Historie Podcasts

Biskop, Carrier, Valentine, 25pdr pistol

Biskop, Carrier, Valentine, 25pdr pistol



We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

Biskop, Carrier, Valentine, 25pdr pistol

Biskoppen eller biskoppen, bæreren, Valentine, 25pdr kanon, var en selvkørende pistol produceret som svar på en presserende anmodning fra Midtøsten Kommando.

Anmodningen blev udsendt i juni 1941 som reaktion på ørkenkrigets hurtige karakter. Ordren blev videregivet til Birmingham Railway Carriage, et af de selskaber, der byggede Valentine. De tog chassiset til Valentine II, fjernede tårnet og erstattede det med en kasseformet overbygning med åben top. Dette bar 25-punderen samt en Bren-pistol på et åbent luftværnsbeslag. Der var plads til 32 runder med 25pdr ammunition.

Prototypen Bishop var klar til forsøg i august 1941, og i november 1941 blev der bestilt 100. Leveringer begyndte tidligt i 1942. I juli 1942 blev yderligere 50 bestilt, og den sidste blev leveret i januar 1943.

Biskoppen led af en række problemer. Den havde en høj silhuet, og pistolen havde begrænset tværgående (4 grader til hver side) og højde (til 15 grader), hvilket begrænsede pistolens rækkevidde. Alligevel blev det brugt i kampene i den vestlige ørken, Tunesien og på Sicilien.

Et regiment af biskopper blev knyttet til den Valentine-udstyrede 23. pansrede brigade under det andet slag ved Alamein for at kompensere for manglen på en nærstående Valentine.

Biskoppen blev udfaset efter ankomsten af ​​den amerikanske M7 -præst med sin 105 mm kanon, og derefter canadiske Sexton, der bar en 25pdr i et bedre mount. Biskoppen blev henvist til uddannelsesopgaver.


Anden Verdenskrigs database


ww2dbase Biskoppen var den første britiske indsats på en selvkørende pistol og var nyttig til at vise typen potentiale, og hvad man skal undgå i fremtidige designs. I hele 1941 havde de britiske og Commonwealth-divisioner i den vestlige ørken lidt at bekæmpe de godt pansrede tyske mediumtanke bortset fra den næsten ubrugelige Boyes Anti-Tank Rifle og problemet 2-pdr (40 mm) Anti-Tank-pistol fra Divisional Anti-Tank Regimenter. Selvom disse var rimeligt effektive mod letpansrede italienske tanke, var de fuldstændig utilstrækkelige til at påtage sig de tungere pansrede tyske tanks (PzKfw III og IV) ansat ved Panzer Regiments of Rommel 's Afrika Korps (DAK). Den eneste virkelig effektive måde at tackle panserne på var at anvende Royal Artillerys 25-punds feltbatterier i anti-tank-rollen. Selvom disse var i stand til at slå de tyske tanke ud, manglede de desværre den mobilitet og beskyttelse, der var nødvendig for krigsførelse i de åbne vidder i det nordafrikanske terræn og manglede en passende AT -runde. I modsætning til tyskerne, der havde udviklet selvkørende kanoner siden 1938, havde briterne ikke forestillet sig brug af sådanne køretøjer lige siden Birch -pistolen var blevet afvist af Det Kongelige Artilleri i 1925. Følgelig da den britiske hær i Mellemøsten oplevede effekter af tysk selvkørende artilleri, det ville ikke tage lang tid, før de krævede et lignende våben. En hastig løsning var påtrængende påkrævet.

ww2dbase Designarbejde blev udført af Birmingham Railway Carriage and Wagon Company, hvis første forslag var at montere en 25 mm antitankpistol i en Valentine-tank. Dette viste sig ikke at lykkes, og det blev derefter foreslået, at det skulle være muligt at montere en 25-Pdr Mk II-haubits på tankchassiset, hvis tårnet blev fjernet og erstattet med en stift monteret, høj, pladesidet pansret kasse. Ved hjælp af Valentine II, drevet af en AEC 131 hk dieselmotor, chassis som grundlag, begyndte produktionen på Vickers Ltd fabrik i Elswick i begyndelsen af ​​1942, og de første køretøjer, nu navngivet "Bishop " (nomenklaturen menes at har sin oprindelse i det 121. feltregiment RA), nåede den vestlige ørken i tide til at deltage i det 2. slag ved El Alamein (oktober 1942).

ww2dbase Biskoppen led desværre af en række ulemper. Det var langsomt (13 mph) og ubehageligt, og boksens grænser betød, at pistolen ikke kunne nå maksimal højde (højde på 15 grader og depression på 5 grader), hvilket derfor stærkt begrænsede kanonernes rækkevidde til kun 5852 meter (6400 yards) ) -mindre end halvdelen af ​​den rækkevidde, den kunne nå på en normal markvogn. De fire mands besætning blev alvorligt hæmmet i deres arbejde af rummet i kassen, som også skulle rumme de 32 runder ammunition ud over det rum, der blev optaget af pistol og besætning. Kanonerne krydsede var lige så fattige på blot 8 grader. Derudover viste det sig, at biskopens høje silhuet udgjorde et glimrende mål for fjendtlige kanoner.

ww2dbase Da biskoppen blev introduceret, blev 25-punderen ikke længere brugt i en anti-tank-rolle. I slutningen af ​​1942 blev denne rolle i stigende grad påtaget af de nye 6-Pdr (57 mm) antitankpistoler, der begyndte at ankomme i teatret i betydelige mængder. Så biskopperne blev omdirigeret til artilleribrug.

ww2dbase Hundrede biskopper blev bygget i juli 1942, og næsten alle blev brugt i de nordafrikanske kampagner, selvom nogle fortsatte i aktion på Sicilien og i de første uger af kampagnen i Italien. Det blev hurtigst muligt erstattet af den amerikanskbyggede 105 mm M7 Priest eller den canadiske 25-pdr Sexton. Som et design til at imødekomme en nødsituation tjente biskoppen sit formål tilstrækkeligt på et vigtigt tidspunkt i krigen, men måske var biskoppernes mest nyttige funktion som et instruktionsmiddel til at lære regimenter udgangspunktet for selvkørende våbentaktik.

ww2dbase Kilder:
The Illustrated Encyclopaedia of Military Vehicles (Ian V Hogg & amp; John Weeks, -Hamlyn, 1980)
Pansrede kampvogne (Philip Trewbitt, Dempsey-Parr, 1999)
Tanke og andre pansrede kampvogne 1942-45 (BT White, Blandford Press, 1975)
Tankkampe i miniature (Donald Featherstone, Patrick Stephens ltd, 1977)

Sidste større revision: september 2009

Valentine Mk I biskop

MaskineriEn AEC A190 dieselmotor vurderet til 131 hk
AffjedringSpole fjedrede trehjulede bogier
Bevæbning1x QF 25pdr haubits (32 runder), 1x7,7 mm Bren -maskingevær
Rustning8-60 mm skrog, 13-51 mm overbygning
Mandskab4
Længde5,53 m
Bredde2,63 m
Højde2,83 m
Vægt17,0 t
Hastighed24 km/t
Rækkevidde145 km

Nød du denne artikel eller fandt du denne artikel nyttig? I så fald kan du overveje at støtte os på Patreon. Selv $ 1 om måneden vil nå langt! Tak skal du have.


Biskop

Biskoppen var et første britisk selvkørende artillerikøretøj baseret på Valentine II-chassiset. Det officielle navn var Ordance QF 25-pdr Mk2 eller 3 på Carrier Valentine 25-pdr Gun Mk1. I hele 1941 havde de britiske og Commonwealth-divisioner i den vestlige ørken lidt at bekæmpe de godt pansrede tyske mediumtanke bortset fra den næsten ubrugelige Boys Anti-Tank Rifle og problemet 2-pdr (40 mm) Anti-Tank-pistol fra Divisional Anti-Tank Regimenter. Selvom disse var rimeligt effektive mod letpansrede italienske tanke, var de fuldstændig utilstrækkelige til at påtage sig de tungere pansrede tyske tanks. Så en hastig konvertering blev foretaget for at oprette en selvkørende pistol bevæbnet med 25 Pounder kanon-haubitser.

Som følge heraf havde bilen mange problemer.


