of the FV215 and, by June 1954, a contract had been signed for the production of a prototype vehicle known as ‘P1’ (Prototype No.1). In October that year, it was also clear that the AA mount for the .50 cal machine gun would not be ready, and as such an L3A1 was substituted. In March 1955, the same year the FV214 entered service, the order had increased to include two pre-production vehicles. A full-scale mock-up – including interior components and a faux engine – was completed between July 1955 and January 1957, with 80% of accompanying schematics also produced. Work started on P1 in September 1955 with a selection of spare parts. The two pre-production vehicles were canceled in early 1956, but work went ahead on P1 which was set to be completed at some point in 1957. Troop trials would then take place by the end of that year. This, however, is where the FV215 story ends.
Head-on view of the small scale mockup. Photo: Ed Francis
In 1957, with just the gun, a couple of turret faces, and a number of other smaller parts built, the FV215 project was officially canceled. This decision was largely down to the Army. From the outset, the Army was not keen on the concept of the vehicle, mostly due to the fact that large-caliber weapons provide a number of logistical issues, mostly caused by the sheer dimension of the weapons. One only has to look at the Conqueror and the issues its size presented to operators during its time in service to understand this hostility to the FV215. At the same time, there was a new contender in the race to find an opponent for the USSR’s heavy armor. Of course, by the mid-1960s, the FV215’s intended opponent, the IS-3, would prove to be a far less threatening tank than the Allies had imagined roughly 12 years prior in 1945.
The new contender was the FV4010, a heavily modified, turretless vehicle built on the Centurion chassis and armed with the newly developed Malkara Anti-Tank Guided Missile (ATGM). This vehicle offered the same damage potential as the 183 mm gun, but in a lighter vehicle and with better accuracy at long ranges. Even though this vehicle also went through full-scale development, it too would not see production or service. The Malkara missile, however, was accepted for service.
Line drawing of one of the designs for the Centurion-based FV4010, armed with the Malkara ATGM. This drawing was produced by Ed Francis, based on line drawings found in the archives of The Tank Museum, Bovington.
Had the FV215 entered service, it would have filled the role much the same as the Conqueror. Its role on the battlefield would have been to support other friendly troops, rather than strike out on its own. It was designed to destroy enemy tanks from afar, covering the advance of the lighter tanks such as FV4007 Centurion. In offensive operations, the FV215 would be placed in overwatch positions and fire over the heads of the main force as it advanced. In defensive operations, the vehicle would again take an overwatch role, but this time from key, pre-set strategic positions to meet an advancing enemy.
A Centurion Mk.3 alongside a Conqueror Mk.1. The FV215 would fulfill the same role as the Conqueror – providing heavy fire support to attacking lighter tanks. Photo: Profile Publications
Busting a Myth: FV215A & B
Over the years, a couple of erroneous designations have emerged concerning this vehicle. These are the ‘FV215A’ and ‘FV215B’. The ‘FV215A’ is the false designation, probably mistaken for the planned AVRE (Armoured Vehicle Royal Engineers) vehicles of the FV200 series. The FV215B is simply a fictional designation for the FV215 Heavy Gun Tank.
Had it entered service, there is no doubt that the FV215 would have been one of the most deadly gun-tanks to have ever existed. At the same time, it is not hard to see why it was not accepted for service. The Conqueror on the other hand, would end up staying in service for 11 years, finally being retired in 1966. It was Great Britain’s first and last ‘Heavy Gun Tank’.
The logistical and high-cost nightmare of the Conqueror would have only continued with the more heavily armed FV215. Heavy vehicles are expensive, not only to build, but to maintain. The heavier a vehicle, the harder the wear and tear on parts, so parts have to be replaced more often increasing maintenance time and burden and so on.
On top of this there was another issue: the feared Soviet heavy tanks like the IS-3 were not being made in the massive numbers expected indicating a shift in policy to lighter, more maneuverable, and more lightly armored tanks. The need for the Conqueror and FV215 from this perspective was simply becoming absent. Other changes were also taking place as technology-wise, larger caliber guns with their huge ammunition were becoming obsolete by the improved anti-armor performance of smaller guns and by the appearance of a new generation of accurate Anti-Tank Guided Missiles (ATGM).
It is perhaps ironic that the Soviet tank which perhaps started this fear, the IS-3, was itself found to be seriously wanting in combat. Losses during the invasion of Prague to little more than lightly armed civilians showed serious tactical failings in the way in which tanks were handled along with the utter disaster of their use in the 1967 Six-Day War with Israel. Here, Egyptian IS-3s were lost in large numbers to mechanical failures and to ‘inferior’ lighter tanks like the British-supplied Centurion and American-supplied M48. The paper-tiger had had its day and the IS-3-smashing Heavy Gun Tanks were as obsolete as the tanks they were designed to counter.
An article by Mark Nash, assisted by David Lister, Andrew Hills & Ed Francis.
Illustration of ‘Tank, Heavy No. 2, 183mm Gun, FV215’. The representation of a 6 ft (1.83 m) gives some idea of the scale of the vehicle and its 183 mm L4 gun. The vehicle is represented in the standard British Army green. As the vehicle never entered service, some of the smaller details – such as the wire reel and lifting eyes – are speculative. This illustration was produced by Brian Gaydos, based on work by David Bocquelet, and funded by our Patreon campaign.
Specifications
Dimensions (L-W-H)
25 feet x 12 feet x 10.6 feet (7.62 x 3.6 x 3.2 meters)
Weight
61 – 65 long tons (62 – 66 tonnes)
Crew
5 (Driver, commander, gunner, 2 loaders)
Propulsion
Rover M120 No. 2 Mk.1, 12-cylinder, water-cooled, 810 hp
Suspension
Hortsmann
Speed (road)
19.8 mph (32 km/h)
Armament
Ordnance Quick-Firing (QF) 183 mm Tank L4 Gun (20 rounds)
Sec. 1 – 2 L3A1 (Browning M1919A4) .30 Cal (7.62mm) Machine Gun (6000 rounds)
.5 Browning (Browning M2) .50 Cal (12.7 mm) heavy machine gun (950 rounds)
Armour
Hull
Front (Upper Glacis): 4.9 inch (125 mm) @ 59 degrees
Sides: 1 ¾ in (44 mm) + 0.2 in (6 mm) ‘Bazooka Plates’
Roof: 1 ¼ in (32 mm)
Floor: 0.7 in (20 mm) + 0.6 in (16 mm) ‘Mine Plate’
Turret
Face: “protection from a 100 mm gun in a 30-degree arc”
Rear: 0.6 in (17 mm)
Roof: 0.6 in (17 mm)
In 1989, the initial Indiana Jones trilogy of movies – created by Steven Spielberg and George Lucas – was coming to an end with the final installment; Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade. The film, set in 1938, sees the swashbuckling fictional archeologist, Dr. Henry ‘Indiana’ Jones Jr., race against a band of Nazis in the hunt for the legendary cup of Christ – The Holy Grail.
The film includes an elaborate chase scene featuring a tank owned by the fictional ‘Sultan of Hatay’, the ruler of a republic located somewhere in the region of Turkey. In appearance, it is similar to that of the real-world Tank Mk. VIII ‘Liberty’. While portrayed in the movie as a real tank operated by ‘The Army of the Republic of Hatay’ – with great similarity to a real World War I tank – it is, however, a completely fictional vehicle.
Officially, this tank was never named. It is often just referred to as ‘The Indiana Jones Tank’ or ‘The Last Crusade Tank’. For the purpose of this article, the vehicle will be identified as the ‘Hatay Heavy Tank’, based on its country of origin and appearance.
Often identified as the ‘The Indiana Jones Tank’ or ‘The Last Crusade Tank’, this vehicle was built specifically for the film. Although inspiration has been taken from the real WW1-era Tank Mk. VIII, the vehicle in the film never existed. Photo: Paramount Pictures
The Film Representation
This Heavy Tank is vaguely reminiscent of the Tank Mk. VIII ‘International Liberty’. The Mk. VIII appeared in 1918, and was the most modern iteration of the ‘quasi-rhomboid shaped tank’ design, made successful by the British in 1916, starting with the Tank Mk. I. The Mk. VIII was a joint project between Britain and the United States, with plans to construct the vehicles in France – hence the name ‘International Liberty’, often shortened to just ‘Liberty’. The idea of the joint project was to give both nations a common tank for their respective armies. In total, 125 Mk. VIII tanks were built, but they entered service too late to see action in WW1.
Where the Hatay tank differs is the presence of a large Churchill-esque turret mounted atop the vehicle, instead of the small superstructure present on the real Mk. VIII. It is unclear whether this is supposed to be a modification made by the fictional country or whether it is supposed to be an ‘original’ feature. In reality, no British production tank of World War 1 era was equipped with a turret like this, and armament was primarily carried in sponsons projecting from the flanks of the vehicle. The first turreted British tank to enter service did not, in fact, appear until 1924 in the shape of the Vickers Medium Mk. I.
Overview of the Heavy Tank
Reminiscent of the Mk. VIII, the Hatay Heavy Tank is quasi-rhomboidal in shape and around 36 feet (11 meters) long and weighing 28 tons (25 tonnes). These statistics are not too far off the Mk. VIII’s length and weight, at 34 ft 2 in (10.42 m) and 41 tons (37 tonnes) respectively. The vehicle’s tracks, as is typical with British heavy tanks of WW1, travel around the entirety of the hull. There are rollers hidden by the side plating at the bottom of the track run. No springing system of suspension was used but, given the low speed of the vehicle, just 5 to 6 mph (8 – 10 km/h) for the Mk. VIII, it was not necessary either. Despite the vehicle’s similarities to the Mk. VIII, the forward track sections are slightly different. On the real Mk. VIII, the forward track sections revolve over a large curve. On this Heavy Tank, the track sections are much more sharply angled, more like the early British Mk. I to V tanks.
Above, the real Mk. VIII tank. Below, the ‘Hatay Heavy Tank’. Note the differences between the two, but also the similarities. Photos: Craig Moore & johnstoysoldiers, respectively.
Despite the size of the tank, it would appear to be operated by just a four-man crew, unlike the real Mk. VIII which needed a crew of 10 to 12 men. However, there does seem to be room inside the Hatay tank for 8 to 10 people standing fully upright. There also appears to be ample room for a 4-man fist-fight. The crew consists of the driver located front and center of the hull who controls the tank via the traditional method of two tiller bars. His primary vision is via a suicidally large hole – for want of a better word – in the front of the tank. This hole is at least 6 inches/15 cm in height and a foot/30 cm wide and would offer no protection to him at all in a battle situation. It does appear to be part of a larger hatch that opens out and down. This is probably his main point of entry.
The fact that two people can see through the driver’s ‘vision port’ gives an idea of scale. Vision ports on armored vehicles are usually small to limit the amount of fragmentation or bullets entering the driver’s face or tank in general. With a port this size, the driver would be lucky not to get hit by a full-size shell, let alone a small-caliber bullet. These large ports are not unique to the driver’s position, they can be found all over the tank. Photo: Paramount Pictures, edited by Author.
The vehicle requires two gunners – 1 for each sponson gun. They would aim, load, and fire the weapon themselves. The last member of the crew is an overworked commander positioned in the turret. He appears to be responsible for loading and firing the turret’s gun, as well as commanding the tank. The engine of the tank is located in the large ‘tail’. It is of an unknown type and the speed of the vehicle is unknown. It is, however, certainly faster than the 5 to 6 mph (8 – 10 km/h) of the Mk. VIII.
A joint view of the left side 6 pounder gun and Hatay operator. Photo: Paramount Pictures, edited by Author.
For armament, the tank is equipped with two sponson-mounted cannons. These are presumably Hotchkiss 6-pounder (57 mm) guns – as would be found on the real Mk. VIII. These guns were operated a bit like giant rifles and were aimed completely by hand without gears and fired via a pistol grip. On the Hatay tank, these were augmented by the addition of a fully rotatable turret on the roof of the vehicle. This is a one-man turret – visually similar to the turret of a Mk. III Churchill, albeit much smaller and pre-dating it by about 5 years (film setting) – mounting an unknown gun, identified simply as a “six-pound gun” by Indiana Jones when first laying eyes on the vehicle. This turret does not seem to have a basket, but there is a platform suspended from the roof underneath it for the commander to stand on. This platform does not appear to rotate with the turret. The commander’s primary vision from the turret is a large slit in the turret face on the left of the gun. This appears to be part of a larger port that can swing up and open, but the gun seems to lack an accurate sight of any description, be it periscopic or telescopic. There is a large circular hatch in the turret roof that opens up and back but this has no vision devices.
The Turret of the Hatay tank is visually similar to that of the Churchill Mk. III. Note the “six-pound” gun and vision slit beside it. Note also, the large open hatch. The inset image of the interior shows just how much room there is inside the vehicle with the driver in the foreground and the turret platform behind. Also, notice the stacked up machine gun ammunition. Photo: Paramount Pictures
The tank is completely devoid of any machine gun armament which would have been far more useful for shooting someone on horseback in the movie than the 6-pounder. On the real Mk. VIII, machine guns would be found in ball mounts in the large access hatches behind the sponsons, and in the roof superstructure. Even without machine guns, a large amount of small arms ammunition cans do appear to be carried. Of course, fitted with machine guns, poor Indiana would have been gunned down much more quickly, so perhaps omitting them was a convenience for the movie rather than anything attempting to mirror historical reality.
Other Details
The only periscope present on the tank would be more at home on a submarine. It is a literal periscope, located behind the turret. It is manually pushed up from inside the tank and is capable of 360-degree rotation. The periscope is completely useless in this position, as forward vision would be blocked by the turret. Also, raising the periscope would be impossible if the turret was traversed to the rear as the main gun barrel would collide with the scope. There is a reason these devices are not found on tanks and quite why this was added to the movie is unclear as its sole purpose seems to be to provide an attempt at humor when Indiana kicks it sending the control handle spinning into the back of the operator’s head.
The submarine-style periscope located at the rear of the vehicle. Photos: Paramount Pictures
The exterior of the tank is absolutely festooned with the stowage of auxiliary equipment. Tarpaulins, shovels, netting, reels of cable, unditching beams, bundles of other sundries, and even spools of barbed wire are carried. While many real-world tanks carry a mix of such equipment – excluding the barbed wire – the sheer amount present on the Hatay tank is absurd.
A collection of images showing the amount of random items stowed on the vehicle. Photo: Paramount Pictures
The tracks bear no resemblance to the tracks used on the Mk. VIII or any British tank of the First World War or interwar period. They are more akin to industrial excavator tracks – not a surprise given the vehicle the tank was built on for the movie. World War 1 British tank tracks, like those used on the Mk. VIII, were deceptively simple consisting of a frame on the back of the track link (for the driving gear to engage) with a plate bolted to the front for contact with the ground. The links were pinned together through this frame, with bulges on one side to accommodate the curve of the track.
Left, the simplistic tracks of the real Mk. VIII. Right, the industrial-style tracks of the movie tank. Photo: Craig Moore and the Micky Moore Collection, Pepperdine University Special Collections and University Archives, respectively.
Battle in the Desert
The trail of the Holy Grail leads to the Republic of Hatay. Hatay is a fictional country in the approximate vicinity of Turkey in the movie. A real Hatay does exist as a province in modern-day Turkey, although at the time of the setting of the film, a Hatay did exist as an autonomous state before unifying with Turkey in 1939. A small Nazi team competing with Dr. Jones for the Grail – lead by American treasure hunter and Nazi-sympathiser Walter Donovan and SS Colonel Vogel – visits the Sultan of Hatay to ask for safe passage through his country (nonsensically, Hatay is a Republic led by a monarch in the movie) The Nazis and Donovan offer the Sultan coffers of gold and various treasures as ‘payment’. He refuses the treasure and instead takes the Nazi delegation’s Rolls-Royce Phantom II (the Sultan even liked the color). In return, The Sultan then promised them a fully armed escort with transport vehicles and tanks, although only one actually appears in the film. (Clip)
The Heavy Tank leads the joint Nazi/Hatay force on route to the Grail location. Photo: Paramount Pictures
Equipped with the tank and large unit of Hatay infantry, the Nazi contingent advances on the fictional ‘Canyon of the Crescent Moon’, the supposed location of the Grail. Indiana, along with his ally, Sallah, and father – Prof. Henry Jones Sr. – await them in the valley. The Nazi’s are holding Indiana’s friend – Prof. Marcus Brody – prisoner, so he plans to retrieve him before progressing onto the Grail. As Indiana spots the tank, the tank fires a round at his position, blowing Sallah’s brother-in-law’s car to bits.
The Nazi contingent is attacked by the Brotherhood of the Cruciform Sword, a group dedicated to keeping the location of the Grail a secret. In response, the Nazi’s move Marcus Brody into the tank, and slaughter the attackers. Donovan and a small team leave them to battle each other, and progress to the Grail. Taking advantage of the distraction, Indiana steals a small group of horses from the Hatay forces. Unknown to him, Henry Jones Sr. then sneaks into the tank to attempt to rescue Marcus, despite his son (Indiana) telling him to hide. Jones Sr. is foiled by Colonel Vogel who takes him prisoner inside the tank. Indiana, not knowing that his father has been taken prisoner, flees with the stolen horses. Vogel then takes command of the tank and uses it to pursue Indiana. Linking up with Sallah, Indiana is told his father has been locked up in “the belly of that steel beast”.
The tank engages the horse-riding Indiana. Photo: Paramount Pictures.
The tank starts to fire upon Indiana, narrowly missing him a few times. Indiana runs rings around the tank, causing it turn sharply and run headfirst into a column of reinforcing Nazi/Hatay troops. The tank then hits a Kubelwagen-esque vehicle, flipping the small car upwards and impaling it on the barrel of the turret gun. For some minutes, the vehicle continues the case with the car stuck on its front, before Vogel coldly instructs the turret gunner to load the gun and blast the car off the front of the tank (this would not work in reality). With the barrel obstruction cleared, the tank then continued to run over the wrecked car which was propelled quite a distance off the front of the vehicle.
Taking advantage of this commotion, Indiana rides alongside the left flank of the tank, and jams a rock into the muzzle of the left sponson’s 6-pounder. The gunner pulls the trigger attempting to hit his target, only for the gun to blow up, causing him to fly across the interior of the tank.
Left, a rock is jammed in the muzzle. Right, the result of that action. Photo: Paramount Pictures
As a result of the explosion, the interior fills with smoke. Vogel emerges from the top hatch and begins taking potshots at Indiana – who is now pursuing the tank on horseback – with his Walther P38 9 mm semi-automatic pistol (a weapon which did not enter production for about 3 years after the film is set). Indiana responds in kind with his trusty Webley (.455/.475 caliber Webley 1896 W.G. Army Revolver – the Webley ‘Green’, made between 1885 and 1912). Indiana gains on the tank, eventually leaping onto the engine deck. He is subsequently joined by a group of Nazis who leap aboard from an alongside truck. After dealing with them, he gets into a one-on-one fist-fight with Vogel.
One of the guards inside raises the incongruous submarine-style periscope and enjoys the view of the brawl going on atop the tank. He turns away to make a clumsy joke about “Americans fighting like women”. As he does, Indiana accidentally kicks the raised periscope, causing the internal handle to whack the guard on the back of the head, knocking him out. Henry Jones Sr. and Marcus Brody take advantage of this and begin brawling with the guards. Knocking one guard out, Jones Sr. mans the right sponson gun, and proceeds to blow another truck full of Nazi troops away.
Henry Jones Sr. blows away a truck full of Nazi’s with the right sponson gun. Photo: Paramount Pictures
The blast knocks Indiana off the back of the tank. He gets carried along the top of the track-run, falls off the side, and he is left hanging off the broken left gun barrel. Colonel Vogel takes one of the shovels stowed on the turret and attempts to beat Indy, and instructs the driver to drive the tank into the canyon wall to grind him off. Inside the tank, Henry Jones Sr. and Marcus attempt to escape through the turret hatch, only for the Nazi soldier previously subdued by Henry Jones Sr. to return for a second bout. He drags Jones Sr. down from the turret and grabs a stray P38 pistol lying on the hull floor. Before the Nazi could fire, Marcus bashes him over the head with a spent 6-pounder casing, causing a negligent discharge of the pistol. The bullet ricochets around the interior of the tank before striking the driver – who has been completely oblivious to the brawl taking place just feet away – and striking him fatally between the eyes. His dead body slumps against the controls causing the tank to lurch to the right, away from the canyon wall but towards a deep canyon.
