Author Topic: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations  (Read 31827 times)

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« on: July 07, 2013, 02:11:31 PM »
An Australian war emergency upgrade replacing the 2 pounder and 3" guns with 25 pounder used in the Sentinel ACII/III.  I believe this gun was developed from the Australian 25 pounder light weight mountain gun so may even have been able to be retrofitted to the original turret.

Offline Rickshaw

  • "Of course, I could be talking out of my hat"
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #1 on: July 07, 2013, 08:10:58 PM »
No, the gun in AC series was a standard 25 Pounder.   The Ordnance, QF, 25-pr short (Aust) Mk.1 only differed in carriage design and barrel length.   This resulted in reduced range and accuracy.  Even so, I'd expect the recoil and run out to exceed the dimensions of the Matilda Mk.II's turret ring's capabilities.   Even attempting to work the weapon in that cramped two man turret would have been nearly impossible.    At the minimum, a new turret would be required and more than likely a much larger turret ring.   Neither was impossible in the Matilda, as the British proved but the question would be asked, to what point?  The 2 Pounder and 3 inch How. were quite adequate weapons for most of the threats that tanks faced in New Guinea.   

The Australian Army developed an effective HE round (base fused, rather than point fused as was the British version) for the 2 Pounder which proved quite useful against Japanese coconut log bunkers of the type encountered in New Guinea and Borneo.  The 3 inch was quite adequate at throwing HE and Smoke rounds.  That doesn't mean a bigger gun wouldn't have been appreciated but with bigger guns come the attendant problems of a bigger vehicle and weight, both factors which made the Mathilda so useful for so long, to us compared to the Middle-East and Europe.   

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #2 on: July 07, 2013, 08:25:42 PM »
Interesting, I wasn't aware we had a HE round for the 2pdr, that would have made it much more useful.
Makes you wonder if the same couldn't have been done for the 6pdr instead of replacing it with the rebored 75mm version in the British cruiser and infantry tanks used in Europe.

My thinking was for a re-engineering of matildas using components designed for the Sentinel.  If it couldn't be done it couldn't be done but a re engining and upgunning with the 25pdr would have been nice.

Offline Weaver

  • Skyhawk stealer and violator of Panthers, with designs on a Cougar and a Tiger too
  • Chaos Engineer & Evangelistic Agnostic
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #3 on: July 07, 2013, 09:55:24 PM »
I've always found the standard "story" that anything under 75mm couldn't fire a "useful" HE round to be curious. "Useful" is relative: if a sub-75mm HE round is no use, then why the current enthusiasm for 40mm grenade launchers?
"I have described nothing but what I saw myself, or learned from others" - Thucydides

"I've jazzed mine up a bit" - Spike Milligan

"I'm a general specialist," - Harry Purvis in Tales from the White Hart by Arthur C. Clarke

Twitter: @hws5mp
Minds.com: @HaroldWeaverSmith

Offline Rickshaw

  • "Of course, I could be talking out of my hat"
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #4 on: July 08, 2013, 02:40:07 PM »
There were two HE round developed for the 2 Pdr.   The British one was a nose fused round, with a super-quick activating fuse which meant it had little penetration.   The Australian one, developed independently, was a base fused round, with a delay fuse.

The former was designed for the destruction of materiale' and personnel.  It was also as rare as hen's teeth because of the internecine arguing between the Royal Artillery and the Royal Armoured Corps.  The RA maintained that as they were the gunners, only they should be firing guns that fired HE.  As the 2 Pdrs were primarily mounted in tanks, the RAC maintained they should fire the HE rounds.   The result was a well known stalemate and the fighting men - by this time in the Desert - couldn't effectively counter the German AT guns because they often outran their artillery support.

In New Guinea, OTOH, the Australians found they had an excellent tank - heavily armoured, small and reliable for use in the Jungle, the Matilda but had no HE rounds for it's gun.  So they set out to develop one which was optimised for the penetration of Japanese bunkers which were constructed primarily of sand and Coconut logs.   The result was the base fused HE round.

In late 1943 trials were held between some of the British and the Australian rounds and the Australian rounds were found to penetrate up to several feet of alternating logs and sand protection whereas the British round exploded on contact and was largely ineffectual.   By then, the British had worked out their arguments and so their Armoured Cars, by then the last users of the 2 Pdr went into NW Europe armed with HE rounds (which in turn caused all sorts of problems with the Little-John adapters which they by then used to improve their AP performance).

With every second or third tank carrying a 3in How and the others in the troop carrying 2 Pdrs, the Mathilda soldiered on until war's end in the SW Pacific Theatre (and in peacetime to the late 1950s in the CMF).

Offline Rickshaw

  • "Of course, I could be talking out of my hat"
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #5 on: July 08, 2013, 02:47:29 PM »
I've always found the standard "story" that anything under 75mm couldn't fire a "useful" HE round to be curious. "Useful" is relative: if a sub-75mm HE round is no use, then why the current enthusiasm for 40mm grenade launchers?

It's all relative.  To the infantry, 40mm packs a wallop and is towards the top end of what can easily be carried and fired (and the recoil accepted by a shoulder).  The gunners, it's a pipsqueak.  They nowadays consider 155mm the norm and 105 the smallest worth firing.  75mm or smaller doesn't bear consideration.

On the receiving end, its all nasty.  ;)

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #6 on: November 25, 2015, 10:45:33 PM »
Matilda medium tank.