Biskoppens pistol havde en begrænset højde, hvilket sænkede dens rækkevidde betydeligt. For at kompensere skulle dets besætninger ofte bygge store ramper op af jorden, så køretøjet kunne vippes. For at rumme 25 punders pistol skulle køretøjet også have en høj silhuet.


På grund af disse faktorer, der sammensatte Valentins karakteristiske langsomme hastighed og tynde rustning, blev biskoppen dårligt modtaget næsten universelt og snart erstattet af M7 -præsten og Sexton. Kun omkring 140 af disse køretøjer blev produceret.


Det så første gang handling under det andet slag ved El Alamein i Nordafrika og fortsatte med at tjene i den tidlige del af den italienske kampagne.


NavWeaps fora

Det er ikke nok, at Gud er på vores side. Vi skal også være på Gud.

2+2 = 4: Et perspektiv i hvid, vestlig matematik, der marginaliserer andre mulige værdier.

5. okt. 2017 #13 2017-10-05T11: 31

40 mm Bofors blev også undertiden presset ind i AT -rollen, naturligvis blev det hurtigere end rustning end 25pdr.
Begrænsningen af ​​biskoppen som en SP AT -pistol forekommer mig at være den begrænsede tværgående og høje profil. Archer var meget nyttig og ville tage samme tid at komme overalt og lidt længere tid for at komme ind og ud af en brandstilling - pistolen vendte tilbage over førersædet, så han skal være af vejen, mens han skyder og derefter bevæge sig tilbage før scootning.
Det ser ud til mig fra Chris Bishop's beskrivelse, at RA havde besluttet, at da nogle 25pdrs blev brugt som nær nok dedikerede AT -kanoner, skulle de placeres på dedikerede SP -mounts, så resten for det meste kunne blive i General Support (GS) -rollen. Da vognene blev leveret, var der 6 pdrs og måske 17 pdrs nok til, at der normalt ikke var 25 pdrs i AT -rollen, så biskopperne blev taget i brug som GS arty. Hvor de ikke var ubrugelige, men viste - sandsynligvis bekræftet - at flere punkter i deres layout ikke var egnede til jobbet. Kun få bygget, men selvom de tidligere, lavere og med mere travers (f.eks. En 25 pdr Archer) ville være blevet efterladt, da tankrustningen blev forbedret. En 25pdr Archer ville naturligvis sandsynligvis snart blive ændret til en 17 pdr version.

Således er Bishop mindre Storbritanniens første design af SP GS arty og mere en af ​​Storbritanniens SP AT -kanoner. Det var tilfældigvis mere nyttigt som et defekt GS -stykke end som et defekt AT -stykke, da det kom til tropperne. Bemærk, at da var kampene i Tunesien og Italien, hvor SP AT -kanoner alligevel var mindre efterspurgte.

"Vær harmonisk, berig soldaterne, hån andre mænd"

"Hvem bekæmper ondskab, pas på at blive ond."

"Vellykket, da tingene går på den vindende side, dræbte flere fjender ved god, kedelig taktik end hans egen ved dårlige, spændende."

5. okt. 2017 #14 2017-10-05T17: 20

5. okt. 2017 #15 2017-10-05T17: 52

5. okt. 2017 #16 2017-10-05T22: 49

EwenS skrev: Jeg tror, ​​at alle problemerne med biskoppen som beskrevet ovenfor skyldes, at det var et forhastet job i krigstid, uden at nogen havde en klar idé om, hvad der var påkrævet i første omgang, fordi det ikke var blevet gjort før, eller alt tidligere lærte var glemt.
Hvis du går ud fra, at det var beregnet til at være et kunstnerisk stykke GS, som fra dine senere punkter synes at være det, så glemt. Birch Gun's generelle layout ville være bedre end biskoppen, hvilket tydeligvis tillod fuld gennemkørsel, hvilket ikke er påkrævet, men ville være bedre end ikke nok som på biskoppen og fuld elevation. At være i stand til at engagere ac var ikke længere virkelig ønskeligt for field arty i '41, men at bruge maksimal rækkevidde ville være.
Dens udvikling fremhævede alle de problemer, der skulle stryges.
Stryges ud? Intet lignende blev bygget eller vedtaget af Storbritannien nogen sinde. Det er ikke strygning.
Mange af disse problemer var ned til begrænsningerne i størrelsen på Valentine -chassiset, der blev anerkendt som lille selv for en tank i den æra, men havde den fordel for en britisk tank at være pålidelig. Det skal bemærkes, at de var konverteringer fra eksisterende tankchassis, omend udført på fabrikken og ikke en grundtænkning.
Hvis du vil have en SP 25 pdr til GS kunstnerisk arbejde måske.
At vende vognen som en bueskytte kan give dig en brugbar køretøj, men det ville sandsynligvis have brug for noget til at bære ammunition til den. Wespe fik en ammunitionsbærer, biskopper gjorde det enkle og slæbte de samme lemmer som normale 25 pdrs brugte. Om de havde to lemmer pr. Pistol og en anden vogn til at blande dem frem og tilbage som normale feltbatterier, ved jeg ikke.
Hvis du ønsker en SP -tankvogn, der let kan ødelægge alt på slagmarken i juni 41 og let skal forblive i stand til noget tid, ja, ville en bueskytte med en 25pdr besvare dette opkald meget let. Bemærk "SP AT gun" ikke en tankjæger, en jagttank eller en Tank Destroyer, bare en AT -pistol, der ofrer minimum i størrelse og skjul for at kunne bevæge sig selv.

Udviklingen ser ud til at starte med, at Birmingham Railway Carriage & amp Wagon Company, der allerede producerede Valentine -tanken, blev bedt om i juni 1941 at lave et design til at sætte 25pdr ind i Valentine -chassiset. I august 1941 blev en prototype testet, og i november 1941 blev der tildelt en produktionskontrakt på 100. En yderligere ordre på 50 blev tildelt i juli 1942, hvorefter omkring 80 var blevet bygget med rustningsproduktion, der syntes at være årsag til forsinkelser. De fleste tog til udlandet. Det trådte i tjeneste i tide til 2. El Alamein i oktober 1942 og synes stort set at have været ude af drift ved invasionen af ​​Italien i september 1943.
6 pdr trådte i tjeneste i maj 42 og var i Churchills, Valentines og Crusaders inden for det år samt bugseret (og portee) brug. Hvis jeg har ret, er det det, der dømte biskopperne, kunne deres oprindelige rolle udføres på andre måder. Som GS arty var de endnu mere fejlbehæftede end som SP AT -kanoner, SP GS arty var mere en rar at have, og M7 var alligevel bedre, så produktionen sluttede hurtigt efterfulgt af service.

I USA synes tanker om selvkørende artilleri at starte for alvor i august 1941 og var heller ikke uden deres problemer.
Hvis Bishop var beregnet til at være SP GS arty, hvilket M7 bestemt var. Med 72 25pdrs i hver britisk division lyder en ordre på 150 ikke meget som at gøre dem til SP. Ved et batteri pr. Regt ville det være 18 regts, som ville udstyre det samme antal divs, men du kan sandsynligvis slippe det til en tredjedel eller deromkring for at tage hensyn til behovet for træning, reserver osv. Lige hvis biskop eller lignende var fremtidens SP GS -vogn nogle ville have været hjemme, men de fleste tog til udlandet. Det lyder mere som en engangs SP AT -indsats for mig.
De amerikanske ækvivalenter ville være TD'erne, der begyndte med en 37 mm på et let hjulet chassis, som slet ikke ville være meget mere nyttigt end de 2pdr portees. Næste (IIRC) var 75 mm på halve spor, der var i stand nok, når den først blev markeret og lettere brugt end biskoppen, men ikke op til 25pdr standard. Derefter M10, som ville udklasse en biskop på næsten enhver måde - måske undtagen rustningstykkelse.

17pdr Archer begyndte udviklingen i september 1942, og selvom den blev accepteret til service i juni 1943, ser det ikke ud til, at produktionen først er startet i april 1944 og derefter i kun små mængder, så den fulde produktion ikke blev afsluttet ved slutningen af ​​krigen, som førte til til at reaminderen blev annulleret. Bueskytten skulle være et stopgap -middel til at få mobiliseret den tunge uhåndterlige 17 pdr antitankpistol. Planen var, at en tank skulle bære pistolen (hvad der blev til A30 Challenger fra midten af ​​1944 med et stort højt tårn - 200 bestilt og bygget i 1944) og en selvkørende pistol på samme chassis (A30 Avenger SP2 med et åbent topped nedre profil tårn - 80 bygget fra 230 bestilt), som ikke optrådte før efterkrigstiden.
Jeg er ikke sikker på, om Archer var beregnet til at være en stopgap, som jeg sagde ovenfor, var det ikke en TD, en JdPz eller en PzJgr, men en SP 17pdr, der ikke var meget større end grundpistolen, men kunne flytte sig selv og gav besætningen mere beskyttelse. Det forblev i drift ind i 1950'erne.