Indiana manages to climb back onto the tank as Vogel has now fallen onto the front of the vehicle. Jones Sr. and Marcus now proceed to climb out onto the roof of the tank. Vogel comes back for another go at Indiana, knocking Marcus off the back of the tank. Vogel takes a swing at both Joneses with yet another shovel, missing Jr. but striking Sr., causing him to fall onto the upper track run. He gets carried along the track run before Jones Jr. manages to snag his father’s leg with his trusty bull-whip. This has the unfortunate side effect of grating his father’s skin against the rotating metal track. Fortunately, Jones Jr.’s friend, Sallah, rides to the rescue on horseback, and proceeds to grab Jones Sr. from the tank, and takes him to safety. The brawl between Indiana and Vogel continues as the tank careens towards the canyon. Indiana manages to jump off at the last minute, but Vogel is carried over the edge of the canyon wall with the tank. The tank and its unfortunate rider are then smashed to pieces on the canyon floor, thus ending the service life of Hatay’s one and only tank. A significant continuity error of note occurs here in the film, whereupon crashing the model of the tank which was destroyed in the film loses its turret, but in the following scene has the turret back on as the vehicle rolls over. (Clip)
The Tank and Vogel plummet to the canyon floor. Photo: Paramount Pictures
Building the Tank
For the filming of the movie which took place between May and September 1988, the tank was designed and built by special effects artist George Gibbs, who took inspiration from the real tanks of the First World War. The Tank Museum, Bovington, in the UK allowed measurements of their Mk. VIII to be taken. As a thank you, the production team gave Bovington one of the Nazi Eagle standards from the first Indiana Jones film, ‘Raiders of the Lost Ark’. This now resides in the museum’s artifacts archive. Both director Steven Spielberg and writer George Lucas wanted the tank to look as real as possible. As a result, Gibbs decided to build a full-scale working prop. It was built using parts of a 28-ton (25 tonnes) excavator, especially the tracks, which weighed 7 tons (6.3 tonnes) alone. The vehicle was built almost completely out of steel instead of the usual lighter materials such as plastics, wood, or fiberglass. The idea was that it would enhance the visual appearance of the tank, but also to make the prop tough enough to survive the violent terrain that its scenes were shot in. This terrain was a canyon in Almeria in the south of Spain.
Original production sketch of the tank. Photo: Ultimate Movie Collectibles
In the words of Gibbs himself:
“World War I tanks did not have suspension, so we built ours without suspension also. Because of that, I knew the vibration inside that tank would be absolutely tremendous and would shake a mockup vehicle to pieces. For that reason, I decided to build the tank from steel. Also, if any of it ever broke apart we could quickly weld it back together. As it turned out, the tank went down the sides of mountains and over really hard, rocky surfaces without any damage at all-and I knew then that I had made the right decision.”
The vehicle was propelled by two Range Rover V-8 petrol engines, connected to two hydraulic pumps – 1 per track unit. A motor from a bulldozer was also installed to provide electrical power. All 3 of the guns were real, and all of them fired blank charges.
The Gibbs Special Effects team working on the replica. Photo: filmtrickery.com
It took Gibbs and his team 4 months to build the tank. It was flown to Almeria aboard a Short Belfast heavy freight aircraft. To transport the vehicle to location, it was loaded onto a heavy transport truck.
According to Gibbs:
“We were lucky, shooting went smoothly and the tank only let us down twice. The first time was because the rotor arm in the distributor broke and it took us a day to get a new one from Madrid. The second time, it was so hot that the solder in the oil coolers actually melted and flowed around with the oil into the valves, shattering two of them to pieces. So we had to change one of the engines and that also took one day. I think everyone expected to lose a lot more time, but the tank worked really well.”
Behind the scenes shot of the making of the ‘car-on-gun’ scene. Photo: Micky Moore Collection, Pepperdine University Special Collections and University Archives
The only real part of the interior was the driver’s seat. The rest of the interior scenes were filmed in a studio. The tank was driven in the film by special effects technician Brian Lince.
“Brian did an excellent job. Being in that tank was like being in an oven, and he was in there every day for nearly eight weeks. We had ten industrial electric fans inside to try and keep Brian cool, the engine cool and the hydraulic oil cool. Not only was it hot in there, but since the tank had no suspension, Brian got rattled around so much that when he came out and tried to take a cup of tea, he would spill it before he could get it to his lips.”
To safely accommodate the filming of the elaborate fight scenes that took place atop the vehicle, Gibbs duplicated the upper half of the tank to identical detail – complete with rotating tracks – and mounted it on a large 4-wheel trailer – reportedly an ex-army searchlight trailer. Alone, this semi-tank weighed around 8 tons (7.2 tonnes). Unlike the full tank, it was made from aluminum, and the tracks were made of rubber so stunts could be performed safely. ‘Catchers’ were also installed around the vehicle to catch anyone that fell off – on purpose or accidentally.
The ‘half-tank’ behind the scenes on a flatbed trailer used for transport. Photo: Photo: Micky Moore Collection, Pepperdine University Special Collections and University Archives
In total, it took 10 days to film the ten minutes-worth of tank scenes at a total cost of US $200,000 a day. For some of the long-range shots, and the scene where the tank drives off the cliff, a smaller scale remote control model was constructed. It was an exact replica of the full-size vehicle, down to the smallest detail. This model was about 6 feet (1.83 m) long and 2 feet (60 cm) high.
The small-scale remote control model used for some of the shots. Photo: Micky Moore Collection, Pepperdine University Special Collections and University Archives
Where is it Now?
It is unknown what happened to the tank in the years directly after filming. However, for a number of years it simply sat rotting in the ‘boneyard’ of Hollywood studios – an area full of forgotten movie props. After some time, it was moved to Disney’s Hollywood Studios at the Walt Disney World Resort in Florida and put on public display. It was not repainted or restored, however, and left in poor condition.
The sorry state of the vehicle in the boneyard. This photo was taken in 2007. Photo: Jim Goings
Sometime later, in around 2010, 2011, the vehicle was repainted in plain desert-tan scheme, and placed in a mock scene with prop WW2 German equipment, complete with MG34 machine gun nest. This is how it remained until around 2015 or 2016, when the vehicle was completely overhauled and repainted back to its movie appearance – complete with Hatay markings – with a large set built around it, again with German Army-themed props. This is how the vehicle continues to sit today.
The Hatay Heavy Tank as it sits today at the Hollywood Studios attraction at Walt Disney World, Florida. Photo: Always Ready For Adventure!
The Hatay Heavy Tank, often just referred to as ‘The Indiana Jones Tank’ or ‘The Last Crusade Tank’. The vehicle was inspired by the real world, WW1-era Tank Mk. VIII, but featured a number of fictional additions such as the large turret. Illustration produced by Pavel Alexe, based on work by David Bocquelet, funded by our Patreon campaign.
In 1954, the British, of C. A. Parsons Ltd. made history. At a public display of armored vehicles, they unveiled an odd-looking, silver turretless tank hull. This vehicle was a world first. Inside the engine bay was a new, experimental turbine engine.
The vehicle was a testbed, serving to illustrate the future possibility of mounting a turbine engine in an armored vehicle. Other countries, notably Nazi Germany in the Second World War, had considered and even reportedly tested turbine technology in a tank, but it was this British tank which was to make history as the first turbine-powered armored vehicle known to the world. However, despite proving that the technology worked, the project ended without adoption by the British Army and it was not until a generation later, with the appearance of the Swedish Strv 103 ‘S-Tank’ and the later American M1 Abrams or Soviet T-80, that this engine type would be seen in a production vehicle.
The Turbine Test Vehicle used a modified FV200 hull. It made history in 1954, being the first British armored vehicle to be propelled by a turbine engine. Photo: Tankograd Publishing
The FV200
In the aftermath of the Second World War, the War Office (W.O.) reviewed the future of the British Army’s tank arm. In 1946, it did away with the ‘A’ designator used on tanks such as the Churchill (A.22) and Comet (A.34). The ‘A’ number was replaced by the ‘Fighting Vehicle’ or ‘FV’ number. In an attempt to streamline the tank force and cover all the bases, it was decided that the military needed three main families of vehicles: the FV100, FV200, and FV300 series. The FV100s would be the heaviest, the FV200s would be slightly lighter, and the FV300s would be lightest. While the FV100 and 300 series were canceled, the FV200 hung on in its development, as it was projected that it would eventually replace the Centurion.
The FV200 series included designs for vehicles that would fill various roles ranging from a gun tank to an engineering vehicle and Self-Propelled Guns (SPGs). It was not until later years that the other uses of the FV200 chassis were explored, such as with the FV219 and FV222 Armoured Recovery Vehicles (ARVs). The first of the FV200 series was the FV201, a gun tank that started development in 1944 as the ‘A.45’. The most well-known member of the FV200 family is the FV214 Conqueror Heavy Gun Tank.
FV201 (A.45), the first vehicle in the FV200 series. Photo: Tankograd Publishing
Background
Armored fighting vehicle design is commonly conceived as revolving around a pyramid of factors: firepower, armor, and mobility. An AFV can rely on two of these, but not all three. For instance, a heavily armed and armored tank will sacrifice mobility, a fast tank will sacrifice armor, and so on. The idea behind installing a turbine engine into an armored vehicle was to overcome this ‘pyramid’. If an engine could be developed that would provide the same performance yet weigh less, then thicker armor and a more powerful gun could be carried.
The idea of using a turbine engine in an AFV was championed by none other than the father of British jet aircraft, Sir Frank Whittle. While aircraft powered by engines of his design – the Gloster Meteor – were engaging V1 rockets by the end of WW2, he was not the first to develop the jet engine.
Even before the Second World War, Nazi Germany was experimenting with jet propulsion. By War’s end, Germany had become the first nation to actively employ jet-powered aircraft in combat, namely in the form of the Messerschmitt Me 262. The end of the War brought the British capture of equipment, documents, and German scientists. With them came insight into some of the AFV plans the Germans were hoping to employ in the later years of the War. One of these plans was for a turbine-engine powered Panzer variant. This project reportedly even had the backing of the Waffen SS.
In late-1948, the Power Plant branch of the Fighting Vehicle Research And Development Establishment (F.V.R.D.E.), based in Chertsey, filed a report on this German AFV turbine project. This lead to a project to investigate the possibility of developing a turbine engine for use in future British tanks and armored vehicles. To this end, in January 1949, a contract was signed with C. A. Parsons Ltd. of Newcastle upon Tyne for the development of this new turbine engine. It was outlined that the engine was to be capable of developing 1,000 hp at 15℃ (60℉), or 900hp at 43℃ (110℉). Although various types of turbine were in development at this time, Parsons opted for a simple, cycle-based engine with a centrifugal compressor driven by a single-stage turbine, in conjunction with a two-stage ‘work’ turbine.
The Turbine Engine
Turbine engines consist of four main components; the compressor, combustion chamber, the turbine, and the heat exchanger. Simply explained, they all work in conjunction thusly:
The compressor serves to compress airflow, in-turn raising the temperature before the fuel injection. The combustion chamber’s role is to provide a continuous flow of fuel into the turbine while keeping it at a constant temperature.
Quite obviously, the turbine is the heart of this engine type. A turbine is simply a propeller propelled by the force hitting it; in the case of this engine that would be hot, vapourised fuel. The main turbine drove the compressor while a separate ‘work’ turbine would transfer the rotary propulsion directly to the gearbox.
The heat exchanger increased the temperature of air before it entered the combustion chamber, reducing the amount of fuel that was consumed bringing the air up to the required temperature. Unlike regular combustion engines where overheating is detrimental to performance, the opposite is true for turbines. The hotter it runs, the greater the power output.
Simple diagram showing how a turbine works. Author’s Illustration.
Parsons’ Engine
C. A. Parsons Limited. Btd., based in Newcastle upon Tyne, England, was founded in 1889 by Charles Algernon Parsons and quickly established itself as a leading manufacturer of steam turbine equipment on land and for naval use. This work continued into the development of the turbine engine envisioned by the Power Plant branch of the FVRDE. To assist with the project, 5 German scientists from the late WW2 project were assigned to the developmental team.
Unfortunately, one of the benefits of the turbine engine could not be met by Parsons: the weight. It was found that, at the time, only be using thinner gauge materials and inferior lighter alloys could the engine be brought to a weight equal to a standard engine. At the time, a standard engine was projected to weigh around 4,100 lb (1,860 kg), while the turbine weighed in at 5,400 lb (2,450 kg).
The final design of Parsons’ Turbine received the model number ‘No. 2979’. It featured a single-stage centrifugal compressor, driven by an axial flow turbine. Only the turbine disc was air-cooled. The smaller ‘work’ turbine was of the two-stage axial flow type, which ran in conjunction with the compressor. A reduction gear unit was fitted to reduce the work-turbines revolutions-per-minute from 9,960 rpm to 2,800 rpm. Lucas Ind., a Birmingham-based company, provided a fuel pump and an air-fuel ratio control unit with an integral throttle unit. To prevent the work turbine from over-speeding during gear changes, it could be mechanically connected to the compressor turbine. This also provided engine-braking. When starting, the compressor turbine was rotated via a 24-volt starter motor and the fuel ignited by a torch-igniter. The rest of the starter sequence was automatic, commencing with the press of the starter button on a new dashboard which was made by the Austrian company Rotax.
The Vehicle
For trials, it was decided that the engine would be placed in the hull of a vehicle from the FV200 series, Prototype ‘P7’ (No. 07 BA 70) of the FV214 Conqueror trials to be exact. The hull was one of three FV221 Caernarvon hulls built at Royal Ordnance Factory, Leeds.
‘P7’ (07 BA 70) in a previous life as a Conqueror Prototype taking part in mobility trials in 1952-53. The Vehicle is fitted with a ‘Windsor’ ballast turret that simulated the projected weight of the Conqueror’s turret. Photo: Tankograd Publishing
The engine bay was modified with a new support structure to hold the turbine engine. A standard five-speed gearbox was introduced with Merritt-Brown steering. The gearbox compartment of the hull had to be lengthened to accept the new gearbox. What was the fighting compartment was completely gutted to make way for a cyclone air-cleaner unit, consisting of 192 cyclone units mounted in 8 24-unit banks. Two new fuel tanks were also introduced into the fighting compartment, along with a homelite generator. This was required as the turbine lacked a generator drive. The driver’s compartment – which remained at the front right of the bow – was largely unaltered, apart from the addition of a new instrument panel with 29 separate dials, gauges, and instruments which were all crucial to monitor the engine.
Internal view of the gutted engine bay inside P7’s hull. Note the new support structure welded to the hull floor and the transmission at the rear. Photo: Conqueror.
The new engine and cyclone air-filter also necessitated some external modification. A large circular plate was placed over the fighting compartment/air-filter bay with a large vent in the roof. The engine deck saw the heaviest modifications. The old deck, which was covered in hinged louvers, was replaced with 3 flat panels that were bolted down. The left and right panel featured 3 small vents, while the central featured one large vent. A taller section with two vents was built up at the rear of the engine deck to provide extra room. The rear plate also saw the addition of a large ventilation ‘box’, through which exhaust gasses and excess heat would escape.
Rear view of the modified FV200 hull. Note the engine deck and round plate over the turret ring. Photo: FineArtsAmerica
Most other features of the hull remained identical. The Horstmann suspension, tracks, fenders, and fire extinguisher system were all standard to the FV200 series of vehicles. A small addition to both the left and right fender was a folding ladder placed over the idler and sprocket wheels. This allowed the test crew to easily scale the vehicle. An unexplained feature of the test vehicle was the second hatch placed next to the driver. This hatch was without a door, and it is unclear whether it was an original feature of P7 or introduced for the tests. Altogether, the vehicle weighed about 45 long tons (45.7 tonnes). The hull’s overall dimensions were unchanged at 25 feet (7.62 m) long and 13.1 feet (3.99 m) wide.
The Trials
By September 3rd, 1954, the FV200 test vehicle was ready for trials at the FVRDE in Chertsey. The race was on to get the vehicle ready for its first public display on the 30th of that month. On the 4th, the engine was started and allowed to idle for 10 minutes. It would not accelerate past 2,700 rpm and had to be turned off after the throttle became stuck open. By the 9th, repairs had been made and the vehicle was towed onto the FVRDE test track ready for its first driven trial. Under its own power, the vehicle successfully moved out onto the track. Moving off in 4th gear with the turbine running at 6,500 rpm, the vehicle successfully completed a full circuit of the track in 15 minutes.
Rear views of the FV200 Test Vehicle prior to painting. Photos: Tankograd Publishing
Between the 21st and 22nd, P7 ran the same circuit again, achieving a combined running time of 2 hours 3 minutes. In general, the vehicle ran well with only minor issues arising that were easily fixed. Occasionally there were starting troubles, but it was found that the addition of four extra batteries dealt with this. The first major breakdown came on the 23rd. The driver attempted to change from 4th to 5th gear but it would not engage. The vehicle was halted with the driver attempting to get it down into 3rd. Instead of 3rd, it slipped into reverse and jammed. The vehicle then had to be towed to the onsite workshops for repairs.
By the 27th, repairs had been completed. Static and short road checks were undertaken and showed that the vehicle was back in full running order. All that remained was to give the vehicle a fresh coat of silver paint for its public display.
P7 made history when it was demonstrated before a large crowd of military and public spectators on September 30th. The vehicle ran without fault, but it was not pushed too hard, achieving a top speed of just 10 mph (16 km/h). For the test, the vehicle was operated by one man, the driver, accompanied by another man next to him under the mystery hatch. What the role of this man was is unknown. On the 30th, they were joined by FVRDE staff members who sat on the rear of the engine deck. Staff present on that day recalled that the onlooking crowd was visibly impressed. Even the film news company, British Pathe were present to record the demonstration.
P7 during the public display at the FVRDE, Chertsey on September 30th 1954. Note the driver on the left and the three extra passengers. Photo: Tankograd Publishing
Results & Further Trials
Parsons’ turbine had now reached a total running time of almost 12 hours. Through tests up to and including the public display of September 30th, the acceleration of the vehicle was found to be acceptable. Deceleration, however, proved to be a recurring issue. It was far too slow, making gear changes prone to malfunction. The engine was also found to be extremely loud. How loud, exactly, is unknown, but it was loud enough that the operator’s appeared to require ear-defenders (as seen in the video of the 1954 display). Attempts were made to reduce the noise level to 92 decibels or under. Following the public display, running trials were paused and the engine removed from the hull. It was completely stripped down and rebuilt, incorporating new modifications.
By April 19th of 1955, the engine had been reinstalled and P7 was ready to re-commence trials. Despite some initial faults, the engine was running well by May 24th. During tests on this day, the vehicle successfully negotiated 1:6 and 1:7 gradient slopes and performed successful hill-starts.
P7 undergoing road trials with additional engineers riding on the hull. Photo: Tankograd Publishing
On June 8th, the final turbine tests were undertaken, consisting of cold and warm starts. Further tests would be carried out utilizing a second turbine engine, ‘No. 2983’. This was an improved engine with much of the initial teething troubles fixed, and an increased output of 910 hp. This increased power would allow P7 to be ballasted in order to compare its performance with the weight of vehicles in operation at the time. The last report from C. A. Parsons came in April 1955. By March 1956, the FVRDE had completely taken over the project. From there, unfortunately, we do not know what happened to the turbine project.
After the Trials
As discussed, we do not know what happened to P7 in the immediate years following the turbine trials. At some point in the early 1960s, P7 was turned into a dynamometer vehicle and served with the Military Engineering Experimental Establishment (MEXE) in Christchurch, on the south coast of England. Strictly speaking, it was not a true dynamometer, but an ‘active’ or ‘universal’ dynamometer as it could be driven under its own power or absorb energy. A standard dynamometer is simply a means of measuring force, moment of force (torque), power, or any combination thereof. This is a chassis dynamometer as it used a full power train on its own, and was basically used not only to measure the engine power of a unit connected to it, but also to calibrate said unit.
To convert it to this role, a new diesel engine was installed and a large welded ballast superstructure was built over the chassis, with a large glazed cab at the front. A large wheel on a pivoting arm was added to the back of the vehicle which was used to gauge travel distances accurately – an upscaled version of a ‘Surveyor’s Wheel’. At some point, the vehicle’s original all-steel tracks were replaced with the rubber-padded tracks of the FV4201 Chieftain. The vehicle was also painted bright yellow and received the new registration number of ’99 SP 46′.
’99 SP 46′, the Dynamometer vehicle. Note the wheel at the rear. Photo: Tankograd Publishing
It is unclear how long the vehicle was in operation before it was retired. The last use of the vehicle, however, was an interesting one. The vehicle ended up at The Tank Museum, Bovington. It did not go on display though, it was turned into a commentary box beside the museum’s vehicle arena. For this, a larger cab was built atop the dynamo cab. This is how the vehicle sat for a number of years, before it was scrapped in the early 2000s.
The vehicle in its last use as a commentary box at the arena of the Tank Museum, Bovington. Photo: Public Domain
Conclusion
P7 and C. A. Parsons’ engine made history in 1954. The trials proved that a turbine did have a place as the powerplant of Britain’s heavy AFVs of the future. Despite this, the engine type would never be adopted by the British Army. Even today, the British Army’s current serving Main Battle Tank (MBT), Challenger 2, uses a conventional, combustion diesel engine. It was not until the appearance of tanks like the Strv 103, the later M1 Abrams and T-80, that the turbine engine became a front line AFV engine.
