Landships II

Hi Wayne,

Not got time for a proper reply right now, so have a few photos of Bovi's MKII instead.

Helen x

 

 

Here it is. There are a lot of posts to sort through, but Mark Hansen posted a comparison drawing that should help you:

http://landships.activeboard.com/t5510701/mks-i-to-v-variations/

Michael,

Is this hole a pistol port?  I see 4 holes in a diamond pattern around the hole.  The remaining bolt is larger than those on the other pistol port covers, and the scrap of steel still attached to that bolt looks different (thicker) from the surviving covers.

Based on Helen's photos, I also had to make the wedge-hatch narrower than the one I made for the MkIV (screen shot of parts is also attached)

Cleaned up the hull rear face a bit.

Regards,

Wayne

Helen,

I can believe a periscope port like the two on the cab roof - a pistol port pointing straight uo would seem to have limited use.  The bolt/rivet patterns do look the same.  Hmmm... maybe the 4 small holes were for an internal bracket to hold the periscope in place when in use?   If that is the case, there should be two bolts for the rotating cover, unless they were internal like the bow pistol port.   I take it from your drawings that the ones on the cab roof do not now have covers.  Some, but not all, drawings of the MkI-MkIV cab roofs show external covers shaped like the pistolport covers; I have learned to take those drawings with a large grain of salt.  I will scour the photo records for some indication of external covers.

I hope you had a good time at Denmead.

Regards,

Wayne

 

Re: pistol ports and periscopes. The problem about this feature is as you observe. All I can say is that it corresponds with that of the Mk IV, in a position which surprised me, as it would be partially obstructed by the exhaust system. If it was a design feature from the tanks without that type of exhaust, it appears slightly more useful, if still quite strange. On the Lincoln Mk IV there is a complete, intact cover as for the other pistol ports, but there is no way of knowing if that is original or a later addition.

Once you start looking for  something at that location on early photographs it seems to be there. And I expect it would have greater value for a periscope...

Confusing, certainly. 

-- Edited by Michael Taylor on Thursday 6th of June 2013 04:20:03 PM

Helen,

I have had no responses to the question about photos showing the "box" at the rear of MkII and MkIII tanks.  Next time I see one, I'll make a copy.

Regards,

Wayne

TCT,

I finally found a pretty good photo of the rear box.  Tankograd 1003 "Beute-Tanks, Vol 1", page 10, middle photo shows the rear of MkII female D28 No586, including the box.

Also found some photos of the periscope covers on MkIV's - same book, page 92 shows views of the top of Lodestar III (Brussels).  All three periscope ports have rotating covers that look to be the same as those on the pistol ports.  I don't know if it is significant, but the bolts, rivets or other protrusions are not in a diamond pattern like those on the MkI cab roof.

Wayne

Wayne: the Tankograd photographs of Lodestar are the very ones that I was going to refer to concerning the periscope apertures and covers. The ones which are open, on top of the cab, seem to me to allow the  small diameter of the periscope to fit, and perhaps be retained in position by something fairly simple, in the recess around the aperture. adjacent to the hatch is the feature also observed on the Lincoln tank. This is closed, but has the same arrangement of hexagonal bolt heads around it as the periscope apertures. Pistol ports do not seem to have so many. 

This makes me come to the tentative opinion that this is an auxiliary periscope aperture, possibly without any means of retaining the periscope in position, as it would be less frequently in use than those on the cab. There appears to be evidence of a similar feature on photographs of MkII, MkIII as well as those to be found on the MkIV. 

The Lincoln MkIV has been exposed to the elements at some time, and I did not feel that my access to the top of the tank allowed me to take liberties with the ports and covers. (I did make notes of measurements in order to prepare drawings, and used film cameras for the last time, and I have not been back there yet to make further notes.)

The photograph of the Mk II shows the configuration you note. The remnant of the "cover" does not seem typical. I just hope that more photographs from the first deployment of the Mk II appear, and show more clearly whether this is a feature of the tanks as constructed, or a modification.

 

 

I can see what you're referring to Helen, and it may be a periscope. It does look a bit shorter, perhaps also thicker - although the thickness may be a case of trompe l'oeuil with track treads and a tarpaulin nearby to confuse things.

It occurs to me that it could be useful for the Mk 1 to have a periscope in the roof, because the raised manhole with it's ports was not present; only the driver and commander/brakesman would be able to see on top of the tank using the cab periscopes, so it makes sense to provide one further back for crew members not directly engaged in driving the tank.

Such a feature would of course still be there on a Mk II - although for Mk IVs there is a question mark.

Here are some photos of the completed MkII female C21 "The Perfect Lady".  The name in small black letters on the khaki background barely shows up at all.  I left the 3-digit number off the lower rear side frames 'cause I couldn't find any photos that showed it.

The track extensions are a bit tedious to make, but I think they add a lot to the model.

I'll start on the male "Lusitania" shortly.

Regards,

Wayne