steveo578

I thought it was 48hours but I could be wrong, I saw the documentary,- reasonably interesting but I would have been happier to see more of the original movie, typical BBC style -group hug documentary which no doubt appeals to the majority of viewers.

The ones I mention were all bog burials so if they ever are found they will stand a good chance of a rust free recovery.

Hi eddy In russia anything found belongs to the state. However there are several instances of stories of sunken tanks in the UK - A valentine in Scotland -two instances of Covenantors sunk in Yorkshire and a story of a troops of covenantors driven into a bog -evidently to get rid of them -but no specific area given. Steve

All but one of the tanks really existed - only the lengthened KV is mythical -although a triple turreted model of SMK was presented to Stalin who promtly ripped a turret off saying "why make a tank into a department store".

Sorry about that I have reposted the pics and hope they remain in place- I notice that they had dissappeared from my HMVF photo archive- I suppose that if the system sees them as none posted they will disappear even if they have been posted but they were actually there if opened in a separate window -bloody computers:computerrage: Steve

Dare I say it your explaination has proved my point Bovington does not own all Gateguards that was the purpose of my post -QED as I said in my previous post That was 2002 some 10 years after CFE 1991 (Conventional Forces [reduction] in Europe) was signed. Your intepretation of CFE is incorrect in a number of points not least in that weapons to be disposed of under CFE had to be functional at the time of their disposal therefore no range wreck Comets allowed and that the Soviets circumvented it by transfering armour to the Marines is also mythology - the treaty was Forces not armies, and both Britain and USA have marines too. CFE is very complex -really I need only say that "we was conned" Anyway the minutiae of this treaty would make for a very boring post -so I propose a CFE treaty for HMVF -Friends of the Tank Museum should stop bigging up Bovington and I'll stop saying that Bovington is not all powerful- otherwise we are going to get into a position of having a flaming argument which will have to be resolved by our own MOD and I have set my own limit on the number of awards I will accept. However enjoy these photos of CFE Chieftains after disposal. Above and below showing the shaped charge damaged to the barrel, note the engine door open to damage the motor by blast. 3rd photo showing hull damage breaking the back of the tank The IMW Sherman V mentioned previosly Steve

Is the such a thing of a Civilian Mobile Nuclear Artillery, The nuclear artillery that gets me was called the Davy Crockett a nuclear mortar bomb fitted on a 155mm recoiless gun firing a weapon with a yeld of upto 250tons equiv. out to a max range of 4,000metres. :nut: it was carried in a M113 personel carrier Steve

Good please present your evidence- IMO Bovington writ only applies to depots and regiments that are affiliated to RAC or RTR and have signed over their holding to Bovington or Bovington has loan the exhibit to the regiment. As I said before the Conqueror at Castlemartin came from IWM who teams had recovered 2 Conqs from Fingringhoe range Essex in the early 1980s 41BA22 was placed there by IWM as a Gateguard in place of 41BA04 which was sent for refurbishment. The Bulford admin block gateguard a Sherman V was recovered in Germany and refurbished by IWM and is their asset. Despite the reduction in size of the forces there are still other arms of services RA,RE,REME and infantry who may have vehicles as part of their duties including the RAF -and may have AFVs as exhibits and gateguards but it doesn't mean they are owned by Bovington. Proir to 2002 Otterburn Training Area HQ had a large number of exhibits-gateguards including Saladin, Saracen Pig, Ferret -can't remember if there was a FV432 but could have been, these were all disposed of in 2002 and David Fletcher told me Bovington had no control over their disposal, as they had not been supplied by Bovington they were in the gift of the Base Commander, sometimes it has gone the other way when bases have "gifted"/dumped their unwanted assets at Bovington as happened when Warminister disposed of its infantry AFV. In the 1970s the French authorities gave exceptional rights to Samaur in that the property rights of all ex Wehrmacht AFVs (even those in private hands) reverted to the museum, I am quite sure if something similar had happened, in that the Government had given Bovington (which is not part of the MOD) rights over gateguards I'm sure it would have been trumpeted ad nuseum by both Tracklink and Tanktimes, as I been a member of Friends for more years than I care to remember I sure I might have heard something I'm not that deaf. Steve

