steveo578

Most Likely it originated in South Africa and was was acquired by Australian troops serving in South Africa in the later part of the 2nd Boer War. Possibly reason for the term is that locals thought the way new arrivals from Britian caught the sun reminded them of the way a pommigranite ripened turning red (from yellow or flesh coloured) on the side facing the sun -similar to the term red neck for those labouring in the sun had their neck reddened where the gap was between hat and shirt. The usual stories of its use in Australia/New Zealand that it refers to the materials (uniforms etc) of those prisoners transported by the British Crown having P.O.H.M or P.O.M. stamped or printed on. That is believed to stand for Prisoner of Her Majesty or even Prisoner of Moorgate or Millgate variously said to be a prison in the Thames or near Ipswich-Colchester where prisoners were held prior to transportation, are now held to be appocriphal. Firstly I don't think anyone has found a POHM or POM uniform or even a shovel or other implement in Australia -certainly most prison uniforms and equipment had the ordnance arrow if they had markings and transportation stopped long before prison reforms led to the issuance of prisoners uniforms in England. That'll cause a few howls of derision from down under- I don't care they are 1000s of miles away;)

Yep you got me "typing without due care and attention" 3 penalty points:beatenup: Just as well the thread title is Steve

Another view of the Stalwarts at ATGW1 car park One awaiting targeting at ATGW2 hard standing. This Stollie is the hindberry Crag target shown in the previous post Thought that would wake you all up, yes Otterburn Training Area has a Panzer myth whether it is true or not one thing I can say is that unless it was buried-or well hinden in a plantation it is not there any more. The remains were supposed to have been recovered to the road side at or around ATGW2 firing point- which of course is the main placement point for vehicles about to be targeted. needless to say I went over the area with a fine tooth comb. It is perfectly possible that a WW2 German vehicle was on OTA at some time many ranges had them especially post war -Pirbright Lulworth SPTA to name the obvious ones. Goswick in Northumberland had a SdKfz 123 SPG for an afternoon in l944-45 -an afternoon is about how long it lasted. There were also 6 early Churchills emplaced in a guarding ring around the main vehicle line on this range- by the time a concerted effort was made to clear the range stared in 1995 there was nothing but reduced scrap left- the only thing I could recognise was a couple of bogie springs (and I think I know my way around Churchills). As for OTA it's a strange range -note there are no remnants of any of the usual suspects on this range, no M10s, Daimlers, Valentines (although the Vickers factory is just 30 miles down the road) or even Churchill gun tanks- its not that clear ups are that thorough -pretty good but still managed to leave a Covenanter, M3 medium and A11 Matilda. The last Sherman went in 1983 -I missed it by a day:-(. It would be nice if some-one came up with some photos of earlier targets.:-( As for earlier times my first connection with OTA was as a cadet in the 1960s -4 times we were on OTA we never saw a tank. We observed a shoot with Wombats on a plate target at Quickencote. Once in what was probably the cadet area the officer was convinced the thing on top of the hill was "definately a tank" despite my insubordination that it looked a pile of bricks with a lump of wood sticking out of it -we climbed the hill -needless to say it was the trig point that had fallen over:(. Another occasion two of us went awol and tried to get to Bushmans where we were sure there would be a tank or two, but had to turn back -the distances were too much -and we were worried we might be put on a charge:shocked:. In 1978 I was attending a course north of Otterburn and on a sunday afternoon we decided to have a look around to see what there was- the first time I saw Merlin the Mk4 AVRE evidently it had been concreted only a few years before, one of the guys came back with a sketch of what he was convinced was a Prototype A23 (a Churchill-Cromwell Hybrid) I now think it was the Mk3 Churchill which was recovered as the Bovington runner. Steve

ian2b Hey it's not that bad off the top of my head:D it's TS50 failing to comply to a road sign other than those such as stop signs which covered by other code:nut: and before anyone else stamps me into the ground MS70 is also a classification for diving with defective eyesight;) Steve

I take it that's a legal defence:D TS10 "failing to conform to a road traffic sign" or possibly at a stretch SP60 -"undefined speeding offence". -seriously the offense would come under "failing to drive with due consideration for other road users." -I think MS40 is the offence of driving with defective eye sight or with inadaquate eye sight correction :-D