Unfortunately, the vehicle no longer exists. Despite its technologically important history, the vehicle ended up being scrapped by The Tank Museum, thus marking the end of a unique chapter in the history of British military technology.
An article by Mark Nash, assisted by Andrew Hills.
The FV200-based turbine test vehicle made history when it debuted on September 30th 1954 before a public and military audience. For the public display, the vehicle was painted in a shiny silver livery, with dark grey highlights on the ‘bazooka plates’ and road-wheels. Illustration produced by Ardhya Anargha, funded by our Patreon campaign.
United Kingdom (1942-1944)
Armored Recovery Vehicle – Unknown Number Converted
To quote Field Marshal Viscount Montgomery – in not so few words – “the REME keeps the punch in the Army’s fist”. To do this, the Royal Electrical Mechanical Engineers (REME) utilize specially adapted versions of existing vehicles. The Churchill Armoured Recovery Vehicle (ARV), developed in the middle of the Second World War, was one of the first of these REME-specific vehicles.
The Churchill ARV was one of the first tank-based ARVs to serve in the British Army. The vehicle first appeared in 1942, the same year that the REME was created. The initial ARV was simply a turretless Churchill outfitted with various pieces of towing equipment – this became known as the Mk.I. A second version, equipped with a faux turret, lifting jibs, and a powerful winch, appeared in 1944 – this became the Mk.II.
Both the Mk.I and Mk.II ARV served until the end of the Second World War, with the Mk.II’s service continuing into the Korean War of the early 1950s. It wasn’t long after this that it was finally replaced by the FV4006 Centurion ARV.
The Churchill ARV Mk.II. These were based on the Mk.III and IV gun tank. Photo: Author’s own
The Churchill
Officially designated as ‘Tank, Infantry, Mk.IV, A.22’, the Churchill entered service with the British Armoured forces in 1941. It was named, contrary to popular belief, after an ancestor of the famous Winston Churchill, not the man himself. It was the last ‘Infantry Tank’ to serve in the British Military.
The armament of the Churchill evolved during its time in service, starting off with the 2-pounder (40 mm) gun (Churchill Mk.I & II). It then progressed to the 6-pounder (57 mm) gun (Mk.III & IV), before progressing to a 75 mm gun from the Mk.VI onwards. Armor protection also evolved, progressing from 4 to 5.9 inches (102 – 152 mm). The crew consisted of the commander, gunner, loader, driver, and bow machine-gunner/wireless operator.
The Churchill was not fast. A lumbering beast at approximately 40 long tons, its top speed was only 15 mph (24 km/h). It was powered by a Bedford 12-cylinder engine producing 350 hp. The tank was supported on a complicated suspension with 11 small wheels per side, each one attached to an independent coil spring. The drive wheel was at the rear with a sprocketed idler at the front. Though it was slow and heavy, the Churchill made a name for itself as being one of the best cross-country tanks ever built and could climb higher gradients and cross harder obstacles than most other tanks then in service.
Churchill Mk.IIIs taking part in training exercises, southern England, 1942. Photo: Brittanica
ARV Mk.I
The Mk.I Churchill ARV appeared in 1942. This initial model was based on the Churchill Mk.I and Mk.II. Initially, both of these Churchill types shared the same turret and 2-pounder (40 mm) gun main armament. The difference was that the Mk.I featured a bow-mounted 3 in howitzer, while in the Mk.II this was replaced by a BESA 7.92 mm machine gun.
For the ARV Mk.Is, conversion into a recovery vehicle was relatively simple as the only major modification was the removal of the turret. This allowed more stowage room for recovery equipment. A simple, shallow conical tower – for want of a better word – was built over the turret ring with a large rectangular hatch built into it. This tower was often used for the stowage of tow cables, which were loosely wrapped around it. Also installed on this ‘tower’ was a mounting point for two .303 Bren light machine guns in an anti-aircraft mount. Boxy, more angular fenders were also installed over the idler and sprocket wheels, replacing the standard rounded fenders of the gun tanks.
A Mk.I ARV pulling a Churchill Mk.II atop a 45-ton Tracked Recovery Trailer. This trailer was built by Boulton-Paul and featured 4 unpowered Orolo track units with an armored winch compartment at the front. Note also the Matilda II in the background. Photo: felixshara.com
Recovery equipment on the Mk.I consisted of an A-frame jib with an approximately 7.5 long ton (7.6 tonnes) capacity that could be mounted on the front or rear of the hull via eyelets. It was anchored to the hull via a length of high-tensile cable. The jib did not use a powered winch-line; rather it would be used in conjunction with a block and tackle or chain hoist, either of which would be carried aboard the ARV. The jib was used to assist in engine lifts and other lighter-duty lifts. The ARV’s main method of recovery was the raw torque of the engine. The vehicle was equipped with a drawbar to facilitate the towing of fellow Churchills or other armored vehicles. When not in use, both the jib and drawbar were carried on the hull.
A three-man crew operated the vehicle, consisting of the driver, bow gunner (the bow-mounted BESA machine gun was retained on the ARV), and commander. All three men would have been REME engineers. The lack of a turret also provided enough room to carry the crew of any tank being recovered.
Churchill ARV Mk.I alongside an A.27L Centaur. Note the chain-hoist in use at the end of the jib and the boxy fenders. Photo: felixshara.com
ARV Mk.II
To meet the needs of British forces fighting in Europe from 1944 onwards, a new version of the Churchill ARV was produced on the hulls of the Mk.III and Mk.IV tanks. Both tanks carried the same 6-pounder (57 mm) gun main armament but had different turrets. The Mk.III had a welded turret while the Mk.IV had a cast turret. Mk.III and IV Churchills were also used as the bases for the famous Churchill AVRE.
The ARV Mk.II conversion process was far more extensive than that of the Mk.I ARV. Rather than the ‘make do’ nature of the original ARV, the Mk.II was much more of a purpose-built machine. Like the Mk.Is, the original turret of the Churchill was removed, but instead of the simple ‘tower’, a faux turret was installed. This faux turret was large, boxy, and constructed from welded steel armor plate. It was also completely fixed in place and had no horizontal rotation. Placed atop the turret were two simple hexagonal cupolas with two-part hatches. There were no viewports anywhere on the ‘turret’. On the rear of this structure, a large stowage box was added. A dummy gun was fashioned from a length of pipe, which was also added to the face of the faux turret. This was put in place to make it look like a standard Churchill gun tank, as there was a fear that the enemy would mercilessly shoot at the vehicle if it was visibly unarmed. The addition of the dummy gun was an effort to deter possible attackers. The gun was mounted slightly off to the right so it didn’t interfere with the forward jib.
Two views of the faux turret and its dummy gun. The two simple, hexagonal cupolas are extremely prominent. The hooks that cover the structure would be used to carry spare track links, recovery equipment, and crew sundries. Photo: Author’s own
The purpose of the faux turret was to serve as a protective housing for the 3-man crew as well as the crew of any vehicle being recovered. A new piece of equipment was also housed within – a winch. With a capacity of 25 long tons and a 250 foot (76 meter) long cable, the winch made the Mk.II ARV a far more effective recovery vehicle, as it could now pull vehicles or heavy equipment from a static position. The winch also worked in conjunction with another new addition, a permanently affixed A-frame jib placed on the rear of the vehicle. This was rooted directly to the hull with a large pulley wheel at the top. This jib had a capacity of 15 long tons (15.2 tonnes) and was mostly used to pull vehicles or heavy equipment. It could also be used to lift, but due to its relatively low height, this wasn’t practical.
On the left is a view of the fixed 15 long ton capacity jib and fairlead welded to the hull below it. On the right is a view of the winch cable emerging from the rear of the ‘turret’. Surrounding it is the large stowage box. Photos: Author’s own
The winch also worked with a feature carried over from the Mk.I ARV, the erectable A-frame jib. This could be attached to the bow of the vehicle. When not in use, it was broken down into its component pieces with one section of the tubular arms carried on each side of the hull, just above the suspension bogies. The pulley wheel that sat at the top of the jib was carried in a cradle on the left side of the bow. As its primary role was to pull from the rear of the vehicle, the winch cable emerged from the rear of the ‘turret’. To get the cable to the forward jib, the cable was passed through a fairlead, over the rear jib’s pulley, and over the ‘turret’ roof. It then passed over a smaller pulley in between the two cupolas and down to another pulley at the front of the bow. From here, it finally passed up and over the pulley atop the jib.
This image shows the direction of travel of the winch cable to the forward jib. Photo: IWM with additions by Author.
The forward jib had a lift capacity of 7 ½ long tons (7.6 tonnes) and was much longer than the rear unit, thus higher off the ground. This made it perfect for engine and equipment lifts. The jib was anchored to the vehicle via a high-tensile cable, attached to an eyelet beside the roof cable pulley. The cable was also brought to the front like this to facilitate pulls from the front without the use of the jib. The engine deck was modified to allow passage of the winch cable. It was completely flattened, cleared of any obstruction. This included the exhaust system which was altered from the single, horizontal bar which ran the width of the deck on the standard gun tank. For the ARV, the exhaust pipe was split into two separate pipes mounted over the sprocket wheels. Protective cowlings were placed over the mufflers. To anchor the vehicle during lifts and pulls, a large ‘spade’ was placed on the rear of the vehicle. When needed, this was lowered by the winch. When not in use, it was folded up against the rear hull plate.
Rear view of the Mk.II ARV showing the spade and large exhaust muffler. Note also one section of the forward jib carried above the suspension units. Photo: felixshara.com
Other Details and Equipment of the Mk.II
Like the Mk.I, the Mk.II ARV’s fenders were more angular and boxy than that of the standard Churchill’s. On both the Mk.I and II, however, the air intakes towards the rear of the vehicle on the sides of the hull were vastly simplified and stripped back. On later models of the Mk.II, they were even more basic, taking the form a simple, shallow rectangular box with a thin layer of mesh covering the intake aperture. Another feature carried over from the Mk.I was the retention of the bow 7.92 mm BESA machine gun. Unlike the Mk.I, however, there was no mounting point for the twin Bren LMGs.
While the dimensions of the Mk.I matched those of the standard Churchill (barring the lack of a turret), the Mk.II was slightly larger in a few respects. With the introduction of the rear jib, the vehicle’s length increased to 27 feet 6 in (8.38 meters) from the original 25 feet 5 inches (7.74 meters). The faux turret also increased height from 8 feet 2 inches (2.49 meters) to 9 feet 9 inches (2.96 meters).
The ARV also housed various other items used for repair or recovery tasks. These included jacks, hoists, pulleys, snatch blocks, tow bars, spare track links and lengths of steel cable up to 100 feet (30 meters) long. All of these were stowed on various points around the exterior of the vehicle via simple steel hooks which were welded to the chassis and ‘turret’. New, large stowage boxes were added behind the exhaust mufflers. In some cases, a vice was even added on the left of the bow plate for small-scale repairs.
Numerous sets of wooden blocks were also carried on both the Mk.I and Mk.II. These were used for several purposes. If winching a vehicle from a steep embankment, the wooden blocks were piled on the crest of the embankment so the cable would not bite into the earth. They were also used in conjunction with jacks, either to support the vehicle or give the jack a firm base to stop it sinking into soft ground.
Top left: The bow of the Mk.II showing the cradle for the forward jib’s pulley wheel. Note the twisted metal plate on the left, this is where a vice would have been attached. Top right: The winch cable pulley at the front of the ‘turret’ roof combined with the anchor eyelet for the forward jib. Bottom left: The simplified air-intake on the hull side and, above it, one of the added stowage boxes. Note the REME tricolour on the fender. Bottom right: This view shows the dummy gun, one of the sets of wooden blocks and a set of tow-bars. Photos: Author’s own
Some of the only items carried on the now barren engine deck were a couple of pioneer tools, consisting of a pick-axe and a sledge hammer. Two shovels were also carried and were stowed on the exterior of the large stowage bin on the back of the ‘turret’.
Much of the equipment carried by the Churchill was shared by the Sherman ARV. The Sherman ARV was a unique British conversion, developed independently of the American M32 variant of the M4 Sherman medium tank. Like the Churchill, the Mk.I Sherman ARV was a turretless tank with an erectable jib. The Mk.II Sherman ARV featured a similar faux turret with a dummy gun and the same fixed 25 long ton capacity rear jib.
Service
Unfortunately, there is not much detail out there regarding the Churchill ARV’s time in service. Initially, the ARV was designed to support armored units equipped with the Churchill tank. At the time it entered service, no other vehicle was capable of pulling the 40 long ton tank. From 1942 onwards, both the Mk.I and Mk.II were in operation with REME troops attached to armored units, and served through the Italian and North West Europe campaigns. The Mk.I was also used heavily in training exercises in the UK.
Churchill ARV Mk.I. The presence of a Canadian Ram in the background suggests this photo was taken in the UK. The turretless Sherman chassis (also in the background) is likely a Mk.I Sherman ARV. Photo: felixshara.com
We do know that the ARV played a crucial role during the March 1945 crossing of the Rhine. As part of 835 Heavy Recovery Section REME, at least two Mk.II ARVs were present. The ARVs were among the first heavy vehicles to be rafted across to the enemy occupied bank. Working alongside the Sherman Beach Armoured Recovery Vehicle (BARV) – another REME specific vehicle – as well as Scammell trucks, D4 and D8 Tractors, the Churchill ARVs were put to use recovering Sherman DDs (Amphibious, Duplex-Drive Sherman tanks) that had become bogged down while emerging from the Rhine. At least 8 Sherman DDs were recovered in this manner. The Churchill was also used to pull lighter vehicles such as the DUKW up the steep banks of the river.
The Churchill ARV’s service continued into the 1950s and it was even deployed in support of British Armoured units fighting in the Korean War (1950-1953). It is often forgotten that the Churchill, specifically the Churchill Crocodile, was deployed during the Korean War. That conflict was the last active combat deployment of the Churchill Tank. It was not until 1956 and the emergence of the FV4006 Centurion ARV that the Churchill ARV was finally retired. However, it hung on in service into the late 1950s with British forces stationed in Hong Kong. Further information on its deployment there is scarce, unfortunately.
A Mk.II ARV in Sek Kong, Hong Kong 1957-58. Photo: Bryan Panter, Gwulo.com
The ARV version is a testament to the versatility and flexibility of the Churchill tank. It is also an important vehicle in the history of the Royal Electrical Mechanical Engineers, being one of the first vehicles specifically converted to be operated by their personnel.
Unfortunately, not many of the vehicles survive today. It is possible that only three are still in existence, all Mk.IIs. One of these can be found at the REME Museum in Lyneham, UK. For many years this served as a range target at Borden Camp in Hampshire before being retrieved in the late 1970s and semi-restored and placed in the REME Museum collection. Two others can be found in India, one at the Cavalry Tank Museum, Ahmadnagar and the other at the Military College Of Electronics And Mechanical Engineering (MCEME) in Secunderabad.
Churchill ARV Mk.II at the MCEME, Secunderabad. Photo: warbirdsofindia
Churchill ARV Mk.I. Based on the Mk.I and II Churchill gun-tank, the Mk.I ARV was simply a turretless ‘tug’. It was equipped with a jib that could be erected at the front of the vehicle but its main role was towing. The red, yellow, and blue tri-color on the side of the vehicle is the REME flash.
Churchill ARV Mk.II. The upgraded ARV was based on the Churchill Mk.III and IV. The turret was removed and replaced with a fixed, welded superstructure housing a powerful winch. It had the same erectable forward jib, but was also equipped with a fix rear jib. So the winch cable could be used at the front of the vehicle, the cable had to be threaded around a series of pullies.
These illustrations were produced by Pavel Alexe, based on work by David Bocquelet, funded by our Patreon campaign.
Specifications (Mk.II)
Dimensions
24ft 5in x 10ft 8in x 9 ft 9 in
(7.44 m x 3.25 m x 2.96 m)
Total weight
Aprox. 40 tonnes
Crew
3 (driver, bow-gunner, commander – all REME)
Propulsion
350 hp Bedford horizontally opposed twin-six petrol engine
Speed (road)
15 mph (24 km/h)
Armament
BESA 7.92mm (0.31 in) machine-gun
Equipment
25-ton capacity winch with 250 ft (76 m) cable
15-ton (15.2 tonne) capacity rear jib
7 ½-ton (7.6 tonne) erectible forward jib
The ‘Tank, Medium Gun, FV221’, otherwise known as ‘Caernarvon’, appeared in the early 1950s and was a mating of an FV200 series chassis and the turret of an Mk.III Centurion. It was designed as an interim vehicle to fill the gap while Britain’s first Heavy Gun Tank, the FV214 Conqueror, was in the final stages of development.
Decades later, in 2018, and despite the real FV221 Caernarvon already being present, the popular online game World of Tanks (WoT) – published and developed by Wargaming (WG) – was looking for a new premium tank (a vehicle bought with real money that provides special in-game benefits) to add to the British ‘tech tree’. The result was a ghastly blend of 4 separate parts (engine, turret, armor plates and hull), all to create a fake tank with a double fake name. It is known in-game as the Caernarvon ‘Action X’.
While all of the constituent parts used to make this tank did exist in one form or another, they were never put together in this way.
The ghastly ‘Caernarvon AX’ as it appears in ‘World of Tanks’. Photo: ritastatusreport
The WoT Representation
A small ‘history’ is provided for this vehicle by Wargaming:
“A further development of the vehicles designed by the English Electric company under the “universal tank” concept (FV200). The project was discontinued in favor of the A41 tank (Centurion). No prototypes were built.”
– WoT Wiki extract
The Caernarvon ‘Action X’ is portrayed as a variant of the real FV221 Caernarvon, which is in turn part of the FV200 series of vehicles. Despite not being given its ‘Fighting Vehicle (FV)’ number, this fake is presented as a vehicle of the FV200 series produced in the early 1950s, in the early years of the Cold War.
The FV200 dates back to the final stages of the Second World War, when the British War Office (WO) was looking for a ‘Universal Tank’. The ancestor of today’s Main Battle Tanks (MBTs), the idea of the Universal Tank was that one chassis would spawn many variants, thus reducing costs, development and making maintenance and supply far easier. The first in the series was the FV201.
Despite a long development period, the FV201 project was canceled in 1949, with development moving onto the FV214 Conqueror, and in turn, the FV221 Caernarvon. As such, only four vehicles of the FV200 series were ever produced and entered into service. These were the FV214, and FV221 gun tanks, and the FV219/FV222 Conqueror Armoured Recovery Vehicles (ARVs).
The Caernarvon ‘Action X’ in-game. Image: WoT player & TE Community member, Nisstro.
Reality: FV221 Caernarvon
In 1950, the gun and turret of the FV214 Conqueror was still in the development phase. The hull and chassis, however, were already in the final stages of development. The chassis was a simplified variant of the FV201 series. The main simplification was in the engine bay, where the power take-off for the additional devices that the FV200 series was to have been fitted with was removed. This simplification meant the tank was slightly shorter. Both of these factors reduced the weight and these savings in weight were reinvested in the tank’s frontal protection, with the glacis being thickened and sloped back slightly more.
With this part of the FV214 complete, the Tank, Medium Gun, FV221 Caernarvon project was launched. The aim of this project was to speed up the development of the Conqueror, while giving crews experience in the operation of the vehicle. The FV221 consisted of an FV214 hull mated with a Centurion Mk.III turret armed with a 20-pounder gun.
With an initial prototype built in April 1952, just 10 of these vehicles were built, the last one in 1953. These had a brief career, nonetheless, seeing extensive trial service in the British Army of the Rhine (BAOR) and the Middle East Land Forces (MELF).
The FV221 Caernarvon, an amalgamation of the FV214 hull and Centurion Mk.III turret. Photo: Tankograd Publishing
In-Game Design of the Caernarvon ‘AX’
This fake tank is simply a fictional ‘upgrade’ to the FV221 Caernarvon ‘Medium Gun Tank’. As this vehicle is also equipped with a 20-pounder (84 mm) gun, it also fits the ‘medium gun tank’ designation. The term ‘Medium Gun Tank’ is a uniquely British designation. It refers to the size and power of the gun, not the size and weight of the tank. The role of a ‘Medium Gun Tank’ was to provide support for assaulting infantry by the sheer volume of fire and engaging lighter enemy armored vehicles. The role of engaging heavily armored vehicles and defensive positions fell to the ‘Heavy Gun Tank’, such as the Conqueror.
The hull armor for this vehicle is listed by WG as 130 mm on the hull front, 50.8 mm on the sides, and 38.1 mm on the rear. This is not too far off reality, however, it is still unclear as to just how thick the upper glacis of the tank was due to conflicting sources. That said, it is believed that the upper glacis is between 4.7 and 5.1 inches (120 – 130 mm) thick. The side armor is accurate, at about 2 inches (50 mm) thick, while the rear plate is actually around 0.7 inches (20 mm).
Despite the countless falsehoods present on this vehicle, the Caernarvon ‘AX’ does share some accurate parts of its design with the real FV221. These include the 4-man crew (commander, gunner, loader, driver), Horstmann suspension system, and the layout of the hull.
