Discussion in 'The Barracks' started by von Poop, Nov 1, 2019.
Few more Vickers Armstrong photos,mainly of the same vehicles:
The top picture is of the Carden Loyd One Man Tank Mk III produced in 1926 before Vickers took over the Carden Loyd Tractor Company. A contemporary review pronounced that it was very difficult for one man to drive it and operate the gun and also that the driving position was very uncomfortable and very hot. As a result Vickers produced the Carden Loyd MkV a two seater wheel and track in 1927 50 were produced. The speed difference between wheel and track operation was so narrow that the Carden Loyd Mk VI of 1929 was track only and the first of a line ending in the universal, bren, mortar carrier etc.
I like the potentially tracked staff car. Anyone have info about it?
Not intended as a staff car - it was a test bed for the track system. Large touring cars were used to test track systems - for example the snake track system used on the Medium D was first fitted to a car
The Russians experimented with a ski and track staff car. Lenin took it over as his personal transport.
The Egyptians produced a Centurion Dozer that used (maybe still is) to be parked in the Cairo Citadel. If I could find a way to post images without changing my browser I'd post one of it.
It’s the Vickers Reconnaissance Car
No it's the test bed for the Vickers Reconnaissance Car track system. The VRC was an armoured vehicle with a turret http://aviarmor.net/tww2/photo/gb/vickers_wctt_m1927/vickers_wctt_1m.jpg
All I can go on is the caption Vickers wrote for the photo in their works photo album
Which is incorrect
Be a good lad in your very well versed replies which ooze with knowledge in many areas and try to say perhaps
Ah the caption I do not believe it to be correct and here is the evidence dah de de dah dah
Instead of the continued smart arse way put down replies
The manufacturers described it in 1926 as the Vickers Reconnaissance Car - wheel-cum-track 1926.
Presumably they were also incorrect in captioning photos as Light Tank MK Ia and Mk IIa as they were later referred to as Vickers Medium Tanks.
CL1 - thanks for your comment, we Clives need to stick together. Unless my name is incorrect. I'm sure someone will tell me.
You are so lucky if you have a Clive in your life. They are hysterical and aren't afraid to stand up for people the care about. They have the best dance moves. They usually have brown hair. They are usually very strong and aren't afraid to wrestle a friend or family. They know how to have fun. If you have a Clive in your life keep him in your life.
Bearing in mind that 'The Thing' is approaching fast, I hope this doesn't mean that this excellent thread will be extinguished come Friday morning.....
It may be even more necessary, depending on how 'The Thing' unfolds.
Clive for PM.
Your tone is objectionable
Manufacturers often played fast and loose with publicity photograph captions. I have already attached a link to a photo of the VRC
And I'm sure that rumours of your connection with India are entirely false
No fighting in the War Tank room!
People will argue over the state of British WW2 tanks forever. 'The Cupboard was bare', 'Death by design', yada yada yada.
I know that they were all the work of serious people, wanting to defeat a belligerent enemy that had worked hard to give itself a head start on armour designs with which it might conquer the world.
I also know those same people, caught on the back foot, after a few years of struggle, gave us the Centurion.
The concept worked to may have been a 'Universal Tank', but that term is for us nerdy types that follow the area.
This is the birth of the MBT - Main Battle Tank. An all-rounder that balances Mobility/Firepower/Protection to an absolute T.
Some say Tiger or Panther were the first, with BFGs & hefty armour within clever packages - I say they're wrong, as they're missing the things that polish off Centurion's world-beating reign - reliability, serviceability, adaptability, simplicity, longevity etc.
All very well to have good factors together - not so good if you can't fully trust them to arrive on the battlefield or be relatively easy to sustain in a long fight; whether hindered by slave labour, fragile engines, weird transport tracks & so on. And where's yer Tiger Bridgelayer? ARV? AVRE?
If you bought Centurion, you bought a solid trustworthy package. Something that represented the next generation after WW2 designs despite it's slender period of wartime introduction.
Produced into the 60s - modified, refitted, adapted to the nuclear battlefield, still fighting - into the 90s. And if you see the Saffer's Olifant as a Centurion variant (debatable) - still in service today. (With the Jordanians & Israelis also fielding them as the basis of recovery & APC machines.)
You can sort of age other nerds by which tank was Britain's MBT when they were a kid - mine was Chieftain, but for many more it was Centurion, because it was ubiquitous, and bought by so many countries.
Not bad for something with a 1943 genesis from a nation that's too often dismissed as crap at WW2 tanks.
So there. And no returns.
Such a shame they ditched the Polsten... I know, I know, but it had a certain something...
That's a nearly new Aussie Cent (169041) that was placed, running, fully bombed & fuelled up with a dummy crew, 500 yards from ground zero of a 9KT A-Bomb.
It bounced several feet & took it hard, the crew would certainly have been killed... But it was driven out, and went on to serve in Vietnam.
Attached to REME in the late 70s there were still a lot of people who would have been happy to return the Chieftains to store and draw Centurions again. Far far easier to maintain in the field.
I still have my Dinky toy Centurion from the 50s although the tracks have perished
I'm 64 and American but Matchbox didn't have an American tank so:
Not mine, unfortunately, but had one
Separate names with a comma.