I read the Osprey book on these tanks, and it told in great detail on the history of their development and manufacture, but little on their actual use in the field. I get the impression there were plenty of different versions, like there were with Shermans. Was a hodgepodge of vehicles of different types out on the battlefield, like was the case with Shermans?

Hi Tom,

The Osprey book and the development covered should have given plenty of detail about the quantities and which Mks saw the majority of combat service.

Oddly enough the Wiki which is useful as a guide and introduction pretty much covers which marks saw the most active service. Due to it's limited use and smallish numbers produced compared to the Sherman there is no where like the subtle variations you can find across the Sherman family tree ... imo anyway


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cromwell_tank


Brent

The Osprey books are useful as a starter, but their size always limits the depth that they can go into.

The Cromwell was a pretty short lived model and was produced in insufficient numbers to replace the Sherman in British Armoured Divisions and Independent Brigades. It was the main battle tank of the 7th Armoured Division and equipped the reconnaisance regiments of 11th Armoured Division and Guards Armoured plus elements of the Polish Armoured Division and the Czech Brigade. It was only used in Northern Europe in 1944-1945.

It was first armed with the British 6pdr, then the 75mm gun and there was a close support 95mm version, but the overall design never allowed it to be further upgunned and it was quickly recognised as being pretty much obsolete when it was introduced and that better designs were needed such as the Comet.

There were minor upgrades during production, which included adding thicker armour plate, more welding used in manufacture, some changes to the deck design and driver and bow gunner hatches. There was also an ARV version. So no, it wasn't used as the basis of many variants as was the Sherman.

The Centaur was essentially the same design as the Cromwell, but started with a less powerful Liberty Engine compared to the Cromwell's Meteor engine. The Centaur saw action with the Royal Marines with the 95mm close support gun in Normandy to knock out beach strongpoints from landing craft and were not even supposed to land, but some were finally landed to fight inland.

In service, veterans of 7th Armoured viewed them with dismay after their experiences with the Shermans in North Africa and Sicily. Being flat sided led to fears of it being more vulnerable to hits. They were also outgunned in close quarters tank on tank engagements in the Normandy Bocage, but once the allies broke out of Normandy and the campaign became more fluid, they came into their own as the were very fast. The relative ineffectiveness of their guns against Panzers in close quarters was less important than the use of high explosive shells against infantry. The British tankers were also expert gunners when their tanks were on the move, so the Cromwells were less easy targets to hit, while the British gunners could fire off more rounds accurately at speed.

Overall, it was not a bad gun tank and no worse than the Sherman and probably marginally better due to their speed and lower profile, but it suffered from being behind the times when it was introduced, when what was needed in 1944 was the Comet.

John