That's a bit of a stretch, especially as it way out of context- that Panther were used in the Arab Israeli conflict To use that argument one could say that France was liberated in 1944 by french guns as the M3 gun of the Sherman is a distant cousin of the Mle 1897:nut: The CN 75 5 you mention as fitted to the M50 Sherman was developed from that fitted to the AMX 13 and while it was developed from KWK 42 fitted to the Panther the Israelis would have prefered the 17pdr gun to upgrade their Shermans had the British not been antipathic to them. The French weapon was vastly different in its production configuration being very much shorter (about 12cal) and a smaller chamber capacity. The only AFV that was armed with a KWK42 type weapon that saw service in the Arab Israeli wars were several Jagdpanzer 4 L/70 (vomag) used by the Syrians using the StuK 42, the SPG version of the Panther gun. The Syrians used more ex Wehrmacht weapons than any other country in the mid-east having Panzer 4 Stug3 Vomag JP4 L/48 and L/70 and a few Hummels, the Eygptians managed to field a battery of 4 15cm SIG auf Panzer 2 which had been swept up after the 1942 battles in Eygpt. surprisingly the nearest the Israeli got to use Wehrmacht AFVs was a plan to buy 80 Hetzers from the czechs in 1948 which fell though. Steve

I would imagine doing the computer set up in a modern weapons system would take best part of a day- considering that it couldn't be done in paralel to the construction. but the point about a propergander exercise is very valid- many aircraft components particularly in the US were almost modular -allowing kits of parts to be shipped to other plants for final assembly. Steve

I assume it is a somewhat sloppy method of distinguishing between a 5th wheel and a balast bodied vehicle, I heard of a type B before but don't bite my head off it's not my designation -I'm only offering an explaination:(.

It's called short tracking, seen that done on Chieftains and Cents it is also done on valentines - John Pearson short tracked his Valentine once when the idler failed, - it was very common in service on valentines esp. those operated by the Russians who were often a long way from service. Ex Catterick driver training Chieftain with a short track around road wheel 3 having sheared the front idler. Canadian Valentine in Russia knocked out after crew made good a sprocket failure in an attempt to tow it away- desparate days. One of the reasons behind the various gaps in torsion bar suspension vehicles -notably on Soviet T54 but also apparent on T62 (althought the gap is between 3 and 4 - 5 and 6) is to clear internal components, in the T62 in particular bogie arm 4 trails and bogie arm 5 leads to allow the motor- power train to sit between the tranverse bars and in the T54 the drivers compartment clearance. In the T62 the drivers seat fits between station 1 and 2 and sometimes bogies have to be positioned with gaps to allow balance of load and C of G. similar to the T54, the U.S T95 series of tank -which had the floor bulged downward between stations 1 and 2 to allow for an even lower seated position for the driver. Steve

I admire Robins intergrity and possibly using a different shade of eau de nil works in the short term but it certainly would need some form of "not the genuine/original article stamp" in the long term. I suppose the important thing is to alter the none original component to fit and avoid any alteration the original structure or mechanisms.

not unless this is the result of some recent agreement, I can think of at least one Sherman that is IWM and the old Castlemartin gateguard Conqueror was certainly IWM too.

The Renault FT was used widely in WW2 and one is reputed to have been dumped into the pond/lake near the power plant on Alderney at the end of WW2, they were in use elsewhere in Europe in WW2 and several were used in Afghanistan possibly even after WW2- one or two stolen from the Kabul War Museum were used as bunkers guard shelters prior to the 2001 invasion. Two were recovered from a junk yard by US troops and are now in USA. Britain had an FT possibly from a Ex Narvik bound french transport ship- it ended up on Barry range in Scotland. Many other nations had FTs on their books in 1939 -Poland, Yugoslavia, Romania, Baltic states even Finland had some for training. Schneider et St Chamond GPF 194mm design dates from WW1 but like the British/US international it was a design that didn't quite make WW1. THe only other WW1 tanks used in WW2 were British. Bovington museum examples used as OPs around Dorestshire and several used as training hulks such as a MkV* used by RE bridging est. Cristchurch as a bridging make weight. Several MkVs were captured in France by the Wehrmacht in 1940 these were disarmed range vehicles which would have become targets had the invasion not happened when it did. There were also a few MkV captured in Estonia where at least 2 were hidden to avoid capture by the Russians or Germans and still exist. A MkIV or MkV may have been captured at Minsk but it may have been part of a war memorial.

George Washington's axe as in the cherry tree incident is a completely mythical story, but perhaps all none original parts should be stamped "George Washington" in memory of the honesty story.