In-game profile shot of the Caernarvon ‘Action X’ showing the Horstmann suspension, one of the only realistic parts of this vehicle. Photo: WoT player & TE Community member, Nisstro
The ‘Action X’ Turret
The ‘Action X’ turret is where this mutated tank gets its name. In its own right, the ‘history’ of this turret is a comedy of errors but, nonetheless, it must be clearly stated that the turret, by itself, WAS a real project. Unfortunately, the history of this turret is long lost, leading historians to piece together its history from fragments of files. The following information has been compiled by amateur military historians and TE members, Ed Francis and Adam Pawley.
The first falsehood to tackle is the name ‘Action X’. The official name for this turret was the ‘Centurion Mantletless Turret’, so called because it was a design for a new turret for the Centurion. The name ‘Action X’ appeared in a book published in the early 2000s, after the author cited seeing the name written on the back of a photo of the turret. What he fails to mention is that this was written in the 1980s, and does not appear in any official material.
Centurion fitted with the Mantletless Turret undergoing trials in the 1960s. Photo: ritastatusreport
Evidence suggests that the turret was developed alongside the Centurion and Chieftain, as a means of creating a method for poorer countries to upgrade their Centurion fleets if they could not afford to invest in the Chieftain. Despite popular belief, its development had nothing to do with the FV4202 project. The design was quite different from the standard Centurion design.
Where the standard Centurion turret had a large mantlet that covered the majority of the turret face, this design was mantletless. A large sloped ‘forehead’ replaced the mantlet, with the coaxial machine gun being moved to the top left corner. The rest of the turret remained rather similar to the standard turret. The bustle stayed the same basic shape, the commander’s cupola remained at the back right, with the loader’s hatch on the back left. Unfortunately, the real armor values are currently unknown. In-game, they are listed as 254 mm (10 inches) on the front, 152.4 mm (6 inches) on the sides, and 95.3 mm (3 ¼ inches) on the rear.
Other than the fact that just 3 of these turrets were made, with 2 of them fitted and tested on Centurion chassis and 1 destroyed in a firing trial, little more official information remains on the project. One of these three originals still survives, and currently sits in the car park of The Tank Museum, Bovington, England.
The surviving ‘Centurion Mantletless Turret’ in the car park of The Tank Museum, Bovington. Note the position of the coaxial machine gun at the top left. Photo: Adam Pawley
Second to the name, the next error is the fact that this turret was never intended to be installed on any member of the FV200 series of vehicles. For one thing, this turret was developed almost a full decade after the FV221 Caernarvon. Another issue is the addition of the additional armor on the turret cheeks. The design of these has been taken straight from another WoT fake, the ‘Super Conqueror’. No such name was ever used. The tank was, in fact, a mere static test vehicle, a guinea pig that was pummeled by High-Explosive Anti-Tank (HEAT) and High-Explosive Squash Head (HESH) ammunition to test their effects on armored vehicles. For this, the vehicle was covered with additional 0.5 – 1.1 inch (14 – 30 mm) armor plates over its bow and turret cheeks. There was never any intention – or even a need – to place these plates on the ‘Mantletless Turret’. In the World of Tanks game, a single Browning M1919A4 .30 caliber (7.62 mm) machine gun was also added to the commander’s cupola on the turret roof. This was known as the L3A1 in British service.
On the left, the real Conqueror target vehicle, on the right, the fake Caernarvon AX. Photos: themodellingnews and WoT player & TE Community member, Nisstro, respectively
The Caernarvon ‘Action X’ is not the only vehicle in WoT to use the false name. The other vehicle is the Centurion ‘Action X’, which is based on the Centurions which were tested with the ‘Mantletless Turret’.
Armament
The armament installed on this spurious vehicle is the Ordnance Quick-Firing (QF) 20-pounder Gun with ‘Type B’ barrel. There were two types of 20-pounder: the ‘Type A’ without a fume extractor, and the ‘Type B’ with a fume extractor. The gun is, at least, an accurate choice, as the ‘Mantletless Turret’ was tested with both the 20-pounder and L7 105 mm gun. The 20-pounder was the successor to the 17-pounder gun of the Second World War and had a 3.3 inch (84 mm) bore. A range of ammunition was available to it. When firing an Armor Piercing Discarding Sabot (A.P.D.S.) round at a muzzle velocity of 4,810 ft/s (1,465 m/s), the gun could penetrate up to 13 inches (330 mm) of armor at 1,000 yards (914 m). In-game, maximum penetration is listed as just 10 inches (258 mm).
The Caernarvon ‘AX’ in-game showing its ‘firepower’. Photo: Wargamming.net
Despite the accurate selection of a gun, there remains an error in the presentation of it in that there is a thermal sleeve around the barrel. Thermal sleeves are used to provide consistent temperature to the barrel, in turn preventing distortions due to thermal expansion caused by the temperature fluctuations around the tube. There were no such sleeves added to the barrels of the 20-pounder gun (either A or B) or the 105 mm until the 1960s.
The 20-pounder gun – both ‘A’ & ‘B’ types – was installed on multiple vehicles. It served on the Centurion from the Mk.3 to the Mk.5/2, after which it was replaced by the 105 mm L7. It was also the main armament of the FV4101 Charioteer Medium Gun Tank and, of course, the real FV221 Caernarvon.
The 20-pounder-armed Centurion Mk.3 (left) and FV4101 Charioteer (right). Both of these are equipped with the ‘Type A’ 20-pounder. Photos: acemodel & peda.net
Erroneous Engine
As with the equally fake FV215b, the Caernarvon ‘AX’ is equipped with the Rolls-Royce Griffon. This is, in reality, an aircraft engine. While Rolls-Royce aero engines have been adapted for use in armored vehicles, there is no evidence at all to suggest that there was ever a plan to make an AFV variant of the Griffon. An example of a converted Rolls-Royce aero engine is the Meteor, as used in the real FV221 Caernarvon. This was an adaption of the Merlin, an engine famous for powering the British Spitfire and American Mustang fighter aircraft of World War 2.
The Griffon was a 37-liter, 60-degree V-12, liquid-cooled engine. It was the last V-12 aero engine built by Rolls-Royce, with production ceasing in 1955. It was used on such aircraft as the Fairey Firefly, Supermarine Spitfire, and Hawker Sea Fury. The engine produced over 2,000 hp in its plane configuration, but in-game it is listed as producing just 950 hp. This is not too far fetched, as converted aero-engines were often de-rated for use in armored vehicles. Meteor is an example of this. As the Merlin, it produced up 1,500 hp depending on the model. When de-rated as the Meteor, it produced just 810 horsepower.
The Rolls-Royce Griffon V-12 Aero-engine. Photo: Wikimedia Commons
On the real FV221, the Rolls-Royce Meteor M120 No. 2 Mk.1 produced 810 hp and propelled the vehicle to a top speed of 22 mph (35 kph). In this fake tank, the engine is listed as propelling this vehicle to a top speed of 36.3 km/h (22.5 mph).
Suspension
The Horstmann suspension of the Caernarvon ‘Action X’ is one of the accurate parts of this vehicle. On the FV200s, the suspension system had 2 wheels per-bogie unit. The wheels were made of steel, measuring approximately 20 inches (50 cm) in diameter, and constructed from 3 separate parts. These consisted of an outer and inner half, with a steel rim in contact with the track. Between each layer was a rubber ring. The Horstmann system consisted of three horizontal springs mounted concentrically, guided by an internal rod and tube. This allowed each wheel to rise and fall independently, although the system did struggle if both wheels rose at the same time. Four bogies lined each side of the hull of the vehicle, giving it 8 road-wheels per side. There would also be 4 return rollers, 1 per bogie. The drive sprockets were relocated at the rear of the running gear, with the idler wheel at the front.
Left, a schematic drawing of the Conqueror’s four Horstmann suspension bogie units. Right, this view of a Mk.2 Conqueror being unloaded from a flatbed trailer shows how the suspension actuates. Sources: User Handbook for Tank, Heavy Gun, Conqueror Mk.1 & 2 – 1958, WO Code No. 12065 & Rob Griffin
Fake, Pure and Simple
The Caernarvon ‘Action X’ is just one of a litany of convenient or lazy fakes by Wargaming. Not only do they erroneously mate a turret with a hull that was never intended to carry it, they also use a completely false designation for said turret. To cap it all, they then adorn the turret with false additions, such as the armor plate.
Had this tank ‘existed’, it would have been completely redundant. The turret itself was not developed until the 1960s, after the Caernarvons had all been retired or turned into Conquerors. By this time, the FV4201 Chieftain was in development, and the Conqureor was about to leave service, showing just how obsolete the chassis was, not to mention the 20 pounder gun.
The Caernarvon ‘Action X’ was released into ‘World of Tanks’ with this optional gaudy ‘Fearless’ camouflage scheme. A fake camouflage scheme for a fake tank. Photo: Wargaming.net
Illustration of the fake Caernarvon ‘Action X’ produced by Ardhya Anargha, funded by our Patreon campaign.
United Kingdom (1953)
Heavy Gun Tank – Approximately 180 Built
On September 7th, 1945, military heads of the Western Powers were horrified by what they saw rumbling towards them along the Charlottenburger Chaussee in central Berlin during the 1945 Victory Parade celebrating the end of the Second World War. During that parade, the increasingly threatening Soviet Union unveiled its latest tank to the world: the IS-3 heavy tank. As these machines clattered down the parade route, a sense of fear enveloped the representatives of the British, US, and French Armies. What they saw was a tank with well-sloped and – apparently – heavy armor, a piked nose, wide tracks, and a gun at least 120 mm in caliber.
The race was on. France, Britain, and the US immediately began the design and development of their own heavy or heavily armed tanks. The Americans would create the 120 mm Gun Tank M103 while the French experimented with the AMX-50. Both of these tanks had 120 mm guns that would – it was hoped – be able to combat the IS-3 threat. The British, on the other hand, would pursue the development of the ‘Universal Tank’, what we know today as a ‘Main Battle Tank’ or ‘MBT’. The FV4007 Centurion was also in development well before the IS-3 appeared. At this time, however, it was only armed with the 17-Pounder gun. It was projected that it would be equipped with the 20-Pounder (84mm) in the future, but a more powerful gun was desired.
This is where the FV200 series of vehicles come in. The FV200s were a projected series of vehicles based on one common chassis, hence ‘Universal Tank’. The FV214 was one of the vehicles in this series, and was a design for a ‘Heavy Gun Tank’. It would become known as the Conqueror. The Conqueror or – to give its officially long-winded title – the ‘Tank, Heavy No. 1, 120 mm Gun, FV214 Conqueror’, was an impressive vehicle. Weighing in at 63 long tons* (64 tonnes), armed with a powerful 120 mm gun, and protected by thick steel armor. The Conqueror – as mighty as it was – had an extremely short service life, in operation between 1955 and 1966. Conqueror was one of the heaviest and largest tanks Great Britain ever produced that made it to active service.
*As this is a British vehicle, mass will be measured in ‘Long Ton’ otherwise known as the ‘Imperial ton’. It will be shortened to ‘ton’ for ease with a metric conversion alongside.
Tank, Heavy No. 1, 120 mm Gun, Conqueror. ‘William the Conqueror’ is a surviving example of a Mk.2 Conqueror and can be found at the Wight Military & Heritage Museum, Isle of Wight, UK. Photo: Author’s own
The FV200 Series
In the aftermath of the Second World War, the War Office (WO) reviewed the future of the British Army’s tank arm. In 1946, they did away with the ‘A’ designator used on tanks such as the Churchill (A22) and Comet (A34). The ‘A’ number was replaced by the ‘Fighting Vehicle’ or ‘FV’ number. In an attempt to streamline the tank force and cover all the bases, it was decided that the military needed three main families of vehicles: the FV100, the FV200, and FV300 series. The FV100s would be the heaviest, the FV200s would be slightly lighter, and the FV300s would be lightest. All three projects were almost canceled due to the complexity that would’ve been involved in producing the respective series. In the end, both the FV100 and FV300 series were canceled. The FV200 hung on in its development, however, as it was projected that it would eventually replace the Centurion.
The FV200 series included designs for vehicles that would fill various roles ranging from a gun tank to an engineering vehicle and Self-Propelled Guns (SPGs). It wasn’t until later years that the other uses of the FV200 chassis were explored, such as with the F219 and FV222 Armoured Recovery Vehicles (ARVs). The first of the FV200 series was the FV201, a gun tank that started development in 1944 as the ‘A45’. This tank weighed around 55 tons (49 tonnes). At least two or three FV201s were built for testing, but the project went no further than that. Work on the project ceased in 1949.
The FV201 (A45) test vehicle with Centurion turret and 17-Pounder gun. Photo: Tankograd Publishing
Need vs Availability
In June 1949, an official requirement was made for a new Heavy Gun Tank with enough firepower to defeat the toughest armor of the time from a long-range. The term ‘Heavy Gun Tank’ is a uniquely British designation. It refers to the size and power of the gun, not the size and weight of the tank. Heavy Gun Tanks are specifically designed to destroy enemy tanks and/or fortified positions. Work on the new tank began that July, when the FV201 project transitioned into the FV214 project. Designers working on the new specifications soon realized they had a few problems, not the least of which was that they did not have a gun, a turret, or a hull.
The requirement for the new heavily armed tank called for the vehicle to be armed with a large caliber gun. A 4.5 in (114 mm) gun that was first considered for the FV205 in 1946 was explored first, before moving on to a 120 mm gun. The problem was there was no such gun in existence or development in the United Kingdom at that time. On the other side of the Atlantic, the Americans were developing a 120 mm gun for their T43/M103 heavy tank project. This gun had a chamber pressure of 17 long tons (17.2 tonnes), but they were planning to increase this value to 22 long tons (22.3 tonnes). The higher the chamber pressure, the higher the velocity, meaning longer range, and increased penetration. With the US and UK working closely, the UK also designed a gun with a 22-ton (22.3 tonne) chamber pressure. Efforts were even made to standardize the guns between each other. On the British side, Royal Ordnance took charge of the development of the gun, resulting in the Ordnance Quick-Firing (QF) 120 mm Tank, L1A1 Gun.
The Royal Ordnance QF 120 mm Tank L1 gun. This particular version is the L1A2 with a threaded muzzle, mounted on ‘William’ the Conqueror, IOW. Photo: Author’s own.
Weighing in at 2.9 tons (3 tonnes) with a length of 24.3 feet (7.4 meters), the 120 mm L1 gun was monstrous. A new turret would be needed to carry it, but this would have to be designed from the ground up. Work started in 1949, with the turret set to be constructed at Royal Ordnance Factory (ROF) Barnbow. It was clear from the outset that a turret would not be ready for a considerable amount of time.
Another issue was developing a suitable chassis that would be strong enough to carry the immense gun and – what would probably be – a proportionately large and heavy turret that was set to be constructed from cast steel. Instead of going back to the drawing board, the designers decided to use the chassis of the nearly complete FV201.
Interim Developments
Tank, Medium Gun, FV221 Caernarvon
By 1950, with the gun and turret still in the development phase, it was clear that prototype production and troop trials of the FV214, now known as ‘Conqueror’, were a long way off. The hull and chassis, however, were already in the final stages of development. The chassis was a simplified variant of the FV201 series. The main simplification was in the engine bay, where the power take-off for the additional devices that the FV200 series was to have been fitted with was removed. This simplification meant the tank was slightly shorter. Both of these factors reduced the weight. These savings in weight were reinvested in the tank’s frontal protection, with the glacis being thickened and sloped back slightly more.
With this part of the FV214 complete, the Tank, Medium Gun, FV221 Caernarvon project was launched. The aim of this project was to speed up the development of the Conqueror, while giving crews experience in the operation of the vehicle. The FV221 consisted of an FV214 hull mated with a Centurion Mk.III turret armed with a 20-Pounder gun. With an initial prototype built in April 1952, just 10 of these vehicles were built, the last one in 1953. These had a brief career, nonetheless, they saw extensive trial service in the British Army of the Rhine (BAOR) and the Middle East Land Forces (MELF).
The FV221 Caernarvon, an amalgamation of the FV214 hull and Centurion Mk.III turret. Photo: Tankograd Publishing
Tank, Heavy Gun, 120mm Gun, FV4004 Conway
Early on, adoption of the 120 mm gun was seen as an urgent requirement, and a plan was formulated late in 1950 to develop a ‘Stop-Gap Heavy Gun Tank’ that would equipped armored units based in Europe until the FV214 was ready. This would turn into the FV4004 ‘Conway’ project which was based on the existing Centurion. The aim of the project was to bring the 120mm gun into the field as soon as possible, while not interfering with standard Centurion production. As such, a new turret would be developed that, while holding the new larger gun, would fit on the existing Centurion turret ring. The new turret was tall and box-like, featuring a fully welded construction to not interfere with standard Centurion turret castings. The 120mm gun was mounted high in the turret allowing it to recoil into the turret bustle, while the large spent brass propellent cases could be ejected out of a hatch in the rear. Vertical traverse was limited to just -5º to +10º. Despite being visually larger, the new turret made the FV4004 just 10 inches (approx. 25 cm) taller than a standard Centurion.
Just two turrets were built for fire-from and fire-at tests, while a weighted hull was used for mobility testing. While the vehicle performed well, by the time it was ready to go into production in the mid 1950s, it was no longer needed as the Conqueror was now entering production.
The FV4004 Conway, based on the Centurion Mk. III. Only 1 complete vehicle was built, but the design was never finalised. This surviving vehicle was photographed when it stood outside the Tank Museum, Bovington. It still survives today – albeit in a poor state – inside their Vehicle Conservation Center (VCC). Photo: Overlord
Finalizing the Conqueror’s Design
Come 1951, work on the FV214 had progressed and, by the end of the year, firing trials of the new Ordnance L1 120 mm gun had concluded with the weapon being accepted for service. As well as the aforementioned FV221 and FV4004, there was also an idea to mount the gun in a casemate style tank destroyer built on the FV200 chassis and designated the FV217 – nothing came of this project either. The design of the turret had also been finalized and it was set to include a number of innovative features, such as an automatic rammer for assisting the loader, a shell ejection system, and a ‘Fire Control Turret’ for the Commander.
By 1952, four pre-production turrets and 3 guns were available to start trials. These were mated with existing FV221 hulls. At least four prototypes were constructed in this manner. Several other hulls were tested with the ‘Windsor’ ballast turret – named after Windsor Castle. It consisted of a large cast steel ring with interchangeable plates and simulated the weight of a fully equipped Conqueror turret.
FV221 Cearnarvon hull with the Conqueror-weighted ‘Windsor’ Ballast Turret, 1952. Photo: Tankograd
These vehicles took part in mobility and endurance trials conducted by the Fighting Vehicles Research and Development Establishment (F.V.R.D.E.) between September 1952 and July 1953. Together, the vehicles covered around 7,911 miles (12,732 km, divided between test locations) – just cross country – at speeds of up to 15 mph (23 km/h). Road trials covering 99 miles (160 km) were also conducted. As it performed well in these trials, 5 more pre-production vehicles were ordered for further F.V.R.D.E. tests. For troop trials, 20 vehicles were ordered in 1953, all to be built at the Royal Ordnance Factory in Dalimur, Scotland. Construction of these vehicles was completed in summer 1955.
One of the Conqueror prototypes built using an FV221 hull. This photo was taken during the trials of the early 1950s. Photo: Tankograd
Mk.1 and Mk.2
While the trial versions were in production, certain details of the vehicle were adapted based on the test results of the first batch of vehicles. This resulted in two types of FV214. Vehicles produced before the alterations were implemented became the Conqueror Mk.1, while vehicles built with the modifications became the Conqueror Mk.2.
The most noticeable differences between the Mk.1 and 2 are the exhausts, fume extractor, and driver’s periscopes. On the Mk.1, the exhausts were equipped with mufflers whereas the Mk.2 featured straight-through exhausts. The Mk.2 is also distinguishable from the Mk.1 as it featured a much larger fume extractor on the 120 mm gun. As a carryover from the FV221 Caernarvon, the Conqueror Mk.1 had three No. 16 Mk.1 periscopes installed in a crescent in front of the driver’s hatch. This was seen as a weak point in the armor and, as such, just the center periscope was retained in the Mk.2. The profile of the upper glacis plate was also changed and the plate made larger. It was also far more common for the Mk.1 to not be equipped with the turret bustle stowage basket, a feature present on most Mk.2s.
Conqueror Mk.1 (left) and Conqueror Mk.2 (right). Note the differences between the fume extractor and the driver’s pericopes. Photos: Profile Publications
The other differences between the two are relatively minor. On the Mk.1 engine deck, fluid filler caps were left exposed, while on the Mk.2 they were concealed by the engine bay cover plates. On the Mk.1, there was a crank to turn over the engine by hand, this was deleted on the Mk.2. Other changes included an improved switch-box in the driver’s compartment and improved hatches for the commander and driver.
