Builds Simmerits 1/35 Chally 2 build as I'm a bit bored and no-one's done one yet!

Managed to locate one of these

F1747838-4E67-4B27-B71E-9BAB0DBCAE7B.jpeg


grill covers is all I was after as the ones on the model are not great
 

Nosferatu

Clanker
Just out of curiousity- what's with the cutting about, pointy bit backwards? Seems to be fairly common!
It's caled"gun rear" and is used when, while still in contact with the enemy, moving to another position to show that you are "friendly forces" As you would imagine, uesd a lot BAOR !
 
It's caled"gun rear" and is used when, while still in contact with the enemy, moving to another position to show that you are "friendly forces" As you would imagine, uesd a lot BAOR !
Always keep your gun pointing towards the enemy for the above reason, and because you never know when you are going to need it, gunner and commander are both looking in the direction of the threat and it is much easier to get a feel for the terrain with a constant ‘picture’ in your mind rather than a panoramic sweep of 180 degrees of countryside as you take up a fire position.
 

Themanwho

LE
Book Reviewer
sort of but not exactly. I was just thinking about Cromwell, Cent, Chiefy, CR1, CR2 - MBTs as they developed. Anyway. I though I’d have a look at the Cromwell next to the CR2

View attachment 572514

I’ve located the tank. I’ve lost the box with all the bits in it
Erm, IIRC, Cromwell wasn't an MBT, it was the last of the Cruisers.

Sorry, but if we can't be pedantic here where can we be?
 
Erm, IIRC, Cromwell wasn't an MBT, it was the last of the Cruisers.

Sorry, but if we can't be pedantic here where can we be?

nothing wrong with being pedantic.

It raises a question though which is which British tank qualified as an MBT? I never really thought of the Churchill as an MBT even when up gunned
 

Bubbles_Barker

LE
Book Reviewer
nothing wrong with being pedantic.

It raises a question though which is which British tank qualified as an MBT? I never really thought of the Churchill as an MBT even when up gunned
Generally accepted I think that Centurion was the first MBT worthy of the concept.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
nothing wrong with being pedantic.

It raises a question though which is which British tank qualified as an MBT? I never really thought of the Churchill as an MBT even when up gunned
Generally accepted I think that Centurion was the first MBT worthy of the concept.
This. The last Heavy we had was Conqueror, declared largely obsolete when Centurion was upgunned to the L7. Thereafter, MBTs all the way.
 
On the premise that there is no such thing as a stupid question....... does the turret rotate more than 360 degrees, or does it do 180 degrees each side?
 
On the premise that there is no such thing as a stupid question....... does the turret rotate more than 360 degrees, or does it do 180 degrees each side?
All the way round and round and round, old joke on new arrivals was to tell them if you traversed more than half a dozen times clockwise you would unscrew the turret and it would fall off.
 

Themanwho

LE
Book Reviewer
nothing wrong with being pedantic.

It raises a question though which is which British tank qualified as an MBT? I never really thought of the Churchill as an MBT even when up gunned
Churchill was an Infantry Tank, and I was of course wrong, Comet, not Cromwell was the last British Cruiser tank! Centurion is generally acknowledged as the first MBT. Cruiser tanks were supposed to have decent armament, decent armour and excellent mobility IIRC, which the Cromwell did, just about.

Early war, the Light and Cruiser tanks were generally used as mechanical Cavalry charging round "exploiting" things (and getting ambushed by Herman's dug in PAK nests) whilst Infantry tanks supposedly plodded along with er, the Infantry as direct support. By mid war, most of the fcuking idiots promoting elan as a substitute for tactics had either been killed, captured or forcibly re-educated by the Hun, light tanks were seldom used for anything other than recce, and there was far more fluidity between cruisers and infantry tanks in their roles. If the Churchill hadn't been rather good (and of course infinitely adaptable) they'd probably have binned the infantry tank role entirely IMHO. US supplied Sherman and Lee tanks were considered to be Medium / Cruiser tanks by the British whilst M3/M5 Honeys were Light tanks.

There were also supposed to be other types: Assault tanks, similar to STUG role, and Heavy tanks (akin to the Tiger) none of the designs made it past prototypes (and looking at some of the designs, the Army should be thankful
 

Themanwho

LE
Book Reviewer

Themanwho

LE
Book Reviewer
Churchill was an Infantry Tank, and I was of course wrong, Comet, not Cromwell was the last British Cruiser tank! Centurion is generally acknowledged as the first MBT. Cruiser tanks were supposed to have decent armament, decent armour and excellent mobility IIRC, which the Cromwell did, just about.

Early war, the Light and Cruiser tanks were generally used as mechanical Cavalry charging round "exploiting" things (and getting ambushed by Herman's dug in PAK nests) whilst Infantry tanks supposedly plodded along with er, the Infantry as direct support. By mid war, most of the fcuking idiots promoting elan as a substitute for tactics had either been killed, captured or forcibly re-educated by the Hun, light tanks were seldom used for anything other than recce, and there was far more fluidity between cruisers and infantry tanks in their roles. If the Churchill hadn't been rather good (and of course infinitely adaptable) they'd probably have binned the infantry tank role entirely IMHO. US supplied Sherman and Lee tanks were considered to be Medium / Cruiser tanks by the British whilst M3/M5 Honeys were Light tanks.

There were also supposed to be other types: Assault tanks, similar to STUG role, and Heavy tanks (akin to the Tiger) none of the designs made it past prototypes (and looking at some of the designs, the Army should be thankful

tanks warfare wasn’t really a strong point….
 

Themanwho

LE
Book Reviewer
On that note, bear in mind that the Churchill had frontal armour that matched the Tiger's - which was also originally supposed to be an assault, not a general-use heavy tank.
Absolutely, but the Churchill was designed as an Infantry tank. It was all a bit of a bugger's muddle, further confused by the inconvenient fact that the Churchill was so good and couldn't easily be replaced by Cruiser tanks. Prompted by this thread I've dragged my copy of "Death by Design" by Peter Beale down from the bookshelf and found that in 1942, the "whole British effort was to concentrated on the Cromwell type of Cruiser tank, and that the production of an Infantry tank would cease to be part of the British programme", but by 1943: "The General Staff have accepted the policy that an Infantry tank of the Churchill type is an indispensable part of the British programme".
 

Latest Threads

Top