I don't know if we've had this before, but I've come across a reference to a tank simply described as "Schneider". Weight 141 tons, L40ftxW10'9"xH9'8", 3 x 75mm guns, 9 x mgs, three turrest, Crew 28. Produced by Schneider, total production 1, date not stated. Sounds like the K-Wagen. Ring a bell?
__________________
"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.
James H wrote: I don't know if we've had this before, but I've come across a reference to a tank simply described as "Schneider". Weight 141 tons, L40ftxW10'9"xH9'8", 3 x 75mm guns, 9 x mgs, three turrest, Crew 28. Produced by Schneider, total production 1, date not stated. Sounds like the K-Wagen. Ring a bell?
Obviously a bit different from the K wagen as this had no turrets (only sort of sponsons) and four large guns not three. Sounds more like a big rival design for the Char 2c
There was a big Schneider scheme that was partially tested. Its covered somewhere in this forum. It was three ordinary Schnieders srticulaeted together via a sort of huge ball and socket joint. Tracks driven by electric motors with the third and last schnieder acting as an engine room for the electric generator - the first two being the fighting compartments. Actually built and tested as a two unit machine. However don't think it had that size crew etc.
Anyway, the third one looks favourite. Perhaps by 3 turrets they mean 3 cupolas. It's claimed that this thing was actually built, but no more details are given than the stuff I've quoted. Did it exist?
__________________
"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.
Kenneth Macksey's 'Tank Facts & Feats' has a similar reference to a Schneider 141-ton design, though it says it carried four 75mm guns - a minor difference hardly worth quibbling over until more information is found - and nine MGs. Apart from that, nothing, and I've always been baffled by it.
Sorry, it does say four x 75mm, which fits Centurion's drawing - presumably 2 fore and aft mounted asymmetrically. This source doesn't give a production date but lists it after the Char 3C of 1926, so if it's in chronological order it's not WWI.
-- Edited by James H at 02:58, 2007-03-30
__________________
"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.
In 1938 there was a French commission set up to come up with a new super heavy tank specifically for attacking very strong fortifications (like the Siegfried Line)
If you look at a thread entiled the Ghost of the Skeleton tank you'll see something about this. I enclose a relevant extract after the initial design studies, to go for the 'Maximum 'Tank with the New Skeleton as a back up project several companies were asked to provide design submissions for each tank (and they didn't necessarily stick too closely to the original spec) so it is likely that this was one company's response but there would have been others. Be interesting to know what they were. Unfortunately it would seem that much of the paperwork was hidden in 1940 to avoid it falling into German hands (although I suspect it would have done the allies a favour if the Germans had been peruaded to spend scarce resources following up these design dead ends) and not all of it survived through the occupation (or was simply lost and is mouldering in some attic or barn).
What little is known of the Maximum tank suggests that the weight you quote is about right and it was to have been a multi turret tank armed with 75s
James H wrote:Sorry, it does say four x 75mm, which fits Centurion's drawing - presumably 2 fore and aft mounted asymmetrically. This source doesn't give a production date but lists it after the Char 3C of 1926, so if it's in chronological order it's not WWI.
Centurion's drawing is of the weird Perinelle-Dumay proposal, originally developed during the period 1918 to 1921, for an amphibious tank. The armament was not at all the same as that of the mysterious Schneider monster, consisting of, as Perinelle-Dumay wrote, two naval 65-mm guns (in the side-mounted casemates) and a 47-mm gun alone at the rear (on the right of Centurion's drawing, above the angled track). The nose-mounted gun in that drawing should actually be a machine-gun, as can be seen in Perinelle-Dumay's sketch which Tim Rigsby has scanned and posted, here:
The sketch appeared in a later pamphlet published by Perinelle-Dumay called Tanks in 1933. This was the final manifestation of the design and differs mainly from the original 1918-21 proposal in that the front of the machine's under-hull was formed into a spoon-shaped skid, whereas the earlier design featured another auxiliary track for climbing. The only known original sketch is the one posted by Tim Rigsby, which was from the 1933 publication. Paul Malmassari, in his fascinating article on the project in Steel Masters (No. 17, October/November 1996), writes that no trace of the original 1918-21 proposal has been found, everything is based on the final 1933 version.
M. Malmassari has also written an article on the 'fortress tanks' projects, an online version of which is here:
Given that James H's reference suggests a post WW1 date I reiterate the suggestion I made above that it was part of the 1938 Fortification Attack project. This had ties back to WW1 as the committee were effectively the French equivalent of the British Old Gang (TOG the reassembled Landship committee) tasked in effect to produce a modern Mk V* as it was thought that current French tanks could not deal with the wide anti tank ditches that the Germans were building into the Siegfried Line. The French obviously thought that WW2 would in effect be the plan 1919 but a wee bit late. (The Mk V* was specifically quoted, as was the Skeleton tank). They came up with four options : 1.Le Char Minimum with 120mm thick armour and either a 75 mm gun or two flame throwers in a single turret. This was rejected as having inadequate trench crossing capability. 2. Le Char Maximum, a very large conventional tank with 120mm armour and both a 75mm and two flame throwers in the turret. This was selected for further development and the spec issued to a number of French tank manufacturers for detailed design studies and proposals. They seem to have ignored the spec and produced their own designs for multi turreted tanks. AMX produced a proposal for what looked like a modernised FMC2 whilst FMC built a mock up of a super heavy tank with twin turrets arranged like the old Austin armoured cars. Most of the material was lost during the German occupation. 3. Le Train Boirault which was basically the articulated Schnieder project of WW1 updated. M. Boirault was the same man that produced the vast walking frame system in WW1. As the train had three units its possible that it might have mounted three cannon and been the tank James H mentions. The committee reduced it to two units and then rejected it as too complicated. 4. Le Char Squellette which was intended to be a modern version of the Skeleton tank with a moveable armoured section within the skeleton. The idea was that it could change the tank's centre of gravity to assist in climbing in and out of anti tank ditches. This scheme was selected as a back up to the Char Maximum and the specs issued to several companies. Again they seem to have made a fairly liberal interpretation of the spec. One of these design studies is dicussed elesewhere in this forum (see Ghost of the Skeleton). Again all detail was lost 1940/44.
If any one has more detail I'd be delighted to see it.
Well, this is puzzling. This plan is labelled "Renault B2", but it looks nothing like the B2. It does, however, fit the description to some extent of the supposed Schneider Supertank. The weight is given as 45 tonnes (the B2 was 35.5) but I can't see how this could possibly come in at that; 141 seems much more realistic for a monster like this. What's really hard to explain is why the captions are in German.
In 1940 there was a design for a somewhat similar "Fortress Tank" of 140 tons (Pic 3), but J,R,& I wrote their book in 1933, so they couldn't have known about it.
"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.