Landships II

Rob · Legend

Identity of Mk V Tank 9171 at Imperial War Museum

Rob · Legend

TinCanTadpole noticed something interesting about the Imperial War Museum's Mk V Tank now that the wooden left hand Male sponson has been taken off and photographed;

�

It's interesting to see the IWM Mk V without the left sponson; the Landships II article says the sponson is a wooden mockup, the reason for which has been lost. Look at the ammo stowage in Lincoln Tanker's photo - 9171 is a lady tank! Perhaps it was desired to display a male tank (surely how we first think of rhomboids, no?) and no genuine sponson was available.�

The registration on it is also wrong too - the top of the Tank's cab has 'ME9828' painted on, however this recent thread on the Great War Forum shows that ME9828 was actually a Mk V* Female

http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=186766

I can't find a photograph showing the ammunition racks on the right hand side, despite the clear panel being on that side, to show whether there's any 6 pounder racks which would make it a Hermaphrodite, or Hotchkiss ammunition tin racks making it a pure Female - does anyone have any history of 9171 or able to find a photograph showing the racks?

tanks3 · Major

Rob

I think you have misunderstood the postings on the GWF forum.� The assumption that the IWM tank is a Mk V* is based on the number 9828 being the production number whereas in fact this number is the civilian road�registration number, hence the confusion.

�

Tanks3

Gwyn Evans · Legend

Tanks3 is right. The discussion on the GWF got off on completely the wrong foot, though fortunately it was brought back on track later. I see no reason to doubt that the IWM Mark V is 9171 and ME9828 and Male.

(For anyone looking at the GWF thread, I should explain that I am 'Sidearm').

Gwyn

Gwyn Evans · Legend

Just noticed I have 666 posts, which is not a good sign. This post is to correct that...

Gwyn Evans · Legend

In fact I have proof that the Mark V at the IWM is 9171 and therefore Male:

TinCanTadpole · Legend

You're quite right Gwyn, I jumped to conclusions without examining matters carefully; Prior to Mk V it seems to have been the norm for shell racks to be located inside the track frames next to the sponsons, so I saw slots for ammo tins and came to the wrong conclusion. They must have changed and put ammo tins there instead, with a small area for shells below (presumably for case shot, given the small number of holes and the apparent colour-coding in red?).

The side stowage further back in the tank does indeed have holes for shells rather than slots for ammo tins; interestingly this layout seems to have been ditched on the Mk V**, which looks to have reverted to storing the shells next to the sponson, with the tin racks further back in the sides.

I wonder which method was used in between, on the Mk V*?

Gwyn Evans · Legend

TCT, do you have photos to illustrate?

Gwyn

TinCanTadpole · Legend

Re Mk V**, Roger Todd posted a factory photo in a thread from earlier this year - the second photo in the ninth post:

http://landships.activeboard.com/t49269862/wanted-measurement-sizes-for-ider-wheels-sprocket-wheels-for/

Looking at the left (far) column of tanks, you'll see that the first vehicle (furthest left) has slots for ammo tins at the front of both sponson openings, showing it to be female; the vehicle ahead of the one upon which I based my judgement, with holes for 6pdr shells visible in the right sponson and tin slots visible inside the left hull further back.�

I confess that I am now uncertain about this picture, as what is visible of the left sponson opening is (on closer inspection) ambiguous. Having expanded the picture I am not sure whether it shows circular holes or the tops of rectangular slots - the tank may be male or composite, depending on whether there were any composite Mk V**s. Certainly I need to inspect pics more carefully before commenting, as I've made a few similar mistakes now.

Gwyn - were there any V** composites? The pic I refer to only holds water if not.

If you're wanting to see photos of earlier marks, I'll have a look to see where I saw them.

Regarding my own question, about the stowage arrangements of the Mk V*, I've seen a factory photo in an image search (using Yahoo, I think) that shows aft side 6pdr racks on one side, and ammo tin slots above 6pdr racks next to the sponson opening - in other words it looks as though the V* had the same arrangement as the Mk V.

-- Edited by TinCanTadpole on Sunday 18th of November 2012 01:51:49 AM

Gwyn Evans · Legend

TCT

The important thing about Composites is that no tank was ever built as a Composite. Tanks were either built as Males or Females and some were later converted to Composite configuration. So the tank in Roger's photo isn't a Composite, it's a Male, and the one behind is a Female. In any case, so far as is known, there were no Mark V** Composites. There were only 25 built anyway, twenty Males and five Females, and most didn't leave the factory until April 1919.

Gwyn

TinCanTadpole · Legend

Ah! Thanks Gwyn. That means that that particular photo does demonstrate what I thought it did.

Was it just the V** you wanted photos of, or the earlier marks as well?

TCT

Gwyn Evans · Legend

Well I just wanted to understand fully the point you were making about the stowage of ammunition having changed. Actually I have now found an internal photo of the Mark IV Male at Bovington, and this shows the 6 pdr rounds stowed above the Lewis ammunition, not below as on the IWM Mark V Male. But any more you (or anyone else) can add would be of interest.

Gwyn

Rob · Legend

Interesting, the Lewis gun ammunition is not for the individual drums as I thought, but appears to be for the metal ammunition boxes which held 8 drum magazines