I've just read that the Mk V and V* Tanks used by the US in France were all hermaphrodites. Is that right?
Having just had another look at previous posts, I form the impression that quite a large number of British vehicles were fitted out as hermaphrodites. Anyone any details?
-- Edited by James H at 10:54, 2008-06-19
__________________
"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.
Some but not, I think, all the tanks with the 301. It would be nice to have figures as to how many tanks were composites but these do not seem to exist
In addition to machnes with US 301 I've come across wasr diary evidence of Composites/Hermaphrodites with 10 and 15 Bns, and there may be more tucked way in my notebooks.
I should have known that. Is that info in the second half of Treat 'Em Rough? I bet it is. The first half is highly entertaining, especially the part about US industry's total failure to produce any Tanks, but every time I try to read the second half I get fed up with the tedious detail it goes into and decide to do something else instead.
Thank you, Simmers. I shall make an effort this time.
__________________
"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.
That radio tank was a MK V* It was first in action at Brancourt 8th Oct 1918From an account of a later action it was armed (but as male, female or composite I don't know) and could transmit whilst on the move (quite an advance from the old Mk I wireless tanks). It seems likely that the exta space in the MkV* allowed a radio and operator room without compromising the tank's fighting capability.
I have a copy of a document from The National Archives at Kew comparing the wireless installation in a Mark IV with that in a Mark V (not a V*). On balance, that in the Mark IV was preferred. This was because in the Mark V it was mounted centrally at the rear and got bashed around a lot. In the Mark IV it was mounted and operated in a sponson, and this combined with the lower speed of the Mark IV meant it had the benefit of a smoother(!) ride.
There were disadvantages. In the Mark V the aerial was run out the back, whereas in the Mark IV it was run out the side, and was often interfered with as a result. But on balance the Mark IV was considered better.
Gwyn Any chance of posting a copy? Does it say what it means by aerial run out and interfered with? I wasn't aware that there was any real difference between the speed of a MkIV and a Mk V (but the MK V* would probably be slower because of the increased weight) The US radio tank does appear to have been a Mk V*
Thanks Centurian for the info on the 301 Radio tank. Unfortunately I don't think there is any info in the book on what type it was.
James H...yes that info was in the 2nd half of the book. I was interested in noting it down as there was a War Office suggestion that Australia provide troops for an Australian manned Tank Battalion. It never eventuated but I was curious as to what types of vehicles it would be equipped with. The US 301 looked like a good model. Unfortunately the book does not go into soft skinned vehicles etc that go along with a Tank battalion at the time.