The Conqueror in Detail
Overview
Weighing in at 65 tons (66 tonnes), the Conqueror is worthy of its name. Measuring 25 feet (7.62 meters) long – not including the gun, 13.1 feet (3.99 meters) wide and 11 feet (3.35 meters) tall, the FV214 cuts an imposing figure. A four-man crew operates the vehicle, consisting of the Commander (turret rear), Gunner (turret right), Loader (turret left) and Driver (hull right). All crew members had access to their own hatches which popped up and swung open, instead of the two-part doors that had been present since before WW2. The Conqueror was one of the first British tanks to have this style of hatch. The older two-piece type persisted on the Centurion for the entirety of its service.
With two of its crew stood before it, the Conqueror’s scale can be appreciated. Note also the swung open hatches. This is a Mk.1 Conqueror of the 3rd Kings Own Hussars, BAOR in 1957. Photo: Conqueror Appreciation Society, Facebook.
Hull
The hull was of an all-welded construction, formed from plates of rolled homogeneous steel armor. At the front of the hull, the upper glacis was between 4.7 and 5.1 inches (120 – 130 mm) thick, sloped at 61.5 degrees from vertical. This would give an effective thickness of either 11.3 or 12.3 inches (289 – 313 mm)*. The lower glacis was 3 inches (77 mm) thick, angled at 45 degrees from vertical. This gave an effective thickness of 4.2 inches (109 mm). The armor profile changed between the Mk.1 and Mk.2 due to the deletion of the left and right No. 16 Mk.1 periscopes. On the Mk.1, the hull roof that the hatch was installed in was slightly sloped. On the Mk.2, this part of the roof is flat.
The rear plate and hull floor are 0.7 inches (20 mm) thick, while the hull roof and sides are 2 inches (51 mm) thick. There was also an extra 0.3 inch (10 mm) ‘mine plate’ under the driver’s position. Protection on the sides of the hull was increased by the installation of two sets of armored side skirts or ‘bazooka plates’. These were approximately 0.2 inches (6 mm) thick and detachable, allowing easy maintenance and replacement. The upper set was attached to the track guards, while the lower set was attached to struts in between the suspension bogies and was fixed directly to the hull side, covering the suspension. These plates were designed to counter shaped-charge warheads by detonating them away from the hull sides and reducing the power of the jet from the shell. Tests of skirting plates had also established a high level of effectiveness for relatively little additional weight against other types of shells too, including Armor-Piercing (AP) and HESH (High Explosive Squash Head).
*There is a lot of confusion over the upper plate thickness, so that is why both possible thicknesses are given. Until a tangible measurement becomes available, it cannot be known for sure.
Top, the heavily armored nose of the Conqueror. Below, the protective ‘bazooka plates’ covering the suspension. Both photos are of ‘William’ on the IOW. Photos: Author’s own.
Designers believed that the 2 inches of side armor, together with the added plates, would be enough to counter the IS-3’s 122 mm gun. This, of course, was never tested in combat. By way of illustration, trials in 1959 proved that even a relatively thin single skirting plate just 10 mm thick helped provide significant protection against Soviet 100 mm UBR-412B Armor Piercing High Explosive (APHE) shells fired at a Centurion, justifying the conclusions of the designers of the time.
On the left of the rear hull plate there was an infantry telephone which allowed friendly troops to communicate with the vehicle’s commander. On the upper right corner could be found the gun crutch (travel lock). Three large stowage boxes were placed on the left and right fenders. Behind these were mountings for pioneer tools (shovel, axe, pick etc.), spare track links, and other sundries.
Rear view of a surviving Mk.2 at the Gunfire Museum, Belgium. Note the infantry telephone box, left, and the gun crutch (travel lock) right. Photo: Jan Wim Hasselman
The driver was located at the front of the hull, on the right. Two traditional tiller bars were used to operate the vehicle, with the gear stick situated between the driver’s legs. At his feet were the clutch (left), brake (center), and accelerator (right) pedals. Other instruments included a hand throttle, claxon (horn), battery and generator switches, fuel/temperature/speed gauges, and a gun position indicator. The driver’s seat could be placed at various heights and positions, allowing the driver to operate head-out or under the protection of a closed hatch. Extensions atop the tiller bars allowed easy operation when driving head out. The compartment to the left of the driver was used for ammunition storage. A semicircular hatch that pivoted open to the right provided the main route of access to the compartment. At least one prototype hull (used for testing a turbine engine) was also fitted with a second hatch but this feature was not carried over onto production vehicles. An additional means of escape for the driver was via a passageway into the turret basket so he could enter or exit the vehicle through the turret hatches. Behind the driver was the fighting compartment and turret. The engine bay was separated from the fighting compartment by a bulkhead.
Schematic view of the Driver’s position. Note the periscope in the roof, the tiller bar extensions and the large central gear stick. Source: User Handbook for Tank, Heavy Gun, Conqueror Mk.1 & 2 – 1958, WO Code No. 12065
Mobility
The beating heart of the FV214 was the Rolls-Royce Meteor M120 No. 2 Mk.1A engine. This water-cooled, petrol-injection engine developed 810 horsepower at 2,800 rpm and was a derivative of the Rolls-Royce Merlin engine, famous for powering the British Spitfire and American Mustang fighter aircraft of World War 2. The transmission consisted of the 7-speed (5 forward, 2 reverse) Z52, and various models from Mk.A to Mk.C were used. Combined, this powerpack gave the FV214 a top speed of 21 mph (34 km/h) on the road. Maximum fuel capacity was 212 UK-gallons (964 litres). This capacity was split between 3 fuel tanks of 115, 85, and 20 gallons (523, 386, 91 litres) capacity respectively. In all, the vehicle would consume 144 gallons (655 litres) per 62 miles (100 km) when traveling on roads, or 188 gallons (855 litres) per 62 miles (100) km cross-country.
Schematic of the engine bay. The Rolls-Royce Meteor M120 No. 2 Mk.1A is located in the center. Source: User Handbook for Tank, Heavy Gun, Conqueror Mk.1 & 2 – 1958, WO Code No. 12065
Unfortunately, the FV214 was no stranger to automotive problems. Luckily, in the field, Conqueror units were supported by Light Aid Detachments (LADs) of the Royal Electrical Mechanical Engineers (REME), who were often equipped with the Armoured Recovery Vehicle (ARV) variant of the heavy tank. Below, Geoff Wright, an ex-Conqueror ARV crew member and REME engineer gives his opinion of the FV214:
“I crewed the Conqueror ARV, which was a fine vehicle, but the tank was a disappointment. Looked fantastic, had a world beating armament system at the time, but it was too heavy when fully loaded for the power unit. I think they were also a problem on many roads for the same reason, as well as the width. We had major problems with the lack of power from the main engine when out on rough ground – misfires, stalling. The three tanks of our squadron were always breaking down, but all the tanks were underpowered. We spent hours trying to adjust the magnetos to see if we could tweak the engines but nothing worked. A nightmare to work on too, the engine deck covers were really heavy, especially after being used to the Centurion.”
– Geoff Wright, ex-REME Light Aid Detatchment (LAD), 1960s.
Like the FV201 and Centurion before it, the Conqueror utilized the Horstmann suspension system with 2 wheels per-bogie unit. The wheels were made of steel, measuring approximately 20 inches (50 cm) in diameter, and constructed from 3 separate parts. These consisted of an outer and inner half, with a steel rim in contact with the track. Between each layer was a rubber ring. The idea behind this was that it would be more efficient on the rubber and would not need to be replaced as often. The Horstmann system consisted of three horizontal springs mounted concentrically, guided by an internal rod and tube. This allowed each wheel to rise and fall independently, although the system did struggle if both wheels rose at the same time. Four bogies lined each side of the hull of the Conqueror, giving it 8 road-wheels per side. There were also 4 return rollers, 1 per bogie. The advantage of using bogies lies in maintenance and crew comfort. Having externally mounted bogies means there is more room inside the tank and also, should the unit become damaged, it is relatively easy to remove it and replace it with a new unit.
Left, a schematic drawing of the Conqueror’s four Horstmann suspension bogie units. Right, this view of a Mk.2 Conqueror being unloaded from a flatbed trailer shows how the suspension actuates. Sources: User Handbook for Tank, Heavy Gun, Conqueror Mk.1 & 2 – 1958, WO Code No. 12065 & Rob Griffin
The drive sprocket was at the rear of the running gear, with the idler wheel at the front. The track – made of cast manganese steel – was 31 inches (78.7 cm) wide and had 102 links per side when new. When the track was close to wearing out, it could use as little as 97 per side. Suspension gave the vehicle a ground clearance of 20 inches (51 cm), and the ability to climb a 35 inch (91 cm) vertical object. It allowed the tank to cross trenches up to 11 feet (3.3 m) wide, negotiate gradients up to 35 degrees, and ford water obstacles up to 4.5 feet (1.4 m) deep without preparation. The vehicle had a turning circle of 15 – 140 feet (4.8 – 42.7 m) depending on gear selection. It could also pivot or ‘neutral’ steer on the spot with each track turning in opposite directions.
A Conqueror Mk.2 is refueled while on exercise in Germany, 1963. Photo: r/TankPorn
Turret
The turret of the Conqueror was a single steel casting. It was an odd shape, with a wide, curved face and a long, bulbous bustle. The turret face was between 9.4 to 13.3 inches (240 – 340 mm) thick, angled at around 60 degrees. This would make the effective thickness either 18.8 inches or 26.7 inches (480 – 680 mm). The mantlet is also estimated to be at least 9.4 inches thick. Armor on the turret sides was around 3.5 inches (89 mm) thick, while the roof and rear were around 2 inches (51 mm) thick.* The roof over the gun was formed by a large rectangular steel plate that was bolted in place. When removed, this allows access to the gun for maintenance. The roof on the right was also slightly stepped to accommodate the gunner’s periscope. The turret was divided into three crew positions with the gunner on the right, loader on the left, and the commander at the rear in his own dedicated position known as the ‘Fire Control Turret’. Both the gunner and loader had their own hatches. Ex-Conqueror crew member, Peter Dobson, gives an idea of crew comfort in the fighting compartment:
As the loader, I had the most room to move about the compartment, but once we were going over rough country it could get quite uncomfortable so you had to hang on. On smooth paved road it was no problem. As loader, I was also the designated tea man, and used to make tea for the gunner and commander.”
– ex-Conqueror Loader Peter Dobson, 3rd Royal Tank Regiment, 1960s.
Head-on view of the Conqueror’s heavy cast turret. The hole in the mantlet is the aperture of the coaxial machine gun. Note the gunner’s periscope sight mounted on the roof in the top left corner of the photo. ‘William’ the Conqueror, IOW. Photo: Author’s Own.
External features of the turret included two ‘Discharger, Smoke Grenade, No. 1 Mk.1’ launchers. One of these was placed on each side of the turret, roughly centrally along its length. Each launcher featured 2 banks of 3 tubes and were fired electrically from inside the tank. Other notable features include the large rack on the rear of the bustle – used to carry tarpaulins, crew sundries, and other stowage – and the circular wire reel mounted on the left side of the bustle. This was a spool of telephone wire – known as the ‘Cable, Reel, Continuous Connection’ – that was carried by most British tanks of the time. It would be used in bivouac areas when the tanks were in their defensive positions. The wire was hooked up to each tank and allowed them to discreetly communicate without broadcasting their positions via radio.
*Much like the hull armor thicknesses, there is much disparity between turret thicknesses depending on the source.
Two views of the Conqueror’s turret, from the front and back. Note the Fire Control Turret at the rear with .30 Cal MG, the bolted plate above the gun, and one of the two smoke discharger sets. On the rear, note the stowage rack on the bustle and the wire reel. Photos: Tankograd Publishing.
Fire Control Turret
One very important title is held by the Conqueror. It was the first tank in the world to feature what we now call a ‘Hunter-Killer’ system. These systems provide the vehicle’s commander with the ability to spot targets for himself and take manual control of the turret and armament. This allows them to either lay their gunner on to target or take the shot themselves. In Conqueror, this system took the form of the ‘Fire Control Turret (FCT)’, a separate unit manned by the commander at the very rear of the main turret. It was capable of full 360 degree powered traverse (there was no manual override, a sore point among Conqueror commanders) independent of the main turret’s traverse. The FCT features its own defensive armament, consisting of an L3A1 .30 Cal (7.62 mm) machine gun – the British designation of the US Browning M1919A4. This gun was operated internally by the commander via mechanical linkages and, unlike the main gun, could be fired on the move. Although fired from the safety of the turret, the gun was fed by standard 200 to 250-round boxes – 3 of which were carried in the FCT. The commander would have to leave the safety of the FCT to reload and cock the weapon.
The FCT and its L3A1/M1919A4 armament. Photo: Wikimedia Commons
The FCT featured a number of optics. In front of the commander’s hatch were his three main viewing devices. The sight for the machine gun – the ‘Sight, Periscope, AFV, No. 6 Mk.1’ – was mounted centrally, with an ‘Episcope, Tank, No. 7 Mk.1’ on either side. Rangefinding for the main gun was done via the ‘Rangefinder, AFV, No. 1 Mk.1’. This was placed laterally at the front of the FCT and had a 47-inch (1.19 meters) sight base, with the apertures appearing on each cheek of the FCT. The rangefinder used the ‘coincidence’ method of ranging. the system laid to images on top of each other. When the two images completly overlap, the range measurement is taken. The system could gauge ranges from 400 to 5000 yards (366 – 4572 meters). Initially, the designers of the Conqueror turned to the Royal Navy for the development of the rangefinder. However, the Navy had trouble downsizing, and as such, the designers turned to the Glasgow based company of Barr & Stroud Ltd. The ‘Sight, Periscope, AFV, No. 8 Mk.1’ – was placed below the rangefinder in the face of the FCT. This had x7 magnification and was the commander’s primary sight for the main gun.
The ‘FCT’ system allowed the commander to set up the next attack while the gunner was finishing his current one. This would work in the following method; the commander spotted the target, measured the range, lay gunner on to it, who began targeting. He then hands off to the gunner who makes the fine adjustments and takes the shot. This allowed the commander to move onto the next target, starting the process over again. Alternatively, the commander could do it all by himself, including firing the main gun or coaxial machine gun with his own controls. The Conqueror was the first British tank to incorporate a range finder.
Left, Diagram of the turret roof with the ‘Fire Control Turret (FCT)’ at the rear. Source: User Handbook for Tank, Heavy Gun, Conqueror Mk.1 & 2 – 1958, WO Code No. 12065. Right, a photograph looking down into the FCT. Note the various eyepieces, the MG control handle on the left, and FCT traverse control on the right. Photo: Profile Publications.
Armament
Both the 120 mm L1A1 and L1A2 guns were used on the Conqueror. The A1 and A2 were basically identical, other than the A2 being threaded at the muzzle end. The weapon system consisted of 4 major components: the gun, the mount, sighting systems, and ejection gear. The 120 mm barrel was forged and rifled with an overall length from muzzle to breech block of 24.3 feet (7.4 meters). A bore evacuator (fume extractor) was placed roughly halfway down the barrel’s length. The gun was mounted on trunnions placed at the front of the turret. The aperture in the turret was protected by a large, flat-sided frustoconical cast mantlet wrapped around the base of the barrel. The gap between the mantlet and the turret face was sealed by a material baffle. On the left and right of the gun were the large buffers of the hydraulic recoil system. The gun mount also carried an L3A1/Browning M1919 coaxial machine gun, which was located on the left of the main gun.
A Conqueror Mk.1 of the 3rd King’s Own Hussars, Hohne Ranges, Germany 1956. This shot was fired by Gunner Barrie Ashwell, the man in the Commander’s seat was Sergeant Alan Wallace. Unfortunately, the man standing on the engine deck is only known as Lieutenant Sherwin. Photo: militaryimages.net
As well as the 360-degree power traverse of the turret, the gun was also equipped with power elevation with a range of -7 to + 15 degrees. Despite the maximum 7 degrees, a limiter prevented the gun from depressing past -5 degrees. The turret was traversed via the ‘Controller, Traverse, No. 1 Mk.1’ spade grip found in front of and to the right of the gunner. A full rotation using powered traverse took 24 seconds. Elevation for the gun was achieved via the ‘Controller, Elevation, No. 2 Mk.1’. This controller was on the gunner’s left, and also incorporated the electrical trigger for the main gun. Both elevation and traverse had manual overrides. As a safety feature, once the tank passed 1.5 mph (2.4 km/h), a micro switch engaged a system that disconnected the gun from the elevation system. The idea behind this ‘carry mode’ was that it put less stress on the gun cradle if the 2.9 ton gun was not locked into the system as the tank negotiated terrain. This effectively meant that the gunner was just along for the ride, having no control over the free-floating gun. A ‘trimming’ dial at the gunner’s station was used to stop the gun drifting too far up and down. As the tank was never designed to fire on the move, this was not seen as an issue. Still, it took several seconds after the tank had stopped before the gunner could operate the weapon once more.
Aiming the main gun was done via the periscopic ‘Sight, No. 10 Mk.1’ which emerged from the roof of the turret. It utilized two views with two eyepieces. One of these was a unity sight which granted an unmagnified field of vision. Integral in this view is a marked circle, this circle would show the view available to the eyepiece of the primary sight. The primary sight eyepiece was installed below the eyepiece for the unity. The sight had x6 magnification.
The 24.3 foot (7.4 meter), 2.9-ton (3 tonne) L1A2 of ‘William’ the Conqueror, IOW. Photo: Author’s own
Just two types of ammunition were carried by the Conqueror in a combat loadout, these being Armor Piercing Discarding Sabot (APDS) and High-Explosive Squash Head (HESH). Both ammunition types were ‘two-stage’, meaning the shell was loaded separately of the propellent. The gun was loaded manually by the loader. It was not the easiest of tasks as the projectiles were heavy and cumbersome. The APDS projectile weighed in at 21.4 pounds (9.7 kg) while the HESH shell weighed in at 35.3 pounds (16 kg). The gargantuan brass propellent cases were equally hefty, with the APDS’ case weighing in at 60.9 pounds (27.6 kg), and the HESH’s weighing in at 41.5 pounds (18.8 kg). The APDS round had a muzzle velocity of approximately 4,700 fps (1,433 m/s) and could penetrate up to 15.3 inches (390 mm) of flat steel armor – or 120 mm (4.7 in) of 55-degree angled steel armor – at 1,000 yards (914 meters). The HESH projectiles had the advantage of consistent effectiveness regardless of the target range. The shell, which had a velocity of 2,500 fps (762 m/s), created effective spalling on armour of up to 4.7 inches (120 mm) thick, angled at 60 degrees. It also served as a dual-use round just as capable of engaging enemy armor as for use as a high-explosive round against buildings, enemy defensive positions, or soft-skinned targets. Between 35 and 37 rounds were carried, divided between the ammunition types.
Ammunition of the Conqueror: (L to R) Armor Piercing Discarding Sabot (APDS), High-Explosive Squash Head (HESH), propellent case. Photos: Bob Griffin
Loathing Loading
The Conqueror’s loader had one of the hardest tasks. He had to load the 20-pound projectile and up to 50-pound propellant case by hand. This arduous task was made worse by an initial War Office (WO) requirement that the loader be able to load 4 rounds in 1 minute, 16 rounds in 5 minutes, and be able to expel all rounds in 55 minutes. Tests performed at the Lulworth Ranges in Dorset soon confirmed that this was an unreasonable demand. The story goes that a special training course aimed at maximising loading speed was arranged for personnel set to become Conqueror loaders. This cannot be confirmed, however.
Men of the 11th Hussars (Prince Albert’s Own) restock their tank, 1962. This photo provides a sense of the scales involved with the Conqueror. We can see the man on the fender loading an APDS round into the turret, followed by the man on the ground who is waiting to pass up a propellant case. All the men are visibly dwarfed by the size of the Conqueror. Photo: Tankograd Publishing, HorsePower Museum.
The War Office also looked into mechanical methods of assisting the loader in his tasks. The Army contracted Mullins Ltd., a company that specialised in the design and manufacture of cigarette dispensers. They developed two devices. One was a hydraulic rammer that would ram all of the ammunition components into the breech once the loader had placed them onto a tray behind it. The other was an automatic ejection system. The idea behind this was that it would stop the turret from being overtaken by the large propellent cases when they were ejected. It would also save the gunner from having to dispose of them manually by throwing them out of a turret hatch. The War Office opted to serialise the ‘Ejection Gear’ over the rammer, installing it on all Conquerors. The rammer was rejected as it was found that a well-trained loader could outrun the rammer by 1 second.
The ejection gear was a good concept, not least for the sake of crew safety, as it removed a source of fumes and embers from the crew compartment. However, as it turned out, the ejection gear was fraught with problems that were never fully resolved during the Conqueror’s time in service. The system came into action after the gun was fired. When the spent propellant case was ejected, it fell down a channel until it was stood vertically on a platform, engaging a micro switch. The platform would then carry the shell up a long chute and out of the tank via an armored door towards the rear of the right side of the turret. The system would then reset in time to receive the next casing, with the whole process taking around 5 seconds. This was when the gear worked as intended, something of a rarity as the following quotes from Conqueror veterans describe:
“I hated the ejection gear, it had a mind of its own. The ejected case should have gone up a track and out of a hatch at the back of the turret but, occasionally, it came loose and ended up on top of the breach. Once there it caused havoc and the unlucky loader – me – would have to retrieve it risking being trapped between the breach and the turret roof!”
