Armor/AFV: British Armor
Discuss all types of British Armor of all eras.
Hosted by Darren Baker
Churchill Mk III Interior Build
AlanL
Visit this Community
England - East Anglia, United Kingdom
Joined: August 12, 2005
KitMaker: 14,499 posts
Armorama: 11,675 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 29, 2010 - 03:01 AM UTC
Hi Guys,

As the inteior build is nearing completion some questions on the Mk IIIs of 14th Canadian Tank Regiment, the Calgary Regiment.

Obviously I have the kit decals for No 13, but need clarification on a couple of points. Did this vehicle have the hoods on the periscopes and would it by the Dieppe Landing have had the square bin added.

I want to depict the model just be for Dieppe, being kitted out and worked on. The one good side picture I have of this vehicle shows it with no bin but I am not sure if the periscopes have hoods or not and the picture would be earlier than I want to portray.

I'm not 100% sure but it would seem these vehicles hadn't yet received the front track bars as the tracks seem to sag a little in that area, so I am assuming the track rods were a later addition, post Dieppe.

Any experts around who might know?

Thanks

Al

Also is there anything else on the exterior I would need to take into account.
ChrisDM
Visit this Community
England - South West, United Kingdom
Joined: January 01, 2010
KitMaker: 717 posts
Armorama: 697 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 29, 2010 - 04:37 AM UTC
Hi Al,

There are a number of thins you'll need to do to the exterior to make it right for a Calgary Tanks Mk III

1. leave off the mud chutes
2. add a 5 in air outlet instead of the kit supplied air outlet at the rear of the engine deck (I have a resin one spare if you need it)
3. leave off the track supports (as you've stated above)
4. leave off the turret bin
5. remove the two large bolts from the lower bow plate
6. leave off sections of mudguard (which depends on which one you want to do
7. replace the rearmost mudguard sections with the older style higher sitting curved sections
8. Change the exhaust pipe ends for the ones that curve upwards
9. leave off the sripper bars and their mounting points from the rear of the pannier by the cover for the sprocket hub
10. leave off the towing hitch
11. leave off the smoke dischargers
12. make the deflection plate that goes across the rear (sectioned in the AFV club kit to fit round the smoke racks) a single continuos defelctor
13. Heavy plate track (as noted at the start of your build log)
14. no blackout/ dimmer deflector bits on the headlamps
15. early tool arrangement (shovels on the outside, pickaxe handle and hammer on the inside)

I think thats everything, others may remember something I've missed

chris
SdAufKla
Visit this Community
South Carolina, United States
Joined: May 07, 2010
KitMaker: 2,238 posts
Armorama: 2,158 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 29, 2010 - 04:37 AM UTC
Hi Al,

On page 78 of Fletcher’s Mr Churchille’s Tank, No. 13 is clearly shown with the periscope hoods but no storage box on the turret rear. The next tank in line, C Squadron, No. 11 (as well as the next three in the same line, C Squadron 10[?] and 9[?] and a regimental HQ tank), has both. The photo is captioned as “Shortly before the Dieppe Raid [the tanks] parade during exercise Yukon II.” Note also at this time the tanks didn't have names painted on them.

C Squadron No. 13 doesn’t appear to have the front track supports in this photo, although there is a build-up of mud and turf that make’s it a bit difficult to say that with absolute certainty. However, I don’t believe that any of the Calgary’s tanks were reworked in time for Dieppe. The official testing of the “prototype” reworked tanks was undertaken from 12 July to 23 August, 1942 (three regiments from the 21st British Army Tank Brigade, the 12th and 48th RTR’s and the 145th RAC). So, the reworked features were not yet approved for fielding in time for the raid (Fletcher, pp 84-86). This includes the extended track skid rails, revised air intakes, track guards, and mud ploughs & stripper plates.

According to Marteinson and McNorgan's The Royal Canadian Armoured Corps, Youkon II was conducted ca. 22 June, 1942. However, in this book, tanks C Squadron, F2 (Calgary) and B squadron’s, 6 (Bob) and 7 (Betty) which are clearly shown on the beach do not have the hoods and, as far as I can tell, no storage boxes.

On page 80 of Fletcher’s book, Blondie (a B Squadron Mk III captured by the Germans and restored to operation) is very clearly shown after the raid in a right front ¾ view, and it also has the periscope hoods. Unfortunately, the angle is indeterminate for the turret rear.

