North Irish Horse Churchill Restoration.

VP

Sounds good and I see the hand our Gerry in all this....hopefully it will be a Mark iv as that is what we had mainly from Algiers to the Alps - my two Mk vi's were made in Leeds ...

Cheers

aarrgghh - just read the blurb - it's a MkVii - we never saw many of those - even a Mk v would have done better as we had one per squadron for the Gothic Line

 

Potentially a major goof - here's an extract of an e-mail I have just sent to my good friend in Belfast who may be able to stop it.

"Why I am writing is that I have received a message from Google (who sends me all things relevant to the NIH automatically) with a photo of Ray Kirk and the Mayor of Carrickfergus standing in front of a Mark VII presumably the one that is being refurbished.

As the four companies that built them, Babcock & Wilcox Ltd. - Newton Chambers & Co. Ltd. - Whessoe Foundry & Engineering Co. Ltd. - Gloucester Railway Carriage & Wagon Co. Ltd. are still in business the regiment may well receive a lot of eggs on its face when they find out.

The logical one to refurbish is the Mark IV {sitting in Dunmore Park, Belfast} - they fought at the Hitler Line and remained in action until war's end, whereas we did not receive a Mark VII (just one) until December 1944 - plus a few more in 1945"

An unhappy Gerry

 

Gerry

hopefully your friend can do something as this is a nonsense as the 145th RAC were long gone before the MK vii came along

Cheers

 

I am not a great fan of journalists, but the amount of tripe in the BBC report surprised even me!

Chris

 

Gerry,

Is this a case of getting the Regimental History wrong or renovation of a Churchill on Budget grounds? ie cheaper to renovate the Mk VII than the Mk IV.

I can well Image the veterans of the RIH being upset

Regards
Tom

 

TCS

Not only will the NIH veterans be upset but all of us who served in Churchills in Africa and Italy as the Mk ( iv ) was the most commonly used Tank in those regiments- the MK(vii) did not appear

until D Day and afterwards- and NIH did NOT serve there ...so IF you are going to venerate one Tank - it should be the MK(iv)..and one is handy - without needing a big budget...

Cheers

 

The problem has compounded itself due to publicity in newspapers and BBC in Northern Ireland stating specifically that Mark VIIs were built there.

They were built by the only four companies equipped with rotary manipulators that provides accurate plate sizes - the one for the aft end being calling for considerable accuracy as the alignment of the drive is dependent on it.

Of particular interest is the fact that Babcock & Wilcox Ltd.'s equipment enabled the building of turrets for the Mark IIIs considered to be by far the safest Churchill to be aboard when facing enemy fire. Ballyrashane a Mark IV which I crewed, was the first tank to be knocked out during assault on the Hitler Line. Fortunately, the 75mm guns of the low firing Panzerturms failed to penetrate the starboard side after hitting the hull four times. By the time that the crew of the Panzerturm realized this and aimed one at the cast turret to easily penetrate it, we had bailed out.

As the Mark IV at Dunmore Park is in good shape, her repair would be less than that at for the Mark VII as she was delivered to the Irish Army post war.

 

Gerry

some parochial politician will win this one as it will have been made in his bailiwick - then boast of how he is serving his constituents by spending more and more on this Mk (vii) - not realizing that he

will be the laughing stock of a diminishing few Veterans..for getting it wrong as this is surely a national - i.e. Tax payers money and not Belfasts budget

Cheers
Tom

 

Gerry i'm shocked to learn the mk4 turret was weaker than the mk3, I have a mk4 avre and the turret casting is 5" on the front and about 3" on the sides but with the added bonus of a little ballistic roundedness as opposed to the slab sided mk3.

it looks like the casting process must have produced a less hard armour than the rolled plates used on the mk3. are there any experts out there that can verify why the armour was weaker on the cast turrets when it is the same thickness as the plate version ?

I still prefer the mk4 shape

rick

 

Rick,

I am not an expert but from the hazy depths of my engineering training, I would say briefly:

Cast : potentially latticed with air holes and often not particularly dense - casting does not always provide homogeneous structures

Plate: often rolled, thereby creating a denser material, closer grained and therefore stronger and less likely to be 'brittle' under impact

TD

 

Rick -
I too preferred the MK (iv) Turret but they did allow an 88mm shot to enter and exit on the other side - now if you weren't in the line of fire - you were OK - BUT - his second shot when we were KO'd

had I been just a nano second slower - I would have been shredded

Cheers

 

it's hard to imagine the forces involved that would allow a solid shot to enter and exit a Churchill turret but on the bright side it's better out the turret than rattling around inside it.
glad you got out Tom, I suppose there's nothing like an 88 to sharpen the reflexes ! by the way what was the name of your tank.

rick

 

Rick

the one that was knocked out was a replacement of our old "DECISIVE" - A5A -which we lost from an act of sheer thoughtless stupidity - which you can read about in my article of "Green Envelopes

for Tank unit near Rimini" in the bbc series below..still waiting for the bill….

Cheers

 

I think I remember reading about that tank, was it the one that rolled down the hill crushing a jeep after a bit of brake adjustment !

i like the name decisive it's a good name for a tank, my Cromwell has a slightly less poetic name

 

Rick

we didn't see enough cush's to shufti at but know the feeling

The PantherPzV we "gained" after Smokey Smith's V.C. was named as " Deserter " by the gunner Walter Pollard who enjoyed stonking the makers until he stepped on a schu

mine and was in agony until he died after two hours - he is buried at Cesena

Cheers

 

mines are a bastard and no mistake, I did a tour of bosnia in 94 with the duke of boots and 8 of the lads got the good news from mines with only one guy getting shot, it's the same story in afghan today. mines are a simple, cheap and practical way of ruining someones day.

I suppose it's just the luck of the draw whether it's you or a pal that gets it.

I still like the blackadder joke about the immediate action drill when stepping on a mine "jump 100 feet in the air and spread yourself over a large area"

rick

 

Rick

as you rightly say…mines are a b****** as whenever a Churchill set one off - that lost at least one bogie and either the driver or co-driver had broken ankles…..the schu being one of th worst as it

jumped three feet in the air and exploded sending a hundred white hot ball bearings into the lower organs ensuring an agonizing death inside two hours which morphine didn't help too much

Cheers

 

mentioning broken ankles reminds me of a mate of mine dougie stroyan, a full screw in the duke of boots who lost his leg when his saxon APC drove over a tank mine in bosnia, even though the hull wasn't penetrated he happened to be standing on the hull floor above the blast and the force shattered his leg bones and his leg had to be amputated, poor buggar.

just to get back on thread do you think the authorities will see sense and use the mk4 for the project, whatever they decide i'd like to offer my services on the technical side if they need any help. they always seem to get the track guards wrong on these restorations, I also have some repro besa barrels they can have and the main gun and cradle with muzzle brake would be an easy fabrication for me as I made the gun on my Cromwell. if they're going to do it they might as well get right !

rick

 

Rick

A fair offer for the restoration BUT - we are dealing with jumped up politicians here and it is doubtful that they need any help as they know everything..I am hoping that Gerry's mob will sort them out to see sense before they do a big cock up

Cheers