Alle disse forsinkelser betød, at Storbritannien var nødt til at få 17pdr ind i Sherman -tanken (Firefly -varianter) fra begyndelsen af ​​1944 og M10 -tankdestruderen (M10C Achilles) fra midten af ​​1944 for at levere de nødvendige tankdræbemaskiner.
Og indtil juni 44 for at få de nødvendige mål uden for Italien, hvor pansret krigsførelse havde særlige problemer, og de bugserede 6 pdrs og 17 pdrs klarede sig fint, indtil SP'er blev tilgængelige.

"Vær harmonisk, berig soldaterne, hån andre mænd"

"Hvem bekæmper ondskab, pas på at blive ond."

"Vellykket, da tingene går på den vindende side, dræbte flere fjender ved god, kedelig taktik end hans egen ved dårlige, spændende."


Forbedrede tidlige krigs britiske tanke?

Mente du Bishp frem for Sexton? Sexton var den anglo-canadiske ækvivalent til M7. Men uanset basisvognen, måske en enklere og bedre Bishop -ækvivalent tidligere. Grunden til, at jeg foreslog 18pdr, bortset fra mulig tilgængelighed, er, at de tidligere versioner havde 6000 meters rækkevidde ved kun 16 graders højde, hvilket kan betyde, at du kunne have en lavere kasemat. Jeg spekulerer på, om højden på OTL Bishop skulle rumme højden af ​​25pdr?

Dette rejser et andet spørgsmål. Hvis der er tæt støtte på plads - og det går tilbage til organisation og taktik - er der så presserende behov for at skynde 6pdr'en i drift? Jeg læste om Littlejohn Adapter - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Littlejohn_adaptor - på Wiki og andre websteder. Der er oplysninger om, at nogle pansrede bilbesætninger forlod adapteren og fandt, at penetration med APSV -skallen stadig var bedre end den normale 2pdr AP. Faktisk en 2pdr APCR? Så måske en POD, hvor denne udvikling er skubbet igennem tidligere på grund af manglen på 6pdr'er, og du har kampvogne bevæbnet med en 2pdr, der kan trænge igennem sen model Pzkpfw III'er og IV'er og med organisk artilleristøtte?

Tomo pauk

Paul_Sussex

Rickshaw

Beklager - det virkelige liv afbrød mit opslag.

Mente du Bishp frem for Sexton? Sexton var den anglo-canadiske ækvivalent til M7. Men uanset basisvognen, måske en enklere og bedre Bishop -ækvivalent tidligere. Grunden til, at jeg foreslog 18pdr, bortset fra mulig tilgængelighed, er, at de tidligere versioner havde 6000 meters rækkevidde ved kun 16 graders højde, hvilket kan betyde, at du kunne have en lavere kasemat. Jeg spekulerer på, om højden på OTL Bishop skulle rumme højden af ​​25pdr?

Ja, undskyld, biskoppen, ikke Sexton. Biskoppens grundlæggende problem var, at pistolen blev placeret oven på skroget, og overbygningens tag blev placeret over toppen, hvilket begrænsede højden. Hvis Glacis -pladen blev skåret for at give en position til pistolen (og føreren flyttede), ville der ikke være et problem.

Yulzari

Tweaking the Valentine er sandsynligvis den bedste POD i perioden, da det var den bedst afbalancerede og pålidelige tank i produktionen og med en gennemprøvet IOTL -pistoludvikling. At rode med affjedringen eller skrogvolumen savner valentinspunktet. Det var den mindste kampbare tank til jobbet med en affjedring og rustning, der fungerede i perioder og et pålideligt køretog også. Forstør det og tilføj mere vægt end IOTL, og du starter runden med mere vægt, derfor ny affjedring, så mere vægt, så der kræves mere kraft. Således et større skrog, så vægten går op igen og så videre. Du ender med en ny tank ved et uheld og ikke design. Du kan ikke rigtig gøre meget mere end IOTL med 2 Pounder eller 6 Pounder eller QF 75mm, men man kunne give en bedre pakke ammunition uden at opfinde AH -teknologi. HE (som blev udført), beholder (udført i USA 37 mm), APDS (som blev udført) og have dem tilgængelige til service efter behov. Motorrummet er lille og større kapacitet (overborede og/eller overstrøgede) versioner af OTL -motorerne ville være den enkleste vej til en beskeden effektforøgelse. Godt til maksimalt 300 hk, før kørebanen beder om en sygemelding og en uges fri. Ja, det er langsomt at blive optimeret af designet til at arbejde ved lavere maksimalhastigheder, men for at kunne vedligeholde dem over dårligt underlag. I virkeligheden var dagens hurtigste tanke ikke så meget hurtigere, når de var væk fra vejen. Sovjeterne kunne især godt lide Valentines relative stilhed. Måske kunne dæk og spor gøres endnu mere støjsvage og udstødningen også? En positiv stealth tank sammenlignet med en tårnhøj klangende stor Sherman. Jeg kender ikke dagens MBT'er på slagmarken, men i min tid kunne man høre høvdinge milevidt væk ved at knirke af sporene, før man hørte motorerne.

Min pointe er at udvikle en bedre faktisk Valentine, indtil den næste generation kommer godt testet i de sidste tre år af krigen. Ikke for at lave en næsten ny tank. Sådan ville du lave en valentine, hvis du begyndte igen. Et klassisk bedste er det gode fjende.

Til SP -kanoner og 17 Pounder har vi OTL Archer som model.

Det hele ville fungere med en filosofi fra Sherman -typen. Vi har en tank, der fungerer. Glem at rode med de andre. Bare slid dem ud for alle roller, mens diasreglen og tegnebrættets boffiner koncentrerer sig om en god udskiftning korrekt. Ingen Tetrach, Covenantor, Crusader, Matilda eller Churchill og alle deres 1.001 alternativer og versioner. Tag bare valentinen og løb med den. Ja, det ender med et 2 -mands tårn, men et 2 -mands tårn, der ankommer til slagmarken med alle dets kammerater, er bedre end et 3 -mands tårn, der sidder på skroget på et værksted, en fabrik eller ved vejkanten.


Sir John Valentine Carden overlever.

2000 fps er ikke særlig fladt at skyde, og den lidt langsomme flyvetid gør målretning sværere i betragtning af den dårlige indsats på amerikanske og britiske afstandsmetoder under anden verdenskrig.

Hvis det bliver solgt som infanteritank, overvejer shelludvalget disse ulemper. Som cruiser er det ikke så godt, da det først skal være hulmaskiner.

Vickers 75mm AA blev pumpet op i rumænsk service til næsten 2800 fps, på bekostning af at være en langt værre tøndebrænder end KwK 42 L70

Bougnas

Det var faktisk temmelig sammenligneligt med M36/M41 90 mm pistolserien med høj effekt. Højere hastighed, så mere præcis på lang afstand, omtrent samme penetration, APDS var bedre end HVAP. Værre HE og ingen HEAT, men det er fordi briterne aldrig forsøgte at få HEAT ammunition.

Hovedproblemet er, at det tilsyneladende bevarede et stort rekylsystem, mens USA gik efter koncentrisk rekyl, som var meget mere kompakt. L7 var designet til at holde sæde- og rekylsystemet fra 20pdr, så det beholdt dette problem.

Coulsdon Eagle

Marts

To strejker mod de 25 pdr i tanke.

Separat indlæsning. så lavt RoF

2000 fps er ikke særlig fladt at skyde, og den lidt langsomme flyvetid gør målretning sværere i betragtning af den dårlige indsats på amerikanske og britiske afstandsmetoder under anden verdenskrig.

Hvis det bliver solgt som infanteritank, overvejer shelludvalget disse ulemper. Som cruiser er det ikke så godt, da det først skal være hulmaskiner.