Yes, all of that, but it depends on the range- The largest live bombs permitted on ranges in UK is about 250kg -most live bombs dropped at OTA are about half that -but some huge buggers were dropped in 2002 during training for the 2nd Iraq war, the cratters are proof enough. Prior to this there were a small herd of stalwarts most with Hi-Ab on the air range- jealously guarded by RAF and only targeted with cannon, but they suffered very badly during the 2002 training. The only range in UK that allows larger bombs is Cape Wrath where 1000kg can be dropped on the Island target. I don't know what restrictions are current at Tain and Somercoats (humber). However practice bombs of up to 1000kg that are used on air ranges by their kenetic energy alone they would take the cab/ balast box clean off an Antar -don't care how mighty they are:-D additionally 30mm cannon firing either live or practice as done on OTA,Tain and Somercoats are very destructive on soft targets. I no idea what are the rules on Canadian air weapons ranges. [ATTACH=CONFIG]34435[/ATTACH] Just for fun;- a bare hull of an FV432 blown up and fell tail first back into the cratter on the OTA air range. the red cross on the floor plate was from a previous target application. Steve

Never thought I would post these trucks as a stop line on the OTA air range What would happen if civilian vehicles were used;- a Bedford CF work bus used as personel carriers by the forces, these were variously positioned on the air range including either side of the bailey bridge all were more or less flattened , There are a couple of elderly civilian cars -probably Ford Popular or Vauxhall 8 at the end of OTA air range at Redesdale where the aircraft target were once, -both cars were buried either deliberately or by accident. Nearbye is the chassis of a short wheelbase tractor unit possibly a Crossley or Commer- but despite a search I can't find the pic. Bedford QL GS not on the air range but subject to intermitent light gun and mortar fire- surprisingly many vehicles manage to still have inflated tires even after years on the range. Remains of a 25pdr traversing ring on OTA air range.

Yes far too easy a target -don't think the Talebs use any as "technicals" from news stories most use cross country motor bikes -and I would have thought RCMP will have confiscated pentry of bikes from biker gangs over the years:D It will last about one pass by a modern aircraft then it will be down to a bare chassis. Anyway IMO a swap for an M4A2 76 HVSS would be a good deal.

At one time there were various motors from AFVs to act as educational exhibits at the then School of Tank Technology and Bovington Museum and at various "trade" schools. for example the transmission and motor of an early M3 Grant is/was displayed at Bovington and of course there is still an armament display which if I remember correctly included WW2 German AFV guns. As to what happened to these motors particularly those at Shrivenham -who knows- concern over outdated exhibits was fairly lax at Shrivenham at one time and stuff disappeared -one example was the Kugelblitz turret c/w stand was exchanged/gifted back to Germany and if the Tiger 1 in the Bovington collection is a tank-chav magnet then surely the Kugelblitz turret and for that matter the Jagdpanzer 4 L/70 would have been too, -but then the public were not allowed to be au fait with the acquisitions policy and regulations of either Shrivenham or Bovington. Often the Shivenham staff were seriously out of touch -during a visit by Bovington Friends many years ago -a minor spat occured as to whether members should be allowed access to a T62, the staff member was actually surprised to be told that T62s were so common place that numbers were even then in private hands. Steve

useful post , I must make an effort to view it. I wonder how valid a competition to build a bomber was -different bombers would take different time and assume the bomber in the USA -california would be either a B17 or B24 although it could be a B25 or B26 which is about a similar sized aircraft- however it is difficult to weigh one aircraft type against another, I would imagine the Wellington with its geodesic structure would lend itself to a comparatively rapid build although British construction practices may not. As an aside did they really think using a Canadian to do the commentry would be more sympathetically heard by a U.S audience?

Some sources say FV432 etc 91 links per track new, I haven't seen any figure for the Abbot but I would have thought as it has a longer track on the ground it should have more.

However remember the professional £14-25 insulated connectors tool does not work on the bare connectors and visa -versa -for people who don't need both tools professionally the cheap multi-tools are probably a better buy -although they certainly don't do the job as well (or as brutally) as the expensive ratchet models.

Very interesting, looks like it should have gone to the local scrap yard along with the MG turret I mentioned, I wonder if it is even armoured plate, There are certainly alot better things to spend £25k on.

Dunno I think we/taxpayers/army have had their money worth out of 432s over the years:D The thing that got me about the video is those idiot drivers thinking the crew of a Scimitar could hear them beeping there little horns -or for that matter that the crew would give a damn, the bridge re-enforcement looked a bit ify too.