HITCHIN TANK

[Sidearm]

The important point here is that for people like Centurion and I the Canadian aspect of the Ashford tank story certainly isn't common knowledge, even though we've both studied tanks for years (can't speak for Centurion here, but it's 35 years in my case). This is completely new and absolutely fascinating. It also makes the Ashford tank even more unique.

So far as I know, at this time the Canadian Tank Corps in the UK consisted of just one battalion. Its War Diary is at Kew - WO158/860. I looked at it this summer and have no note of them being in Grantham, but next time I'm there I'll have a look again (unless someone else wants to do it - hint!).

I would be very interested indeed in seeing (or finding out where to find) this contract or any other documents that provide something of the history of this tank pre-Ashford.

The tank may well have come from Grantham, but this would suggest it was built in Lincolnshire - i.e. by Fosters. And they only built Males. So, was this another converted Male? Guess we won't know as it's been gutted.

Gwyn

[Sidearm]

Neil, I meant to reply to your comment about having a photo of the Hythe tank. I have some photos of this but they're small and rather distant views of the tank, as I recall showing it sitting in the corner of a memorial garden. If you have anything clearer I would be very interested in seeing it.

Thanks

Gwyn

[centurion]

Neil, I meant to reply to your comment about having a photo of the Hythe tank. I have some photos of this but they're small and rather distant views of the tank, as I recall showing it sitting in the corner of a memorial garden.

Is this the one you have?

[Mark Hansen]

...The tank may well have come from Grantham, but this would suggest it was built in Lincolnshire - i.e. by Fosters. And they only built Males. So, was this another converted Male? Guess we won't know as it's been gutted.

Gwyn

Depending on the extent of the gutting, it may be possible to determine whether it was originally constructed as a male. All you need are pictures of the inside of the tank from just behind the sponsons. If the inner frames are there, the shell holders should still be in place.

[centurion]

One for Gwyn

If a male tank was converted to female would it retain its male 100 series home service number or would this be changed to a 200 series female home service number? The photo I have of the tank arriving in Ashford shows a 200 series number.

[tanks3]

Neil,

This is ground breaking news as to the way Ashford was granted its tank. My research shows it was presented to the town by The National War Savings Committee. This is based on an article in the April 1919 issue of the Silver Bullet where the NWSC list all the 265 tanks it presented throughout the land. Ashford is listed. I would dearly love to see the Canadian Agreement. This is exciting stuff. Any chance of posting a copy? If you wish I can post a copy of the Silver Bullet Article. It certainly explains why the Ashford tank escaped the scrap drive prior to WW2.

By the way I lift my hat off to you for the work you have done in having the tank restored and listed. Its a credit to you.

Tanks3

[Roger D]

Tank 3.

I'd certainly be very interested in seeing the Silver Bullet article if you are willing to post it. This thread has been excellent reading and I suspect it would be very interesting background material. Thank you.

[Sidearm]

Centurion, thanks for posting the photo of the Hitchin tank. This is one of two or three I've seen but they're all very similar. I would like to see a clearer one, if such exists. Anyway, Male presentation tanks aren't so common.

I don't know the answer to the question re Home Forces numbers of ex-Male newly Female presentation tanks, because I've never seen one with Home Forces numbers. I know of Mark IVs that were Males but became Females once presented. Ryde IoW and Cambrai were ones I spotted early on. I think that Worthing is another one (I would have to check my databases again - working from memory isn't always advisable). But none of these have Home Forces numbers. I have also just found evidence that at least 30 Mark IV Males were fitted with Female sponsons by Central Workshops. They were recorded as "Males with Female sponsons", so goodness knows what might have happened to the neat Home Forces numbering system when they were shipped back to the UK. I suspect they were passed off to grateful towns asap!

Finally I would wish to second tanks3's comment with regard to the good work done by you, Neil. It is very much appreciated.