Australia decides to start building tanks as part of pre-war rearmament, as its pre-war Infantry tanks seem to be the best option.  Due to the need to establish the capability to build them locally production is delayed giving time to assess the lessons of Blitzkrieg and determine that while the armour was sufficient, speed and firepower weren't so the opportunity was taken to fix these issues and turn the Australian version into a more versatile medium tank.

The turret from the Churchill IV or VI will probably fit, this gives the Matilda a 6pdr and a 95mm.   As this was a new line the hull could be widened if required but being early war the 6pdr would do so no need to go bigger and try and fit a 17pdr etc.

Engine, would the GM 6046 diesel of the M-3A3 and M-4A2 fit in a Matilda II.  Its component six cylinder engines are similar capacity to the AECs of the Matilda, as is the engine configuration, it is logical that the two engines should be similar in size but I know logic doesn't always apply.  This would significantly increase power, hence speed which in turn would require improved suspension, so would it be possible to fit the VVSS suspension from the M-3/4 etc?

So in a nutshell we have a modified Matilda hull with a Detroit Diesel, VVSS suspension, M-3 / M-4 tracks, widened / spaced out side skirts and a Churchill turret.  A perfectly adequate medium tank for the middle years of the war that would still be useful post war an all but the most challenging employment.  Shouldn't be that hard to model either.




Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #7 on: November 26, 2015, 03:14:06 AM »
Matilda Infantry Tank Mark III with 57mm OQF 6 Pdr:


All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #8 on: November 26, 2015, 03:14:51 AM »
I like the idea of converting old Matildas into 'Stug' style assault guns.
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #9 on: November 26, 2015, 03:21:27 AM »
Matilda with 76mm Zis gun:

All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #10 on: November 26, 2015, 11:55:57 AM »
Matilda with 76mm Zis gun:




That looks impressive.

I like the idea of an assault gun version but am not sure how it could be done due to the shape of the hull and the central drivers position.

The Churchill turret would be a better fit with its smaller diameter turret ring, which should not need an adaptor as the Cavalier turret did.  As I plan to rob a Churchill of its turret and a Sherman of its suspension, the thought crossed my mind that a Churchill would look good with a Firefly turret. 

Offline Weaver

  • Skyhawk stealer and violator of Panthers, with designs on a Cougar and a Tiger too
  • Chaos Engineer & Evangelistic Agnostic
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #11 on: November 26, 2015, 01:24:21 PM »
I like the idea of converting old Matildas into 'Stug' style assault guns.

The Matilda's front hull was a thick one-piece casting so modifying it would be difficult.
"I have described nothing but what I saw myself, or learned from others" - Thucydides

"I've jazzed mine up a bit" - Spike Milligan

"I'm a general specialist," - Harry Purvis in Tales from the White Hart by Arthur C. Clarke

Twitter: @hws5mp
Minds.com: @HaroldWeaverSmith

Offline Weaver

  • Skyhawk stealer and violator of Panthers, with designs on a Cougar and a Tiger too
  • Chaos Engineer & Evangelistic Agnostic
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #12 on: November 26, 2015, 01:25:39 PM »
How about a Matilda Hedgehog modified post-war with early ATGWs in place of the spigot mortars and an auto-cannon in place of the 2-pdr?
"I have described nothing but what I saw myself, or learned from others" - Thucydides

"I've jazzed mine up a bit" - Spike Milligan

"I'm a general specialist," - Harry Purvis in Tales from the White Hart by Arthur C. Clarke

Twitter: @hws5mp
Minds.com: @HaroldWeaverSmith

Offline jcf

  • Global Moderator
  • Turn that Gila-copter down!
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #13 on: November 26, 2015, 02:47:00 PM »
I like the idea of converting old Matildas into 'Stug' style assault guns.

The Matilda's front hull was a thick one-piece casting so modifying it would be difficult.

Stug guns didn't come through the front of the hull, they were mounted in a casemate over the hull proper.
No reason the same thing wouldn't work on a Matilda II hull.
“Conspiracy theory’s got to be simple.
Sense doesn’t come into it. People are
more scared of how complicated shit
actually is than they ever are about
whatever’s supposed to be behind the
conspiracy.”
-The Peripheral, William Gibson 2014

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #14 on: November 26, 2015, 07:03:50 PM »
I like the idea of converting old Matildas into 'Stug' style assault guns.

The Matilda's front hull was a thick one-piece casting so modifying it would be difficult.

Stug guns didn't come through the front of the hull, they were mounted in a casemate over the hull proper.
No reason the same thing wouldn't work on a Matilda II hull.

True but the result would be quite high and the gun permanently over the drivers position, where a Churchill based conversion could simply mount something larger than the original 3" howitzer in the hull, i.e. an 18 or 25pdr, while deleting the turret or replacing it with something smaller such as the 15mm BESA turret from the Mk VIC Light Tank, or even the Quad BESA turret from the Light AA Mk I for a really impressive infantry support vehicle.

My cunning plan is to see if I can realistically and convincingly turn the Matilda into a competent mid war medium tank that would give industry time to perfect (or discard and replace) the Churchill and Cromwell, without any need for the Valentine, Crusader, Covenanter, Cavalier, Centaur and perhaps even lead to reduced numbers of M-3 being ordered (there would still be significant numbers of Shermans as UK and Commonwealth production would not be able to met demand.  A successful Matilda medium could permit initial Churchill hulls being rerolled as assault guns and tank destroyers while, 17pdr armed, Meteor powered, medium (cruiser) and heavy (infantry) tanks are developed and perfected for large scale deployment prior to Normandy.

