WW1 Military Motors - 1916 set x 50 cards

[Lancashire Fusilier]

The air louvres look a bit vulnerable.

johnboy,

The louvred grille at the rear of the Mark V Tank which supplied air to the Tank's radiator, was a design feature new to the Mark V, and it was certainly vulnerable, particularly to mud and dirt clogging the grille.

To protect this grille, 2 louvred metal panels were fitted over the grille, however, either due to wear and tear or their being deliberately removed to increase the air flow, we often see one or both of the louvred grille panels removed, and in some cases, the grille itself has been removed.

Towards the end of WW1, an inverted ' V ' frame was designed to fit above the grille to help keep dirt and mud off the grille.

Attached is a photograph of a Mark V Male Tank, with both the protective grille louvred panels still fitted.

This Tank was knocked out by a German mine exploding under the Tank as it crossed German wire in the Picardy Somme region of Northern France in late September 1918, the large crater and the damage to the underside of the Tank caused by the explosion, can be clearly seen.

Also of note, are the Tank's Unditching Beam still fitted to the roof of the Tank, and Tank's Semaphore Signalling Discs also fitted to the roof of the Tank.

A second photograph, shows the later inverted ' V ' frame fitted above the radiator air intake grille designed to keep mud and dirt off the grille.

Regards,

LF

IWM This image is reproduced strictly for non-commercial research and private study purposes as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, as amended and revised.

[Lancashire Fusilier]

In the following 2 photographs, we can see the inverted ' V ' frame fitted above the Tank's air intake grille designed to keep dirt and mud off the grille.

LF

This image is reproduced strictly for non-commercial research and private study purposes as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, as amended and revised.

[Lancashire Fusilier]

A close up view of the inverted ' V ' metal frame which was introduced in the latter part of WW1, to be fitted above the Tank's radiator air intake grille, and designed to keep dirt and mud off the grille.

LF

This image is reproduced strictly for non-commercial research and private study purposes as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, as amended and revised.

[Lancashire Fusilier]

While taking another look at Uncle George's very interesting photograph ( post #4466 ), I noticed it is even more interesting than I first thought, as it shows not Mark V tanks, but the modified, and longer bodied Mark V* Tanks.

The addition of the ' Star ' ( * ), was to denote the longer Mark V* Tank, which was modified initially at the Tank Corps Central Workshops in France, with this length modification then incorporated into the design of new Mark V* Tanks being built by the Metropolitan Carriage Waggon & Finance Co., in Birmingham.

The Mark V* length modification devised by the Tank Corps' Central Workshops in France in February 1918, involved simply cutting a Mark V Tank in half, and inserting 3 additional side panels to the right of the sponsons. This length modification increased the Mark V's length from 26 ft 5 inches to 32 ft 5 inches, with this 6 feet length increase being designed to allow the Mark V* Tank an additional 4 feet of trench crossing ability, increasing it's trench crossing capability to 14 feet.

Also, this extra 6 feet of body length on the Mark V* allowed for an additional Hotchkiss machine gun port to be inserted into the side of the Mark V* to the right of the sponson, and also the addition of an extra armoured crew door below that extra machine gun port.

Neither of those modifications are seen on the Mark V Tank, so those two very distinctive features on the Mark V* are an excellent way of telling the Mark V and the Mark V* apart.

The Mark V* Tanks were first used during the Battle of Amiens in August 1918, and their extra 6 feet in length was also originally utilised to carry an additional 4 machine gun crews in each Tank, who would dismount during the battle. However, this plan was unsuccessful as the machine gun crews riding in the Mark V* Tanks were so badly affected by the heat and fumes inside the Tank, that when they arrived at their destination and dismounted the Tank, they were too ill to fight, so the plan was abandoned.

632 Mark V* Tanks were built, 200 Male Tanks and 432 Female Tanks.

There was a further modification to the Mark V*, the Mark V**, which was a new version of the Mark V*, with a slightly different body design, rearranged interior and other upgrades, plus a larger 225 hp ' Ricardo ' engine, whereas the Mark V and the Mark V* had smaller 150 hp ' Ricardo ' engines.