– ex-Conqueror Loader Allen Whittaker, 17th/21st Lancers, 1965 – 1987.
“Often on schemes [exercise] we broke down with the gear. On one occasion, all 3 tanks in my platoon were broken down in what was known as ‘Conqueror wood’, an area on the Brilon Training Area in Germany.”
– ex-Conqueror Loader Peter Dobson, 3rd Royal Tank Regiment, 1960s.
There was a manual override to the powered system that could be used in the event of one of these all-to-common breakages. This consisted of a hand crank that was operated by the commander that would perform the role of the powered system. It was not an enjoyable task for the commander as – even empty – the shell lift was heavy. Manually, the process of cranking a spent case out of the turret could take over 5 minutes.
Left, this internal diagram shows the chute of the ejection gear (circled). Right, the armored door that the shell was ejected through. Images: David Lister & Jan Wim Hasselman, respectively
Other Systems
A separate smaller engine in the engine bay was used to operate a generator that provided the tank with electrical power – necessary for the turret’s power traverse, radio, and, most importantly, the tea maker (aka the ‘Boiling Vessel’ or ‘BV’) – whether the main engine was on or off. The 29 hp, 4 cylinder, water-cooled petrol engine produced 350 amps at 28.5 volts.
Various radio sets were equipped on the Conqueror. These included the ‘Wireless Set No. 19 Mk.3’, ‘Wireless Set No. C12’, ‘Wireless Set No. 88 Type A AFV (VHF)’, or ‘Wireless Set No. 31 AFV (VHF). On vehicles built later in the production run, a number of these were replaced by such units as the ‘Wireless Set No. A41’, ‘Wireless Set No. C42’, or ‘Wireless Set No. B47’. The radio was installed on the turret wall behind the loader’s station.
The Loader was also responsible for the most important feature of a British tank, the ‘tea maker’. Otherwise known as the ‘Boiling Vessel’ or ‘BV’, this was a hot water boiler that was used not only to make tea, but also to heat rations. This is a feature that continues to be present on most tanks today. In the Conqueror, it was located on the right of the hull, behind the driver. It would appear that not all Conqueror’s were equipped with BVs, at least one account from an ex-crewman states that they were issued with the older – and smokier – ‘Stove No. 2’ Petrol Cook Set instead.
Service
Conqueror finally entered service in 1955, with the last vehicles being produced in 1958. Its role on the battlefield was to support its allies, rather than strike out on its own. It was designed to destroy enemy tanks from afar, covering the advance of the lighter FV4007 Centurion. In offensive operations, Conquerors would be placed in overwatch positions and fire over the heads of the main force as it advanced. In defensive operations, Conquerors would again take an overwatch role, but this time from key strategic positions to meet an advancing enemy.
The majority of FV214s went straight to the West Germany (Federal Republic of Germany – FRG) based units of the British Army Of the Rhine (BAOR). A small number of vehicles were retained in the UK for training and development, and to keep as donor vehicles for spare parts. Right from the start of its operational life, it was clear that the sheer size of the Conqueror was going to cause problems. The initial delivery of tanks – consisting of 4 Conquerors – landed at Hamburg Docks in mid-1955. From there, they were to be taken to Hohne on the back of Antar tank transporters. What should have been an approximately 2-hour, 90 mile (146 km) trip instead took 12 ½-hours. This was largely due to the combined mass of the tank and the Antar, a combined weight of 120 tons (122 tonnes). No bridge would take this weight, so every time the convoy came to one, the Conqueror’s had to be dismounted. Each vehicle would then be driven across separately.
Conqueror Mk.2 on the back of an Antar Tank Transporter. This is how the tanks were moved to and from training areas in West Germany. Photo: Conqueror Appreciation Society, Facebook
At this time of the FV214s adoption, armored regiments were equipped with various marks of the Centurion. Generally, 9 Conquerors were issued to each regiment, although this did occasionally differ. Regiments would deploy their Conquerors in different manners, the majority placing them in troops of 3, with one ‘heavy troop’ to one armored squadron. Others placed them into single ‘heavy squadrons’, while some integrated them into mixed squadrons of 3 Centurions to 1 Conqueror.
1958 almost saw the premature end of the Conqueror. That year, 5 tanks succame to engine failure in quick succession. Two failed due to metal filings found in the oil system which had ground against bearings and other moving parts. Two others failed due to dust contamination, while one failed due to poor engine construction. Thankfully, the issues were fixed. The metal filings originated at the factory where engines were not being kept clean during construction. The solution was changing oil filters every 100 miles. The dust issue came from the fact that the air intakes on Conqueor were near the tracks, so debris shaken off them would sucked into the system. Following this, air filters were cleaned far more regularly.
Brothers in Arms: A Centurion Mk.3 alongside a Conqueror Mk.1. Photo: Profile Publications
Mobility-wise, and contrary to a popular perception of heavy tanks as being slow and somewhat hapless, the Conqueror performed better than most at the time had expected. On road marches, the tank was able to keep up with the smaller Centurion, despite being around 15 tons heavier. On rough ground, it was found that the Conqueror was less likely to become bogged down, largely due to its wider tracks. Thanks to its metal-on-metal running gear, it was also very rare for the Conqueror to throw its tracks of boggy ground – a much more common occurrence on the Centurion due to the rubber on the wheels flexing away from the track’s guide horns. The Centurion did have the advantage on softer ground as it was lighter, but if it was driven to the limit, the Conqueror was able to keep up.
Conqueror’s were operated by the following units in the BAOR: The 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 7th (The Desert Rats), and 8th Royal Tank Regiment (RTR), 9th Queen’s Royal Lancers, 16/5th Queen’s Royal Lancers, 17/21st Lancers, 9th/12th Royal Lancers (Prince of Wales’), 3rd Kings Own Hussars, The Queen’s Own Hussars, 8th King’s Royal Irish Hussars, 10th Royal Hussars (Prince of Wales’ Own), 11th Hussars (Prince Albert’s Own), The Queen’s Royal Irish Hussars, 14/20th King’s Hussars, 13/18th Royal Hussars (Queen Mary’s Own), 4/7th Royal Dragoon Guards, 5th Royal Inniskilling Dragoon Guards, 3rd Carabiniers (Prince of Wales’ Dragoon Guards), and the Royal Scots Greys (2nd Dragoons).
A Conqueror Mk.2 of the 17/21st Lancers under guard by troopers in full dress uniform. The turret marking indicates that this tank is from ‘No. 1 Troop, A Squadron’. The markings on the front of the hull are (from left to right) the bridge classification (80), the vehicle’s registration number, the formation sign of the 4th Guards Brigade (atop the glacis) and finally the unit badge. Photo: Profile Publications
One of the first units to receive the Conqueror was the 4/7th Royal Dragoon Guards based at Fallingbostel, West Germany. This unit had to adapt to the size of the Conqueror. The 4/7th was based in a Second World War-era ex-German Army base, complete with tank hangars. The problem was the hangars were built for smaller tanks – such as the Panzer IV – not something the size of the FV214. At a squeeze, the tanks would fit in the pens, but the 24-foot (7.3 meter) long gun would be left protruding out of the doors. Unable to close them, the crews cut squares out of the doors so they would shut (this led to the rather comical image below). The gun’s length also effected how the tank crossed rough terrain. If the tank descended a steep incline, there was a danger that the muzzle could get driven into the ground – filling it with mud or causing damage in the process. To overcome this, the turret had to be traversed to the rear.
The 4 barrels of the 4/7th Dragoon Guards’ Conquerors protruding from the hangars. Photo: Crowood Press
Unfortunately, mechanical faults plagued the Conqueror throughout its service life. Constant engine breakdowns and recurring fuel leaks would often keep tanks off the front line. Continuous malfunctions of the ejection gear also brought combat effectiveness of the tank into question as it greatly reduced the vehicle’s rate-of-fire. The sheer size of the vehicle also caused numerous logistical and tactical problems. Small country roads were all but destroyed due to the weight of the vehicle, coupled with its bare manganese-steel tracks. Country bridges were also unable to accommodate the vehicle, causing delays in deployment. The tank’s long gun also caused problems if the tank had to operate in constricted locations such as small villages or heavily wooded areas. Its size also caused problems when it came to placing the vehicles under shelter when bivouacking or for maintenance.
While of course no Conqueror’s were ever lost to ‘enemy action’ but many did succumb to mechanical and accidental destruction. One such instance is recalled by ex-REME engineer and Conqueror ARV crew member, Geoff Wright:
“I remember one of ours catching fire. The fire was caused by a round not being properly secured in the rack. It got trapped when the turret traversed and burst into flames. The tank cooked-off for 24 hours and it took 3 days before it was cool enough for it to be recovered.”
– Geoff Wright, ex-REME Light Aid Detatchment (LAD), 1960s.
Conquerors of the 4/7th Royal Dragoon Guards passing through a German village. The parked VW Beetle provides a good sense of scale. Photo: Conqueror Appreciation Society, Facebook.
In 1959, the Conqueror’s fate was sealed. That year, Royal Ordnance had begun the final tests of the famous 105 mm L7 tank gun. It was found that, ballistically, the performance of the smaller 105mm almost matched that of the larger L1 120 mm gun of the Conqueror. This new 105 mm was set to be mounted in all future models of the Centurion. This simple act made Conqueror obsolete almost overnight. The vehicle, however, remained in service until 1966, when the final nail in the coffin was hammered home; the arrival of the Chieftain. The FV4201 Chieftain was leaps and bounds ahead of the Conqueror technologically and also featured a new, even more powerful L11 120 mm gun. So, after just 11 years of service, the Conqueror was retired, just 8 years after the last Conqueror rolled off the assembly line.
The Conqueror Armoured Recovery Vehicle (ARV) was the only variant of the FV214 gun tank to reach production and service. Weighing in at 65 tons (66 tonnes), the Conqueror outweighed the British Army’s existing recovery vehicles. As such, in 1959, a recovery vehicle based on the Conqueror itself was developed. This would be designated as the FV219 Conqueror ARV Mk.1. In 1960, the second incarnation followed as the FV222 Conqueror ARV Mk.2. Just 8 Mk.1s were built before production shifted to the FV222. Twenty of these were built.
Left, the FV219 Conqueror Mk.1. Right, the FV222 Conqueror Mk.2. Photos: Tankograd Publishing
The two ARVs differ in appearance (the Mk.1 featured a small superstructure in place of the turret whereas the Mk.2 featured a larger structure and sloping glacis plate at the front) but their equipment was identical. Both vehicles carried 2 x tie-bars, a wooden bumper/buffer bar, 2 x heavy-duty single-sheave snatch blocks, and 3 x steel cables – 1 x 98 foot (30-meter), 2 x 15 foot (4.5 meter).
While the FV214 gun tank was retired in 1966, the ARV continued to serve after this. Although it was officially replaced in service by the FV4006 Centurion ARV (a similar vehicle, just built on the Centurion hull) which entered service in the early 1960s, a few were retained in operation in various locations. Records show that at least one Conqueror ARV was still in operation in Germany in the 1990s. One is also reported to have been in operation at the Amphibious Experimental Establishment (also known as ‘AXE’) at Instow in North Devon. It was used for beach tank recovery practice.
An FV222 ARV Mk.2 tows a Mk.2 Conqueror in Germany, 1960s. Photo: Tankograd Publishing
Turbine Test Vehicle
Between 1954 and 1956, a petrol-operated turbine engine was tested in the turretless hull of a Conqueror. When it was publicly unveiled in September 1954, the vehicle made history as it was the first armored vehicle in the world to be propelled by a turbine engine. It was not until much later in the 20th Century, with the appearance of the Swedish Strv 103, American M1 Abrams and Soviet T-80, that this engine type would be seen in a production vehicle.
Rear view of the Turbine Test Vehicle. Photo: FineArtsAmerica
The engine was designed and built by the firm of C. A. Parsons Ltd., based in Newcastle upon Tyne, and was tested by the Fighting Vehicles Research and Development Establishment (FVRDE). Turbine engines were investigated as a means of providing an armored vehicle with a more powerful engine without increasing the vehicle’s weight. Turbine engines are generally made of lighter materials than traditional combustion engines. A turbine engine operates thusly: In an open cycle, a rotary compressor mixes air with combusting fuel. The expanding air is forced over power output, in this case, a turbine, which provides rotation to the drive shaft.
In FVRDE tests, it was found the engine could develop 1,000 hp at 6,500 rpm. Although a general success, the project ended in 1956, with the last official report on it being filed in 1955.
However, the vehicle was not scrapped. Later, it found use as a Dynamometer Vehicle, used to measure engine power. A welded superstructure was placed atop the hull, with a large cab placed at the front and was painted bright yellow. Later still, it found use at The Tank Museum, Bovington as a commentary box in their arena. For this, an additional cab was fitted atop the Dynamometer cab. Sadly, despite the vehicle being one of a kind and a unique piece of tank history, the vehicle was later sent to the scrapper by the Museum.
Left, the Turbine vehicle in its secondary use as a Dynamometer Vehicle. Right, its last use as a commentary box at The Tank Museum, Bovington. Photos: Crowood Press, Conqueror Appreciation Society, Facebook, respectively
Shaped Charge Trial Vehicle
In recent years, a number of myths have been propagated over this variant, with two large games companies (Wargaming and Gaijin, makers of World of Tanks and War Thunder, respectively) labeling it as a ‘Super Conqueror’. No such name was ever used. The tank was, in fact, a mere static test vehicle, a guinea pig that was pummeled by High-Explosive Anti-Tank (HEAT) and High-Explosive Squash Head (HESH) ammunition to test their effects on armored vehicles. For this, the vehicle was covered with additional 0.5 – 1.1 inch (14 – 30 mm) armor plates over its bow and turret cheeks.
The test vehicle in tests. Note the additional armor plates. Photo: themodellingnews
The vehicle was constructed from spare parts. The tests started in 1957. Ammunition from the 183mm Gun of the FV4005, the 165mm gun of the FV3903 Churchill AVRE, Malkara missiles and even prototype versions of the American T42 ‘Dart’ HEAT shell were tested against the armor. Internally, the vehicle was fully stocked with a standard APDS and HESH ammunition loadout. The crew positions were filled with life-size dummies or a more grisly alternative; live rabbits.
Conclusion
For the British Army, the Conqueror was the last of its kind, and is somewhat of a forgotten giant in armored vehicle history, despite the power of 120mm main gun and the veritable slew of features that were, at the time, leading edge. Just a couple of years after it entered service, most of the world’s major powers realized that the day of the heavy tank had passed and that the Main Battle Tank (MBT) would dominate the battlefields of the future. With the British Army investing in the Conqueror’s replacement – the FV4201 Chieftain – the Conqueror was retired, never having got the chance to combat its rival, the IS-3, or any other opposing tank for that matter.
By this time, it was also found that the fear that the USSR’s IS-3 inspired in the Western Allies in 1945 was largely overblown. It was not produced anywhere near the numbers feared and itself did not last long in frontline service. It would come to face combat in the Middle East during the Six-Day War of 1967, where its failings were made apparent to the public.
Old enemies. An IS-3M alongside a Mk. 2 Conqueror on display at Imperial War Museum, Duxford, in the late 1980s. (AI upscaled) Photo: Simon Dunston
Upon retirement, the majority of Conqueror’s went straight to gunnery ranges across the United Kingdom and West Germany. A number of gutted, rusted hulks still remain on ranges such as Kirkcudbright and Stanford (UK) and Haltern (Germany). Unfortunately – of the approximately 180 vehicles built – only a handful remain intact. In the UK, examples can be found at The Tank Museum, Bovington, and the Wight Military & Heritage Museum, Isle of Wight. An example can also be found at Musée des blindés, Saumur, and at Patriot Park, Moscow. Other examples of varying conditions can be found dotted across the world.
Left, Conqueror Mk.1 at The Tank Museum, Bovington. Right, Conqueror Mk.1 at Musée des blindés, Saumur. Photos: The Tank Museum & Mechtraveller, respectively
An article by Mark Nash, assisted by David Lister & Andrew Hills.
FV214 Conqueror Mk.2. Weighing in at 65 tons (66 tonnes), the Conqueror is worthy of its name. Measuring 25 feet (7.62 meters) long – not including the gun, 13.1 feet (3.99 meters) wide and 11 feet (3.35 meters) tall, the FV214 cut an imposing figure. It was one of the largest and heaviest tanks ever to serve with the British Army.
FV214 Conqueror Mk.2 with turret fully traversed. The powerful, 2.9 ton (3 tonne), 24.3 foot (7.4 meter) long Ordnance QF 120 mm Tank L1A2 Gun is resting in the travel lock. Note the hatch in the turret bustle. This was where shells ejected by the troublesome Mollins gear were jettisoned from the tank.
These illustrations were produced by Ardhya Anargha, funded by our Patreon Campaign
Specifications (Conqueror Mk.2)
Dimensions (L-W-H)
25 feet (without gun) x 13.1 feet x 11 feet (7.62 x 3.99 x 3.35 meters)
Total weight, battle ready
65 tons (66 tonnes)
Crew
4 (Driver, commander, gunner, loader)
Propulsion
Rolls-Royce Meteor M120 810 hp (604 kW)
Suspension
Hortsmann
Speed (road)
22 mph (35 kph)
Range
100 mi (164 km)
Armament
Ordnance Quick-Firing (QF) 120 mm Tank L1A2 Gun
Sec. 2x L3A1/Browning M1919A4 .30 Cal (7.62mm) Machine Guns
Armor
Hull
Front (Upper Glacis): 4.7 – 5.1 in (120 – 130 mm) @ 61.5 degrees
Front (Lower Glacis): 3 in (77 mm) @ 45 degrees
Sides & Roof: 2 in (51 mm) + 0.2 in (6 mm) ‘Bazooka Plates’
Floor: 0.7 in (20 mm) + 0.3 in (10 mm) ‘Mine Plate’
Turret
Face: 9.4 – 13.3 in (240 – 340 mm) @ 60 degrees.
Mantlet: 9.4 in (239 mm)
Sides: 3.5 inches (89 mm)
Roof & Rear: 2 inches (51 mm)
The brain-child of the famous Professor Ferdinand Porsche, the Landwehr Zug, literally meaning “Land Train”, was one of the first ever hybrid power vehicles. This heavy haulage machine was designed to transport heavy equipment to troops in the field, powered by both diesel and electrocortical drives. There were three versions, each bigger and more powerful than the last. The A-Zug, B-Zug, and C-Zug. They were produced by Austro-Diamler Generator Wagon.
These vehicles entered use in 1912 but would go on to serve through the First and Second World Wars.
The A-Zug with a full trailer load demonstrating how tightly it can curl – Photo: porscheforever.hu
Porsche’s Hybrid
Porsche developed his diesel/electric engine in 1900. The first vehicle equipped with this drive was his Semper Vivus road car. It was powered by two gasoline engines that were connected to generators. This formed a charging unit that provided the batteries and motors mounted in the wheel hubs with power. The generators also served as the starter. The vehicle could drive a long distance on electric power alone until the combustion engines were used to charge the batteries. This technology would be used again for the Landwehr Zug, minus the batteries.
The Zug
The assembly of the vehicle started with a small tractor at the head of the train. It held a 100 hp gasoline engine that powered a generator. This provided current to the tractor’s rear axle motors, propelling the vehicle. With the help of a long cable that spanned the length of the train, this generator also provided power to the wheel-mounted motors of the individual carts. This, of course, meant the trailers were self-propelled and not towed, meaning the vehicle was able to traverse the harshest of road conditions with relative ease. Tangled mountain side roads were no issue either as the individually powered carts could handle the tightest serpentine movements.
This power cable also allowed a relatively heavy vehicle to cross weak or temporary bridges. The tractor would go across on its own, the carts would then propel themselves over the bridge one by one. With a small exchange of wheels, the Land Train could become a regular train, able to run on rails.
The Zug running on rails. Note the open engine compartment.Another Landwehr Zug in Austria in 1913. Photo: Schiffer Publishing
Larger Zugs
With the A-Zug fulfilling the basic rolls, there was a need for a more powerful vehicle. This gave rise to the B and C-Zug. The B-Zug was more powerful than the previous vehicle, able to transport heavier loads such as light cannons and their heavier ammunition supply. More information on this vehicle is not known, unfortunately.
The C-Zug was the largest of the Landwehr-Zugs and was known as the Artilleriegeneratorwagon. It was designed to make Škoda’s 380 mm (15 in) and 420 mm (16.5 in) siege mortars transportable. For this, the tractor’s generators were powered by a 150 hp gasoline engine. This tractor pulled a single trailer with 8 powered wheels. Fully loaded, this train could weigh up to 38 tons, yet it could still reach the respectable speed of 24 km/h (12.5 mph). This particular vehicle would stay in service into the Second World War.
