Chieftain L60......air cleaner

#1
Hi all,as I was only a lowly B3 driver can anybody provide an answer to this question?

I believe the air-cleaner on the early models used up 100 HP of engine power,this was rectified by a mod designed by the Israelis,and consisted of an electrical motor mounted on the side of the air cleaner at approx 45 degrees.

I spent God knows how many hours wallowing in oil and diesel only to be told on another forum that I´m wrong..........am I?

Any pics?

Where the Fcuk is GDav when you need him! :x
 
#2
midnight said:
Hi all,as I was only a lowly B3 driver can anybody provide an answer to this question?

I believe the air-cleaner on the early models used up 100 HP of engine power,this was rectified by a mod designed by the Israelis,and consisted of an electrical motor mounted on the side of the air cleaner at approx 45 degrees.

I spent God knows how many hours wallowing in oil and diesel only to be told on another forum that I´m wrong..........am I?

Any pics?

Where the Fcuk is GDav when you need him! :x
You're talking about the Dust Extractor Fan mounted on the side of the hopper here?
The Rootes blower was quoted as using 100hp IIRC.

No idea wether the Israelis were involved
 
#3
PE4rocks said:
midnight said:
Hi all,as I was only a lowly B3 driver can anybody provide an answer to this question?

I believe the air-cleaner on the early models used up 100 HP of engine power,this was rectified by a mod designed by the Israelis,and consisted of an electrical motor mounted on the side of the air cleaner at approx 45 degrees.

I spent God knows how many hours wallowing in oil and diesel only to be told on another forum that I´m wrong..........am I?

Any pics?

Where the Fcuk is GDav when you need him! :x
You're talking about the Dust Extractor Fan mounted on the side of the hopper here?
The Rootes blower was quoted as using 100hp IIRC.

No idea wether the Israelis were involved
Believe PE4 (Mi lunned colleague) to be right here. The Rootes Blower used HP as it would, being driven directly by the engine itself. The ME hopper did have an electrical motor on the side of it although never field clinometered the angle of the dangle, it may have been 45 degrees. Israeli design? Not convinced they had access to the L60 to be able to design?
Sounds like the other forum may be verging on the 'Tad sad' side of the black hole?? Tell 'em to go take themselves out back for a good talking to!!!! 8O
 
#4
Just listen to you lot! :? Now you are all old and stuff you start chatting away like tank boffins and sensible like. Where's all the bollux talk and totaly worthless drivel gone? :? I dunno, change of the times and a sign of old age I reckon! :roll:
 
#5
banjotrooper said:
Just listen to you lot! :? Now you are all old and stuff you start chatting away like tank boffins and sensible like. Where's all the bollux talk and totaly worthless drivel gone? :? I dunno, change of the times and a sign of old age I reckon! :roll:
Oi, almost a plastic frog, aren't you supposed to be out on trench filling duties or summat? Arf an me is allowed to be sensible once every decade. Think yersel lucky to have seen it.

Now buggar off and send me a parcel of Trappist beer or something.
 
#6
Thanks PE4,

A3Bs
the Israelis helped a great deal in the development of Chieftain and had some in Israel,it was only the Labour Government with Harold Wilson in 1969 that stopped the sale,so they had lots of access.
 
#7
Here is the offending DEF;

I'm sure there was a shroud on the original-this is one of those "Drive a tank experience" Chieftains, hence the mountaineering stylee palaver. As I recall it was a toss-up whether the driver connected up the electrical three-way to power the thing.
 

elovabloke

ADC
Moderator
#9
ObnoxiousJockGit said:
Here is the offending DEF;

I'm sure there was a shroud on the original-this is one of those "Drive a tank experience" Chieftains, hence the mountaineering stylee palaver. As I recall it was a toss-up whether the driver connected up the electrical three-way to power the thing.
Bugger - I wondered what they kept under the RH rad. I though it was storage for spare crewmen.
 
#10
midnight said:
Thanks PE4,

A3Bs
the Israelis helped a great deal in the development of Chieftain and had some in Israel,it was only the Labour Government with Harold Wilson in 1969 that stopped the sale,so they had lots of access.
Well there you go Midders, I've learnt something mate!! Spose it's logic since they did such a good job modding Cent. Good old labour though eh?? Never look a gift horse in the mouth? Not when they can keep stealth taxing the hell out of us!!!
The shroud incidently was a fibreglass cowl affair which normally lasted until the first Hopper removal smashed it off. 8O 8)
 
#11
One view of the ending of the Israeli/UK Chieftain deal;
At that time, in 1966, Britain came forward with a dramatically historic proposal. The British needed money in order to complete the development of their new tank of the future, the Chieftain, with its 120mm cannon. This tank was designed to be the strongest and most modern in the west. In view of their financial constraints they proposed a "package deal". According to this deal, we would buy hundreds of obsolete Centurion tanks. They, in exchange, would allow us to participate in the final stages of Chieftain development, would sell us Chieftains, and would help us build, in Israel, an assembly line for Chieftains. This was seen as an ideal solution to the unacceptable predictions regarding the middle-eastern armor balance from both quantitative and qualitative points of view.