Gwyn

[centurion]

Much heat has been (unintentionally) generated re the Ashford tank. I've put together as dispassionately as possible the reasons why I find the news of the Ashford/Canadian agreement so 'out of left field'

The Canadian 1^st and 2^nd Tank Battalions were formed in 1918. Before then there were no Canadian tank units although British tanks were allocated in support of various Canadian actions and at least one Mk V tank was Canadian crewed. In general there was a reluctance amongst the Canadian troops in France to volunteer for tank service as they were regarded as death traps (this may be due to an incident when a number of tanks supporting the Canadians were hit by German artillery and 'brewed up') The two battalions were recruited in Canada (mainly from Universities and Technical schools). The 1^st Battalion arrived in Britain in June 1918 and was equipped with Mk V and V* tanks. The second Battalion arrived in October 1918. I believe that it was intended that they would be in part equipped with French FT tanks (which would require training in France). The 1^st Battalion was nearing the end of its training when the war ended. The 2^nd cannot have been anywhere near trained. Both went home in early 1919, before the distribution of presentation tanks began.

Photos show some of their training was at Wool in Dorset. I can find no record of any training by them at Grantham where the training schools based around Belton Park were mainly concerned with machine gun, trench mortars and bombing (grenades). Plenty of Canadian units were trained there but not, I suspect, tankers. The Canadian tank depot was at Bovington (and a number of men's service histories confirm this) and any Canadian tanks would have been returned here before the battalions left for Canada. Tanks were certainly built and tested at Grantham before being shipped to the units that would use them.

The Canadians are extremely unlikely to have trained on a Mk IV female such as that at Ashford. The Mk IV had a totally different transmission system to the Mk V and required a driver and two brakesmen to steer it, the Mk V could be steered by the driver alone. Nor would a Mk IV female be suitable for gunnery training as it carried Lewis guns whereas the Mk V used Hotchkiss machine guns. The Tank Gunnery School was at Lulworth Dorset and again photos suggest by mid 1918 was only using Mk V tanks and Whippets.

As has been said the National Savings Committee allocated (awarded) presentation tanks to towns that had participated in the tank bank and other fund raising efforts through the sale of bonds. Nearly 300 tanks were awarded Ashford being listed as one of the recipient towns. Most of these tanks were Mk IV Females, again as per the tank at Ashford. The process of delivery involved the tank being delivered by rail and then driven by a British Tank Corps team to be formally presented to the town by a Tank Corps officer. The tank would be driven to its resting place by the team who would disable it by removing the drive chains. Some of the stories told by the presenting officers were not always models of accuracy. Most of the presentation tanks were ex training tanks (with other being tanks returned from France). British training tanks had a 3 digit number (in the 100 series for Male tanks and 200 series for female tanks). The original number (known as a home service number) of the Ashford tank was 245 as can be seen on a photo of it arriving in the town (this might suggest that it was not a male converted to female in France). Deliveries took place over a period of about a year and were made after the Canadians had gone home. Mk IVs were probably chosen as they were obsolete well before 1919 and there were plenty available.

Given all of this it is difficult to see why there would be any link between Ashford and the Canadians which is why the agreement between the town and the Canadian government is puzzling ( to me at least) and why sight of it would be of great interest.

[tanks3]

Hi Rodger D,

Here is a copy of the article. I hope you are able to copy it onto your computer than enlarge it to read. If not, send me a pm and I will send you a copy

Tanks3

[Guest flyinghigh]

Hi i purchased this old postcard today,Does anyone know what happened to this memorial and where exactly was it

This is a long out of date thread, but someone may read it. I seem to remeber in the 60's playing on a WW1 tank in Hitchin and have been looking for proof it existed, hence finding this thread. But I am unsure now if my memory is invented, from someone telling me at the time of the tank, or it was real, all depends when this was removed. I also found this quote on the BBC peoples war site:

1938: I was a spectator at a civil defence exercise on Butts Close, Hitchin. I had a grandstand view because my father seated me on a World War I tank which stood on the Close as a memorial.

any more info gratefully recieved

[centurion]

I have so far found only 3 presentation tanks that survived WW2 and one of those was gone by the 1950s. If there is any evidence that the Hitchin tank was a fourth I'd be very interested.