The Mark V** was a slightly larger, heavier, faster Tank, with a greater range.

Only a small number of Mark V** Tanks were built just after the Armistice, so none saw service during WW1.

In the attached enlarged version of Uncle George's photograph, the distinctive additional Hotchkiss machine gun port to the right of the sponson and the additional armoured crew door directly below that additional machine gun port can clearly be seen on these 1 Male and 3 Female Mark V* Tanks, and I have marked them accordingly.

Regards,

LF

[Lancashire Fusilier]

For comparison purposes, here is a nice clear detailed side view of a British Mark V Female Tank currently on display in Murmansk, Russia.

This particular Mark V Tank was one of 6 Mark V Tanks, along with their British volunteer crews, which were part of the British North Russian Expedition Force sent to Russia in 1919 to aid the White Russian Northwestern Army in their fight against the Red Bolshevik Army.

Eventually, all 6 British Mark V Tanks ended up in Communist hands, and are currently displayed in various Russian cities.

LF

IWM This image is reproduced strictly for non-commercial research and private study purposes as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, as amended and revised.

[Lancashire Fusilier]

Again for comparison, here is a nice clear detailed photograph of a British Mark V* Female Tank, and when comparing this side view to that of the Mark V Female Tank shown in the previous post, we can clearly see the additional 6 feet in the length of the Mark V* as a result of the additional 3 armoured side panels added to the Mark V* , and the additional Hotchkiss machine gun port to the right of the sponson, plus the additional crew door below the extra machine gun port, neither of which was part of the Mark V's design.

632 Mark V* Tanks were built, 200 Male Tanks and 432 Female Tanks.

LF

IWM This image is reproduced strictly for non-commercial research and private study purposes as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, as amended and revised.

[Uncle George]

While taking another look at Uncle George's very interesting photograph ( post #4466 ), I noticed it is even more interesting than I first thought, as it shows not Mark V tanks, but the modified, and longer bodied Mark V* Tanks.

The addition of the ' Star ' ( * ), was to denote the longer Mark V* Tank, which was modified initially at the Tank Corps Central Workshops in France, with this length modification then incorporated into the design of new Mark V* Tanks being built by the Metropolitan Carriage Waggon & Finance Co., in Birmingham.

The Mark V* length modification devised by the Tank Corps' Central Workshops in France in February 1918, involved simply cutting a Mark V Tank in half, and inserting 3 additional side panels to the right of the sponsons. This length modification increased the Mark V's length from 26 ft 5 inches to 32 ft 5 inches, with this 6 feet length increase being designed to allow the Mark V* Tank an additional 4 feet of trench crossing ability, increasing it's trench crossing capability to 14 feet.

Also, this extra 6 feet of body length on the Mark V* allowed for an additional Hotchkiss machine gun port to be inserted into the side of the Mark V* to the right of the sponson, and also the addition of an extra armoured crew door below that extra machine gun port.

Neither of those modifications are seen on the Mark V Tank, so those two very distinctive features on the Mark V* are an excellent way of telling the Mark V and the Mark V* apart.

The Mark V* Tanks were first used during the Battle of Amiens in August 1918, and their extra 6 feet in length was also originally utilised to carry an additional 4 machine gun crews in each Tank, who would dismount during the battle. However, this plan was unsuccessful as the machine gun crews riding in the Mark V* Tanks were so badly affected by the heat and fumes inside the Tank, that when they arrived at their destination and dismounted the Tank, they were too ill to fight, so the plan was abandoned.

632 Mark V* Tanks were built, 200 Male Tanks and 432 Female Tanks.

There was a further modification to the Mark V*, the Mark V**, which was a new version of the Mark V*, with a slightly different body design, rearranged interior and other upgrades, plus a larger 225 hp ' Ricardo ' engine, whereas the Mark V and the Mark V* had smaller 150 hp ' Ricardo ' engines.