Some other Mk III’s that are shown clear enough to see the status of the periscope hoods or storage boxes after the raid and on the beach are: C Squadron’s Chief and Cat and B Squadron’s Bert (towing Cat). These are shown on pages 65 and 89 in Ford and Gerrard’s Osprey Campaign 127: Dieppe 1942. None of these three tanks appear to have the periscope hoods, and it is very clear that none have the storage box.

Cat also doesn’t have the front track supports in this photo. This is very clear.

(BTW, the photo of Cat is a great illustration of how the water-proofing material was applied to the turrets and other places!)

So, what conclusions can be drawn? Hard to be too definitive, but it appears that the periscope hoods were a sometimes “yes” and sometimes “no” feature. The photos show that some tanks had them while others didn’t. Possibly this was a crew preference issue or perhaps one where the requisite parts weren’t universally available. C Squadron’s No. 13 clearly had them during Yukon II, though.

As for the storage boxes, none of the Mk III’s that I saw in my references had them during the actual raid although some appeared to have them during the training and preparation phases. During Yukon II, No. 13 clearly didn’t have the box. (I believe the kit decals are for this particular time period.) My guess is that the boxes interfered with the waterproofing or at least made its installment more difficult. Added to the fact that the raid was planned as a short duration event (and presumably not requiring of extensive crew storage), it would seem that all the boxes were removed for the operation.

Just my .02 cents, though. Others who have studied the matter more thoroughly might have some more insight or more detailed observations.

HTH,
Mike
SdAufKla
Visit this Community
South Carolina, United States
Joined: May 07, 2010
KitMaker: 2,238 posts
Armorama: 2,158 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 29, 2010 - 05:20 AM UTC
A cpuple last thoughts, Al:

The Calgary's changed their marking system and regimental sign sometime between exercise Yukon II (22 June, 1942) and the actual Dieppe raid (19 August, 1942).

The AFV Club decals are a mishmash between the two time periods with a dash of a later period thrown in for complete inaccuracy. Although the markings are based on the very widely published photo of the tanks parading during Yukon II, they include the "Calgary Ram" on the Maple Leaf for the regimental insignia but omit the tank name (Cougar T68173) both used durig the actual raid.

As if that isn't bad enough, the regimental / brigade marking is not correct, in and of itself, for any time period. AFV Club has taken the later 1st Canadian Army Tank Brigade marking (horizontal black-red-black with the gold maple leaf) and added the "Calgary Ram" to it. This is incorrect for both Yokon II and Dieppe. The earlier brigade marking should be solid black with the maple leaf for pre-Dieppe (Yukon II) with the added "Calgary Ram" (regimental mascot) for the actual raid. The 1st Brigade sign was later changed to add the "senior unit" red stripe when the 2nd Can. Arm. Bde. was activated (which used the "second senior unit" blue stripe on the basic brigade symbol). And after Dieppe, the Calgary's dropped the ram from their tanks' brigade sign.

There is a very clear photo of a regimental HQ tank during Youkon II on page 136 in The Royal Canadian Armoured Corps which shows the early solid black regimental sign on a MkIII without the "Calgary Ram," As further evidence of the major change in the marking system, note that the tanks shown parading in Youkon II are numbered sequentially within each squadron (not troop), but during the actual raid, the troops were numbered and the tanks were named. C Squadron's No. 13, T68173 just coincidentally retained the same squadron marking and its tank number 13 just happened to match its troop assignment (13 troop).

There is a very nice photo of Betty, T68176.R, B Squadron, 7 Troop on page 35 of Guthrie and Beldam's Camouflage and Markings: Canadian Armored Vehicles Part 1 which very clearly shows the solid black 1st Brigade sign with the yellow maple leaf and "Calgary Ram" on the beach at Dieppe.

I don't know the date of the change, but obviously it took place in time for the final preparations for the raid which included repainting at least all the turret markings (as these were applied over the waterproofing material on the turrets).

I mention this because you say you want to show the tank at a slightly later date than the Yukon II parade photo.

Also note in that photo, which is sometimes not clearly reproduced, there are hand-painted serial numbers on the air intake. These are painted in a color other than white and omit the preface "T". This was probably done to keep "sticky fingers" away from the air intakes which were removed for rail transport. The color looks to be maybe red, but could be some other color - just not white. These numbers are not included in the kit decals.