The largest of the vehicles, the C-Zug or “Artilleriegeneratorwagon”, hauling a large Škoda mortar. This type went on to be used into the Second World War.
Legacy
Porsche would continue to make use of his hybrid design. It would prove an integral part of his later tank designs. This includes the VK 30.01 (P) Medium Tank, the VK 45.01 (P) otherwise known as the Tiger (P) and, later, his crowning glory, the infamous Maus super-heavy tank. The power-sharing system would also be transplanted into these vehicles.
The VK 30.01 (P) on the right and the VK 45.01 (P) on the left practicing the power-share system – Photo: Schiffer Publishing
The VK 30.01 (P) on the right and the VK 45.01 (P) on the left practicing the power-share system – Photo: Schiffer Publishing
The VK 30.01 (P) on the right and the VK 45.01 (P) on the left practicing the power-share system – Photo: Schiffer Publishing
To the “Average Joe”, Porsche is simply known as a luxury sports car producing company. What is much less known is how important one of his earliest developments is. The petrol-electric hybrid is seen as the next step in the life of the combustion engine, but even today, it is still a largely unexplored and sparsely used technology. Only recently has worked really begun again on this type of engine, with vehicles like the Toyota Prius or BMW i8 fitted with this low emission alternative.
Illustration of the Landwehr Zug, produced by Yuvnashva Sharma, funded by our Patreon campaign.
Kingdom of Norway (1948-1953)
Medium Tank – 61 Operated
Assault Gun – 10 Operated
Norway was left battered and bruised by a 5-year long German occupation (April 1940 – May 1945) that only ended with the capitulation of German forces at the end of the Second World War in Europe. Retreating German forces left a large quantity of equipment in their wake. Rifles, machine guns, anti-tank guns, tools, and even some aircraft were left behind and claimed by the now free and rebuilding Norwegian Military (Forsvaret, Eng: “The Defence”). Many armored vehicles were also left behind, mostly consisting of various types of the Panzerkampfwagen III medium tanks (both long-barrelled 50 mm and short-barreled 75 mm gun-armed models) and a few Sturmgeschütz III assault guns.
Eager to protect their newfound freedom, the Forsvaret adopted these surplus vehicles. They would sit in storage for a few years until 1948 , when the Norwegian Military – preparing for a possible Soviet invasion – devised a defensive plan for Norway’s strategic airfields. Not wanting to relegate their small M24 Chaffee force to guard duty, the Army activated the obsolete Panzers.
The ex-Wehrmacht Panzers and StuGs, which were renamed Stridsvogn KW-III and Stormkanon KW-III respectively, filled this role until the early 1950s, when they started to be replaced by an increasing number of M24 Chaffees donated by the United States.
A Stormkanon KW-III (StuG III) follows a Stridsvogn KW-III (Panzer III). Bardufoss, 1951. Photo: Pz III in Norway, Facebook
The Vehicles
Stridsvogn KW-III (Panzer III)
The Panzerkampfwagen III (Sd.Kfz. 141) medium tank was developed in the mid-1930s and was designed to fight enemy tanks alongside its larger brother, the Panzer IV, which was originally intended to support the Panzer III and friendly infantry.
The Panzer III had very good mobility for its time. It was powered by a 12-cylinder Maybach HL 120 TRM 300 PS, producing 296 hp. This propelled the 23-tonne vehicle to a top speed of 40 km/h (25 mph). A running gear consisting of 6-road wheels per side supported the tank’s weight. The road wheels were attached to a torsion bar suspension. The drive sprocket was at the front, while the idler was at the rear. The return of the track was supported by 3-rollers.
The tank was operated by a 5-man crew consisting of a Commander, Gunner, and Loader in the turret, with the Driver and Radio Operator/Bow Machine Gunner in the hull.
Two main types of Panzer III were left behind and reused by the Norwegians. These were both later model Panzers, being the Ausführung N and mix of Ausführung J, L, & Ms. The N was the last model of Panzer III. Armed with a short 7.5 cm KwK 37 L/24 gun, it was intended to act as an infantry support vehicle firing mostly High-Explosive (HE) shells. It could also fire Armor Piercing (AP), High-Explosive Anti-Tank (HEAT) and Smoke shells. The Ausf. J, L, and Ms were all armed with the 5 cm KwK 39 L/60. This was a tank-killing gun, and could penetrate up to 130 mm (5.11 in) of armor firing an Armor-Piercing Composite Rigid (APCR) shell. All of these variants were equipped with a coaxial and bow-mounted 7.92 mm MG 34 machine gun.
As later model Panzer IIIs, the majority of the tanks were equipped with an add-on armor kit known as ‘Vorpanzer’. This consisted of armor plates being added on the upper hull plate and gun mantlet. This boosted the original armor thickness of 15 mm to 50 mm. A few of the vehicles were also equipped with Schürzen add-on armor on the turret and hull sides.
Stridsvogn KW-III (Pz.Kpfw. III Ausf. N) in training at the Trandum Tank School, southeast Norway. Photo: Pz III IN Norway, Facebook
Stormkanon KW-III (StuG III)
The Sturmgeschütz were a series of assault guns that found a successful role as tank destroyers. The StuG IIIs were based on the chassis of the Panzerkampfwagen III medium tank. The Panzer III’s turret and superstructure were removed from the hull and were replaced with an armored casemate. Armor on the vehicle was 16 to 80 mm (.62 to 3.15 in) thick.
The StuG was powered by the same 12-cylinder Maybach HL 120 TRM as the Panzer III, which propelled the 24-tonne (26 ton) vehicle to 25 mph (40 km/h). The StuG was manned by a crew of 4, consisting of a Commander, Gunner, Loader, and Driver.
At least 2 types of StuG III were reused by the Norwegians. These were the Ausführung F/8 and the Ausführung G. There were only minor differences between the two, with the Ausf. G being based on Panzer III Ausf. M hull with a redesigned (and widened) superstructure. Both StuGs were armed with the 7.5 cm StuK 40 L/48 (an anti-tank gun derived from the PaK 40). This was a powerful anti-tank gun, with a maximum penetration of 176 mm (6.9 in) firing an APCR shell.
The Crew of a Stormkanon KW-III (StuG III). Date and Location unknown. Photo: Pz III in Norway, Facebook
Origin
The first Panzer IIIs to see deployment in Norway were from the Panzer-Abteilung z.b.V. 40. This unit had been originally created for the invasion of Norway and was originally equipped with Panzer I, Panzer II, and Neubaufahrzeug tanks. However, during the invasion, it lost several tanks during the fighting against the Norwegian and British forces, including multiple Panzer Is and one of the Neubaufahrzeugs. To replace these losses, the last five production Panzer III Ausf. Ds were sent from Germany. Later on, the unit was further reinforced with around 15 more Panzer IIIs of Ausf. G and Ausf. H variety. These tanks arrived after the Invasion of Norway and didn’t partake in any fighting. They did, however, get their baptism of fire in June 1941 when the Pz.Abt.z.b.V. 40 was sent to secure the Finnish Lapland front as the Continuation War began with German and Finnish Forces fighting against the Soviets.
The Pz.Abt did not leave Finland until December of 1942, when they were re-deployed in Norway, leaving some of their obsolete equipment behind. Amongst other things, 16 Panzer Is and the three remaining Panzer III Ausf. Ds were left in Finland for the newly formed Panzer-kompanie 40 to use. Pz.Abt. z.b.V. 40 itself saw no further action and was disbanded on June 10th, 1943. It is then believed that its remaining equipment and personnel were passed on to the 25th Panzer Division (Wehrmacht) which was, at the time, based in Oslo.
Two Panzer IIIs prepare to cross a river via pontoon in Norway. Exact date and location unknown. Photo: historyofwar
The 25th Panzer Division had originally been formed as the “Schützenverband Oslo”. Early on, it operated mainly captured French Somua S35 and Hotchkiss H35 tanks but later received Panzer III and IV tanks as well as a few StuG III assault guns. Its original intended purpose was to serve as a potential rapid response force for the invasion of Sweden. However, as the war with the Soviet Union dragged on, it was decided that most of the 25th Panzer division would depart from Norway in the fall of 1943 and be moved to the Eastern Front. Those parts of the 25th that would stay in Norway would form a new unit called the “Panzer Division Norway ”. This arrangement, however, would not last for long as, in May 1944, it was transferred to Denmark in order to reinforce the 25th Pz. division. What remained in Norway was briefly reorganized into the Panzerabteilung Norwegen. This however, would also not last long as the unit again went through several restructurings before finally ending up as the Panzerbrigade Norwegen. The unit remained in this form until the end of the war. At the moment of its surrender to the British forces in May 1945, it had 25 Panzer IIIs with the 5 cm KwK 39, 36 Panzer III Ausf. Ns, and 10 StuG III assault guns of Ausf. F/8 and Ausf.G variety. How most of these tanks ended up in Norway is, however, a bit of a mystery.
Fahrgestell Numbers
Fahrgestell Numbers – meaning chassis numbers – help us track the unique history of German vehicles. Thanks to these, we know the specific history of 4 Panzer IIIs, as they survive today in Norway. These are Fahrgestell 66158, 73651, 74352 and 76219. 66158 was an Ausf. H, built by Motorenwerke Augsburg Nuremberg (MAN) in 1941 and would have been equipped with the short 5 cm KwK 39 L/42 gun. At some point, however, its turret was replaced with an Ausf. N or M turret with the short 75 mm. 73651 is an Ausf. J, originally built by Henschel und Sohn in May, 1941 before being upgraded. 74352 had an interesting history. It served with the infamous SS Division “Das Reich” between 1942 and 1943 in France and on the Eastern Front. Lastly, 76219 was built by MAN in 1943. It was part of one of the first batches of Ausf. Ms produced and was deployed by Panzer-Grenadier Division “Grossdeutschland” on the Eastern Front in 1943. The number 76149 is also recorded in relation to one of the Pz.Kpfw III, Fgst.Nr 73651. This has led to some confusion as 76149 is actually one of the StuGs, an Ausführung G.
Thanks to the Fahrgestell numbers, this information is known to us, but quite how these things ended up in Norway by the war’s end is currently a mystery. After 1943, many of these units were re-equipped with more powerful and newer tanks, so it is possible that these tanks were sent to Norway as it was a less crucial part of Germany’s war effort, ergo, units stationed there were not in need of the latest armored vehicles. It is also possible that these vehicles were damaged during fighting, sent back to Germany for capital repair and refurbishment and then allocated to quieter sectors. This would explain the fact that some of the known vehicles are older models that had been upgraded.
A Panzer III Ausf. J, L, or M is driven through Akershus to a collection point for surrendered German equipment, May 1945. Photo: digitalmuseum.no
The origin of the StuGs is less well documented, unfortunately. It is unknown how many of the 10 StuGs remained operable, and what their origins were. At least 4 StuG III Ausf. F/8s were operated in Norway during the War by Panzerjäger-Abteilungen 14, 14th Luftwaffen-Felddivision, so this may be where at least 4 came from. There were at least two Ausf. Gs handed over, but their origins are unknown.
Three of the possible 4 StuG III Ausf. F/8s of Pz.Jag.Abt 14 in Norway, 1944-45. Photo: PeKo Publishing
Adoption by Norway
The Panzers that were adopted into the Norwegian Army were of varying quality, some of them had even been sabotaged by the Allies. Like the majority of Panzer IIIs that were still in service at war’s end, many of them were upgraded older models, having been upgunned or up-armored. Many were also equipped with Schürzen armor and/or Zimmerit anti-magnetic mine paste. A vast majority of them were handed over as the Germans surrendered. For example, at least 15 Panzer IIIs of various types were handed over with the surrender of Panzer-Brigade “Norwegen” at Trandum, southeast Norway, in May 1945.
The surrender of Panzer-Brigade “Norwegen” in Trandum, May 1945. On the left, the nearest of the two officers in the berets is the Lieutenant Colonel of the British army O.J. O’Conner, who accepted the surrender of the Nazis. Photo & Caption: albumwar2.com
With the mysterious origin of the StuG, it is unclear as to what condition the vehicles were in upon adoption. Assuming 4 Ausf. F/8s came from Pz.Jg.Abt 14, and taking into account the two known Ausf. Gs, that accounts for 6 StuGs. The stories of the 4 outstanding vehicles are unknown also, though, as with the Panzers, it is possible that these were simply kept as donors for spare parts.
Norsk Service
With the end of the Second World War, Norway was once again facing the possibility of invasion, this time from the Soviet Union with which it shared a northern border. In 1945, Norway began to receive aid under the US-led ‘MAP’. The ‘Military Aid Program’ benefited the war-ravaged countries of the Second World War by providing them the means to rebuild their military and defenses. In the case of Norway, this meant the delivery of the M24 Chaffee light tank, starting in 1946. The Chaffee would give the military their first taste of operating a relatively modern armored vehicle, having not had a tank since the L-120 ‘Rikstanken’ of the late 1930s.
A Norwegian Army Chaffee on maneuvers in the 1950s. Photo: Pinterest.
In 1948, with the perceived threat from the USSR, the Norwegian Military decided that it was crucial to keep its major air bases protected. It was decided that the most important of these were Gardermoen, Eggemoen, Sola, Fornebu, Værnes, and Bardufoss. To give an idea of the strategic importance of some of these airports, Gardermoen was located near Oslo, the capital of Norway, and was the main base of the Luftforsvaret (Royal Norwegian Airforce). Sola, located on Norway’s south-eastern coast, was an important link with the western Allies. Værnes, located roughly in central Norway, allowed transit to the North and South of the country.
It was decided that each airport would need its own unit consisting of armored vehicles and platoons of troops. At this time, however, Norway only had 17 Chaffees to its name, and the Army was not going to allocate its only ‘modern’ tank to guard duty. With the surplus Panzers in storage, it was decided that it was time for them to fill a role.
Only around 25 of the Panzers IIIs were in operable condition. The remaining 36 vehicles were mostly used as donors for spare parts. The best of these were themselves repaired and rearmed as best as possible. This work was carried out at Trandum, an Army base just north-east of Oslo. It is unknown how many of the Panzer IIIs with the short 7.5 cm KwK 37 guns were true Ausf. Ns. With the recycling of various parts from the stock of spare tanks, it is highly likely that many of them were artificial, being older models with later guns. This may also be true for some of the 5 cm KwK 39 L/60 gun-armed tanks. One detail to mention is that the Norwegian crews kept an MG42 7.62 mm machine gun mounted on the Commander’s cupola. Another unknown is if the tanks were re-painted, and if so, what color. At this time, the tanks would have remained in their original, Wehrmacht colors.
Three Stridsvogn KW-IIIs (Pz.Kpfw III Ausf. Ns) and one Stormkanon KW-III (StuG III) of a Norwegian Army Platoon in Bardufoss, 1949. The vehicle on the end is a Canadian-built CMP truck. Photo: Pz III in Norway, Facebook
Understanding fully that the Panzers and StuGs – now renamed the Stridsvogn KW-III and Stormkanon KW-III, respectively – were all but obsolete at this point, they were not going to field them as front line tanks, but rather keep them as defensive vehicles. The 25 Strv KW-IIIs and 10 Stkn KW-IIIs were divided between the newly created Airport Defense regiments. These regiments were raised between November and December 1948. They consisted of the 1st Dragoon Regiment (raised at Akershus) stationed at Sola and Fornebu, the 2nd Dragoon Regiment (raised at Oppland) assigned to Gardermoen and Eggemoen, and the 3rd Dragoon Regiment (raised at Trøndelag) assigned to Værnes and Bardufoss. The Norwegian army found the 5 cm gun of the Strvs to be lacking in tank-killing power, so each unit was equipped with at least one StKn KW-III or a towed 7.5 cm PaK 40 anti-tank gun. These guns also came from ex-Wehrmacht stocks adopted at the end of WW2. In October 1949, the Dragoon Regiments officially began to garrison the airports. The tank crews consisted of 22 men. Also at their disposal were motorcycles, Willys Jeeps, and Fordson ¾-ton (.68 tonne) trucks.
Also in 1949, Norway and the west became an even more united front. In April, the North Atlantic Treaty was signed, and NATO was born with Norway a founding member. As it shared a border with the USSR, it was seen as a crucial partner. Thanks to this, Norway began to receive more military aid, and the number of M24 Chaffees available to the Army vastly increased. By 1951, the entire KW-III force had been replaced by the 125 Chaffees Norway now had. By 1949, it would appear, the vehicles seem to have been painted in the same basic olive green used on the Chaffees. For winter, they were covered in a rough white-wash haphazardly lashed on by hand. This method of whitewashing lasted into the 1980s.
Left, an Strv KW-III (Pz.Kpfw.III Ausf. H/L amalgam) taking part in a Military Parade at Værnes, June 1950. Right, ‘Yellow 1’ at Bardufoss, 1951. Photo: Sverresborg Tröndelag Folkemuseum & Pz III in Norway, Facebook
With more Chaffees at their disposal, the Army began to phase out the recycled KW-IIIs. Both the Stridsvogn and the Stormkanon stayed on in service at Bardufoss as training vehicles for future Norwegian tankers. We know that Fgst.Nr 74352 – known as ‘Yellow 3’, Fgst.Nr 66158 – known as ‘Yellow 2’, and Fgst.Nr 76219 – known as ‘Yellow 1’ were among them*. The tanks served here until 1953, when the Army found a rather unique role for them to fill…
*These tanks are known by these names due to the fact that they had large yellow numbers painted on the sides of their turrets. The function of these numbers is unknown, however.
StKn KW-III (left) and Strv KW-III (right) at Bardufoss in 1951. Note the rough white-wash winter camouflage on the Stormkanon. ‘Yellow 2’ is one of the Panzers that was buried. Note the M.G. 42 machine gun. Photo: Pz III in Norway, Facebook
Fort Bjørnåsen
In 1953, the garrison of Bardufoss Airfield began to dig their 7.5 cm gun-armed Stridsvogns into static defensive positions connected to Fort Bjørnåsen, ‘Yellow 3’, ‘2’, and ‘1’ amongst them. This fort was located in the grounds of the airfield, and was a system of former Luftwaffe bunkers built during WW2. For the defense of the airfield, the Norwegians expanded upon it. The purpose of the bunker and the static tanks was to cover the airfield from as many angles as possible, should an enemy attempt to storm it. The priority target of the 7.5 cm guns would be any aircraft that attempted to land. The tanks were dug into pits roughly 4 meters (13.1 ft) wide, 5.5 meters (18 ft) long with a 3.25 meter ramp, and 1.5 meters (4.9 ft) deep, leaving just their turrets above the ground. A simple wooden shelter was constructed over them. Inside, the tanks were completely stripped. The engine, transmission, driveshaft and other components housed in the hull were completely removed. With all power-providing components removed, the turrets would have been traversed manually. A hole was cut into the hull of the tanks, to which a concrete tunnel was connected, which allowed direct access to the fort, provided a protected entranceway for the crew, and allowed a direct means of ammunition resupply.
Original diagram showing how the Strv KW-IIIs were to be buried. Photo: Pz III in Norway, Facebook
The KW-III turrets remained in place into the 1960s, by which time they became obsolete. The turrets were replaced with 40 mm Bofors anti-aircraft guns. For these, new concrete emplacements were built beside the buried tanks. A new hole was cut into the side of the buried tanks to connect them to the new structures to allow the use of the old ammunition tunnels. Earth was then built up around the new emplacements, completely burying the tanks.
Left: Diagram showing how the panzers were buried when they were replaced by 40mm Bofors. Right, note the cut out rear section on Fgst.Nr 74352 ‘Yellow 3’. Photo: Pz III in Norway, Facebook, edited by Konsta Pylkkönen
Rather frustratingly, despite extensive searches and inquiries by both writers, no pictures can currently be found of the Panzer turrets in situ during their time in operation.
Fate
The majority of the Stridsvogn and Stormkanon KW-III fleet was retired by 1953. Much of the fleet was scrapped with the rest ‘sentenced to death’ as targets on various ranges. The Strvs that were dug into the bunker complex at Fort Bjørnåsen were simply forgotten once they were buried.
From 1943, Finland, Norway’s eastern Scandinavian Neighbour, had operated a fleet of StuG IIIs. These were initially bought from Nazi Germany, but they remained in service post-war. By the late 1950s, however, there was a severe spare parts shortage. In 1958, the inspector of the Finnish Army’s tank section and member of the Ordnance Division, Aaro Manskinen, traveled to the Norwegian Fjords on leave. While there, he by chance happened upon a stock pile of Panzers in various states of disrepair. It soon became clear that the Norwegian Ministry of Defense was looking to sell this pile of – what was then considered – scrap. After some initial troubles due to the 1947 Paris Peace Treaty – which blocked Finland from purchasing equipment from or of German origin – a deal was agreed. 20 Panzer IIIs, 1 StuG, 10 Maybach engines, and a pile of spare parts were sold to Finland. Upon arriving in Finland, the tanks were disassembled and all useful parts were stored for later use. This kept Finland’s StuG fleet in operation well into the 1960s.
