steveo578

In December 1999 six further chieftains were sent to OTA for targeting due to the 2001 FAM outbreak it would be nearly 3years before all were finally positioned. They were amongst the first targets received at OTA to be de-poluted, however their arrival caused another outbreak of anti-army protests by an organisation called "road watch". these tanks both arrived with the offside track short tracked after loosing their idler. Steve

In 1994 ten CFE designated Chieftains arrived at Redesdale camp for destruction -the central bogies were already removed and the breach blocks were stored in the mudguard boxes.

Otterburn Chieftains The first otterburn Chieftain targets were surplus (wilich) turrets a pair each at Quickencote HESH range and a pair (yellow painted) on the mobile range at bushmans road. Quickcote turrets Bushmans mobile target range hard target turrets after there removal for scrap or relocation Note the dilapidated ferret 00EC40 in the background

nothing much wrong with them - certainly debatable whether a digital or direct transfer from negs to computer would be any better. The tanks are at the Battle for Normandy Museum and the Hill 112 Memorial tank -I could be wrong but that tank may have been recovered by Carl Brown from the Thetford training area. Unfortunately a Mk7 that is of later build date than the battle for which it is a memorial. Steve

I'll be putting some up on the Otterburn thread given some time -problem is A). Avoiding duplication with photos I've put up on other threads B) Getting them uploaded from prints via scanner- it does take time. In the mean time there is a search facility on the forum which can be useful. Couple of CFE victims on OTA Steve

Apart from a touch of creosote on the track + 15 or 16 years of sunshine and rain I don't think much has been done with the Eden camp Churchill since I took this pic. Shame really even a rub down with an oily rag would help:( Steve

Yes the curved rails were well thought out -in effect they were an extension of the standard rails on the upper sponson which the Churchill had in place of return rollers. However other things weren't so well thought out. For the most part the best way to recover a tank is to do it like the REME do, in this case it would require railway sleepers paralel to the side and jack up the side, pull the track through beneath the wheels and drop the tank onto the track- repeat on the other side. Reconnect both tracks. The scheme (not mine:() for recovering Merlin was to jack up the rear, pull through the tracks as far as possible under the wheels, let down the rear and push/pull and winch the tank backward until completly onto the track. The problems were multiple, several left side bogies were trashed, additionally the 39ton tank it was completely full of concrete so the jacking up of the rear caused the nose to sink markedly and without a large recovery vehicle it proved impossible to firstly winch the tank backward onto its tracks with a small tracked bulldozer and secondly push it with a large truck-tractor unit. It was recovered months later after more suitable kit was bought in. The first and second photos show the tank jacked up at the rear With the tracks pulled half way through the tank was let down onto the track and an attempt was made to push the tank backward. As an aside the blast plates from Merlin were used to support the jacks and were wrecked- blast plates are not that easy to manufacture. It was certainly a nice Churchill -I wonder where it is now. Steve

Hi Hanno Certainly is -for the interest of members of the forum -note the curved rail around the sprocket to allow the track to move without engaging the teeth.- necessary as the transmission compartment was/is still filled with concrete and it proved impossible to release the sprocket drive spline shafts. Two photos of the sprocket spline access. On Merlin with bolts removed to withdraw the sline shaft- however it was necessary to access the transmission itself as the spline would not release, the cover plate was reattached. A view of another Churchill target tank shows the cover removed and the spline extracted- for correct recovery after the spline is withdrawn the sproket support and the cover should be replaced otherwise the bearings of the sprocket will be put under severe strain- in the case of tanks due for targeting it did not matter. It's a generallisation but if a wreck is found with the splines out it was towed into place, with splines in place -assuming it has a transmission drive train in place it probably got there under its own power. Steve

Yes the British stuff is more viable as a project and are full of character- the StuGs shown look as though the Pansar Museum has already picked over the carcase for any spare necessary to keep there own collection going. If money was no object I would prefer to spend it restoring something like the wreck T28 that is in the Finnish collection. Steve

The Mantlet came off a range wreck see http://hmvf.co.uk/forumvb/showthread.php?15743-two-tracked-vehicles&highlight=feldom post#9 . This was a concreted target and the remains of the turret were salvaged some years ago. FYI there were no drivers hatches on this target. Steve

It's a target on the Otterburn ranges- when I was last there it hadn't taken too many shots but could rapidly deteriorate -although it had been externally burnt- and has lost all road wheel rubber. It was very high on Cridgon hill in the centre of the main range. A number of OTA targets placed in the mid to late 1970s were probably ex Chertsey.