Hope this was useful and not just confusing!

Mike
AlanL
Visit this Community
England - East Anglia, United Kingdom
Joined: August 12, 2005
KitMaker: 14,499 posts
Armorama: 11,675 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 29, 2010 - 06:13 AM UTC
Hi Guys,

Thanks for the input, I didn't want to do an on the beach tank, and I like the look of C Squadron's No 13 and had noted the bins on the rear of the others and the lack of bolt studs on the front plate as shown in Blondi.

OK that should be do-able but you may have to keep me right. I agree about the track runners they appear to be absent from these vehicles.

Excellent, back to the radio.

Chris, I have a set of the early style exhausts.

Do you know if the mods were made in the field, or were they made at REME Wksp?

Cheers

Al
ChrisDM
Visit this Community
England - South West, United Kingdom
Joined: January 01, 2010
KitMaker: 717 posts
Armorama: 697 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 29, 2010 - 06:25 AM UTC
Hi Al,

As far as I know, none of the external features of the tank were modifications (with the exception of the rather unique air intakes on BOAR which were RE manufactured and only feature on BOAR and ARVs)

I believe all the features were factory built in the last version of the design before things got muddied by the rework scheme

As far as I can tell, the Calgary MkIIIs look like they are from the first full production run of The MkIIIs after the introduction of proper mudguards and the square air intakes, and as such differ in appearance in a few ways from those seen in Tunisia and later

Chris
AlanL
Visit this Community
England - East Anglia, United Kingdom
Joined: August 12, 2005
KitMaker: 14,499 posts
Armorama: 11,675 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 29, 2010 - 08:09 AM UTC
Hi Chris,

many thanks I shall study the pictures I have and ask questions when in doubt lol, lol.

No more update pics today although I have fitted the hull Besa and started finishing up the paint work.

Looking at picture on page 78 Mr C's tanks I've added some bolts around the lower turret ring. Radio is almost ready for fitting and I've started to add the periscopes.

Like the M3 Grant interior build I did this is great as I'm learning lots of new stuff as I go. Things are definately looking more tank like.

Mike's infomration was reallly useful as it gives me a good scope with the bits I have.

If you have one of these then that sounds a necessary item:

2. add a 5 in air outlet instead of the kit supplied air outlet at the rear of the engine deck (I have a resin one spare if you need it)

Many thanks for all the help.

Al
ChrisDM
Visit this Community
England - South West, United Kingdom
Joined: January 01, 2010
KitMaker: 717 posts
Armorama: 697 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 29, 2010 - 08:17 AM UTC
I'll post it to you Monday Alan
AlanL
Visit this Community
England - East Anglia, United Kingdom
Joined: August 12, 2005
KitMaker: 14,499 posts
Armorama: 11,675 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 29, 2010 - 08:24 AM UTC
Many thanks, Chris, time for a break.

Al
AlanL
Visit this Community
England - East Anglia, United Kingdom
Joined: August 12, 2005
KitMaker: 14,499 posts
Armorama: 11,675 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 29, 2010 - 09:29 PM UTC
Hi guys,

some update images across the build.































Al
KEVINT
Visit this Community
England - West Midlands, United Kingdom
Joined: August 29, 2005
KitMaker: 191 posts
Armorama: 176 posts
Posted: Sunday, May 30, 2010 - 12:21 AM UTC
Hi Al,

This is a wonderful step by step build that I will use as a guide when I get around to starting mine.
What do you have planned for the finished model to show off the interior?

Cheers
Kevin
AlanL
Visit this Community
England - East Anglia, United Kingdom
Joined: August 12, 2005
KitMaker: 14,499 posts
Armorama: 11,675 posts
Posted: Sunday, May 30, 2010 - 01:07 AM UTC
Hi Kevin,

Many thanks, it's coming along.

Current thinking is to show the tank all hatches open being 'prepared' for war ie the Dieppe Landings. I am not sure if the deep wading mods were made 'in the field' or in a REME Wkps somewhere, but I might add some or part of the fittings.

The other option is to leave it in sections, displayed on a simple base.

Kinda lacks a transmission, see a space fill it Chris mentioned that he may do one though and a proper set of fuel tanks would round it off.