Vickers 75mm AA blev pumpet op i rumænsk service til næsten 2800 fps, på bekostning af at være en langt værre tøndebrænder end KwK 42 L70

Jeg mener ikke at bruge den faktiske Ordnance QF 25-pund som en tankpistol. Jeg foreslog at bruge den samme kaliber som 25pdr, så 3,45 & quot eller 87,6 mm. Briterne opretter en ny pistol siger QF 88mm HV, der bruger en ny enkelt lasterunde i stedet for separat lastning som 25pdr. Du kan downloade drivmidlet i HE-skallen for at holde den til 2000ft/s, mens AP-skallen (APCBC alligevel) sandsynligvis ville være omkring 25 pund ved 2700-2800ft/s.

Det er en ny pistol, der bare bruger en eksisterende kaliber og eksisterende værktøj, som Storbritannien var ret glad for at gøre. Det er også et stort nok trin op over Vickers 77mmHV -ækvivalent med TTL, hvis det er sådan tingene skrider frem til at gøre det værd at udvikle, mens det ikke er så uhyrligt stort som noget som QF 32 -punderen.

Derwit

Ramp-rotte

Jeg har læst denne TL med stor interesse, men har indtil nu afstået fra at kommentere. Men jeg tror nu, at jeg er i stand til at tilføje mine to øre værd, og se om jeg kan bidrage med nogle i en lille foranstaltning. Først hvad der er sket, og vigtigere hvad der ikke er sket. En mand lever i denne TL, der i OTL døde, men meget lidt andet har ændret sig. Briterne er stadig ikke fuldt forberedt på den kommende konflikt, bortset fra et lille våbenområde, flertallet af britiske styrker har det ikke bedre end de var i OTL. RN, er stadig domineret af Big Gun Gang, og deres fiksering med slagskibe og muligheden for krig mod Japan i Fjernøsten "vidste", at den tyske flåde er en mindre trussel, og at de og franskmændene kan let håndtere italienerne. De er lige ved at vågne op til den trussel, som de tyske ubåde udgør, men det er overskueligt, da Tyskland på nuværende tidspunkt ikke har en stor ubådsflåde eller direkte adgang til Atlanterhavet. Det tog Frankrigs fald at vende de tyske ubåde fra håndterbart problem til et blodig mareridt.

RAF, domineres af Bomber Gang, der tror, ​​at de kan vinde den kommende krig på egen hånd. Dette på trods af ikke at have en levedygtig moderne tung bombefly, besætningerne til at bemande en, hvis den eksisterede, alle vejrflyvepladser at basere den fra, eller færdigheder og udstyr til at få den til sit mål og bombe dem. Det er på trods af indvendinger, der er tvunget til at udvikle det, der dengang var det bedste og mest sofistikerede nationale luftforsvarssystem i verden. Men det er krigere, der stadig flyver i stramme Vic Threes, ikke finger fours, der mangler reservepiloter til at tage højde for kamptab, og Bomber Gang tror stadig, at måden at forhindre tyske luftangreb er i dagslysbombe de tyske flyfabrikker . Som det vil gøre med hensyn til ubådstruslen, efter Frankrigs fald, og Frankrig vil falde, uanset hvad den lille forbedring i Brittons tankflåde. Den foreslåede BAFF, British Airforce i Frankrig, har ikke det rigtige fly, baser eller kontrolstruktur eller taktik til at udføre det arbejde, det er beregnet til.

Hæren, der har været i bunden af ​​finansieringstræet i løbet af mellemkrigsårene, var ikke nær klar til den forpligtelse, som den britiske regering har lagt på det, efter år med at have fået at vide, at Storbritannien ikke ville være involveret i land i en større europæisk konflikt igen. De har nu været at forberede sig på at levere en BEF, British Expeditionary Force, men selv indtil 1938 var størrelsen og sammensætningen af ​​styrken under debat. Det var først i 1939, at Storbritannien fuldt ud forpligtede sig til at levere en feltstyrke til brug i Frankrig. Og det var først den 27. april, at begrænset værnepligt blev indbragt i Storbritannien, kun 4 måneder før krigens udbrud. Den britiske hær led af en række ulemper, de fleste officerer var efter WWI -standarder over alder og manglede uddannelse til at bekæmpe en moderne højintensiv krig. I det sidste år af WWI var gennemsnitsalderen for en oberstløjtnant med ansvar for en infanteribataljon i begyndelsen af ​​trediverne, ved udbruddet af 2. verdenskrig var den 45 plus. Britisk infanteri brugte stadig et bolt -rifle, der havde haft sin første alliteration som et sort pulvervåben, før de skiftede til at ryge mindre pulver. Briterne havde ikke en indfødt SMG, faktisk havde de slet ikke en SMG. Mens Storbritannien kunne have udviklet et .270 SLR i mellemkrigsårene, vidste de, at de havde brug for en, ikke mindst pengene eller viljen var der. Listen over fiaskoer i den britiske hær er lang, men størstedelen af ​​dem skal placeres for regeringens fødder, som ikke formåede at sætte det realistiske mål eller levere tilstrækkelig finansiering.

For alle sine fejl havde den britiske hær to fordele i forhold til alle de andre i Europa, de fleste af dens kontorer havde set elefanten, det vil sige, at de havde set en kamp, ​​om end kun i begrænset omfang, i politiet af imperiet. Og mange af de midterste rækker havde været i aktion under WWI, så havde en idé om omfanget af moderne krigsførelse. Det faktum, at mange af dem troede på, at den kommende konflikt ville blive en gentagelse af konflikten som set i WWI, Trenches og gå over poserne. Jeg havde glemt lektionerne fra de sidste hundrede dage, og mobil krigsførelse og integration af alle våben viser mangel på intelligens. Den anden var den anden end den lille amerikanske hær, der var halvt så stor som den belgiske hær i 1939, og først kom til at være over en million stærk før 1941. Den britiske hær var formentlig fuldt motoriseret ved udbruddet i 2. verdenskrig, ja der var et par hesteenheder i imperiets bagvand, men de enheder, der tog til Frankrig, og dem i Nordafrika, var fuldt udstyret med motorkøretøjer. De var måske under strøm, ikke så robuste som nødvendigt, men de blev alle drevet af en forbrændingsmotor, ikke hø og havre.


Så hvordan har begivenhederne i denne TL ændret tingene hidtil, og hvilken effekt kan de have i de kommende år. For det første er effekterne til dato meget små, alt, der har ændret sig, er, at Storbritannien måske har et lille antal betydeligt bedre tanke i 1940. HMS Royal Oak vil stadig blive sænket i Scapa Flow, af Gunther Prien i U 47, HMS Courageous sendt på ant u-boat patrulje af Winston, vil stadig blive sænket af U 29, ligesom HMS Glorious under den norske kampagne. RAF kommer til at få sin røv leveret til den, forsøger at bombe den tyske flåde i dagslys og broer over Meuse -floden i 39/40. Den norske kampagne vil være en komplet katastrofe på jorden, men hvis tingene går som de gjorde, vil det være den tyske flådes død, og den væsentligste årsag til, at det usigelige havpattedyr ikke havde en sneboldchance i helvede af succes. Det er først, når vi kommer til slaget ved Arras, at vi vil se betydelige ændringer, både i selve slaget og i efterfølgende begivenheder. Lad os være generøse og takke briterne for en forbedret tankproduktion før 1940 og bedre kampvogne takket være, at Sir John var i live. 100 A11 med 2 lb pom Pom og 30 Vickers Valentines med 6 lb pistolen. Selvom briterne ikke kommer til at vinde slaget på sigt, vil intervention fra Luftwaffe om eftermiddagen stoppe briterne. Oddsene er, at tyskerne kommer til at lide betydeligt større tab, muligvis inklusive Rommel, og få et stort chok for deres system.