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #15 on: November 27, 2015, 03:25:45 AM »
One could go either the low Stug style:



or the higher Marder style:



Either way, the idea would be to remanufacture older Matildas and to add in a larger main gun.  Practicality is optional... ;)
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline Weaver

  • Skyhawk stealer and violator of Panthers, with designs on a Cougar and a Tiger too
  • Chaos Engineer & Evangelistic Agnostic
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #16 on: November 27, 2015, 09:10:20 AM »
One could go either the low Stug style:

or the higher Marder style:


The reason the Germans could do the Stug style is that on the Panzer III, the vertical plate in front of the driver is a separate piece from the bow and glacis plates, which meant it could be replaced by a modified one on the Stug with the cut-out for the gun. The driver's position was already offset to the left.

On the Matilda, the entire bow, including the vertical area around the driver and the box, are a single casting, which means you can't just replace the top half with a new piece. It'd haved to be the whole casting or nothing, and if you're doing that, you might as well design a whole new vehicle. Furthermore, the Matilda driver sits dead centre without enough room for a gun to either side of him, and although it looks like the hull is full-width, in fact, the hull proper is a narrow 'canoe' like the Matilda I (it was actually inspired by the Christie tanks) with triangular stowage bins to either side. This means that you can't just move the Matilda driver to one side without, again, re-building the entire front end of the tank with new castings.

The Marder style might be doable, but again, you have the problem of the central driver's hatch, which means the new gun barrel can't really be mounted any lower than the original turret's 2 pounder. The Germans did actually try this with some Matildas they captured in France, the result being the 'Infanterie-Panzerkampfwagen Mk II (e) mit 5 cm KwK L/42 ("Oswald")'. As you can see, the Oswald was not exactly an impressive fighting vehicle:





(from here: http://en.valka.cz/topic/view/12466)

It might be possible to do an allied version of the Oswald with a 6 pdr, or more likely, a 75mm howitzer to provide HE support to the infantry and gun tanks.
"I have described nothing but what I saw myself, or learned from others" - Thucydides

"I've jazzed mine up a bit" - Spike Milligan

"I'm a general specialist," - Harry Purvis in Tales from the White Hart by Arthur C. Clarke

Twitter: @hws5mp
Minds.com: @HaroldWeaverSmith

Offline Weaver

  • Skyhawk stealer and violator of Panthers, with designs on a Cougar and a Tiger too
  • Chaos Engineer & Evangelistic Agnostic
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #17 on: November 27, 2015, 09:20:10 AM »
Good pic of Matildas under construction at the Vulcan Foundry at Newton-le-Willows (about 30 miles from here, just north of Warrington).


From here: http://www.enuii.com/vulcan_foundry/ww2/photographs.htm

You can see both the bow shape without the stowage boxes and the small turret ring.
« Last Edit: November 27, 2015, 09:22:28 AM by Weaver »
"I have described nothing but what I saw myself, or learned from others" - Thucydides

"I've jazzed mine up a bit" - Spike Milligan

"I'm a general specialist," - Harry Purvis in Tales from the White Hart by Arthur C. Clarke

Twitter: @hws5mp
Minds.com: @HaroldWeaverSmith

Offline Weaver

  • Skyhawk stealer and violator of Panthers, with designs on a Cougar and a Tiger too
  • Chaos Engineer & Evangelistic Agnostic
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #18 on: November 27, 2015, 09:28:01 AM »
Here's another one. Note how little room there is between the driver's casting and the engine bulkhead. You'd be hard-pressed to operate a gun with a much more inboard length and recoil stroke than the 2 pdr in such a space.


Pic from here: https://servicepub.wordpress.com/2014/07/13/part-1-the-infantry-tank-mark-ii-matilda-ii-a12-in-service-with-the-canadian-army-overseas/
"I have described nothing but what I saw myself, or learned from others" - Thucydides

"I've jazzed mine up a bit" - Spike Milligan

"I'm a general specialist," - Harry Purvis in Tales from the White Hart by Arthur C. Clarke

Twitter: @hws5mp
Minds.com: @HaroldWeaverSmith

Offline dy031101

  • Yuri Fanboy and making cute stuff practical- at least that's the plan anyway
  • Prefers Guns And Tanks Over Swords And Magic
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #19 on: November 27, 2015, 12:35:17 PM »
It might be possible to do an allied version of the Oswald with a 6 pdr, or more likely, a 75mm howitzer to provide HE support to the infantry and gun tanks.

Doesn't the Matilda II already have a turreted 3-inch howitzer option?
Forget about his bow and arrows- why wait until that sparrow has done his deed when I can just bury him right now 'cause I'm sick and tired of hearing why he wants to have his way with the cock robin!?

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #20 on: November 27, 2015, 12:40:17 PM »
If you look at the Churchill you find the same thing as the Matilda, the forward bulkhead for the engine bay is only a couple of inches aft of the turret ring
http://s11.photobucket.com/user/HKElias/media/GB-ChurchillCutAway.jpg.html

If the Cavalier turret fit and worked with an adapter the Churchill IV turret with the 6pdr, the V with the 95mm or the VI with the British 75mm, should be a more straightforward fit.

The assault gun I am still looing more at Churchill than Matilda, perhaps with a Stug type slightly raised superstructure that also provides more height to the engine bay for perhaps a Liberty V12.

