In "British Mark I Tank 1916" by Fletcher it says:
"The Male tanks carried three Hotchkiss air-cooled machine guns: one in the front, operated by the commander or driver as needed, and one in each sponson, behind the main gun: these could be fired by the loader or gearsman."
However, later there is a specifications sheet with 4 machine guns so my question is Mk. I Male / Female armament
The number of machine guns to be precise; is it 3 or 4 (Hotchkiss) for Male and is it 5 or 6 (4 Vickers and 1 or 2 Hotchkiss) for Female? and why the discrepancy?
It seems like a really simple question which may be I've overthought but I;d like some expert opinion on.
There's been some confusion caused by the fact that tanks carried a spare mg.
Broadly speaking, the number of mgs mounted in Mks I to IV is usually overstated by one.
The Mk I Male actually had mounts for five mgs - one in the cab and two in each sponson, but the barrel of the 6pdr obstructed the forward mount so it was ignored.
So until we get to the Mk V, the number of mgs was: Male - one in cab, one in each sponson = 3; Female - one in cab, two in each sponson = 5.
In the Mk V, a rearward-firing mg was fitted in the rear armour, to deal with enemy that might allow the tank to pass through and then attack it from the rear. It was made possible by the repositioning of the engine and the release of the gearsmen from steering duties, so there was someone to man the gun. Therefore totals were: Male 4, Female 6.
I don't think we ever established whether in the V*, V**, etc all guns were installed and/or manned at all times. If so, a Mk V* Female would have sported nine.
Hope this helps
__________________
"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.
Oops. The Mk V* would have been maximum 10. Sorry.
__________________
"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.