The Mark V** was a slightly larger, heavier, faster Tank, with a greater range.

Only a small number of Mark V** Tanks were built just after the Armistice, so none saw service during WW1.

In the attached enlarged version of Uncle George's photograph, the distinctive additional Hotchkiss machine gun port to the right of the sponson and the additional armoured crew door directly below that additional machine gun port can clearly be seen on these 1 Male and 3 Female Mark V* Tanks, and I have marked them accordingly.

Regards,

LF

It seems to me that the third of these tanks is shorter in length than the other three; and it doesn't look as if his can be explained by their respective angles to the photographer (which all seem to be the same). So is this a photograph of three Mark V*s, plus one Mark V? But you will point to the machine gun port and door below. Three Mark V**s and one Mark V*?

(I meant to post the link for Monash's book; so here it is:)

http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks13/1302421h.html

[Lancashire Fusilier]

It seems to me that the third of these tanks is shorter in length than the other three; and it doesn't look as if his can be explained by their respective angles to the photographer (which all seem to be the same). So is this a photograph of three Mark V*s, plus one Mark V

There is another prominent feature of the Tanks shown in your photograph, which confirms that 3rd Tank as being also a Mark V* Tank, and that is the position of the large Epicyclic Shaft Boss, which on the shorter Mark V Tank is located pretty centrally between the right of the sponson and the air intake grille, whereas, on the longer Mark V* Tank the Epicyclic Shaft Boss is much farther off centre and to the right, as on the 3rd Tank in your photograph.

See attached.

Also, many thanks for the excellent Monash book link.

Regards,

LF

These images are reproduced strictly for non-commercial research and private study purposes as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, as amended and revised.

[Lancashire Fusilier]

Comparisons in position of the Epicyclic Shaft Boss on the Mark V and the Mark V* Tanks.

LF

These images are reproduced strictly for non-commercial research and private study purposes as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, as amended and revised.

2

[Lancashire Fusilier]

Location of the 3 additional side panels fitted to the Mark V* Tank increasing it's length by 6 feet, and it's trench crossing ability by 4 feet.

LF

These images are reproduced strictly for non-commercial research and private study purposes as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, as amended and revised.

[Lancashire Fusilier]

This photograph shows an array of German WW1 equipment, uniforms and weapons, including ' Wex ' Flamethrowers, being used by German ' Freikorps ' troops in their street battles against the Communist ' Spartacists ' in Berlin during early 1919 following the end of WW1.

The ' Freikorps ' arsenal also included 2 captured British Mark IV Female Tanks, which were taken to Berlin during WW1 following their capture by the German Army, and in January 1919, all remaining armoured vehicles in German hands were regrouped in Berlin under the command of the Reichswehrgruppenkommando 1, which was formed into 2 Battalions ( Abteilungen ). One of these Abteilungen was designated ' Schwere ' ( Heavy ) Kampfwagenabteilung and included the 2 British Mark IV Female Tanks. These two Mark IV Tanks, were subsequently surrendered to the Allies in the Summer of 1919 under the terms of the Treaty of Versailles.

LF

This image is reproduced strictly for non-commercial research and private study purposes as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, as amended and revised.

[Lancashire Fusilier]

A British Mark IV Female Tank No. ' I 36 ' captured by the Germans during the Battle of Cambrai, is loaded on a German flatbed rail wagon for shipment back to Germany.

Interestingly, the word ' Cambrai ' has been chalked on the mid-right edge of the flatbed.

LF

IWM This image is reproduced strictly for non-commercial research and private study purposes as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, as amended and revised.

[Dai Bach y Sowldiwr]

This tank, compared to others whose pictures we have seen on the forum, doesn't show much sign of damage, and if it was worth saving, and sending back to Germany. is it safe to assume it was one of the countless tanks that broke down?