Offline Rickshaw

  • "Of course, I could be talking out of my hat"
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #21 on: November 27, 2015, 10:10:33 PM »
It might be possible to do an allied version of the Oswald with a 6 pdr, or more likely, a 75mm howitzer to provide HE support to the infantry and gun tanks.

Doesn't the Matilda II already have a turreted 3-inch howitzer option?

Yes,  The 2 Pounder mount could be swapped for a 3 inch Howitzer.  This was usually done in the British Army with the Squadron HQ vehicles.  In the Australian Army, entire troops were swapped.


Offline Weaver

  • Skyhawk stealer and violator of Panthers, with designs on a Cougar and a Tiger too
  • Chaos Engineer & Evangelistic Agnostic
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #22 on: November 27, 2015, 10:23:16 PM »
It might be possible to do an allied version of the Oswald with a 6 pdr, or more likely, a 75mm howitzer to provide HE support to the infantry and gun tanks.

Doesn't the Matilda II already have a turreted 3-inch howitzer option?

Yes,  The 2 Pounder mount could be swapped for a 3 inch Howitzer.  This was usually done in the British Army with the Squadron HQ vehicles.  In the Australian Army, entire troops were swapped.

Okay, fair comment. How about a 25 pdr then?
"I have described nothing but what I saw myself, or learned from others" - Thucydides

"I've jazzed mine up a bit" - Spike Milligan

"I'm a general specialist," - Harry Purvis in Tales from the White Hart by Arthur C. Clarke

Twitter: @hws5mp
Minds.com: @HaroldWeaverSmith

Offline Rickshaw

  • "Of course, I could be talking out of my hat"
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #23 on: November 27, 2015, 10:25:24 PM »
It might be possible to do an allied version of the Oswald with a 6 pdr, or more likely, a 75mm howitzer to provide HE support to the infantry and gun tanks.

Doesn't the Matilda II already have a turreted 3-inch howitzer option?

Yes,  The 2 Pounder mount could be swapped for a 3 inch Howitzer.  This was usually done in the British Army with the Squadron HQ vehicles.  In the Australian Army, entire troops were swapped.

Okay, fair comment. How about a 25 pdr then?

Nope.  The turret was too small to house the gun and it's recoil and the ring was too narrow to absorb the recoil.

Offline Weaver

  • Skyhawk stealer and violator of Panthers, with designs on a Cougar and a Tiger too
  • Chaos Engineer & Evangelistic Agnostic
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #24 on: November 28, 2015, 01:14:18 AM »
It might be possible to do an allied version of the Oswald with a 6 pdr, or more likely, a 75mm howitzer to provide HE support to the infantry and gun tanks.

Doesn't the Matilda II already have a turreted 3-inch howitzer option?

Yes,  The 2 Pounder mount could be swapped for a 3 inch Howitzer.  This was usually done in the British Army with the Squadron HQ vehicles.  In the Australian Army, entire troops were swapped.

Okay, fair comment. How about a 25 pdr then?

Nope.  The turret was too small to house the gun and it's recoil and the ring was too narrow to absorb the recoil.

No, I meant on an open mount like the Oswald.
"I have described nothing but what I saw myself, or learned from others" - Thucydides

"I've jazzed mine up a bit" - Spike Milligan

"I'm a general specialist," - Harry Purvis in Tales from the White Hart by Arthur C. Clarke

Twitter: @hws5mp
Minds.com: @HaroldWeaverSmith

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #25 on: November 28, 2015, 01:18:16 AM »
It might be possible to do an allied version of the Oswald with a 6 pdr, or more likely, a 75mm howitzer to provide HE support to the infantry and gun tanks.

Doesn't the Matilda II already have a turreted 3-inch howitzer option?

Yes,  The 2 Pounder mount could be swapped for a 3 inch Howitzer.  This was usually done in the British Army with the Squadron HQ vehicles.  In the Australian Army, entire troops were swapped.

Okay, fair comment. How about a 25 pdr then?

Nope.  The turret was too small to house the gun and it's recoil and the ring was too narrow to absorb the recoil.

The suggestion relates to a turretless assault gun version, a 3" howitzer was initially suggested but when it was pointed out that there was already a close support version with a turreted 3" the 25pdr was put forward instead.  No one was actually suggesting a 25pdr could be fitted to the turret of a Matilda II.

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #26 on: November 28, 2015, 01:20:19 AM »
On the other hand the 95mm was available in the Churchill V turret, which would fit.

Offline jcf

  • Global Moderator
  • Turn that Gila-copter down!
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #27 on: November 28, 2015, 03:00:11 AM »
Limited room is why the IJA Type 1 75mm Ho-Ni I ended up with the gun mounted so high,
the later version improved protection but still had the high mount.



http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/jap/Type_1_Ho-Ni-I.php

http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/jap/Type_3_Ho-Ni-III.php

BTW the Tamiya Pak 40 barrel fits perfectly on the 75mm Type 90 mount in their Ho-Ni I kit.  ;)

“Conspiracy theory’s got to be simple.
Sense doesn’t come into it. People are
more scared of how complicated shit
actually is than they ever are about
whatever’s supposed to be behind the
conspiracy.”
-The Peripheral, William Gibson 2014

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #28 on: November 28, 2015, 03:24:29 AM »
the 'Infanterie-Panzerkampfwagen Mk II (e) mit 5 cm KwK L/42 ("Oswald")'.

