WW1 Tanks

Yes it was. I can see your Posts, so there's no reason why you can't see mine. Mind you, I don't know if there's a time lag.

Spudgun

I can see 'em. And very excellent they are too!

By coincidence, on 22 September, Tavin posted some pictures of his Emhar MkIV tank.

Somewhat bizarrely, "Mother" (aka "Big Willie", which is hilarious and somewhat rude in the UK) was in fact a male tank.

Little Willie, was built by William Foster and was originally fitted with a rotating turret, 'Bullock Creeping Grip tracks', imported from the US, and also had the 'trailing wheels' common on early British tanks . Unfortunately the tracks proved unsuitable and wre replaced with traks designed by William Tritton (of Fosters). At the same time the turret (which never had a gun installed) was removed. This is the form in which the tank is now preserved, it survived partly because it was used as a pillbox during the Second World War.

The weaknesses in the 'Little Willie' design were addressed by Tritton resulted in the 'Tritton Machine', which is the familar shape (as the Airfix kit), though was only built from mild steel and as such unsuitable for combat. This vehicles was later re-named 'Big Willie' and later still 'Mother'.

The name 'Willie' on both tanks is probably a tribute to it's designer 'William Tritton'.

The Mark I was intended to take part in the Battle of the Somme (September

1916) , some fourty-nine were mustered, but only a handful succeeded in reaching their objectives, due to poor ground, unreliable mechanical parts, and poorly trained crews.

Only fifty Mark II & III were built and were only minor improvements on the Mark I, the big change was they lacked the tail wheels, which were soon removed from the Mark Is in service. These were last used in April 1917, but eight were despatched to Egypt early in 1917 and were used in action in Gaza (how topical).

The Mark IV was externally similar, but included many detail changes in the light of operational use, these were used at Messines in June 1917 and remained in service till the end of the war.. The Mark IV was the British side of the first Tank Vs Tank in April 1918.

The Mark V was a major upgrade, the improved transmission meant that it was the first tank able to be driven by one man. The Mark V's first battle was Hamel in July 1918

The workshops in France produced Mark V* and Mark V**, which were lengthened version with more powerful engines, the idea was to provide an early APC, but the conditions inside the tank proved unpleasant for the troops.

Th Mark VI oly reached a wooden mock-up, none were produced..

The Mark VII was designed in 1918, but cancelled at the Armistice.

Hope this helps.

JH

A slight word of warning, virtually all WW1 tanks that survived the war were either scrapped or sent to towns around the country as a 'thank you' for the monies raised during the war.

These were all installed on plinths by 1920 and most were scrapped by the thirties. I think all these tanks were 'Females', all the 'Males' were scrapped aside from those preserved at Bovington (in a collection that became the current tank museum) and the Imperial War Museum, which I think was at the Crystal Palace before moving to Lambeth. Incidental the captured A7V was scrapped in the twenties too.

One (the only one) of these 'town tanks' survives on it's plinth in Ashford in Kent, and there is one in a museum in Lincoln.

What I'm saying is that it would be highly unlikely that WW1 tanks still existed to be moved about the 1930s, in fact, few still existed in the first place.

One interesting aside was that at least one tank was bought by enterprising individuals and was used to give 'tank rides' at Southend-on-Sea.

MH

thanks very much Max

Wondering if anyone has pics of the one I "believe" was called The Tadpole?

Thanks again

Steve

I can't see any of them

bugger

I will have to email my ISP and wait til just before the return of Christ for their answer no doubt.

Maybe I can dig them up in a Usenet archive or something

Steve

I just thought that if you were making a diorama with the WW1 tanks that you would have to include Australian soldiers.But if its a railway scenic...no probs.

There is a nice picture of a tank with a Tadpole Tail here:

interesting - you can see where the extended tail has been added on

Thanks!

Steve

helps a bunch.

Try here for some pictures of the preserved tanks,

click on the boxes down the right hand side.

MH

When the British heavy tanks were tranported by rail, weren't the sponsons removed, halving the width of the tank but leaving massive holes in the side ? I think they worked out that moving them with the armament fitted would result in knocking down telegraph pole and signals all along the railway, until the tank met a more immovable tunnel entrance...

This would mean that you'd need interior detail in the tanks - though from what I remember of the ones at Bovington, the interior of the body of the tank is mostly engine.

good point - I will look into it ...... the idea AND the interiors

:)

but I was told earlier that this is indeed the case, that the sponsons were removed, though I don't know that I will remove them for transport....

Steve

"Rik Shepherd" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@news.bnb-lp.com...

Steve wrote

Um. Apparently, the sponsons on the Mark IV could be swung into the body of the tank for transporting. Be interesting to see a picture of that.

The Bovington tank museum website mentions a 'sponson trailer' used when transporting the earlier tanks, and there's a tantalising little glimpse of a bit of sponson and a wheel behind a display case on the panoramic view of one end of the WW1 hall, but they don't give a clear view of it. Or anything, really. I suspect you have to buy decent pictures off them, or visit the museum.

"Rik Shepherd" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@news.bnb-lp.com...

but they don't give a clear view of it. Or

Bloody silly on their part then - especially for international travellers who might want to gain a good idea of what's there prior to spending big cash to be disappointed.

This is correct and a fault of the Emhar kits. The rear of the sponsons should be slightly angled (the Emhar hits are square), to allow each of the sponsons to be pushed into the tank for transportation. The Osprey book has a picture of a MKI being loaded onto a train without its sponsons, so you can see the engine. It also has an illustration of the rig used to remove the sponsons.

Spudgun

Hi again Spud

any chance of getting a copy of the pics?

Thanks

Steve (OP)

Hi again all

Just to let folks know - I have picked up two Airfix Kits and am considering buying a male and Female Emhart (?) kits as well to work out how to make the hinge-able sponsons talked about. All kits were cheap, (approximately $10Aussie each) therefore not a great tragedy if I destroy them in my ignorance - will still do my best NOT to though of course

Many thanks for all the advice, assistance and pics/hints/contacts.

It will be a fun project!

Steve

please post pics of the wip.