Our cooperation with the British lasted for about three years. Two prototypes of the Chieftain tank were delivered to Israel. Israel invested heavily in the improvement and final development of the Chieftain in close cooperation with British officers and engineers, who worked with us in Israel.

However, Arab states intervened. They threatened Britain with sanctions, with pulling their monetary reserves out of British banks, and other actions. Demonstrations were held in Arab capitals and British embassies were attacked. In November 1969 Britain withdrew from its Chieftain deal with Israel.
Mind you, I've also read that the US knobbled the deal; either 'cos the tank would upset the balance of power in the region or perhaps 'cos they wanted to sell loads of their own tonks? :?
 
#12
ObnoxiousJockGit said:
One view of the ending of the Israeli/UK Chieftain deal;
At that time, in 1966, Britain came forward with a dramatically historic proposal. The British needed money in order to complete the development of their new tank of the future, the Chieftain, with its 120mm cannon. This tank was designed to be the strongest and most modern in the west. In view of their financial constraints they proposed a "package deal". According to this deal, we would buy hundreds of obsolete Centurion tanks. They, in exchange, would allow us to participate in the final stages of Chieftain development, would sell us Chieftains, and would help us build, in Israel, an assembly line for Chieftains. This was seen as an ideal solution to the unacceptable predictions regarding the middle-eastern armor balance from both quantitative and qualitative points of view.

Our cooperation with the British lasted for about three years. Two prototypes of the Chieftain tank were delivered to Israel. Israel invested heavily in the improvement and final development of the Chieftain in close cooperation with British officers and engineers, who worked with us in Israel.

However, Arab states intervened. They threatened Britain with sanctions, with pulling their monetary reserves out of British banks, and other actions. Demonstrations were held in Arab capitals and British embassies were attacked. In November 1969 Britain withdrew from its Chieftain deal with Israel.
Mind you, I've also read that the US knobbled the deal; either 'cos the tank would upset the balance of power in the region or perhaps 'cos they wanted to sell loads of their own tonks? :?
IIRC They did something similar against the Crabs getting TSR 2 which was, for those days, scary as it could low level dodge a telegraph pole from about a mile away?? "Scrap that sucka!!! Buy our F111s on the cheap!!" They screamed, TSR got shelved but, buy the F111?? Somehow that got shelved too!!!
IF the Israeli Chieftain deal existed, I think they got off lightly as they too could have had the L60 for their pains!!!
 
#13
I must admit I never knew that the Israel´s had so much to do with the development of Chieftain untill recently.Not entirely understandable as Britain voted against the State of Israel at the UN after giving back it´s mandate,reckoned there´d be no peace in the ME as long as the Israeli´s were there,not exactly a friendly act?Bit of a cheek though asking us to buy their knackered Cents back.

As I recall the DEF wasn´t just a bolt on mod but an entirely different filter system without the ´church organ´like tubes of the Rootes system.With the Rootes being driven by the main engine and the DEF by the Generator(Coventry Climax?) it´s only logical that power would be saved?
 
#14
Hi,
Readinng the discussion about air cleaners and blowers, there seems to be some confusion. Yes the Rootes blower did take a great deal of horsepower to use, but that was , if you like, a supercharger bolted directly onto the engine , and not the air cleaner, which had an extractor fan fitted. Originally this fan was fitted to the hull wall , and later moved to the air cleaner body.
As for Isreali improving the design, I can find no record of this, but did find a great deal of Iranian influence.in fact the Iranis ordered 707 chietains in 1971, and a further 187 improved Chieftains , (designated FV4030), later.

On a personal note, I can remember having to do a demo for Iranian officers, in the field, of a Chieftain with the pack running outside the hull.
I think they were more interestd in getting back to the mess for drinks than in the tanks!
 
#15
midnight said:
As I recall the DEF wasn´t just a bolt on mod but an entirely different filter system without the ´church organ´like tubes of the Rootes system.With the Rootes being driven by the main engine and the DEF by the Generator(Coventry Climax?) it´s only logical that power would be saved?
The "church organ tubes" are the cyclonic filter which work in the same way as a dyson hoover! They eliminated a certain percentage of the dust particals before they contaminated the actual air filter. The DEF (was it DEF on chieftain and DEB on Challenger or the other way around??) was to suck out the excess dust in the bottom of the air filter hopper and blow it out into the powerpack compartment.

They did away with it for Challenger 1 and used a blue pipe fitted after the turbocharger to draw the dust out (Bernoulli's theory) and blow out of the exhausts on each side. The DEF/DEB was then reintroduced for Challenger 2. CRARRV has it too but i'm not sure if it was orignally there or a retro fit.