That is probably closest to what I was thinking.  My thoughts with such a vehicle (and I again emphasise that practicality is able to be thrown aside here), centre on one of two basic scenarios:

  • The vehicle is an act of desperation whereby the Brits are desperate to upgun anything they have to counter the Germans.  This may result in existing Matildas being given bigger guns in open tops like that shown
  • The vehicle is the result of Matildas being left over after other more capable tanks were introduced.  In this case, the desire is to do something with a perfectly good hull.  One may even consider trying to fit a 17pdr in non turret form
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #29 on: November 28, 2015, 03:30:58 AM »

the 'Infanterie-Panzerkampfwagen Mk II (e) mit 5 cm KwK L/42 ("Oswald")'.


BTW, speaking of the Oswald, clicking on the images below will take you to a model build of one:


All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #30 on: November 28, 2015, 03:31:51 AM »
And just a nice picture... ;)

All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #31 on: November 28, 2015, 03:32:44 AM »
On another track, what about a Air Defence Matilda?  Maybe even just give it a turret such as that shown here:

All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #32 on: November 28, 2015, 11:08:23 AM »
On another track, what about a Air Defence Matilda?  Maybe even just give it a turret such as that shown here:



That's a turret I could imagine on a Churchill STUG

Offline Buzzbomb

  • Low Concentration Span, oft wanders betwixt projects
  • Accurate Scale representations of fictional stuff
    • Club and my stuff site
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #33 on: November 29, 2015, 02:43:39 PM »
I like your cunning plan.

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #34 on: December 19, 2016, 11:51:18 AM »
Does anyone know of a more powerful engine that would fit in the Matilda?  I was a very small vehicle so I imagine there could be issues but surely something more powerful could have been fitted?

The other factor is the suspension, I know the Matilda was slow but could its suspension have handled higher speeds, i.e. 25mph?  Looking closer, fitting return rollers on top of the bogies could have helped and maybe rubber around the bogie wheels, could this have worked as well or better than replacing the bogies with HVSS?

Offline jcf

  • Global Moderator
  • Turn that Gila-copter down!
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #35 on: December 19, 2016, 12:50:17 PM »
The 'engine' was two inline six diesels mounted side-by-side, not exactly a compact installation.


Two @ 87hp, 174hp total


Two @ 95hp, 190hp total

So supposing you could find a 200+ hp diesel engine that would fit, would it be available or would the supply
be tied up in powering something else? It was wartime and logistics ruled with an iron fist on the Allied side.

The Matilda II had "track carrying wheels" aka return rollers.


The Vickers suspension design was pretty much biased towards cross-country ride v. speed and I don't see how you
could speed it up without some major redesign.

By the time the HVSS suspension units were available en masse there would be no reason to fit them to a Matilda hull.
“Conspiracy theory’s got to be simple.
Sense doesn’t come into it. People are
more scared of how complicated shit
actually is than they ever are about
whatever’s supposed to be behind the
conspiracy.”
-The Peripheral, William Gibson 2014

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #36 on: December 19, 2016, 02:23:49 PM »
Thanks for those scans, they are excellent and better than anything I have found.  I do wonder how it compares in size and weight to the GM 6046 diesel.  Another thought is whether the options developed for the Sentinel would fit, or maybe even the proposed DH aero engine concepts that were postulated a the time, should they be willing to drop diesel.

Interesting on the return rollers as that is what I assumed it had but had just watched The Chieftains Hatch Matilda video where he stated skids not rollers, just shows nobody is perfect.

The idea was based around a notional pre-war rearmament project to produce a modern infantry / medium, verses a cruiser tank in Australia, which likely would not see anything produced until after 1940/1.  They would need to set up production, make alterations and then would have had the chance to learn from the early years of the war.
« Last Edit: December 19, 2016, 02:36:05 PM by Volkodav »

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #37 on: April 23, 2017, 12:33:04 AM »
Been playing the Commonwealth expansion in Hearts of Iron IV and they list the Matilda LP (Local Production) as a Light Tank.  Interesting, I suppose with its size, weight and armament it really was a light tank, only its protection setting it apart.  Now if we could just get more power and increase its speed it really could be a light tank.

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #38 on: July 30, 2017, 06:58:01 PM »
Was reading on another site and dumb me didn't save it but they provided the dimensions of the Matilda engines which actually turned out to have a larger volume than the meteor!  The site suggested that a version of the RR Kestrel could have been used to provide more power and it was also mentioned that the GM6048D was actually initially designed by a member of the British purchasing team sent to the US as a power plant for a proposed US built Matilda!  Wow, this site is the only place I have come across this information so have no details or sources but if correct it really opens a can of WIFFs.

Offline Old Wombat

  • "We'll see when I've finished whether I'm showing off or simply embarrassing myself."
  • "Define 'interesting'?"
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #39 on: July 30, 2017, 09:19:47 PM »
Paul, I read (somewhere? :-\ ) recently that the Russians replaced the return rollers with return skids to simplify maintenance on their Matildas, although it's possible this was done by the manufacturers (Vulcan Foundry) to simplify & speed up the slow & skilled-labour-intensive manufacture.
"This is the Captain. We have a little problem with our engine sequence, so we may experience some slight turbulence and, ah, explode."

Offline jcf

  • Global Moderator
  • Turn that Gila-copter down!
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #40 on: July 31, 2017, 12:20:06 AM »
Looking further into it, evidently early versions had rollers, later versions had skids.
“Conspiracy theory’s got to be simple.
Sense doesn’t come into it. People are
more scared of how complicated shit
actually is than they ever are about
whatever’s supposed to be behind the
conspiracy.”
-The Peripheral, William Gibson 2014

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #42 on: July 31, 2017, 10:17:16 PM »
Seen some of them, they were great.