I think the two most critical parts of the build are the placemnt of the rear firewall and the placement of the cross-member on the hull floor. If they are correct then eveything else should fit into place. There is little room to play with and if you're out a half mm then that has a big knock effect as I have found out .

Adding the Resicast Engine complicated things and I've ended up with it sitting about one an a half mm lower that it should but as the 2 set are made separately matching them up was always going to be a problem. Other than that I'm pretty happy with progress so far. The AFV kit is a great kit, Chris has covered all the bases on the interior although there are some areas that could be imporved upon, but what kit is perfect.

Only other regret is not adding some plumbing to the basket, but I missed the instruction on the last page and I'm probably too far along to fix it now but you never know.

Cheers

Al
AlanL
Visit this Community
England - East Anglia, United Kingdom
Joined: August 12, 2005
KitMaker: 14,499 posts
Armorama: 11,675 posts
Posted: Sunday, May 30, 2010 - 01:38 AM UTC
Bit more work on the turret which is now pretty mcuh complete except for some more detailed painting. I use a spare part from the Resiocast Radio Set to complete the radio installation and added a small home made wheel to the gun elevation as I can't find the appropraite PE part.











Al
ChrisDM
Visit this Community
England - South West, United Kingdom
Joined: January 01, 2010
KitMaker: 717 posts
Armorama: 697 posts
Posted: Sunday, May 30, 2010 - 02:57 AM UTC
Superb work on that turret, really superb Al

One small comment, the periscopes look to be sitting a bit high? I had the same problem with my first AFV Club Churchill. The holes are quite wide and if you push the clear parts in first, they tend to go about 1/2 mm too far through. Then when you attach the top parts there is a small gap between them and the hull roof. The solution is to fi the top part first, then glue the clear part to the top part

HTH

Chris
AlanL
Visit this Community
England - East Anglia, United Kingdom
Joined: August 12, 2005
KitMaker: 14,499 posts
Armorama: 11,675 posts
Posted: Sunday, May 30, 2010 - 03:24 AM UTC
Hi Chris,

Thanks, I'll lower them down a bit.

Cheers

Al
AlanL
Visit this Community
England - East Anglia, United Kingdom
Joined: August 12, 2005
KitMaker: 14,499 posts
Armorama: 11,675 posts
Posted: Tuesday, June 01, 2010 - 11:44 PM UTC
Hi Guys,

This brings to an end the lower hull interior build. I have added the water container in front of the gunners seat, spare prisms and the jack, plus placed the POW can.

Some observationas: My floor cross bean is about 3mm to high up the floor, If you draw a line between the top of the two side door openings and place the top edge of the beam there then you will have just that much more room to work in. Either that or use a thinner beam as the tool box butting up to the beam seems to be in the correct place to me. Whilst I can fit the jack in the POW can will have to go as it interfers with the turret basket. I am happy that 94mm is good from front of floor to firewall, although I wasn't able to fit the 2nd Besa can, but that may have been due to the raised feet that I had to add, becasue when I tested fitted them flat to the floor they fitted fine!

This is a challenging and interesting build, I think the instructions could be imporved on, and some of the parts better cast, but I got just about everything in and you can judge for yourself the results. Had I chosen a later time period for the build then the interior could have been finished in off white/cream. For me adding the side runners to the seats not only helped the look of the interior but proved a useful guide when placing the seats. Also adding the welds to the underside of the panniers helped give the interior a more bonded look, well at least I think so.

All that remains is to add some headphones and a little personal gear here and there, unless you tell me otherwise!









I hope you have found the blog useful.

Cheers

Al



AlanL
Visit this Community
England - East Anglia, United Kingdom
Joined: August 12, 2005
KitMaker: 14,499 posts
Armorama: 11,675 posts
Posted: Thursday, June 03, 2010 - 08:08 PM UTC
Moving on from that impressive response, I started the alterations of the side plates. These require some additional detailed added and some removed. I also needed to remove the 2 units on the rear of the suspension.





Next step will be to get a look at the rerar plate and see what if anything needs done there.

