Landships II

philthydirtyanimal · Commander in Chief

75mm on Tracks?

Centurion · Legend

Its the Gun Motor Carriage Full Track (Ordnance). There were two varieties both using the 75mm one onted on a 21/2ton Holt and the other on the 5 ton Holt. Problem was it got the gun there but the crew and ammo had to be carried seperately.

James H · Legend

Beat me to it, Centurion. It looks very like the Mk VIII, with the ill-fated M1916 75mm on a Holt 2.5 ton chassis - the one whose similarity to the FT17 suspension PDA pointed out the other day. It had a split trail arrangement to stabilise it when firing, which I think can be seen in the pic.

Fairly sure I've got a pic somewhere. Stand by.

-- Edited by James H at 22:09, 2008-10-16

Centurion · Legend

I've got a photo of the VII but I'll have to get the scanner working in the am. It wasn't produced until 1919 and doesn't quite match the one in pda's link. The one I'm thinking of is a closer match, produced 1917/18.

BTW the Soviet Union produced a copy of the VII

James H · Legend

First pic is of the Mk VIII. According to F Crismon, there might�have been�only one of these built. The reason for the trail becomes clear in the light of its dimensions: 7'3" high, 4'10" wide.

Second pic is of same on the 5-ton chassis, also from 1918.

The later Mk VII was based on the Mk VIII, using a modified suspension that� still very obviously owed its design to the FT17, with an enlarged rear wheel so that the upper and lower track runs were almost parallel.

Centurion · Legend

James H wrote:

The later Mk VII was based on the Mk VIII, using a modified suspension that� still very obviously owed its design to the FT17, with an enlarged rear wheel so that the upper and lower track runs were almost parallel.

The Mk VII was built by Holt in 1919 - only two made. I have 2 photos in 2 different sources. It doesn't make sense that it would be developed from a Mk VIII. Surely if so it would have been a Mk IX

I have the same "Mk VIII" photo as you printed alongside a photo of the Mk VII - it is not referred to as the Mk VIII and its design is atributed to the Ordance department

Centurion · Legend

Whatever its Mark this is the thing in motion

philthydirtyanimal · Commander in Chief

Thank you Gentlemen.

I did some searching using your leads, and found this on the TANKS! site

http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/UnitedStates/selfpropelledguns/usspg-mark8-andre.jpg

with the ramps down (in the lower photograph) it looks like the same vehicle.

On the site it is called the Mark VIII. The one after it (on the TANKS! site) is unidentified.

http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/

and the one after that (on the site, and chronologically) is called the Mark VII.

Which, as Centurion points out, does not make sense.

I believe the gun is the famous French 75. Ne c'est pas?

And something else I thought of; this is all very similar to the Italian semovente 105/14

http://www.landships.freeservers.com/jpegs/newpics_05_2005/semovente_bw.jpg

which also did not have the capacity to carry crew or ammunition.

philthydirtyanimal · Commander in Chief

Just noticed in my last posting that 2 out of 3 links dont do what i want them to do!

On the TANKS! site, go into the USA section (in the column of flags on the left), then choose SPG's from the bottom of the USA page. Its about halfway down. ish.

and here's another picture of the Semovente 105/14

http://www.flickr.com/photos/7700258@N05/2941563267/in/photostream/

So did Louis Renault use Holt/Best/Caterpillar/Hornsby's idea for the tracks? Or vice versa? Did the Americans copy the Italians? Or vice versa?

Centurion · Legend

The Mark VII Used the M1916 75 mm which I think is an American version of the French 75

James H · Legend

Right. This is complicated.

If F Crismon is to be believed, Holt and/or the US Army counted backwards, like the Romans. If we assume that he and FSU are correct, this is the story. Bear in mind, though, that FSU might be cribbing off Crismon and repeating any innaccuracies. There is a model that both are unable to fit into the chronology.

The Mk VIII was the 2.5 tonner with the M1916 (US) 75mm. FC maintains that only one was built, in 1918, on the very Renault-like track assembly. Centurion's pic appears to be of this model.

The Mk VII was built in 1919, something of a redesign but again with the M1916 on the upgraded Renault-style tracks. FC says only two were made, but were used for experimental versions for a number of years, so there are pics of the Mk VII with a long barrelled M1920 US 75mm.

The Mk VI was made in 1921, using�the long-barrelled�75, and had a very different layout and tracks. Two were built.

Now, the puzzle is the version apparently on the 5-ton chassis, in the right-hand pic I posted. FC says it was made "around 1918" with a rigid suspension (i.e. none). He doesn't give it a Mark number, and FSU appeal on their site for an ident. I suspect this might have been a one-off that wasn't designated a number. Feel free to argue.

As regards who copied whose track assembly, it's well-known that the Schneider borrowed heavily from Holt, but I have always been under the impression that Renault started from scratch when designing the FT17, so I am tempted to believe that Holt based their 2.5 tonner�on the Renault layout having seen either the plans or the real thing.

Incidentally, whilst I haven't discovered when the chief designer Rodolphe Ernst-Metzmaier died, I think he lived to a ripe old age, possibly into the 1970s. He seems to have a number of descendants living in France. There are a couple of Ernst-Metzmaiers on Facebook.

-- Edited by James H at 10:59, 2008-10-18

-- Edited by James H at 11:19, 2008-10-18