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #43 on: August 01, 2017, 02:56:47 AM »
Good pic of Matildas under construction at the Vulcan Foundry at Newton-le-Willows (about 30 miles from here, just north of Warrington).


From here: http://www.enuii.com/vulcan_foundry/ww2/photographs.htm

You can see both the bow shape without the stowage boxes and the small turret ring.


Looking at this image, I wonder if you could put two heavy guns in the hull fixed forward in a roughly similar set up to this:



Guns would be through where the stowage boxes are on either side of driver.  Remove turret of course and have a heavy tank destroyer result.
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #44 on: August 07, 2017, 09:35:25 PM »
Getting excited imagining what a US Matilda would have looked like, how long it would have taken to design and get into production, and whether it would have been suitable for production instead of the M-2 or M-3 Medium.  We already have the GM6048D, could it have incorporated M-2 or M-3 suspension and tracks, we know a Churchill III/IV turret could have fit, with its 6pdr, therefore the rebored RO 75mm 6pdr tube and new breach should have fit?

The though that comes to mind is this cast hulled, vastly improved vehicle, designed for production in the US could have been produced in Australia instead of the Sentinel and in Canada instead of the Valentine or even the Ram.  With the more powerful engine and improved suspension it would have evolved into more of a heavy cruiser than an infantry tank, the use of these US developed systems would have made it possible to upgrade the vehicle with improved M-4 components instead of M-2/3 components.

Offline Rickshaw

  • "Of course, I could be talking out of my hat"
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #45 on: August 08, 2017, 02:09:12 PM »
For the US Army to want their version of the 'tilly, you'd need the US Army to figure out how to use it first.  As the concept of the "I" tank never took root in the form the British had thought it out (and which the 'tilly became), you'd need to make it into the equivalent of the British Cruiser.   It would need improved suspension to allow a higher cross-country speed to be sustained as well as, of course a more powerful engine.   As the Churchill turret would not fit on a standard 'tilly hull, it would need to be wider to allow a larger ring to carry it.   The American 75mm gun would be adequate for most of the war.   If the standard Churchill could mount a 17 Pounder, then so should the American Churchill turret.   It'd end up looking rather like a lower, longer, wider 'tilly with a square moulded cast Churchill turret.

Offline jcf

  • Global Moderator
  • Turn that Gila-copter down!
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #46 on: August 08, 2017, 02:44:10 PM »
To build on Brian's comments, in order to figure out what to do with a slow infantry tank,
the US Army would have to throw out all of their conceptions of offensive movement versus
static defense thar they had developed throughout the '20s and '30s, all of which was based on
their experience in WWI and a desire to prevent that deadlock from reoccurring. There was
no place for a slow infantry tank in any of their deliberations. The lesson that Britain took was
to protect the infantry in a set piece battle, the lesson the US took was to not engage in a set
piece battle. Ultimately, both were right and wrong. Sorry Paul, in the period you're looking at
a US Matilda is simply a non-starter, as there is no mechanical feature of the vehicle that would
appeal to the Army board, they would probably like the armour aspect, but they'd apply it to a
different vehicle.
“Conspiracy theory’s got to be simple.
Sense doesn’t come into it. People are
more scared of how complicated shit
actually is than they ever are about
whatever’s supposed to be behind the
conspiracy.”
-The Peripheral, William Gibson 2014

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #47 on: August 08, 2017, 07:17:39 PM »
Guys you are missing the point, the US Matilda I am referring to is the Matilda the UK wanted the US (or anyone) to build for them, i.e. an easier to build improved version using available US components.  In the real world the US decided not to build foreign designs but to adapt US designs to foreign needs, but I have come across information that the UK requested the US build the Matilda and the British Purchasing Commission even developed the concept of the GM6048D, i.e. two bus engines arranged in the same way as the Matildas AEC and Leyland power plants, to power this improved Matilda.

On the Churchill turret, its turret ring diameter was almost identical to that of the Matilda making its adoption much easier than the Cromwell/Cavalier turret that was adapted to the Matilda.  Besides, this is an improved version using available US components that could have been ordered and shipped to Canada, or Australia for example and fitted to the adapted cast hulls that could be produced in those nations.  With the GM power plant and VVSS suspension the Matilda would not have been a slow infantry tank, it would have been superior to the M-3 in performance while lower, better balanced and better armoured.

This suggestion had nothing to do with changing US doctrine but rather getting a useful tank for the British Commonwealth.  Besides, an improved Matilda as described (GM diesel, VVSS suspension) would actually have been closer to the US Army's requirements than the M-3 actually produced and using these components would still have lead to the Sherman.

Offline Rickshaw

  • "Of course, I could be talking out of my hat"
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #48 on: August 09, 2017, 12:37:38 PM »
OK, that is clearer.   However, while you now don't want to change US Army military theory, you need to change Industrial attitudes, which IMO would be nearly as difficult.   US industry would want to use as much US componentry as possible because it would be quicker and easier than trying to manufacture anew British componentry.  The Merlin is a good example of that.  It might have looked like a Rolls Royce Merlin and it might have worked like a Rolls Merlin but under the skin, it used US fasteners and components.  They were arranged in the same way but they were sufficiently different to the original Merlin that a completely new series of marks were assigned to them to differentiate them for the mechanics working on them.