The comment above (johnboy #4474) that the louvred radiator air intake looked vulnerable, I would agree with, even after the louvered metal plates had been added.

I would have thought that a quick burst of machine gun fire well aimed at this area could easily penetrate the radiator, let alone what damage a shrapnel shell could cause.

Any idea what the commonest causes of mechanical breakdown were in the heat of battle?

Overheating?

Engines seizing?

Carburation problems?

Transmission jamming?

[Lancashire Fusilier]

Any idea what the commonest causes of mechanical breakdown were in the heat of battle?

Overheating? Engines seizing? Carburation problems? Transmission jamming?

Dai Bach y Sowldiwr,

As yet, I have seen no statistics relating to specific reasons for a Tank's mechanical breakdown, and the Tanks themselves were mechanically very well maintained by trained mechanics at the British Tank Depots, and one of the Tank's crew was also trained to deal with the more common engine problems.

The two main reasons for a Tank being ' out of action ' were enemy action and ' Ditching ' ( when a Tank got stuck fast in soft ground or a shell hole, and had to be abandoned ), and it was these ' Ditched ' Tanks, which were often undamaged or slightly damaged, which were the main targets for salvage recovery after a battle by both the British and the Germans.

In fact, the Germans set up a large facility at Raismes, just North of Valenciennes in the Nord-Pas-de-Calais region of Northern France, which was dedicated to the maintenance, repair and refurbishment of salvaged British Tanks.

In the attached 1918 photograph, which could be mistaken for a British Tank manufacturing factory, we can see trained mechanics working on many British Tanks ( Male & Female Mark IVs ). However, those mechanics are German, and that ' Tank Factory ', is the German Tank Depot at Raismes specifically set up to maintain, repair and refurbish salvaged British Tanks, and once the work was completed, reissue those salvaged British Tanks to the German Army.

Regards,

LF

IWM This image is reproduced strictly for non-commercial research and private study purposes as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, as amended and revised.

[Lancashire Fusilier]

This December 1917 photograph, shows German Officers examining British Mark IV Tanks salvaged by the Germans after the Battle of Cambrai.

LF

IWM This image is reproduced strictly for non-commercial research and private study purposes as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, as amended and revised.

[Modelmaker]

This tank, compared to others whose pictures we have seen on the forum, doesn't show much sign of damage, and if it was worth saving, and sending back to Germany. is it safe to assume it was one of the countless tanks that broke down?

The comment above (johnboy #4474) that the louvred radiator air intake looked vulnerable, I would agree with, even after the louvered metal plates had been added.

I would have thought that a quick burst of machine gun fire well aimed at this area could easily penetrate the radiator, let alone what damage a shrapnel shell could cause.

Any idea what the commonest causes of mechanical breakdown were in the heat of battle?

Overheating?

Engines seizing?

Carburation problems?

Transmission jamming?

I have yet to find a definitive listing of tank "casualties" whether mechanical or enemy fire.

Ditching seems to have occurred on numerous occasions, due to terrain, shell holes, trench crossing....much has been written about this, the difficulty of steering may have been a contributory factor.

Early tanks had a number of design problems, the numerous bogie wheels when first manufactured were of hollow section. These wheels would collapse when crossing obstacles such as tree trunks, they were replaced with solid wheels.

The engine was under-powered on early machines, coupled with the gravity fed carburetor. The introduction of the "auto-vac" fuel pump helped resolve the problem. It is manifestly clear that a lot of development and improvements were required, however the state of industry and the other call on workforce, materials did result in existing designs being modified slowly....re-design was time consuming too.

Reading various accounts of tank history..it does seem that a number of interested parties for good or ill were involved in the design....resulting in a lot of delays.

Obviously another area of research that is required......any takers ??????

George.

[Lancashire Fusilier]

Lieutenant Leslie Bowman Cadell, 6th Battalion, holding a German ' Wex ' Flammenwerfer, captured near Stirling Castle in the Ypres sector during September 1918.