I beg to differ -there is not only such an offence but there are places where minimum speed is mandated on a road sign -if you ever drive through the Dartford tunnel you will see one such zone. I've also know some-one who was "done" for impeeding traffic flow by driving too slowly on the M62 motorway in a Citreon 2CV, he was exonerated as the Magistrate accepted he was driving at a reasonable speed for the type of vehicle and had otherwise conformed to the RTA in that he stayed in the nearside lane. There is also an infamous case in the early 1990s of a guy done for the same offence on the M25 in an Austin Alegro at a constant 40mph -which he considered a "nice speed" to drive at. http://www.abd.org.uk/speed_limit_signs.htm Minimum speed sign. ah Tony you posted while I was copying the signage Steve

While superficially a Borgward B2 I think it is more likely to be a version of the prototype series of leichter Landungsträger Sd Kfz 302 (E -motor) which is an electric motor explosive charge demolition vehicle -also known as Goliath Gerät 67 - later versions, the common type, had small wheels and looked a bit like a minature WW1 British Mk1 tank. The exhibit in the photo is probably a SdKfz302 because it lacks any sign of exhaust pipe -therefore no gasoline motor -only a heat vent for the electric motors. note the large sprocket much larger than the one on the B2 and the different patern wheels B2 had 4 spoke -the first prototype SdKfz302 had wheels with solid covers.

Stollies Several Stolies in various state of disrair at ATGW 1 car park. On the road (well nearly) to Hindberry Grags - ATGW3 firing point this Stalwart was used as a target from ATGW1-2 it didn't last well and could not have been popular with Range Control due to the proximity of the road and any overs may hit the infrastructure of ATGW3. It was replaced by the Chieftain 00FD64 Achillies in early 2000 which was better placed away from the road. Steve

If you look in my forum Profile my occupation is an electrican - you seem to be under a misunderstanding I don't work for the MOD, my connection was entirely voluntary with the kind permision and encouragement of the former RO. If I did work for the MOD my life would be a misery by now -being hectored by eddy to find the enigmatic Otterburn Panzer. It was entirely in the control of the Range Officer and the OC training with input from interested organisations/parties such as English Heritage (for the National Park). The RAF have some control/input over targets on their range area -hence very few Stalwarts escaped from their clutches. As I said elsewhere scrapping is generally done when no further use can be found for a target, the MkI/II Conqueror was a good example it was pulled off and replaced with a CFE Chieftain but it was then found that the old tank had some "target life" remaining and it was repositioned to the west of Black Knowe mobile target complex about 300 metres north of the T55 shown earlier. When removed for scrapping they are generally scrapped to scrapyards in Newcastle-Gatehead unless some-one interceeds, but most are really of dubious value by the time they get to the scrapping point. However at least one Scout airframe and parts were recovered as was the Ferret 00EC40 which is evidently under restoration -but actually neither of these items were actively targeted. The 40mm bofors were removed for scrapping and 1 possibly 2 were recovered for museums. The aircraft off the dummy airstrip were scrapped in a yard in Blaydon and were evidently under order to be reduced to scrap -it's sometimes best not to ask questions;). This selection of aircraft debris on OTA is not a target but is the unfortunate remains of RNAF Starfighter D-8337 flown by Lt Martin Sasbrink-Harkema which crashed 3 mile west of Alwinton in the lea of Crigdon Hill in March 1983 during the Mallet Blow 1983 excercise. Lt Sasbrink-Harkema was killed he was 26 years old. Most if not all of the aircraft is still there and several articles have been written about the crash -including one that states that the remains of the RNAF Lt. was found in the wreckage- which is strange as according to witnesses the unfortunate pilot ejected at very low altitude which tends to be supported by this photo of the canopy which shows the effect of the 1st stage of ejection -blown out perspex. The pilot was taken to hospital in Newcastle and pronounced DOA -the body was then under the 1958 NATO Act returned to the RNAF and repatriated. Possibly a sign of sudden loss of power the afterburner - still on the surface The tail section complete with both the isnignia of the squadron. You don't really worry too much about the destruction of range wrecks when you come across this sort of thing:-(. RIP Lt Sasbrink-Harkema your plane is still where you left it.