I betragtning af det chok, som tyskerne har modtaget og en dag mere til at planlægge for forsvaret af Calais, er 3. RTR udstyret med A11’er, ikke blandingen af ​​lette tanke og krydsere, det var. Chancerne for, at både Calais og Dunkerque kan bruges til evakuering for en tid, er meget bedre, men i betragtning af indsættelsen af ​​den britiske hær på det tidspunkt, vil Dunkerque være det vigtigste evakueringspunkt, som det var. Men i betragtning af at Luftwaffe nu skal sprede sig over to havne, og var IOTL, kæmpede for at angribe en, og fortsat støtte det tyske angreb i Frankrig. Det glemmes ofte, at slaget omkring Dunkerque ikke fandt sted isoleret, og at både den tyske hær og Luftwaffe stadig var involveret i betydelige aktioner andre steder i Frankrig. Hvis du skal dele Luftwaffe -angrebet mellem to havne, vil det blive mindre affektivt og give RAF større chance for at gribe ind. Vil briterne være i stand til at få flere ting ud af Frankrig, ja, men kun personlige våben, artilleri, kampvogne, pansrede biler og lastbiler vil stadig blive efterladt. Det kan dog være muligt for det meste af det efterladte udstyr at blive gjort totalt ubrugeligt og kun egnet til skrot.

Post Dunkerque, forudsat at Winston ikke pakker alle tropperne på en båd og sender dem til Frankrig i en gal romantisk spøgelse. Storbritannien burde have formået at få flere mænd ud af Frankrig, både britiske og franske, plus muligvis et par tusinde belgiske og hollandske. Hvis Storbritannien er steget med 10%, bragte tropperne hjem, og 10% over alt dette betyder yderligere 30 til 40 tusinde mand. I betragtning af at på grund af Sir Johns overlevelse producerer Storbritannien to levedygtige tanke i 1940 til hans design, og på grund af hans indgriben er alle tankproducenter bedre opsat, end de var. Det er ikke nødvendigt for den britiske regering at gå i panik over mangel på kampvogne og truslen om invasion. Dette vil give dem mulighed for at koncentrere sig om at øge produktionen af ​​lastbiler, hvilket vil være en mangelvare. More tanks and more lorries, especially more lorries will have a major impact on events in North Africa.


Biskop

Forfattet af: Staff Writer | Senest redigeret: 10/08/2018 | Indhold og kopi www.MilitaryFactory.com | Den følgende tekst er eksklusiv for dette websted.

In the decades following World War 1, the British Army rewrote their armored warfare doctrine to include two distinct groups of combat tanks - "cruiser tanks" and "infantry tanks". Cruiser tanks were designed with speed in mind, intended to break past enemy defenses and attack the more vulnerable flanks and rear. The heavier Infantry tanks worked in conjunction with infantry units to break the enemy's center of defense through slower paced operations. In conjunction, the theory would bring about two different forces to achieve a singular objective.

On September 3rd, 1939, Britain formally declared war on Germany marking the official start of World War 2 in Europe. In 1940, the British Army unveiled the "Valentine Infantry Tank", a small thee-man tracked vehicle fitting the QF 2-pounder (40mm). The tank was produced by Vickers-Armstrong and was developed into subsequent marks each fitting progressively larger guns. The initial production mark became the "Valentine Mk I" and this was inevitably followed by the "Valentine Mk II" up to the final "Valentine Mk XI" armed with its 75mm main gun. Differences between the Mk I and Mk II were the latter's use of the AEC A190 6-cylinder diesel engine of 131 horsepower and the addition of an external fuel tank (the original mark utilized the AEC A189 gasoline engine of 135 horsepower).

1940 also saw the introduction of the Royal Ordnance QF25 25-pounder field gun/howitzer. This weapon proved to have an excellent rate-of-fire, accuracy at range and good inherent mobility. The weapon could fire a broad range of ammunition types and quickly settled in as a primary artillery system for the British Army for the duration of the war - even seeing service for decades following.

As the war itself spread an British involvement grew, so too did the list of military requirements based on up-to-the-minute operational experience from the front. The British Army now required a mobile artillery piece capable of supplying "plunging fire" against enemy positions at range. In June of 1941, the heavy industries concern of Birmingham Railway Carriage and Wagon Company was charged with developing such an implement. Development saw the selection of the Valentine II tracked chassis and - atop the hull - a fixed, forward-firing slab-sided superstructure was added. Within this superstructure was the fighting compartment which allowed management of the QF25 series field gun installation. At its core, the vehicle was nothing more than an interim solution to a long-term problem - at least until a more capable and purposefully developed weapon system could be manufactured in quantity. A pilot vehicle became available for evaluation in August of 100 and British authorities found the design acceptable enough to the point of placing an order for 100 examples in November of 1941. The new vehicle was formally designated as the "Ordnance QF 25-pdr on Carrier Valentine 25-pdr Mk 1" and was categorized in the British Army as a "self-propelled artillery" system - of "SPA". The vehicle became the first self-propelled artillery system for the British Army.

Outwardly, the Bishop held a unique appearance though not unlike the Soviet KV-2 series which operated in the same role. The Valentine pedigree was clearly on display for the running gear was wholly retained. The vehicle was suspended by a coil spring system featuring three-wheel bogies. There were four small road wheels which were book-ended by a larger road wheel to each track side. The drive sprocket was held at the rear with the track idler at the front. The glacis plate was well-sloped for some ballistics protection while the sides were straight. Equipment could be carried over the fenders. The turret sported flat sides and double-doors along the rear facing. The front turret facing was only slightly sloped with the 25-pounder gun barrel protruding out over the hull. The engine was kept in a rear compartment. Crew accommodations amounted to four personnel to include the driver, commander, gunner and loader. The driver maintained a position in the front left hull with the remaining crew in the turret. Secondary armament was a 0.303 Bren light machine gun though the Bishop was never intended to meet the enemy at close ranges. Armor protection was 8mm to 60mm across major facings.

The British and Commonwealth campaign was now centered on North Africa at this point in the war, particularly against famed German General Erwin Rommel. For the British, North Africa would become the proving ground for their own General Bernard Montgomery. Hundreds of thousands of men as well as thousands of armored vehicles would play a role in this early campaign of the war. On October 23rd, 1942, the Allies - led by Britain - went up against the forces of Germany and Italy to begin the 2nd Battle of El Alamein. The battle would last until November 4th of that year and would become the first combat actions of the 25-pdr Valentine gun carrier. By this time, the British Army referred to her simply as "Bishop".

In practice, few doubted the capabilities of the QF 25 gun. However, it was in the overall design of the vehicle that the Bishop suffered mightily. The use of a fixed superstructure provided for many inherent limitations for the combat vehicle. Firstly, the vehicle had to be turned (in whole) to face the direction of the enemy. Secondly, the limited space within the superstructure directly limited the main gun's elevation to just +15 and -5 degrees and traversal as only 8 degrees itself. As such, gunnery crews took to establishing mounds ahead of the Bishop's hull to angle the vehicle further upwards at the front, thusly increasing the trajectory of their 25-pounder guns. The turret's design also made for a high profile along the clean desert horizon - a tempting target to enemy tankers and anti-tank teams alike (the Soviet KV-2 suffered from the same quality). To compound matters, the addition of a heavy gun and superstructure atop the existing Valentine chassis restricted top road speeds and directly limited operational ranges. The Bishop - fitted with its AEC A190 series diesel engine of 131 horsepower - managed 15 miles per hour on ideal surfaces and up to 90 miles of operational range.

Regardless, the need during wartime was great and the Bishop was utilized. Its 25-pounder main gun did not disappoint but crews generally regarded the Bishop as a forgettable creation. It was only the arrival of the American M3 Lee/Grant-based M7 "Priest" self-propelled artillery system that doomed the Bishop to limited use and secondary roles thereafter. The Canadians took the M7 Priest design a step further and developed the "Sexton" - complete with its 25-pounder main gun - and this was used in increasing numbers by the British Army with time. As such, the Bishop only ever existed in 149 total forms with production spanning from 1942 to 1943. Once quantitative levels of the M7 and Sexton were met, the Bishop fell to the pages of World War 2 history.


Bishop, Carrier, Valentine, 25pdr gun - History

In 1936 a decision to increase the range to 13.500 yards carried with it approval to design a new equipment capable of firing super charge. Early in 1938 a split-trail pilot equipment had passed technical and field tests, had been approved for introduction into the service, and a small order placed. However, at 41 cwt (2087 kg) it was rather heavy instead the Royal Artillery favored a box-trail carriage with a firing platform as fitted to an experimental 105-mm gun produced by Vickers in 1922. This was an improved version of the original gun wheel platform, developed as an anti-tank measure in 1918 . Production of the split-trail equipment was therefore held up while one of the 25pdr Mark 2 guns was fitted to the Vickers carriage. After a demonstration at the School of Artillery, Larkhill (now the Royal School of Artillery) , those taking part voted unanimously in favor of the latter combination. It became the legendary "25 Pounder Mark 2 on Mark 1 carriage", familiar to all Commonwealth Gunners who served from World War 2 to the 1960s. The Mark 2 gun first saw action in Norway in 1940, and by 1945 over 12 000 had been made, by Britain alone!.