LF

IWM This image is reproduced strictly for non-commercial research and private study purposes as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, as amended and revised.

[Lancashire Fusilier]

Details of the top of the cylinder/tank from the portable backpack version of the German ' Kleines Flammenwerfer ' or ' Kleif ' Flamethrower operated by a 2 man crew, which propelled burning fuel oil for 18 metres ( 54 feet ), and showing the circular manufacturer's plate of mild steel welded to the upper centre rear of the tank. It is impressed with the following details: In the centre " 1343 ( serial No. ) / LETZE DRUCKPROBE / 14.12.16 / HOCHST BETIEBSDRUCK / 25 ATM 11 KUGEL "; and, around the circumference " FIEDLER FLAMMENAPPARATE GESELLSCHEFT m.b.H BERLIN 1916 ".

LF

AWM This image is reproduced strictly for non-commercial research and private study purposes as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, as amended and revised.

[Lancashire Fusilier]

My final post relating to the German Flamethrower ( Flammenwerfer ), shows a member of a German Flamethrower Unit, which were typically part of the ' Garde Reserve Pioniere Rgt. - Totenkopf Pioniere ', and who wore a skull & cross bones ' Death's Head ' insignia on their lower left sleeve, as shown in this photograph.

LF

This image is reproduced strictly for non-commercial research and private study purposes as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, as amended and revised.

[Dai Bach y Sowldiwr]

Details of the top of the cylinder/tank from the portable backpack version of the German ' Kleines Flammenwerfer '

" 1343 ( serial No. ) / LETZE DRUCKPROBE / 14.12.16 / HOCHST BETIEBSDRUCK / 25 ATM.

The 25 ATM presumably means the pressure inside the tank is 25x atmospheric pressure, namely 350psi.

(Other units are available).

[Lancashire Fusilier]

The 25 ATM presumably means the pressure inside the tank is 25x atmospheric pressure, namely 350psi.

(Other units are available).

Yes, you are correct. The specification for that particular Flamethrower was :-

" The fuel oil tank had a storage capacity of 4.2 gallons (about 19 litres) and weighed just over 70 pounds (31.7 kilograms) fully laden. The pressure on most units was 338 psi. "

Regards,

LF

[Lancashire Fusilier]

Re. the Tank at an acute angle,this is a drawing from my Dad's autograph/note book you will have seen it in previous post a time ago but this his view of a Tankman in battle the rh. tank is at that angle and was in some serious trouble.

Crimson Rambler

Crimson Rambler,

I know your Dad was in Ireland with the 17th Armoured Car Battalion, and the 17th AC were issued with the newer longer Mark V* Heavy Tank for their Dublin deployment.

Here is one of the 17th AC's Mark V* Male Tanks in Dublin circa 1919, supporting British troops, with the Mark V* Tank's extra length providing an excellent roadblock.

Regards,

LF

This image is reproduced strictly for non-commercial research and private study purposes as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, as amended and revised.

[patrick Eggs]

Thanks LF

Great photo good to see the 17th. AC on the job,in Dublin ,as you say some roadblock, most of Dad's time seems have been around Limerick I will double check my odd photo's , but no large Tanks may be the odd Whippet ?

Thanks again LF.

Crimson Rambler

[Lancashire Fusilier]

With reference to post # 4497, whilst the British Mark V* Tank is certainly forming a roadblock, it is also actually taking part in a military raid to search a premises for illegal weapons and explosives, and the Tank is being used to batter down the front of the premises so that the troops can gain entry to conduct the search of the property.

LF

[Lancashire Fusilier]

Another example of a Mark IV or V Tank being used for internal security duties in Dublin during the ' Irish Troubles ', with this Tank's power pushing a wooden pole, which is being used as a battering ram, to force open the door of a premises so that waiting troops can conduct a search of the property looking for illegal arms and explosives.

Also, note the searchlight fitted to the top of the driver's cab.

LF

This image is reproduced strictly for non-commercial research and private study purposes as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, as amended and revised.