Gate Guardians

[Peter4456]

If the MOD continue their apparent programme of disposing of UK Gate Guardians, then Withams please put me down for this one, seen this weekend at Lulworth Camp, Dorset (with a Challenger I on the other side of the road and a Saladin visible further inside the camp)!!

 

[robin craig]

When you get it Peter I have road wheel end caps and a few traverse gear motors for it!

 

R

[Big Al]

I Belive all Gate Guardians belong to the Tank museum bovington.

Al

[steveo578]

Big Al

I Belive all Gate Guardians belong to the Tank museum bovington.

 

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.

[Stone]

Surely they wouldn't gate guardian something unless it was beyond economical repair...would they?

 

I'd expect there to be something disastrously wrong with it, anyway. :???

 

Stone

[JoelH]

I Belive all Gate Guardians belong to the Tank museum bovington.

Al

 

I think Alec is correct.

[Richard Farrant]

Surely they wouldn't gate guardian something unless it was beyond economical repair...would they?

 

I'd expect there to be something disastrously wrong with it, anyway. :???

 

Stone

 

 

If you are refering to the Warrior, it is a trials vehicle, check out the "NC" ARN. The recovery version in the REME Museum collection is also NC ( meaning Non Census), and if I recollect, not made of armoured metals.

[steveo578]

Fruitbat

I think Alec is correct

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

[John Pearson]

No doubt there are gate guardian vehicles that are not owned by Bovington but I agree with Big Al that most are but it is nothing to do with who placed them there. I believe it is due to the Conventional Arms Limitation Treaty (or some such title!). This decreed the totals of tanks, artillery pieces etc that the members of the Warsaw Pact and NATO could have. The negotiators agreed that everything with a 75mm gun or bigger was an MBT and had to be included in the counting, which of course included saladins and scorpions but excluded the various Eastern Bloc vehicles with their 73mm guns. Anyway, any tanks owned by the Army were counted, but not if they were part of a Museum collection. Hence, a range recovery Comet on a plinth was counted as a live AFV unless it was given over to Bovy (or to a lesser degree IWM) and that is what happened. The 'surplus' Cheiftains were disarmed with a large cutting charge that cut the turret, turret ring and hull. The USSR by the way moved thousands of T54/55/62 to their Marines where they were not counted!

[steveo578]

John Pearson Re: Gate Guardians

No doubt there are gate guardian vehicles that are not owned by Bovington but I agree with Big Al that most are but it is nothing to do with who placed them there. I believe it is due to the Conventional Arms Limitation Treaty (or some such title!). This decreed the totals of tanks, artillery pieces etc that the members of the Warsaw Pact and NATO could have. The negotiators agreed that everything with a 75mm gun or bigger was an MBT and had to be included in the counting, which of course included saladins and scorpions but excluded the various Eastern Bloc vehicles with their 73mm guns. Anyway, any tanks owned by the Army were counted, but not if they were part of a Museum collection.

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

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

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

Edited September 15, 2010 by steveo578
problem with photos

[eddy8men]

the million dollar question we all want answered is there a chance for us mere mortals to obtain/swap a gate guardian or is it an avenue that has been well and truly travelled to no avail by others and also does anyone know of a previous gate guardian that has been obtained this way. the sheffield churchill comes to mind although that was more of a smash and grab affair and it wasn't a military site. which raises another point are there any non military ww2 guardians about, a £50 reward will be given by me for every tank you can get for me

 

eddy

[ferrettkitt]

 

However enjoy these photos of CFE Chieftains after disposal.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]34693[/ATTACH]

Above and below showing the shaped charge damaged to the barrel, note the engine door open to damage the motor by blast.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]34691[/ATTACH]

3rd photo showing hull damage breaking the back of the tank

[ATTACH=CONFIG]34690[/ATTACH]

The IMW Sherman V mentioned previosly

[ATTACH=CONFIG]34692[/ATTACH]

 

Steve

 

I can not see you're pictures at the moment.. disgraceful giving a description and no pictures:-D

[REME 245]

If you have the right contacts and your face fits there is always the possibility of acquiring or swapping a gate guardian.

 

I can think of a person who acquired a number of Daimler Armoured Cars and spares from others being used as gate guardians.

 

I was meant to be restoring the Daimler Armoured Car for the RWY at Swindon but they gave it away to another unit after assuring me that they would never do it. They then in turn swapped it for a working Saladin from a private collector.