I wasnt aware that the Churchill's turret ring was "nearly" the same diameter as the Mathilda.   You learn something new everyday.  While it might have made it easier to mount the Churchill turret, I somehow think that US industry would look rather askew at the Churchill turret.   No doubt they'd like to mount their own design of turret.   As for the weapon carried, the British were enamoured for quite a long time of mounting dual weapons - the 2 Pdr and the 3 inch How.  One for AP the other for HE/Smoke.   I could see the US manufacturers scratching their heads at that and preferring the 75mm.    Even so, the ring would be too small to fight from.   They would want a larger one for crew comfort and fightability.

They would sneer at the 'tilly's suspension.   They'd rather use the US standard VVS suspension.   So, ultimately, you'd end up with as I've said, a lower, wider, faster Matilda with a more powerful engine, a bigger turret and a bigger gun.   It would take about 2 years to design and develop to manufacturing standard.    It would be a good tank but it would not look like a Matilda.

As for manufacturing downunder, we didn't really have the manpower to sustain aircraft, ship building and tank building.   Particularly by 1942 which is when I'd expect this to come on line.   It was one of the major reasons why the Sentinel was dropped.   We redeployed the manpower to ship building, which was used in the offensive against Japan.

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #49 on: August 09, 2017, 09:28:53 PM »
I mentioned Canada and Australia as Canada produced the Valentine, Ram and Grizzly while Australia produced the Sentinel so both proved capable of producing tanks.  One of the key issues with the Sentinel was the difficulty Australia had obtaining the necessary machine tools and components that could not be sourced locally.  Combining the cast and bolted hull of the matildas and the cast turret of the Churchill IV would have been a good fit with the capabilities of Australian industry, building in US automotive and suspension components would have accelerated the entire program.

On the armament side of things, yes the US had the 75mm in the M-3 and M-4 but remember there was also a 105mm howitzer armed Sherman as well as the 75mm howitzer armed M-8, not that different to the 3" complement to the 2pdr, the 95mm complement to the 6pdr and 75mm and the 165mm was originally designed to complement to the 17 and 20pdr in a similar way.

This is what if, it is working backwards from a concept of what I would like to build trying to explain how it came about.  Discovering that the British desired an improved US built Matilda and that the GM6048D was conceived as a US alternative for the AEC and Leyland power plants, also that the basic engine bay was large enough for a Meteor or obviously anything similar or smaller, means that this build I have wanted to do for ages is becoming more and more believable.  Its gone from "that is impossible" to "this very nearly happened" making consideration of what could have pushed it over the threshold a reasonable proposition.  THe question is what was more likely, the US government letting a US company build a modified British design, the US exporting components and or tooling to aid in the building of the vehicle elsewhere.

Offline Old Wombat

  • "We'll see when I've finished whether I'm showing off or simply embarrassing myself."
  • "Define 'interesting'?"
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #50 on: August 10, 2017, 03:15:59 PM »
The more I read this the more I'm looking at my Tamiya Matilda II with a Scratch'n'Bash mindset.

I'm thinking an Australian built tank in my RAM's universe, in which Australia has a larger population & is more industrialised post-WW1. Basically a heavy-cruiser type to operate in Australia in Australian conditions (from desert, to arid tropics, to high country, to tropical jungle & rain-forest) using a beefed-up Horstmann type suspension system (pretty much a HVSS) but based on the Matilda II hull & turret (more by accident than design in this universe), only larger & with a better engine (I'm still working on that, but probably diesel & probably American).

To get some extra range for open plains operations I'm thinking the initial armament will be an indigenous design based on the QF 3-inch 20 cwt.

Entering service somewhere between 1938 & 1940.


*******************************************************************************************************************

This is annoying, as I only have one Matilda II in the stash & will need to buy another to fulfil this idea & build a stock-standard(ish) version. ::)
"This is the Captain. We have a little problem with our engine sequence, so we may experience some slight turbulence and, ah, explode."

Offline apophenia

  • Perversely enjoys removing backgrounds.
  • Patterns? What patterns?
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #51 on: August 16, 2017, 06:27:21 AM »
Not quite what's being talked about but here's a rough reworking of an upgunned Matilda with US running gear ... based on models by Panzerserra -- a Matilda II (6 pdr) and a Skink (with Grizzly tracks).
Froglord: "... amphibious doom descends ... approach the alter and swear your allegiance to the swamp."

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #52 on: August 16, 2017, 08:00:08 PM »
 :smiley:

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #53 on: September 07, 2019, 06:20:42 PM »
I just bought the New Vanguard Churchill book on Kindle and low and behold the A20 was designed with as 54" diameter turret ring to take the Matilda II turret. The A22 (Churchill), that was developed from it, retained the same turret ring diameter, due to the track sponson design making it impossible to have a larger diameter.  Interestingly many of the original Churchill turrets were manufacture in the US.

Extrapolating this, a minimum change local production matilda II in Australia, Canada or even the US could be easily turned into something superior to the M-3 Grant in the same sort of time frame, using US engines and suspension and even US manufactured Churchill turrets.  Later versions replacing the 2pdr with a 6 pdr and then a 75mm.

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #54 on: December 30, 2019, 11:09:51 PM »
Question, could M-3 / M-4 suspension be retro fitted to the Matilda II?

Thinking about my post on the M-3/M-4 topic and upgrading the Australian M-3 fleet for service into the 50s and the info on ANZAC Steel ref the post war use of the M-3. Those retained post war were all GM 6046 diesel powered and had been fitted with M-4 suspension.