Al

AlanL
Visit this Community
England - East Anglia, United Kingdom
Joined: August 12, 2005
KitMaker: 14,499 posts
Armorama: 11,675 posts
Posted: Friday, June 04, 2010 - 07:34 AM UTC
OK, where are you all hiding? I know you're there

Well the nest step turned out to be the two front side plates. These were obviously designed for the kit parts to fit into and needed thinning down a good bit. In my reference picture they seem to have a square frame around them so I have added that from plastic square rod.

Also added the side air vents today after finishing the riveting and got a bit of base coat on. I will get some pics up tomorrow, just having a holiday beer to drown my sorrows (Wot, who said beer?!!)

Cheers

Al
AlanL
Visit this Community
England - East Anglia, United Kingdom
Joined: August 12, 2005
KitMaker: 14,499 posts
Armorama: 11,675 posts
Posted: Friday, June 04, 2010 - 08:18 PM UTC
Blood from a Stone

Ok, here you go. As outlined above with the altered side hull, some texture on the panels and the front side plates added, plus a bit of 'brown'.









Al

AlanL
Visit this Community
England - East Anglia, United Kingdom
Joined: August 12, 2005
KitMaker: 14,499 posts
Armorama: 11,675 posts
Posted: Friday, June 04, 2010 - 11:37 PM UTC
Thanks to Carmen's outstanding build there are some useful pictures of the layout of the rivets on the back plate on these early Mk IIIs.

Top section done:



Lower plate and sides to follow.

Al
AlanL
Visit this Community
England - East Anglia, United Kingdom
Joined: August 12, 2005
KitMaker: 14,499 posts
Armorama: 11,675 posts
Posted: Saturday, June 05, 2010 - 01:14 AM UTC
Hi folks,

I have followed Carmne's lead on the layout of the rear upper side rivets. The arrangement is different on this version but without an decent picture it's kinda a best guess.





On the lower back plate I have a question. Are the upper row all rivets? Some look like drill holes to me. This is Carmne's original picture:



I have added the lower row and the others that are certainly rivets, but you thoughts on the other 'holes' would be appreciated.



It's not a problem to add them, just double checking.

Thanks

Al
AlanL
Visit this Community
England - East Anglia, United Kingdom
Joined: August 12, 2005
KitMaker: 14,499 posts
Armorama: 11,675 posts
Posted: Sunday, June 06, 2010 - 05:55 AM UTC
Hatches, hatches and more hatches

Some general clean up but the handles are nicely done and much easier to woirk with then PE.



Al
AlanL
Visit this Community
England - East Anglia, United Kingdom
Joined: August 12, 2005
KitMaker: 14,499 posts
Armorama: 11,675 posts
Posted: Sunday, June 06, 2010 - 10:07 PM UTC
Hi Guys,

As pointed out by Chris the vents on the rear of the tank were of a slightly different style than the kit vents. I met Chris yesterday at Duxford and he kindly gave me a part with the correct layout.

However, having sompleted my riveting work on the rear of the hull I was reluctant to ditch this so I have altered the kit vents to be more appropriate.

The spare part will not go to waste though as I was very imopressed with Carmen's Mk I so I may just set it aside for the future.



Once I have the altered part re-fitted I'll add the small eye bolts to the underside of the rear hatches. Fortunately these seem free from any sink marks and AFV have the small indents on the underside into which the Resicast eye bolts fit.



One thing I need to check is whether or not there are any latch handles on the underside of the hatches. The diagram on the engine instructions show 4 of these but I don't see any in the kit, nor do I see any retaining rods to keep the hatches open.

Al
AlanL
Visit this Community
England - East Anglia, United Kingdom
Joined: August 12, 2005
KitMaker: 14,499 posts
Armorama: 11,675 posts
Posted: Sunday, June 06, 2010 - 10:28 PM UTC
Question for the Churchill Experts:

I was looking over on Armouor in Focus at the Mk III restoration. In the section on the hull it shows the air outlet. Would I need to fit part C16 there but just leave off the towing hook?

http://www.armourinfocus.co.uk/churchill/restoration/hull/index.htm

Thanks

Al
ChrisDM
Visit this Community
England - South West, United Kingdom
Joined: January 01, 2010
KitMaker: 717 posts
Armorama: 697 posts
Posted: Sunday, June 06, 2010 - 10:47 PM UTC
Hi Alan,

I believe that restoration is a later MkIII 75

Leave the towing hook parts off for a Dieppe MkIII

Chris