Landships II

cmanning · Corporal

Bolt pattern for Mark 1 burst plates

Gwyn Evans · Legend

I think I'm right in saying that this gives me a chance to use my favourite word, and say the bolts are arranged in a quincunx pattern (i.e. arranged like 5 on dice).

Gwyn

cmanning · Corporal

Thanks Gwyn!

Does the 5 spot pattern also apply to the drivers cab panels?

Lastly.... I was waiting for a reply before asking.... I've seen some pictures of the bolts on the Gaza Mark 1s and they don't look like threaded rods with bolts. Does anyone have a clear picture of that these bolts or rods actually looked like??

PS - I'm writing that word down for future use! Well done!

MK1 Nut · Hero

Ha ha Gwyn you got to use your favourite word again I see. :D

Unfortunately I never did get around to drawing out the positions of the mounting bolts for the spaced armour. I have though attached a photo that shows the real deal, bolts with spacers and a nut at the top that would normally hold the plate in place. From what I've seen to would position the spaced armour level with the top of the L-Beams joiners on the roof.

One thing I will say is that not all Male tanks had the spacer positions drilled out. No idea why, but something I thought was just an oddity of the Bovington MK1 until I noticed the same with others in period photos.

Helen x

Oh and the centre spacer of the five is slightly off centre towards the outer edge on the rear roof. Nt sure about the others.

-- Edited by MK1 Nut on Wednesday 24th of February 2016 10:53:38 PM

cmanning · Corporal

Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!

That is exactly what I was looking for. I appreciate the help and the info!

Carmen

mikegrieve · Corporal

Hi there Carmen, hope all is going well

You might like to have a look at the following discussion from a couple of years ago:

http://www.landships.net/t57371418/spaced-armour-mk1-tank/

I remembered this one, and particularly the diagram provided by Helen (posted on 27 April 2014), as I used it to add the roof bolts to a Masterbox 1/72 Mk.I Female model rendition of “War Baby”. So, really, a belated ‘thanks’ from me to Helen for her efforts is in order!

Best regards

Mike

(Canberra, Australia)

MK1 Nut · Hero

Hi Mike,

I had completely forgotten about that. I think it was because I never added it to the 3D model that I somehow convinced myself I hadn't got around to drawing the roof bolts out.

Now officially embarrassed!

:)

Helen x

cmanning · Corporal

Thanks Mike! I tried searching the forum before posting and didn't find that thread! Much appreciated!

Carmen

compound eye · Colonel

Excellent thread, and link to prior info... Will be very useful if every I get around to modelling HMLS Tiger!

Couple of thoughts / questions though...

i/ If the Gaza Mk.I were clapped-out training tanks 'sent in error' when an order / requisition was mis-handled [think this is alluded to in the Richard Pullen book I was reading in the pub last Sunday], might that explain these being earlier machines with spacing studs not present on later tanks? Are there instances of female tanks without studs also?

ii/ Looking at my Takom kit, I am wondering how the mounting of the two sponson jibs would have been affected on studded tanks. I've not done a detailed comparison, but if you look at the colour profile for 'Sir Archibald' here, the front one at least would seem to interfere with Helen's proposed stud positions... 1.bp.blogspot.com/-RAbuVIeWB7E/VkkiEwnDnSI/AAAAAAABp7E/pzjlPWcrekY/s1600/Takom%2B2031%2BMk.%2BI%2BMale%2BWWI%2BHeavy%2BBattle%2BTank%2B-%2B%2Bpic%2B36.jpg

iii/ Is there any proof of Supply Tanks with residual evidence of spacing studs at all? Seems logical to me that older - earlier - machines stood a good chance of being relegated to supply duties, and you might expect to see a few studs still in place or absent/plugged/sawn-off - if this was ever the case, then at least two studs on the cab roof would have had to 'go' to make way for the central hatch early supply tanks were retro-fitted with.

-- Edited by compound eye on Thursday 25th of February 2016 07:56:09 PM

MK1 Nut · Hero

Ok I've been for some time now mentioning that Male MK1 Tanks are often seen without the spacer bolts for the roof armour, how about this is due to them being the designated Crane Tank!?!

The Takom MK1 Male Tank model has the crane and its mounting points in the correct positions and like the surviving Male Tank at Bovington there are no signs of there having ever been any bolt holes for the spaced roof armour.

It kind of makes sense, the Male has the heavier Sponsons and in theory it would in an ideal world have its two Female Tanks flanking it keeping enemy from getting close, so less in need of the spaced armour. Once the Male has removed its own sponsons it can act as motorised crane to remove the sponsons from the Female Tanks.

One tank in three with a crane might also explain the lack of photos. Just about all the photos I know of are those taken of the Gaza Tanks.

What are peoples thoughts?

Helen x

I have noticed one exception to the male with crane but no spaced armour rule, one of the Gaza Males has armour spacers on the rear roof panels. Maybe they were replaced panels.

-- Edited by MK1 Nut on Thursday 25th of February 2016 10:29:15 PM

Rhomboid · Field Marshal

25 sets of 4mm spaced armour plates were manufactured by Metropolitan, and it is possible that a larger number of MkI's had the bolts fitted. I have not seen any photographic evidence that the bolts were fitted to the tanks produced by Fosters (739-775). Of the male tanks produced by Metropolitan (701-738), I have not seen the bolts on any tanks up to at least 721. All of the Gaza tanks, which includes 736, had the bolts. Metropolitan manufactured all of the female MkI's (501-575). The bolts are in evidence from at least 546 onwards in the production sequence, but are not seen below 529. Of course, the photographic record of the MkI tanks is far from complete.

My working hypothesis is that the spaced armour modification was introduced in the latter half of the Metropolitan production run.

The venerable tale of the Gaza MkI's being worn out training tanks sent in error instead of new MkII's can't be correct, since the first MkII's left the factory after the departure of the Egyptian tank detachment from England. The known serial numbers of the Gaza tanks (574, 736) suggest that the last MkI's produced by Metropolitan were sent to Egypt.