Yes sad, I remember Ark Royal and Illustrious launched -I can remember aged 7 seeing a carrier and 2 submarines tied up for dismantling on the Gateshead side of the Tyne beneath the King Edward 7 railway bridge- never have found out which carrier it was though.

Of course it is Shooting-star T-Bird and Star-Fire, Talon an F5 derivative -I should have checked:blush:. Thanks for the correction. One of the wrecks could be a disarmed F80 liasion aircraft rather than a T33 trainer but they were in very poor condition, very difficult to ID. Steve

I'm rather the surprised the more well informed on the site haven't responded to this information request:confused: A motor rifle batalion would have an A/T company of 6 x 6pdr towed by Loyds with limber vehicles. No doubt normal infantry -ie those not in brigades directly supporting armoured divisions may have had their A/T towed by other probably wheeled vehicles, (U/Cs were used for towing short distances cross country to set up defensive positions). It seems fairly rare for British 6pdrs in ETO to be towed by halftracks which were primially a motorised brigade vehicle for carrying infantry in support of armour. The only other units I noted as using Halftracks towing 6pdr were US M1s towed by M3s in both infantry batalions and other units such as engineers and both Soviet and French/French Morocian. No doubt the standard brigade histories of campaigns such as Normandy will tell you the tac numbers of the various Motorised and Infantry Bats. for example the unit involved in the incident at Villers Bocage was 1st Rifles. Steve

I think it is T32092 (all Mk1-2 Churchill are five number serials) a Harland Wolfe built Churchill -the A/T ice berge is well hidden but no doubt disaster will soon strike:D. Here is another photo from the same series or film stock. Steve

Rather unwisely a pair of T33 Talon trainers (the P80-F80 Shootingstar trainer conversion) one certainly manufactured in 1951 was sited on the range at Hindberry about the most inappropriate area to place air frames,more or less in the centre of the impact area, they were soon almost un recognisable. A picture of the Scout airframes at ATGW2 hard standing- the scouts were sent to the range in late 1994 but sensibly they were not placed as active targets. Steve

While you have a point some factories in the Churchil programme could build in theory from scratch, most Churchills were built by bringing together parts from various manufacturers- there is even unco-oburated reports that some Churchill Nk1-2 turret castings may have been sourced from the USA -probably just tentative contract enquiries. The shadow factory system worked because sub contractors were often in other regions for example welded A22F hulls were supplied to Vauxhall and eventually Broom and Wade from factories as far scattered as Darlington -and be aware there were no Churchill manufactures in the North East of England. Whether Goucester Carriage manufactured entirely its own hulls I don't know but in the end Goucester Carriage became a component supplier rather than a tank assembly enterprise. Similarly other strategic components were sufficiently dispersed to prevent manufacturing bottle necks in the event of bombing- consider armour plate manufacture -with plants widely dispersed in the Black country Lincolnshire Yorkshire, North East England, North West England and South West Scotland, a Luftwaffe inspired disruption would have had to involve an air fleet a factor of 10 at least larger than the Luftwaffe was at its height. Steve

T55 at Black Knowe just west of the mobile target complex note the pick up disc and having previously painted with white stripes -it was an easy target- (bet the Taliban dont put white discs on their T55s:D) I had to investigate this tank closely as from first sight it looked like a PRC T69 with smoothbore gun as the fume extractor was at the correct position :-) however as the say when you hear hooves think horses not zebras -all that had happened was a missile hit had forced the fume extractor down the barrel- so nothing exotic just a bog standard T55. Note the deep hole dug by multiple short falls. Steve

The T54 at Dearbush Burn area -Carshope Plantation in the far background. This tank was successfully recovered under its own power after almost a decade of Northumberland weather:shocked: It sat there along with a pair of Stollies almost forgotten suffering a light dusting of mortar fire and a halfhearted attempt to KO it with a Millan -which missed T54 at Hindberry a potential target for both ATGW2 and 3 -it actually supplied its starter to get the Dearbush tank mobile.