you really don't like Saracens do you:D

Hi eddy There is a genuine Mk1 at CFB Borden Canada -it went there in WW2 for a extreme cold weather trials and decided to emigrate:D. The thing at Bovington is a Mk2 and is one of the early Churchills -the Mk1 and 2s were built at the same time- there wasn't nearly enough 3inch howitzers to make all of them as Mk1, so the bovington one should be put back to Mk2 standard -it would still be a rare and significant tank. A lot of the Pirbright stuff was prototypes (although apart from the mild steel pilots all early Churchills were prototypes -as one wit put it "actually we have 500 protoypes") the Matilda is from the pilot series and it is very interesting to see the way the front hull is constructed -great photos. Steve

The Submersible Centurion 43BA64 and 43BA95 were test vehicles to give Centurions the cabablity that Soviet T54-55 had as standard. Submersible tanks date back to a prototype A9 which crossed the River Stour in 1940 -the Soviets had already developed the technique on a T28 and the Germans had developed a Pzkfw3 and Pzkfw4 submesibles which were used on 22nd june 1941 to storm across the River Bug at the begining of Barbarosa. So by April 1965 how far had the British developed the technique of submersible tanks? This is the what is believed to be first prototype 43BA64 which was burnt out during trials during ex. ploughshare. As a prototype the roof plate was removed -the dirver had a glazed section in the Glacis, it would seem there was a tendency for the tank to become bouyant on the nose so a crude hole was cut in the hull floor where the water tank was to stop the tanks nose porpoising.

No mate That's the Submersible Cent different story. Robin meant the DD tank which floated by displacement. Steve

Possibly but speculation exercises the grey matter- the reason I think there may be more to it is why bother going to that effort and ending up with a tank that doesn't resemble any service vehicle- consider that the Danish Universal carrier dummy tanks were a silhoette of an M24 -an in service vehicle. A towed target would be just as effective with a 40lb plate target welded onto a cut down ferret or even a Landy chassis. Sometime ago I had a discussion with David Fletcher about the Comres Comet which had turned up on the OTA - and although at the time it was still under the 30years rule he found an interesting article in an old RAC Journal with a number of strange little concept tanks -with reduced turrets and/or oscilating turrets. Similar continental designs such as the French Leger EVEN look somewhat similar to the photo shown in post #1 Photo of the Bovington Ram which seems to be a "mover" and was possibly a British conversion- perhaps replacing an earlier type possibly based on the Matilda. Comet ETT as a range target there is a preserved one I think at the Royal Hussars museum. there also seems to be 2 different build standards the preserved one has heavy additional armour. apart from the Cent there was also a Conqueror which carried a target above its turret -with its gun removed so possibly a mobile target. The ETT were used for shooting at by the early ATWG missiles such as Vigilant and as mentioned inert Wombat -although most firing would be done with the ranging MG. Carl Gustav has also been mentioned but that seems unlikely as I don't think there is a true inert round for the 84mm RL- but I could be wrong -I've just never seen one. The USA built ETT too laterly based on M103 tanks (used to trial inert Tow missile but certainly used M4A3E2 Jumbos just after WW2 to be shot at by up to 50cal ball and possibly inert RLs. The Israelis also used a heavily modified Sherman- which is in the Latrun Collection

Go to this site http://www.michaeljohngrist.com/ruins-gallery-2/ The tank is a USMC M4A2 75 VVSS with the welded style drivers hods and a one piece transmission cover. Steve

It may one of the saipan wrecks

Rog8811 Excellent photos, thanks for posting. FYI eddy the churchill with the turret remains inside is a Mk1 there is another nearbye which is a Mk2. Steve

Ok you lot:nono: Come on then 'fes up I know one of you totters has got it:cool2: just confess - you know it will be good for your soul:angel:

Can this be verified:??? as oposed to a written report/article, it might have been disposed of but was it cut up and scrapped :??? Steve

Yes thanks:-)

not much point in informing the BBC they are wrong -last week BBC Radio 4 reported that Sodium Cholide NaCl was bleach:wow: and that 50 minus 5% was 45:-X

The DD Centurion was 00BA95 a Mk3 fitted with what was probably salvaged screen and components from the FV201 DD, The Cent was trialed at Fremington Sands AWXE in 1954 it was found unsatisfactory mainly the lack of speed in deflating and lack of gun depression. Another Cent was fitted with 12 lightweight sheet steel blow off panels -it was called inland Water Obstacle Crossing equipment, it wasn't successful. A final type called rigid panel flotation equipment was also trialed as was a inflatable rubber ring -like tyre inner tube was also trialed again without result.

Yes it's probably called "Rue de Flick" -ie the gendarmes will have you on the way out. The Shermans photographed were fairly early production- although its possible that hull swaps haven't happened during their MADP life -they only taken out of service after the attempted OAS coup in 1962.