Challenger 2 has had extensive work done to the filteration, dual stage cyclonic tubes and a tougher DEB i beleive.
 
#16
ArmySurplusSpecial said:
midnight said:
As I recall the DEF wasn´t just a bolt on mod but an entirely different filter system without the ´church organ´like tubes of the Rootes system.With the Rootes being driven by the main engine and the DEF by the Generator(Coventry Climax?) it´s only logical that power would be saved?
The "church organ tubes" are the cyclonic filter which work in the same way as a dyson hoover! They eliminated a certain percentage of the dust particals before they contaminated the actual air filter. The DEF (was it DEF on chieftain and DEB on Challenger or the other way around??) was to suck out the excess dust in the bottom of the air filter hopper and blow it out into the powerpack compartment.

They did away with it for Challenger 1 and used a blue pipe fitted after the turbocharger to draw the dust out (Bernoulli's theory) and blow out of the exhausts on each side. The DEF/DEB was then reintroduced for Challenger 2. CRARRV has it too but i'm not sure if it was orignally there or a retro fit.

Challenger 2 has had extensive work done to the filteration, dual stage cyclonic tubes and a tougher DEB i beleive.
I 'am finding this all very interesting, but I 'am worried that a Sigs Instr :sleepy: :sleepy: :sleepy: :sleepy: might come in & start going on about the cooling fans on the VRC353 & how they evolved into the loudest thing to go off during a radio stag :?
 

elovabloke

ADC
Moderator
#17
Vent_Tube_Tester said:
I 'am finding this all very interesting, but I 'am worried that a Sigs Instr :sleepy: :sleepy: :sleepy: :sleepy: might come in & start going on about the cooling fans on the VRC353 & how they evolved into the loudest thing to go off during a radio stag :?
Had to think of something to keep you awake. However hearing about the things you got up to fiddling about in the turret it sounds as if you were safest asleep.
 
#18
Theres me thinking radio/line stags were all about reading porn or listening to my walkman - lol

Far to many spotters on here

Biggest problem was generally the DEF not being connected, or burnt out.

Nobby
 
#19
Vent_Tube_Tester said:
I 'am finding this all very interesting, but I 'am worried that a Sigs Instr :sleepy: :sleepy: :sleepy: :sleepy: might come in & start going on about the cooling fans on the VRC353 & how they evolved into the loudest thing to go off during a radio stag :?
Ahhhhhhhhhh - VTT - I take it, due to your inability to pass any constructive comment on maters D&M you'd try your luck on this thread at passing derogatory remarks about Sigs Instrs??? Well, why don't you just Foxtrot Uniform Charlie Kilo Oscar Foxtrot Foxtrot!!!???

Oh and by the way Mr Halo round an IG's head........


Speaking of heads
:wink: 8O
 
#20
Arthur3bums said:
ObnoxiousJockGit said:
One view of the ending of the Israeli/UK Chieftain deal;
At that time, in 1966, Britain came forward with a dramatically historic proposal. The British needed money in order to complete the development of their new tank of the future, the Chieftain, with its 120mm cannon. This tank was designed to be the strongest and most modern in the west. In view of their financial constraints they proposed a "package deal". According to this deal, we would buy hundreds of obsolete Centurion tanks. They, in exchange, would allow us to participate in the final stages of Chieftain development, would sell us Chieftains, and would help us build, in Israel, an assembly line for Chieftains. This was seen as an ideal solution to the unacceptable predictions regarding the middle-eastern armor balance from both quantitative and qualitative points of view.

Our cooperation with the British lasted for about three years. Two prototypes of the Chieftain tank were delivered to Israel. Israel invested heavily in the improvement and final development of the Chieftain in close cooperation with British officers and engineers, who worked with us in Israel.

However, Arab states intervened. They threatened Britain with sanctions, with pulling their monetary reserves out of British banks, and other actions. Demonstrations were held in Arab capitals and British embassies were attacked. In November 1969 Britain withdrew from its Chieftain deal with Israel.
Mind you, I've also read that the US knobbled the deal; either 'cos the tank would upset the balance of power in the region or perhaps 'cos they wanted to sell loads of their own tonks? :?
IIRC They did something similar against the Crabs getting TSR 2 which was, for those days, scary as it could low level dodge a telegraph pole from about a mile away?? "Scrap that sucka!!! Buy our F111s on the cheap!!" They screamed, TSR got shelved but, buy the F111?? Somehow that got shelved too!!!
IF the Israeli Chieftain deal existed, I think they got off lightly as they too could have had the L60 for their pains!!!
I think it was that the yanks needed a major buyer for the 'Vark and the Aussies were very keen on TSR-2 which was a world beater. Yanks put pressure on Wilson and he scrapped everything including the tooling jigs. Oz bought the 'Vark and USAF followed suite.

After many teething problems it has provided sterling service to both the UASAF and the RAAF. Damn shame about TSR-2 though. Fantastic aircraft!

Scouse
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top