It wasn’t until November 2007 that the first Fort Bjørnåsen Panzers (Fgst.Nr 74352, 66158, 76219) began to be excavated, with a second two being uncovered in August 2007.
The excavation of the Panzers. Left, the first to be uncovered in November ‘06, Right, one of the second two uncovered in August ‘07. Photo: Pz III in Norway, Facebook
Today, just 7 of the Panzer IIIs (of various types) and 2 of the StuG III Ausf. Gs survive. Panzer IIIs Fgst.Nr 74352 (‘Yellow 3’), Fgst.Nr 66158 (‘Yellow 2’), and Fgst.Nr 76219 (‘Yellow 1’) are among them. ‘Yellow 3’ currently resides at Troms Forsvarsmuseum, Setermoen, awaiting restoration. ‘Yellow 2’ is currently undergoing full-scale restoration at Muzeum Broni Pancernej, Poznań in Poland, where it has been since 2013. ‘Yellow 1’ was transferred to Finland in 2013.
Fgst.Nr 73651, a Panzer III Ausf. J, was put into storage at the Oslo Defence Museum in 1964. In 1988, it was loaned to Memorial de Caen, Normandy. It was recently returned to Norway. A ‘Tankenstein’ Panzer III consisting of a Ausf. G/H hull and an Ausf. N turret can be found at the André Becker Collection in Belgium. The vehicle left Norway in the late 1940s and was located in Sweden until the 1980s. The others, an Ausf. N and an Ausf. M, can be found at Rena Military Camp, Norway, and the Wheatcroft Collection, UK, respectively.
On the left, Pz.Kpfw.III Ausf. J (Fgst.Nr 73651) in storage. On the right, Pz.Kpfw.III Ausf. N (Fgst.Nr 66158), also known as ‘Yellow 2’, undergoing restoration at Muzeum Broni Pancernej, Poznań in Poland. Photos: the.shadock.free.fr
As for the two StuG III Gs, Fgst.Nr 76149 has been cosmetically restored and currently resides in storage at the Forsvarsmuseet, Trandum. Another, which is simply the remains of a rusting hulk, can be found at Rogaland Krigshistorisk Museum.
Sturmgeschütz III Ausf. G (Fgst.Nr 76149) as it looks now after being repainted. Photo: the.shadock.free.fr
Conclusion
Norway’s use of the Panzer III and StuG III is a prime example of ‘make do and mend’. Eager to defend themselves from the increasingly threatening Soviet Union, they activated equipment that was obsolete years before the Second World came to an end. What effect these vehicles could have had on Soviet Tanks is debatable. This, however, was not their intended role. Being assigned to airport garrison forces, their primary role was to engage troops and aircraft attempting to land.
The use of the Panzers and StuGs allowed the recovering Norwegian army to train their first batch of tank crews and allowed them to practise and train on a scale that would have been impossible with only the initial number of M24s. This allowed Norway to build up its fleet of more modern M24 Chaffees, and save them for active duty in a combat scenario, should the need have arisen.
A StKn KW-III (left) with two Strv KW-IIIs at Bardufoss, 1951. Note ‘Yellow 2’ on the far right. Photo: Pz III in Norway, Facebook
An article by Mark Nash and Konsta Pylkkönen.
Illustration of Stridsvogn KW-III ‘Yellow 1’ (Fgst.Nr 76219). Originally built as an Ausf. M, it was later brought to Ausf. N standard and fitted with the short 7.5cm KwK 37. ‘Yellow 1’ was also one of the tanks buried at Bardufoss airfield.
Illustration of one of the 10 Stormkanon KW-IIIs (StuG IIIs) operated by Norway, this example being a StuG III Ausf. F/8. The vehicle is covered in the roughly painted white-wash camouflage pattern. This type of winter camouflage was used by the Norwegian Army well into the 1980s.
These illustrations were produced by Ardhya Anargha, funded by our Patreon campaign.
Stridsvogn KW-III (Pz.Kpfw.III Ausf. N)
Dimensions
5.49 m x 2.95 m x 2.50 m
(18ft x 9ft 8in x 8ft 2in)
Armament
7.5 cm KwK 37
Machine Guns
2 × 7.92 mm MG34
Armor
Up to 50mm (2 in)
Weight
23 tonnes
Crew
5 (commander, gunner, loader, driver, radio operator/bow machine-gunner)
In the late-1960s, the Norwegian Military (Forsvaret, Eng: “The Defence”) began an upgrade program with the company of Thune-Eureka A/S, based in the country’s capital, Oslo. This program was aimed at drastically upgrading the M24 Chaffee fleet with the introduction of a new 90 mm main gun, a new, more powerful engine, a new transmission, and various other modernizations.
While this upgrade program was underway, it was also decided that the upgraded Chaffee – which would receive the designation NM-116 ‘Panserjager’ (tank hunter) – would need a support vehicle. As such, the NM-130 Bergepanser (Armored Recovery Vehicle, ARV) was conceived. Just four vehicles would be converted, but they would all go on to support the NM-116 throughout its service life.
The M24 Chaffee-based NM-130 Bergepanzer (Bjvg) was developed to support Norway’s new NM-116 ‘Panserjager’, itself based on the M24. Source: hestvik.no
Foundation: The M24 Chaffee
The M24 Chaffee, named after Army General Adna R. Chaffee Jr., entered service in 1944, largely replacing the M3 and M5 Stuarts. It was a small tank at 16 foot 4 inches (5.45 m) long, 9 foot 4 inches (2.84 m) wide, and 5 foot 3 inches (2.61 m) tall. It was also light at just 20.25 tons (18.37 tonnes). Armor on the vehicle was ¾ inch to 1 ½ inch (19 – 38 mm) thick. It was armed with the 75 mm Lightweight Tank Gun M6. It was operated by a 5 man crew, consisting of the commander, gunner, loader, driver and assistant driver/radio operator.
It was a very maneuverable vehicle, powered by a Twin Cadillac 44T24 8-cylinder petrol engine producing 220 hp. The transmission and drive wheels were located at the front of the vehicle. The Chaffee rolled on 5 roadwheels attached to a torsion bar suspension. The fifth road wheel was attached to the idler wheel at the rear of the running gear. This is because the idler was of the compensating type, meaning it was attached to the closest roadwheel by an actuating arm. When the roadwheel reacted to terrain, the idler was pushed out or pulled in accordingly, keeping constant track tension.
Norsk Chaffees
Norway received its first Chaffee’s from the US under the ‘MAP’ in 1946. The ‘Military Aid Program’ benefited the war-ravaged countries of the Second World War by providing them the means to rebuild their military and defenses. Norway was one of these countries that was rebuilding after the lengthy Nazi Occupation of the country. Other countries that benefited from the MAP included France, Portugal, and Belgium, but also former enemy nations such as West Germany and Japan. In April 1949, the North Atlantic Treaty was signed and NATO was born, resulting in the United States prolonging its Military Aid Programs.
The initial 1946 delivery consisted of just 9 vehicles. These were sent directly to Trandum leir, a Norwegian Army Camp (now closed) near Ullensaker. From 1946 until the early 1950s, Norway received a total of 125 M24s. The M24s gave the Norwegian Army (Hæren) excellent service for many years, until the late-1960s. Some went on to serve with the Heimevernet (Home Guard).
An M24 Chaffee of the Heimevernet (Home Guard) taking part in range exercises in 1977. Photo: modellnorge.no
The Conversion
The NM-116 was the result of a military on a small budget trying to improve the lethality of its tank arsenal. The NM-130 was the result of the same sort of dilemma; how do you provide a new tank with a new support vehicle without breaking the bank?
Of the Hæren’s 125 M24s, 72 would go on to be used in the NM-116 upgrade program. To develop the ARV, four extra M24s were set aside. As said above, most of the remaining M24s went into service with the Heimevernet. Any remaining vehicles were likely scrapped. It is not uncommon for recovery vehicles to be based on the same chassis as the vehicle they are designed to support. The American M103 heavy tank-based M51 Heavy ARV and German Leopard 1-based Bergepanzer 2 are prime examples of this.
The conversion work to turn the vehicles into ARVs was undertaken by Kvaerner Eureka AS. The four Chaffee hulls went through the same automotive upgrades as those being upgraded to the NM-116 standard. The turrets, however, were completely removed and replaced with a large crane. A small dozer blade was also installed on the vehicle’s lower glacis.
An NM-130 parked in front of an NM-116. This gives an idea of the drastic modifications. Photo: Thor Christoffersen
Crew
The NM-130’s crew consisted of three personnel; Commander, Crane Operator and Driver. The driver sat at the front left of the vehicle, as on the original Chaffee. The Commander sat in a position roughly halfway down the length of the hull, on the right side, under a large circular hatch with an incorporated periscope. The Commander was also responsible for the vehicle’s only weapon, a German-made 7.62 mm MG3 machine gun. This was a defensive weapon only. The crane operator sat in an external, unarmored position on the crane unit when it was in operation. When it was not in operation, it is unknown where he would have sat. It is likely that he sat in what would have been the bow gunner’s position on the standard Chaffee, at the front right of the hull. Concrete evidence of this escapes the author at the time of writing.
Dag Rune Nilsen, ex-commander of an NM-116 from Panserverneskadron, Brigade Nord (PvEsk/N, Eng: “Tank Squadron, Northern Brigade”), describes here the working relationship with the NM-130 and its crew:
“The NM-130 crew was an important part of the Panserverneskadron. It was manned by the mechanics who maintained our vehicles at base, so we had a close working relationship. I got the impression that they were very happy with the vehicle and [they were] proud to operate it. It had a strong winch, a solid crane and other tools including a welding machine. Our squadron operated M113s, NM-142s and, of course, the NM-116. The NM-130 were capable of assisting us in all the situations we encountered. No problems whatsoever.”
The Driver’s position (left) and Commander’s position (right). Photos: hestvik.no (left), Erik Torp, primeportal.net (right)
Automotive Upgrades
The Chaffee’s Twin Cadillac 220hp petrol engine was replaced by a Detroit Diesel 6V-53T two-stroke diesel engine that was liquid-cooled and equipped with a turbocharger. Diesel engines perform better in cold temperatures and are also somewhat safer as diesel is less volatile than petrol (gasoline). The engine gave the tank more power as it produced 260 hp, but slowed the tank down to a top speed of 47 km/h (29 mph). This was not too big of an issue as the increased torque gave it the power to navigate Norway’s tough terrain. Two, 208-liter (55 gallons) fuel tanks also gave it a greater range of 300 kilometers (186 miles) compared to the 160 kilometers (100 miles) of the original powerplant. Four heat exchangers were also installed to cool the engine’s oil.
The Detroit Diesel 6V-53T engine that replaced the M24’s original Twin Cadillac. Photo: NM-116 Handbook via modellnorge.no
The original ‘Hydramatic’ transmission was also replaced with an Allison MT 650/653 pre-selector 6-speed (5 forward, 1 reverse) gearbox. An additional gearbox was installed to control the speed transferred to the differential housed at the front of the tank.
In this crane adaption, two hydraulic pumps were installed in the engine compartment to power the hydraulically operated crane, winch, and dozer blade.
Crane
The crane (No: kran) chosen for the Bergepanser was the BK710MIL made by Moelven-Brug A/S – now known as CHSnor. For the installation of the crane, a solid metal plate was welded over the turret ring. The base of the crane was then fixed to the top of this. The crane is capable of full 360-degree rotation. When not in operation, the crane is rested at 0 degrees, with the boom fully retracted. The whole unit is then swung 180 degrees so it points over the vehicle’s engine bay.
The crane consists of a large boom with an integral, external control position. The crane’s boom is of the telescopic type, being able to extend from 3.4 meters (11.1 ft) to 5 meters (16.4 ft). The boom can travel on its vertical axis from 0 to +55 degrees. It is raised and lowered via a hydraulic ram underneath the boom, at its base.
The NM-130 with its crane arm fully extended to 5 meters (16.4 feet). Note the hydraulic ram underneath. Photo: hestvik.no
A hydraulically driven winch was mounted at the base of the crane boom. The winch cable runs externally up the spine of the boom to a large single guide wheel at the tip of the boom. The cable ends in a simple clevis rather than a hook. A large cable-guard safety grate was also mounted at the base of the crane to protect the operator.
The single guide wheel at the end of the crane boom (left) and the clevis at the end of the cable (right). Photo: Erik Torp, primeportal.net
The crane had a maximum lift capacity of 7 tonnes (7.7 tons), as long as the boom was not raised over 25 degrees upwards. If the crane was raised to 25 degrees of elevation or over, the maximum load was reduced to 2 tonnes (2.2 tons). The crane had a relatively low lift capacity as it was not designed to lift the entire vehicle, but just its components. The 2-7 tonnes lift capacity was more than enough to hoist the NM-116’s Detroit Diesel engine which weighed just 600 kgs (1323 lbs).
While Dag Rune Nilsen never required the use of the Bergepanser personally, he was witness to it assisting his comrades as he describes in the following story about a powerpack lift:
“The NM-130 did assist my good friend Sergeant Storli when he had to change the engine on his tank, callsign 12, name of ‘Aratos’, in the field. I remember the mechanics requesting if they could tow the broken NM-116 to the nearest military garage. The request was denied and they had to change the engine in freezing cold weather in the open during the night! Good realistic practice even though the crew disagreed!”
Sergeant Storli stands next to his tank’s engine as it is held aloft by the NM-130 which is unfortunately out of shot. Photo: Dag Rune Nilsen
The steel-wire cable utilized by the crane was 22 mm (0.8 in) in diameter and had a capacity of 19 tonnes (21 tons). Despite the crane having a meager capacity of 2-7 tonnes, it was necessary that the cable be stronger so it could tow or retrieve the NM-116. For this, the cable was threaded through fairleads (a device that guides a line, rope or cable) placed behind the drum. This allowed the vehicle to tow vehicles behind it. To do this though, the crane would have to be traversed 180 degrees. Judging from the few available photos of the NM-130 in service, it would appear that crane’s boom was used as a stowage point for the crew’s personal packs and effects, as well as camouflage nets and other sundries.
The cable-guard on the left. On the right, the winch drum at the base of the crane. Note the fairlead just above the ‘P3’ stencil. Photo: Erik Torp, primeportal.net
Crane Operator’s Position
The Crane Operator’s position was incorporated into the crane boom and was mounted on its right. The position consisted of a padded seat and a control desk. It was completely open to the elements and was without armor protection. Operation of the boom was rather simple, with basic levers that raise, lower, swing, extend/retract the boom, and let-out/reel-in the winch cable.
The Crane Operator’s position (with control panel inset) was mounted directly to the base of the crane and was completely open to the elements. Note the vice under the seat. Photos: Erik Torp, primeportal.net
Dozer Blade
Much like the dozer blade (No:bulldozerblad) found on the American M88 ARV, the NM-130’s dozer blade performed three main roles: light earthmoving operations/obstacle clearance, support during lifting operations, and anchorage when winching.
The hydraulically operated blade was shallow but roughly vehicle width at 2.84 meters (9 ft 4 in) and was mounted on the bow. It moved up and down via two large hydraulic rams mounted above it. The blade was operated by the driver. To avoid breakages while earthmoving, the front-wheel stations of the vehicle were reinforced. During the lift and winching operations, the blade acted much like outriggers on a conventional crane and lifted the front end of the vehicle off the ground to stop it shifting on its tracks.
The Dozer Blade of the NM-130 performed standard earthmoving tasks, but also acted as an outrigger during lifts by lifting the front end of the vehicle off the ground. Note the two large hydraulic rams. hestvik.no
Other Features
As with the NM-116, the Bersepanser received the same 73-link split rubber block tracks made by the German company Diehl. At some point, the NM-130 also received the same sprocket upgrade as the NM-116. The new sprocket wheel had smaller and fewer teeth. The original Chaffee sprocket had 13 teeth while the newer one had 12. This was likely done to improve the compatibility with new track types. Also, while the NM-116 kept just two of the original four shock absorbers, the NM-130 kept three, with two at the front, and one at the rear.
The newer sprocket wheel and Diehl tracks. Photo: Erik Torp, primeportal.net
The same eight smoke-grenade launchers, or Røyklegginganlegg (Smoke Laying Device), that were added to the turret of the NM-116 were also installed on the NM-130. They were mounted on the left and right fenders in single banks of four. These German-made devices were electrically fired, and were used to launch the 76 mm (3 in) Røykboks (smoke grenade) DM2 HC grenade. In total, 16 smoke grenades were carried and, if necessary, all loaded grenades could be fired at once.
One of the two banks of German-made Røyklegginganlegg (smoke grenade launchers). Photo: Erik Torp, primeportal.net
Other features included the introduction of large tool/stowage boxes on the rear of the left and right fenders. On the back right corner of the engine deck, there was a stowage point for extra pulleys and clevises for winching and hoisting. There was also a point on the right rear of the hull for carrying a spare NM-116/130 roadwheel. Steel-wire tow cables were carried on the right fender, with tools such as an axe and sledgehammer carried on the hull wall above them.
It was not uncommon for crews to carry their own selection of preferred equipment, as Dag Nilsen describes:
“NM-130 mechanics improvised and added additional equipment that experience had shown they needed. The crew that assisted Sergeant Stoli, for instance, carried a welder. In my own experience of NM-116 crews, we would regularly amend the tanks for comfort and for practical purposes. I believe NM-130 crews did the same.”
Above we see the left tool/stowage box, spare roadwheel, and extra pulleys and clevises. Below can be seen the right fender, note the tow cables, tool/stowage box, smoke grenade launchers, sledgehammer, and axe. Photos: Erik Torp, primeportal.net
Service
Unfortunately, much like the NM-116, details of the Bergepanser’s time in service are scarce. The vehicles entered service in the mid-1970s; an exact year is unknown but it was probably around the same time as the NM-116, in 1975. How the four ARVs were split between the 72-strong NM-116 fleet is also unknown. However, it is known that he only full-time operator of the NM-116 was the Panserverneskadron, Brigade Nord (PvEsk/N, Eng: “Tank Squadron, Northern Brigade”). At least two NM-130s were part of this Brigade. The vehicle was also capable of supporting Norway’s fleet of US-made M113 Armored Personnel Carriers (APC) and derivative there of, such as the NM-142 (TOW) Rakettpanserjager.
This quote from Dag Rune Nilsen provides a small insight into the NM-130’s use:
“I never required assistance myself (pure luck!) but I did indeed witness the recovery team rescue many of my comrades. The terrain we operated in was brutal all year around and absolutely not ideal for tanks. It was quite common to lose the tracks or to sink into deep snow. Most of the time we managed to do self-recovery through various tricks but the NM-130 could always be counted on. It would cost the commander a case of beer though! The winch was the multipurpose tool for recovery and could drag an NM116 easily onto safe ground.”
NM-130 and crew on exercise in the Norwegian mountains, 1988. We can see the Commander (rear), Driver (far right) and closest to the camera, the Crane Operator making use of the empty bow position. He is also manning the vehicle’s defensive MG3 machine gun. Note the amount of stowage lashed to the crane boom. Photo: Dag Rune Nilsen
Like the NM-116, the vehicle initially entered service in an olive drab livery but, in the mid-1980s, a new ‘Splinter’ camouflage pattern was introduced. The NM-130 would see out its service in this livery.
The NM-116 was retired in 1993. It is unclear when exactly the NM-130 was retired, but there is a possibility that it stayed on in service a little longer to serve Norway’s fleet of M48s and Leopard 1s, but concrete evidence of this cannot be found.
Norwegian Military camouflage application guide for the ‘Splinter’ pattern on the NM-130. Photo: modellnorge.no
Conclusion
In the NM-130, the Forsvaret achieved its goal of providing an effective recovery vehicle to not only the NM-116, but the Hæren’s other light vehicles too, all while sticking to a strict budget. Just like the NM-116, the NM-130 was an ingenious use of what was – at the time of its development – an almost thirty-year-old piece of Second World War hardware.
Dag Rune Nilsen perhaps describes it best:
“I would describe the NM-130 as a fit for purpose recovery tank, and thus a very successful modification. Much more successful than the NM-116 itself since the NM-130 did exactly what it was intended for and remained effective for its entire service life.”
It is unclear how many of the four NM-130s survive. The one featured in most of the photos used in this article was located – until recently – at the Rena Army Camp, eastern Norway. Where it is now is unknown. At least one NM-130 can still be found at the Rogaland Krigshistorisk Museum, also in Norway.
The NM-130 that was kept at Rena Camp until recently. Photo: Erik Torp, primeportal.net
An article by Mark Nash, assisted by Steffen Hjønnevåg.
An NM-130 Bergepanser in ‘Splinter’ camouflage with the Crane in its travel position. Illustration produced by Ardhya Anargha, funded by our Patreon campaign.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Cookie settingsACCEPT
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
United Kingdom (1942-1943)
Republic of Hatay (1938)