The strength of the carriage was amply demonstrated in 1943 when the first QF 17-pr anti-tank guns were mounted upon it it easily stood up to the much more powerful piece.

The Germans appreciated a good gun when they saw one. They put all 25-pdrs captured in serviceable condition into service in their own forces they formed whole regiments of 25pdrs Mark 2, which they designated 8.76cm FK 280(e) (split-trail carriage) [FK = Feld Kanone, field gun]. They were deployed for coast defense.

A mark 2/1 of the gun emerged in 1942, with the fitting of a Muzzle brake to ease the strain on the carriage caused by the firing of super charge (later super plus increment), and the radiusing of the corners of the breech ring to strengthen it and prevent cracking.

Towards the end of World War 2 a Mark 2 carriage with a wheel-base of reduced width was introduced to enable the gun to be towed by light vehicles, eg jeeps in the jungle, or be carried in an aircraft, but it was far from satisfactory - or popular. Every time the layer turned the traversing handwheel he skinned his knuckles on the left gun wheel.

In order that Armored units might be supported by field guns with the same cross-country performance as tanks, several self-propelled equipments were produced for the Royal Horse Artillery, only two of which saw service. These were the Bishop (25pdr on Valentine tank chassis) and the Sexton (25pdr on Sherman tank chassis).

It was one of the first weapons designed as a gun / howitzer combining the best features of these weapon types. It uses variable charges allowing it the ability to fire its projectiles in a high arc similar to a howitzer but also may fire at high velocities for a flat trajectory. During the fighting in North Africa during 1941-42 it was pressed into use as an anti-tank weapon where it proved itself in that role as well.

The carriage has a circular base plate which is lowered for firing, this raises the wheels off the ground and allows the weapon a 360' traverse. It is designed for high speed travel and a gun shield is provided. The firing platform is in the form of a wheel which is carried either under the trail or on the back of the prime mover. The gun can be placed in firing order on its platform in 1 minute. To place the piece in action, the platform is lowered to the ground and the carriage is then manhandled or tractor-drawn over it and coupled to its center. To permit easy maneuvering of the trail, the spade has been imbedded in a "box" commonly called a "banana," which functions very effectively and prevents the trail from digging in.

Each gun was pulled by a Field Artillery Tractor (FAT), also known as a Quad, behind a trailer, artillery no 27 , better known as a limber. It is a testament to the design of the gun that only one major review was undertaken (1940, resulting in the mark 2) despite the gun remaining in service with various armies to this day. As recently as 1980 some 26 other countries were still employing the 25-pdr, and many probably still are. The last major campaign in which the gun fought was the Indo-Pakistan war of 1971.


Bishop, Carrier, Valentine, 25pdr gun - History

Some Background

Usually any review starts by saying who makes the kit, in this case it is not that easy. The model originates from Russia as it says clearly on the sprues. From what I hear it came originally from Allan in the CIS, but I have not seen it from them. Instead, I have different examples marketed by DML/Dragon including a North American issue with a very good crew figure, typical 8th Army style but not available in my native England for some reason. To really confuse things it also appears in RPM, Toga and VM boxes. They all contain much the same plastic parts although two styles of tracks can be found, the main difference being packaging, instructions and decals. While the latter seem to be very similar subjects their quality varies. So too does the price, Dragon costing around 24 to 25 in the UK and the others more like 18, although nowadays more and more kits are being discounted and US prices are often very low. It seems Dragon no longer list the Valentine though many of their kits are reissued or have appeared under the Shanghai Dragon label. So plenty for the kit box collectors to search for. As the plastic is the same apart from some variation in colour, assuming you have access to more than one package you can vote with your money when you decide to buy. My constructed example was from a Dragon box but I built it back-to-back with a Toga Bishop and very soon all track was lost of which parts came from which box.

Whichever make you purchase, the vehicle it depicts is the Valentine Infantry Tank. To those not familiar with British WW2 armour or its nomenclature, an 'Infantry Tank' was designed to accompany infantry in the assault and as such was better armoured but slower than the medium 'Cruiser Tank' although its armament was not much different. The first two types of 'I' tank were the A11 and A12, both called Matilda and both used in France in 1940. The second Matilda was very successful in the early Desert battles and later in Australian hands in the Pacific, but the Valentine's career was somewhat different.
First of all, it was unusual in that it was not an official government design. It was developed by Vickers, then as now active in tank design, as a private venture and aimed to be an alternative to the Matilda with the advantage of being cheaper and easier to build. It used the same design of suspension as Vicker's A9 and A10 Cruisers and also the same 2pdr gun, but with more armour to fit its role. It was good enough to be taken into British service in 1940, and was in part responsible for a change in naming practice. Not having an official 'A' design number allotted to tanks when the specification was first issued, it could be called 'Infantry Tank Mk III' but the name Valentine was attached to it. Whatever the disputed origins of this, it was built in large numbers - at around 7250 gun tanks alone, more than any other British wartime tank - by three UK manufacturers and another in Canada.

While designed as an Infantry tank, it was widely used in British armoured divisions ('I' tanks were usually employed in separate Tank Brigades to be attached to infantry divisions on an ad-hoc basis as needed) in the United Kingdom, with many a tank crewman cutting their teeth on them. Its main active employment was in its intended role in North Africa, and a large number were sent as aid to the Soviet Union, over 2000 from the UK with 300 odd more lost en route, and all but 30 of the 1420 Canadian ones being given over. The tank also developed into a series of marks. The main drawback it had was its small size, and the initial design had a cramped turret - I have been inside one so I can vouch for that! - with just enough room for two men and the gun. To overcome this, a revised design extended the turret at the front and back to allow room for three men - been in one of them too, and it is a little better - then it was realised that the 2pdr was no longer powerful enough and a new turret with a 6pdr was designed and fitted. Initially this lacked a co-axial machine gun, so another type with both gun and machine gun was produced, and finally a 75mm was fitted. When added to different engines - initially petrol but later British or mostly General Motors diesels - and the slightly different Canadian ones which used .30 Browning machine guns instead of the 7.92mm BESA and also had the front hull section cast instead of fabricated, there were in the end eleven gun tank marks. Also one SP with a 25pdr field gun of which more separately, another with a 17pdr anti tank gun, a bridgelayer which was widely used, amphibious 'DD' tanks of various marks, and flail mine clearers and a variety of other variants built as one-offs and small runs. Some served as command vehicles in North West Europe in 1945. There are enough variations to build a good armour collection with just Valentines alone!

Yet there has been little interest in the tank from model manufacturers in 1/35 scale. Accurate Armour have produced two gun tanks and the 17pdr Archer and there have been smaller scale versions from Fujimi and Esci, but we have had to wait a long time for a plastic kit in a larger scale. There was a plan to release one in 1/32 many years ago from Airfix but that never happened, in the end it is down to the Russians of all people to come up with the goods. Overall it is worth the wait. Allan have produced a good model of the Mk II variant, with two-man turret mounting a 2pdr gun, which is a good choice as this is the type most widely used in North Africa and most Canadian ones were similar to this type. The other variants all used the same basic hull so we may well see other flavours at a later date, and regardless of that the after market manufacturers could find lots of scope for different turrets. The kit itself is well up to current standards from the CIS, maybe not as good as Dragon could do themselves or the likes of Italeri, Tamiya or AFV Club. The main drawback of release through Dragon is cost, for example I could buy an ex Zvezda SU-100 via Italeri for half the cost of a Dragon Valentine or pay less for a model in a Middle European box, yet the vehicle and resultant model is not that big. But, if you want a Valentine and prefer plastic to resin, at least you have a kit to work from.