The gateguard went sometime ago the story has been recounted on other threads. It was a Mk7 AVRE FV3903 a Post War mod. -with a piece of tube in place of the 6.5inch BL gun. The multitude of companies used in the building of the Churchill tank was a supreme example of the shadow factory system -somewhat inefficient but almost bomb proof, a necessary and far sighted plan in retrospect as some tank production was eliminated by bombing notably the T17 Tetrarch production at Metro Cammel in April 1941. Could it be done again -really would any want to:-( Steve

While I take your point I cannot wholy agree with it, anyone involved in movement control in the forces would be less than happy with that kind of design rational. Your own troops safety has to be taken into consideration as has civilians and inferstructure in the training area esp. as Stormer like other CRVT are not under the same area restrictions of MBTs etc. Here in the North East we have on going problems with enviromentalist ( IMO barely disguised anti-war and anarchist groups -but that's in danger of becoming political) who are against movement of various military vehicles both on track and on transporter and I have to say that some of the CVRT and other "light AFVs" do damage the inferstructure -mainly due to it being badly designed (the inferstructure that is) for other political reason -often as anti-car measures. Steve

Surely a split system on a car can be tested as the halves of the dual system act diagnally -(right front left rear -left front right rear) therefore any fault will show up in the standard brake test. Obviously this cannot apply to a tracked vehicle although I would have thought that a vehicle with both steering and main brakes should clasify as two separate systems -although obviously predating C & U regs if I recall correctly Shermans and other Cletrac systems use steering brakes as a main brake.

A question came up about why some Churchills lack the nuts on the hull side and toe plate. Initially Churchills Mk1,2 had armour retaining bolts which were externally flush with the face of the armoured plate, in later production longer bolts were used in areas where they could be fitted with cone shaped nuts without interfering with other components such as tracks. Churchill Mk1 this photo shows a number of the original unre-enforced bolt ends A 43rd Btn RTR tank Sprinter showing the bare hull and original split air intakes. A remanufactured Mk2 to Mk4 standard Ko'd out in Russia in Aug. 1943 it is of the 36th Guards breakthough rgt with the famous logo "For the Soviet Ukraine". A detail pic of the OTA Mk4 Merlin ex OTA showing later remanufacture improvement of welding a cone of similar dimensions to the conical nut over the original bolt end. A detail of above A close up of a conical nut and bolt. The Feldom wreck which had conical nuts and bolts and retrospective applique armour. An Excel spreadsheet of Churchill production showing the original plain hull production anotated as cream column sections and the later conical nuts and bolt hull type as light blue columns and column segments. Some production batches by Birmingham Rail Carriage, Metro Cammel and Leyland (2nd batches) have been split as the T numbers seem to have been issued in two runs- therefore a batch of plain hulls have later numbers than those with conical nuts, may have been due to contracts and components being transfered. The graph is extrapolated from approximately 7% observation of tank numbers. To use the first batch as an example Vauxhall built 450 tank of which about 413 should be plain hulls. Notes The graph only shows approx. number of each type of hull built by the various contractors -it does not take into account dates of manufacture. The graph shows only the five figure tank numbers in the ranges T31*** T32*** T67 *** T68*** T69***. Later manufacture in the 6 figure Tank numbers T17**** T25**** T34**** have not been included as all these tanks have either conical nuts-bolts or as Mk7 and 8 were welded A22F hulls. Steve

I think it will have been the same as photo 1 on my Post No#19 the bit under the doors would have been a liablity on an in service tank -reducing the ground clearnace so is possibly something to do with the Volvo conversion- I certainly never seen it on a M1-M50 or M51 or its derivatives. Steve

Yes they were -a bit like sheep I'll be posting them in the near future. Steve

Two general views of the Centurion Mk7. Steve

Looking down into the open turret View of the window cut in the glacis. The overall colour was Red/White as a survey target, the vehicle was seldom engaged by heavy weapons althoug at one time it had been on fire and had lost all rubber from the wheels- In 1965 during trials it (assuming it is 43BA64) burnt out the engine after a fuel problem and backfire.