 

The Sheffield Churchill was discussed on a different thread at the time. It is was indeed owned by the Council as some claimed, anyone can submit a Freedom of Information request for a full disclosure on any deal.

[steveo578]

ferretkitt

.. disgraceful giving a description and no pictures:-D

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

Edited September 15, 2010 by steveo578

[eddy8men]

i thought the sheffield churchill fell into a legal loophole as it was owned by a family business with links to the old churchill factory and placed on the plinth by them, the company was then dissolved and the churchill was not counted as an asset and so it had no legal owner but you'd probably have to be some kind of lawyer to figure all that out :cool2:

 

eddy

[antar]

i thought the sheffield churchill fell into a legal loophole as it was owned by a family business with links to the old churchill factory and placed on the plinth by them, the company was then dissolved and the churchill was not counted as an asset and so it had no legal owner but you'd probably have to be some kind of lawyer to figure all that out :cool2:

 

eddy

 

All the guys at TC Harrison JCB thought I had nicked it ! took some convincing them that I had not. They were most upset to arrive for work on Monday morning and find it gone. You must have been very close to it recently after talking to you last night ?

[recymech66]

Just a few gate guardians from BATUS.

 

BATUS HQ Chieftain.

 

BATUS HQ Centurian.

 

Camp Crowfoot Challenger 2.

 

Camp Crowfoot Challenger 2.

[eddy8men]

john, i've got to be honest i had the same idea about swiping the sheffield churchill but my plan was to swap it for a cosmetically restored range wreck and restore the sheffield churchill to running condition, apparently it was driven onto the plinth under it's own steam and then left with the engine running with no oil to sieze it and so make it immobile but other than that it was good to go. i might have missed my chance with that one but there's still plenty more fish in the sea/ranges.

 

eddy

[steveo578]

eddy8men

..... missed my chance with that one but there's still plenty more fish in the sea/ranges.

 

 

It's a learning curve -get in while you have the chance- but certainly you may have learned why people tend to keep none gateguard discoveries to themselves:-)

[Big Al]

Just a few gate guardians from BATUS.

 

BATUS HQ Chieftain.

 

BATUS HQ Centurian.

 

Camp Crowfoot Challenger 2.

 

Camp Crowfoot Challenger 2.

I wounder if they were runners when placed there ! They do look in good order from the photos or freashly painted.

Al

[steveo578]

I think the Cent. might have been a donor vehicle for the TV programme rebuilding another Canadian Cent. So might have been a runner long ago but not now.

 

Steve

[recymech66]

They weren't runners as such, the packs will have been removed and used in other vehicles.

[robin craig]

The donor and recipient Centurions you are thinking about both belong the the Ontario Regiment Museum chaps down in Oshawa. I am ready to be proved wrong but I hold this to be true.

 

 

R

[John Pearson]

 

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.

 

 

Steve

 

Steve,

You are not my ex wife posting under an assumed name are you???

I and about 160,000 visitors per year like the Tank Museum, you obviously don't and choose not to support it. I am sure both I and the Museum will be able to live with that. I am not aware of anyone 'bigging up' (what???) the Museum or claiming it is 'all powerful' and was certainly not aware that HMVF might in some way be in opposition to the Friends of the Tank Museum?

Perhaps I should get you to proof read my posts before posting them if you are going to be so pedantic? Of course, there will obviously be many score of 'gate guardians' that the Tank Museum is not responsible for, aircraft at RAF bases for one thing, anchors ar Navy bases, the JCB outside the factory by Uttoxeter, a yellow submarine on a garage in Devon (if it is still there?) and even a Cheiftain on an industrial estate local to me. I think it is clearly implicit that we are talking about the officially placed large AFV gate guardians. Some time ago I saw a very very long list of such items, the annual stocktake of gate guardians which Bovington IS responsible for, transfered 'en masse' to remove from Army census. Clearly, I did not then drive round the country to cross reference or count any that they were not responsible for but the list was so long there can't have been many spare plinths left.

I will have to hit Big Al on the head with a spanner for having the temerity to say ' I think all gate guardians' when of course he should have said 'I think the vast majority of tank gate guardians'. I am sure he feels the level of shame appropriate to the degree of this error.

Thanks for correction about CFE. No doubt I could have looked up the correct title if I could have been bothered!

Cheers

John

[andym]

... a yellow submarine on a garage in Devon (if it is still there?) ...

 

Eh? Tell me more!

 

Andy