Whatever the box the kit itself comes on six sprues, with wheels and turret on their own sections, hull on another, suspension and details on the fourth while two more contain individual link tracks. In total, I counted 135 in grey plastic plus another 240 more track links. Two types of these have turned up in different boxes, with the Dragon distributed one being the one which seems more common in photos. There is some choice of options, with both the small front mudguard sections and the desert style sand shields included, and the standard of design and moulding is good enough for someone used to modern kits. Indeed, straight from the box it makes a very pleasing replica, although there have been a few glitches and as usual there is scope for improvement. The plastic itself can be brittle so take a little care when removing parts from the sprues. Assembly is best done as per the instructions. The suspension is the first part, and needs a little care. The large finned external brake drums parts E74 should be assembled and left to set, then any join line carefully cut and sanded off before fitting to the drum cover E75 and sprocket E73 as once fitted they would be hard to work on. I chose to fit the final drive housings E79 to the hull and add the sprocket unit later.

The four bogie units look more complicated than they really are. Each has a large spring part C40 which will need cleaning up before assembly. Note that the coils of this were square in section so do not attempt to round them off! Fit to the support units C42/C43 or C41/C44, taking care to open the locating hole in one part which is moulded closed. It may be best to assemble the units and clean up the joins before gently opening up the arms and springing the springs into place, keeping the moulded details facing upwards. On the front of the idler mounting parts C50 and C51 is a small extension, in real life a slot to fit the track tension adjusting tool into. This can be opened up for extra realism. As to the wheels, the real vehicle had tires which had a rounded edge, not the square finish as on the kit. This is soon corrected with a little scraping and filing. Painting is easier if the wheels are not assembled until after they have been painted, so you can soon move on to the hull.

This consists of a lower open-topped box, an upper unit with integral mudguards, and some smaller sections. The lower section has a large bulkhead moulded into it so should be good and square, and the parts are well enough designed to match the complex angles of the original tank. One pointer though is to fill the locating holes in the rear vertical plate part A3 as these are for the Bishop's towing hook unit and are not needed on this model. Other than that, just add parts in order, taking care to dry-fit them first and you should not go far wrong. One area which needs a little modification is the driver's hatches. While parts A13 and A14 are fine, straight from the box they are not totally accurate. The front visor plate part A11 should be altered to make a small step where the downward slopes meet the vertical outer edges, with a 1mm horizontal being cut and the slope altered to meet it. This done, shave the hatches A13/A14 to fit with the outer edge in line with the step, so there is a 1mm gap between the vertical edge of the hull and the outer edge of the flap. This is not easy to put into words but is not hard to do. Some filling, either using scrap plastic or your favourite putty, is then needed and you have added some accuracy to your model. A minor point and one you many like to not bother with as it is not too noticeable.

The real vehicle had a series of metal strips around and below the large engine compartment doors part A4 which are added from thin card strip. Other details, engine compartment lower sides parts A5 and A6, try not to mix them up and there should be a distinct gap between their upper edges and the main hull. The many handles parts C62 could be left till a later stage and should be treated with care as they are not too robust. Exhaust muffler unit is hardly seen with its cover in place, the fishtail outlet part C53 is improved by opening its outlet out and adding three small supports into the gap, see the model photos and box art for a guide.

Stowage box arrangements seem to have varied on Valentines. The large forward box parts A7 and A8 had a plain lid on many tanks and I smoothed the moulded ribs off mine. Canadian built vehicles had a distinctive design of diagonal ribs with a round raised shape in the centre which you may like to duplicate. The rear box parts A9/A10 benefits from a new hinge of the same design as its larger counterpart, easily made using a strip of sheet plastic and a length of fine rod or stretched sprue. When the glue has dried thoroughly, make cuts into the rod and remove short lengths to match the kit hinge.

Tools on the model are sparse. The shovel and crowbar unit C60 is adequate but I made the shovel blade less pointed in outline. The handle for the pick C69 needs making from scrap or rod, basically a flattened rod 28mm long will suffice, and the distinctive curved track adjuster needs making. The photos show it and it is soon done from a 'boomerang' of 1mm plastic rod with 26mm long bent in the middle until its overall dimensions are 24mm and 7mm 'across'. L shaped pieces of scrap 4mm long by 2mm high at each end finish the item. See the model pictures for the final appearance.

One other item is the wooden blocks for the jack. There were two short, thick pieces of wood on the real vehicle, and appearances are improved by filing part C59 smooth, scribing a line all around the outer edge and then adding the frame for the blocks and a strap from thin plastic sheet. Note also, the strips across the front and rear at the top were not there on the original, so leave them off unlike me! The rear view mirror part C70 I left off, adding the locating brackets on the hull using the kit part as a guide. Headlights come with deep moulded in indentations where the lens was left clear of the paint used to cut down reflections. These I filled and filed smooth, just painting a small area glossy black for the clear space. Some tanks carried their lights reversed and folded with the lens areas laid down onto the hull to protect them.

The turret needs some work. First of all, the D shaped pistol port on the left side part 23 is the wrong way round, it needs to be carefully removed and re-fixed with the vertical hinge facing forward. The separate port on the other side part 28 could use a bolt head at each corner. Most parts fit well enough but the joint at the front of parts 23 and 24 may need some filler, and I filed the rear lip on the turret back - which is correct in having an opening under it so no filling is needed to block it off - to thin down its outer edges. 2pdr guns came with two styles of barrel, that in the kit with distinctive steps at the muzzle and near the mantlet while others had a smooth transition for the change of outside diameter and a slight belling out at the muzzle. Either can appear on Valentines so watch this if you want to depict a specific vehicle.

Sight vane part 36 can be thinned down or replaced with card or maybe an after-market etching if one is available, and some detailing on the inside face of the hatch flaps parts 33 and 34 is of benefit if you want the hatches open as these had padding on them. Hatch stops can be added from scrap sheet. Turret interior detailing could be done using the basic gun breech parts 29/30 but if you add figures you will not be able to see much anyway. I will leave this to your discretion and refer you to the Museum Ordnance Special or Bellona Print for inspiration.

One common extra fitting was the three boxes for magazines for the anti-aircraft Bren gun, made from plastic sheet these are 8mm wide and high by 6mm front to back, with lid slightly oversize and detailed with scrap strip. The distinctive Lakeman mounting can be made from plastic strip with a Bren taken from a Tamiya Universal Carrier kit or one of several figure or weapons sets, but this is not an easy task and also from photos was not widely used. I did fit a short piece of 0.5mm rod on a scrap of strip on the right of the turret hatch to depict the base for the mount however, and a sun compass bracket from scrap as well on the other side.

While I agonised for some time over making up the tracks, in the end I finally took the parts off the sprue, cleaned them up and assembled them and found it not too difficult. With the bogie units added and the main painting done, the tracks were made up into two long lengths for the track on the ground and four shorter units for the two sections curving upwards. These were painted black with a heavy dry brushing of pale grey - I prefer this to stagy silver but a dull aluminium shade does just as well. Several individual links were painted up and fitted directly to the sprockets and idlers. Ground runs then upswings were glued into place and finally the sprockets and idlers glued on and adjusted to meet up with the upswings. All it needs is a little care. As I wanted a vehicle with sand skirts the top run of the track was not fitted.

Final major item added was the sand skirts A17 and A18 which had the inner faces thinned down for scale effect and the locating lip filed off as with it in place the guards fit too low down, their top edge should align with the top edge of the mudguards. I also had to move the front stiffening rib detail on the left side A18, cutting it off using a thin sharp blade, and repositioning it to line up with the mudguard stay part C57 ahead of the exhaust outlet. In doing this I missed the fact that the sandshields were not vertical, but flared out on the way down. Alas by the time I spotted this it was too late and all I can do is advise you not to make this mistake! As a guide, the outer edge of the vertical 'ribs' on the outer faces of the sandshields should be vertical.

The small mudguards parts A15/A16 are needed to provide contact area for the front of the mudguards, I chose to cut these down and just use their top edge to fill the chamfered area under the mudguards. The real vehicle had rubber or similar sections on the front and rear extremities of the mudguards, the join between these and the sheet metal is depicted on the kit as a zig-zag groove. Many desert vehicles had sheet metal extensions in their place, so I filled and sanded the grooves and added card pieces at the final stage by eye from photos and the kit colour scheme diagrams. Refer to photos of a specific vehicle before you do this as it was not a universal detail. Likewise, some tanks also had a rail along each side of the sandshield to take the steel tube and canvas 'Sunshade' which disguised them as trucks. Looking at photos, this seems to have been fitted to either all tanks in a unit or none, although as vehicles were moved around this would not have been a hard and fast rule. I did not add this item but it is easily made from plastic strip about 1mm square or a little over 1mm deep lengths of 0.25mm sheet, with the same used for five brackets to space it out from the sandshield.

