Armoured vehicles and loading gauge...

Not really a tank. Unlike this, which was presumably also out of gauge:

"kim" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@giganews.com:

...

Jesus weapt ... 1/35th scale!!! Build a new garage to house it in first.

They do versions in 1/87 and 1/144 as well. Had Airfix done one it would probably be in 1/76 but run on 1/87 track. No 1/152 scale version yet so 2mm fans will have to scratchbuild their own :o)

(kim)

Yes

The air intakes on either side had to be removed and then the tank loaded to within 1 inch of centre, special gauges were provided to check this, before the load was accepted as being in gauge.

Regards

Tony Cane

Secretary World war two Railway Study Group

I'm assuming practically no european WW2 tanks would fit within the UK loading gauge if produced to the correct scale? I've even seen a suggestion that the Airfix Tiger and Panther were produced closer to 1/87th scale in order to fit on British 1/76th scale wagons.

(kim)

They are 1/76th, but the tiger is actually in rail travel form for the continental system, thats why the back turret bins and other things re not there.

All British Light Tanks (Mk.IV through to Tetrarch), Cruiser Tanks through from A9 to (IIRC) Cromwell, but if not that then certainly to Crusader and Covenenter, Infantry Tanks from Mk.1 ("Matilda I"), through Matilda (Infantry Mk.2) to Valentine (Infantry Mk.3) all could be carried within the .uk loading gauge with no or minimal work. The US-built Honey (US name

- Stuart) could also be carried.

Of the tanks on the mainland, most of the French designs (apart, of course, from the Char-B and the Char d'Rupture) would probably have fitted, as would the various Vickers 6-ton derivatives (used widely by Poland, the Sov. U. and many other places). The Czech T-35 and T-38 would probably have fitted, as would the German Pz-I through to Pz-III - though, of course, this was unlikely to ever be put to the test[1]...

Panzer Mk III and possibly MarkIV would have fitted, I think. After that, most developments were towards a lower profile, as it was realised that high-profile tanks like the Sherman were vulnerable in tank vs tank battles. The Sherman/Grant/Lee family were transportable by rail, albeit on well-wagons rather than flats. I'm pretty certain the Airfix Tiger/Panther were closer to 1/76 rather than 1/87, as the avowedly HO scale Minitanks models of them were much smaller. Even the Germans had to change their ideas about rail transport when the Tiger/King Tiger family came out, as they were too heavy for 4-axle wagons, meaning that 6-axle ones had to be built. There were also loading gauge issues for them on the western parts of the French rail network- possibly being, indirectly, the cause of the massacre at Oradour, as the tank regiment in question had to travel by road rather than rail. Brian

Yes but if it's in rail travel form for the _continental_ system, it should not be able to fit within the _UK_ loading gauge which is even narrower.

(kim)

I don't think the German army circa 1940 was intending to rail their tanks around Britain! =8^) From what I've read of (German) WWII tank design the loading gauge was very much a limiting factor. Later in the war one of the major German tank designs had narrow transport tracks and removable guards, and whatever the last F.Porsche design was, it only fitted the loading gauge with tracks removed.

Greg.P.

The first tank on the train would "adjust" the loading gauge for the following tanks! I remember having a similar problem with 8'6" high and then 9' high ISO containers in New Zealand around 1980!

Regards, Greg.P.

"kim" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@giganews.com:

...

I'm not so sure that it wouldn't, the Tigers I and II when in travel mode lost their outer wheels and were fitted with special narrow tracks, loose the mudguards of the Tiger 1 at the same time and it might just sqeeze in guage, especially on the old GWR lines.

... and re an earlier post the A13 series Crusader and Covenenter both fitted within the UK loading guage - Chris Ellis+ "British and American Tanks and AFVs of WW2".

"BH Williams" wrote in news:f94b2m$gr$1$ snipped-for-privacy@news.demon.co.uk:

...

SOE agents had previously added abrasive powder to a lot of the axle boxes on the special Tiger transporter wagons when they were parked up in a marshalling yard prior to the move. After a number of wagons failed the German?s had to abandon rail transport for the divisional armour.

The main problem with continental vehicles was there footprint, looking down they are much squarer than British designs, which is one fo the obvious traints of the British loading gauge limitation.

"estarriol" wrote in news:f985uo$cit$1$ snipped-for-privacy@news.demon.co.uk:

Don't really want to make a big deal out of this but no, there's no general rule that would support that point of view.

RCH wagons?

Greg Procter wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@ihug.co.nz:

Ah ... oops I thought that we were still talking about armoured vehicles, I never considered that in a newsgroup concerned with model railways the thread would drift to become on topic. :-)

Sorry, my mistake! One could surely fit a light armoured car into an RCH PO wagon?

Greg Procter wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@ihug.co.nz:

....

Possibly, certaily fit on a flat of the same size.