[Sidearm]

Me too!

[NigelS]

Unless I've missed it, I don't think this story from The Times of January 9th 1920, about the Hitchin tank has been mentioned previously:

Live Shell in Presentation Tank

The tank which was presented to Hitchin last autumn slid from its pedestal in November, while it was being restored to its place yesterday a live shell was discovered in the car

I seem to recall reading in another thread about live ammunition being found in another tank - I don't think it was Hitchin - but have been unable to track it down.

NigelS

[centurion]

Unless I've missed it, I don't think this story from The Times of January 9th 1920, about the Hitchin tank has been mentioned previously:

Live Shell in Presentation Tank

The tank which was presented to Hitchin last autumn slid from its pedestal in November, while it was being restored to its place yesterday a live shell was discovered in the car

I seem to recall reading in another thread about live ammunition being found in another tank - I don't think it was Hitchin - but have been unable to track it down.

NigelS

Happened on more than one occasion. The tank at Paisley had live rounds in it and schoolboys managed to load and fire one ,an unfortunate bystander was blinded by the debris ((sweet papers etc) in the barrel. I think another was Derby's second tank ( at Newton's factory).

[centurion]

Happened on more than one occasion. The tank at Paisley had live rounds in it and schoolboys managed to load and fire one ,an unfortunate bystander was blinded by the debris ((sweet papers etc) in the barrel. I think another was Derby's second tank ( at Newton's factory).

Thinking about it more, the standards of safety when tanks were presented were appalling. One workman was killed when cutting up the Aylesbury tank in 1929 because the fuel tank, which still had fuel left in it, exploded and another found , just in time, that the cylindrical object between the frames that he was applying a cutting torch to was a live 6 pounder round.

[NigelS]

Although this is an old thread and the original poster ('flyinghigh') of post #61 appears, through lack of postings, to be no longer active, it looks as if the Hitchin tank was scrapped in 1937.The Times of August 11th of that year gave:

The Hitchin Urban Council has sold for scrap a tank and two guns presented to the town after the war, and is giving to the local hospital the £57 obtained from a Sheffield firm.

The Times had quite a few notices of tanks being scrapped between the wars, If of interest I can summarize dates etc. either on this thread or a new one.

NigelS

[robins2]

if I may add this one to the mix (Canadian Tank) card in frame so apologies for quality

Regards

Bob R.

[centurion]

Are you saying that that is the Hitchin tank?

[tanks3]

NigelS

Would be interested to see your summary

Tanks3

[robins2]

No not saying that at all, just posted photo as a matter of interest, there appears to be a number on the upper deck (521??)

earlier in this thread there was a discussion of Cdn Tanks/training etc. so I thought the photo would be of interest

regards

Bob R.

[centurion]

A number of tanks were assigned to support the Canadians. These were not part of the Canadian Tank Corps (which did not complete training in time to see action) but part of the British Tank Corps although it would seem likely that some or all of the crews were Canadians. I would suspect that the tank shown is one of these.

[robins2]

I also observed there is a gaping hole where the gun emplacement should be, so I suspect it is a training venture, I think the photo was taken in U.K./France?? judging by the farm court yard/house?/

the picture was obtained along with the owners: .445 Cal. officers colt revolver.his ribbon bar, a photo copy photo of the officer with President Roosevelt (apparently he was a Cdn Liaison officer to the US during WW11, he also saw service during WW1, a M.C. recipient, I have not researched his records as yet, may be the records would shed some light as to the tank photo.

Regards

Bob R.

[Sidearm]

The photo of the tank in post #68 is a Mark I Female that was later converted to use as a Signal Tank. Call me a sceptic but the HMLS Canada markings don't look right. I suspect that the photo has been altered to add these words.

Gwyn

[robins2]

I don't think photo was altered,although there is that possibility

appears to me that HMLS was painted on as a lark???