I also kept the extra stowage down as Valentines did not seem to have as much of this as some desert tanks. Common in the desert were extra fuel and water cans, and some tanks had a large auxiliary fuel tank on the left hand side. This item and some one-gallon "flimsy" come in the Bishop variant and a kit could be robbed to add them to your model, or the parts used as a basis to make from scratch. I will not mention the fact that Valentines in Russian service would not use sandshields despite what the Dragon instruction sheet says, while the British ones had sand shields which Toga think they did not..

Colour Schemes

Valentines were painted 'Khaki Green No 3' in the factories with the interior in aluminium according to the original specifications, although this was probably changed to plain white. Home service vehicles usually had the No 4 Dark Green shade added in broad bands. Markings followed the unusual practice of the time, with coloured brigade and divisional signs on the front and rear of the hull, squadron markings on the turret, and vehicle serial numbers in white on the driver's door flaps or sometimes the turret sides and on the hull rear. I decided on a desert vehicle but hit a couple of snags when finishing my model. One was deciding which unit to depict, and the other was that I could not find my Dragon decal sheet so safely had I stored it. However, I did have a Toga one, and this coincided with my final choice of subject.

My model depicts a vehicle from 40th Battalion, Royal Tank Regiment on Ruweisat Ridge in July 1942. The Toga sheet gives full decals for the tank commanded by Second Lieutenant L Wiard - named CULLODEN, it was vehicle 10 in C Squadron, the red circle and number decal is correct and all it needs is the area behind the 10 painting in a rough green circle while the rest of the vehicle was 'Pale Stone' or sand yellow, not sand and brown as listed on the Toga colour notes. Trackguard front and rear extensions were not carried. I chose another vehicle of the same unit without the white lettered name or turret markings but with trackguard extensions. 40RTR tanks in photos of the time did not have the long flat rails on the trackguards for Sunshade cover which make the tank look like a lorry when seen by prying aircraft. The white 40 on red square and green and black GO sign of the 8th Armoured Division could be found on other sheets or hand painted, these marks seem to have appeared on the front only, although the vehicle in the Tank Museum, Bovington here in the UK has them on the back photos show that was not always the case at least.

Both the Toga and Dragon sheets also have decals for 50RTR in Tunisia 1943 - not 'El Alamein' as the Dragon colour notes suggest - and while not too bad some details are a little out. The vehicle's name RESPOND was in a dark shade, possibly black, and the turret appears to have a C Squadron circle, although possibly also HQ in small letters within that. Colour seems to be pale stone and green or possibly brown, somewhat the worse for wear after pursuing the Afrika Korps for many long miles. Trackguard extensions are not fitted or missing, but the rail for sunshade was carried.

Mixing decals could also give marks for 40RTR in Tunisia, they carried the 23rd Armoured Brigade's black and white 'Liver Bird' depicting their Liverpool origins on the left front and 40 on the red square on the right, a mirror image of those in 50RTR - who says markings instructions are always obeyed? Colours were sand and green in bands.

Dragon give a set of markings for '1st Army Tank Brigade' and I think this is a machine of 8th Battalion, Royal Tank Regiment. Another of their vehicles named HAL II appears in a photo to have a three colour camouflage scheme, with an upper band in a dark shade which varied from dark grey to purple brown, a middle band in pale blue-grey and the lower surfaces sand yellow. The white-red-white recognition marks were often obscured with paint or a mixture of oil and sand as they were a good aiming point for Afrika Korps gunners.

Both decal sheets show the same Red Army vehicle but do not name the unit.
As an alternative, Polish vehicles could be modelled if you use some hand painting or else track down the Intech decal sheet booklet series 4. These were produced in Krakow in 1996 and may still be around although I have lost touch with the UK supplier. The decals come with a small booklet which has photos and colour profiles of several vehicles, this set has full markings for a Valentine of 1st Polish Armoured Division from 1942 as well as Shermans, Matilda and a Jeep plus Pz III and Steyr RSO in unusual markings.

Further Details

Other colour schemes (including a plate showing Lt Wiard's tank) can be found in the old Osprey Vanguard series no 23 'British Tanks in N. Africa 1940-42' by Bryan Perrett, 'Desert Tracks - British Armour Camouflage and Markings in North Africa' by William E Platz, the classic 'Armour Camouflage & Markings, North Africa 1940-1943' by George Bradford, and more desert - with a photo of RESPOND - and schemes for tanks in training in the United Kingdom in 'British Tank Marking and Names' by B T White, all sadly out of print.

An alternative is on the Polish Intech decals sheet no 4 and the original out-of-print Osprey Vanguard series no 30 'Polish Armour 1939-45'. These are for vehicles of the 1st Polish Armoured Division in England in 1942 and include the census (vehicle serial number) of the special batch allocated to the Polish Forces. These are from a series from the non-armoured or B vehicle blocks for some reason, and appeared on a variety of vehicles.

One of the few currently available books on Valentine is from Darlington Productions of Aberdeen, MD in the USA. Their Museum Ordnance Special no 10 by Paul Roberts which has some fine detail photos of the tank preserved at Camp Borden in Canada and a later Mk III in the Virginia Museum of Military Vehicles. The Borden example has some unusual and early features which differ from the kit plus items which differ in Canadian manufacture such as headlamps, as well as interior photos and drawings. Well worth having for reference.

Another useful source are the Military Vehicle Workshop series from Allied Command Productions of Ottawa, Canada. These use original vehicle manuals and official publications to show vehicles in great detail. Two titles cover Valentine, MV-2 does the vehicle from the outside including the suspension and details of the Canadian pattern hull nose as well as both UK and Canadian stowage bin layouts. MV-05 takes a look inside, with seating and ammunition stowage, radio installation and the engine compartment.

Other sources of information are the two works on British Armour in the Second World War, 'The Great Tank Scandal' and 'The Universal Tank' by David Fletcher, published by HMSO for the Tank Museum, Bovington, England. The former even has makers plans for an early Valentine and a three-man turret version, the latter ones for a 6pdr armed Mk IX, and both have much to commend them for anyone interested in period British armour.
The old Bellona Prints series no 34 covered the Valentine two-man turret versions, and no 38 dealt with the later versions with text and plans to 1/76 and 1/48 by D P Dyer. Sadly they are long put of print as they give very detailed coverage of the tank. Mr Dyer gave his opinions on building the kit complete with 1/35 scale plans in the Military Modelling "AFV Modelling Special Issue" (Vol 28 No 12, August 1998) which you may like to seek out. He used Fruilmodel tracks on his model.

For details of the tank in action, seek out 'The Valentine in North Africa' by Bryan Perrett (Arms & Armour Press, London, England) - another out of print title - or try '50th Royal Tank Regiment - The Complete History' by Stephen D Hamilton (The Lutterworth Press, Cambridge, England) for use in North Africa or 'With Churchills to War - 48th Battalion Royal Tank Regiment at War 1939-45' by Peter Gudgin (Sutton Publishing, Stroud, England) which deals with their Valentine tanks in the UK as well as the unit overseas with Churchills. These last two should be available from specialist mail order booksellers.

Overall Rating

Despite a few shortcomings, where other manufacturers may not have done any better, this is a good kit. It could almost but not quite convert me to liking individual link tracks, as link and length looks as good to me and saves time. Having waited for a plastic kit of the tank I am not disappointed, and the best I can say is to slightly paraphrase the words of the Soviet government in Worlds War 2.

Of all the equipment supplied by the Allied nations to the USSR, one of the few, and possibly the only, item they commented on was the Valentine. They liked it, and to show how much they liked it, they asked for more! Fifty and more eventful years later I would send the same comments back. Rumours of other marks and variants continue to be passed around, with the Bishop the only one seen so far.


Det Bishop Artillery is an unusable vehicle featured in Battlefield V. Its single in-game appearance is as a vehicle wreck on the map Arras.

A drivable version of the Bishop was planned, with a UI icon, model and some Vehicle Customization items evident in the game files, but with weapons and projectile data missing. Ώ] It was cut alongside several other self-propelled artillery vehicles, namely the Churchill AVRE, Hummel and Grille. As of patch 6.2 the vehicle has been removed from the game files. ΐ] The vehicle had a rotating turret and could seat only one player as driver.


Se videoen: British 17 Pounder Field Guns 1943 (August 2022).