The GM 6046 was designed for a proposed US built Matilda so should have fitted in the UK built Matilda, the Matildas suspension was bogie type, fixed to the hull sides, like that of the M-3/M-4 and the Matilda had the same turret ring diameter as the Churchill.

I have extrapolated all of this previously for an Australian production "Matilda Medium Tank" but am now thinking in terms of a remanufacturing program, perhaps post war but maybe even starting during the war, to produce a higher performance, more reliable and overall more capable Matilda from existing stocks, using existing parts pools.

Rebuilt Matilda post war Matilda-
GM 6046 engine (plus new transmission?)
M-4 suspension
Churchill turret (MkVII with 75mm and Mk VIII with 95mm)

Sounds crazy but then again Australia had tank production facilities and look what Brazil did to the M-3 Stuart.

Offline jcf

  • Global Moderator
  • Turn that Gila-copter down!
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #55 on: December 31, 2019, 02:31:15 PM »
Looking at photos of Matildas being constructed and under restoration and it looks
like your trying to use M4 suspension units is a non-starter.





“Conspiracy theory’s got to be simple.
Sense doesn’t come into it. People are
more scared of how complicated shit
actually is than they ever are about
whatever’s supposed to be behind the
conspiracy.”
-The Peripheral, William Gibson 2014

Offline apophenia

  • Perversely enjoys removing backgrounds.
  • Patterns? What patterns?
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #56 on: December 31, 2019, 03:51:53 PM »
There's also the question of hull length. Googling suggests that the A12 Matilda hull was 15 feet 11 inches long while the M4 Sherman was 20 feet 4 inches (or 20' 7"?).
Froglord: "... amphibious doom descends ... approach the alter and swear your allegiance to the swamp."

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #57 on: January 01, 2020, 12:37:08 AM »
There's also the question of hull length. Googling suggests that the A12 Matilda hull was 15 feet 11 inches long while the M4 Sherman was 20 feet 4 inches (or 20' 7"?).

Two bogies instead of three on each side maybe.

I have a couple of Matilda kits just need some M-3/4 bits to dry fit and see if it works.

Offline jcf

  • Global Moderator
  • Turn that Gila-copter down!
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #58 on: January 01, 2020, 07:57:35 AM »
Are you going to remove the skirts?
Because it appears they're actually part of the structure, not just bolted on, and it looks like the
suspension is attached to the skirts.

The M3/M4 suspension units are self contained and it's very doubtful they'd fit between
the hull and the skirts. Height looks like it would also be an issue.

The Matilda II tracks are 14" wide, M3 and VVSS M4 16", 16.56" and 20.1" (T48 track) wide, HVSS M4 23" wide.
« Last Edit: January 02, 2020, 10:58:53 AM by jcf »
“Conspiracy theory’s got to be simple.
Sense doesn’t come into it. People are
more scared of how complicated shit
actually is than they ever are about
whatever’s supposed to be behind the
conspiracy.”
-The Peripheral, William Gibson 2014

Offline Rickshaw

  • "Of course, I could be talking out of my hat"
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #59 on: January 02, 2020, 09:55:03 AM »
The skirts also contribute significantly to the armour protect on the sides of the vehicle...

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #60 on: January 02, 2020, 10:04:04 PM »
I thought the skirts were structural but are actually bolted on and can be spaced out further over new suspension bogies.

As I understand it the issue with the Matilda was it was a time consuming design to build due to the amount of grinding the hull castings required pre assembly. While the Matilda had excellent armour protection the fact is the Valentine was cheaper, easier and quicker to build, the Churchill was better armoured and both were eventually better armed, cruisers were more mobile and pretty much everything American was more reliable, more mobile and better armed, there was really no need to further develop the Matilda.

The Matilda was successful in the Western Desert but its low speed and small gun were an issue by mid war, this however was not a problem against Japan where its small size and excellent protection made it more suitable than the available Grant, Lee and Stuart in theatre.

There are three ways I can see an improved Matilda coming into being:
- US production for the UK,
- local Australian production kicked off prewar in the way the Beaufort and Tribal class destroyer programs were,
- late or post war upgrade of existing tanks in Australia.

Offline jcf

  • Global Moderator
  • Turn that Gila-copter down!
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #61 on: January 03, 2020, 12:36:16 AM »
"Bolted on"?
Umm, I see a shitload of big ol' rivets in that close up pic with
the only bolts appearing to be related to the suspension.
“Conspiracy theory’s got to be simple.
Sense doesn’t come into it. People are
more scared of how complicated shit
actually is than they ever are about
whatever’s supposed to be behind the
conspiracy.”
-The Peripheral, William Gibson 2014

Offline tankmodeler

  • Wisely picking parts of the real universe 2 ignore
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #62 on: January 03, 2020, 12:53:24 AM »
"Bolted on"?
Umm, I see a shitload of big ol' rivets in that close up pic with the only bolts appearing to be related to the suspension.
Rivets can be drilled out and then replaced with a spacer and replacing the side armour if a wider gap in the side armour is desired for new suspension units.

But that's not the way to do it, I don't think, because maintenance of the M4 bogie units would be essentially impossible under the skirts. Better, perhaps, to strip off the skirts, weld on new armour to replace the value of the skirts, then bolt the M4 bogies onto the outside of the new armour.

But, in the long run Volkodav is right, the Matilda was a dead end. Too tightly integrated with the small turret ring to take much upgunning. You'd need to increase the turret ring and then lengthen the vehicle to accommodate the driver, who sits right in front of the turret ring in the Matilda. Definitely not worth it. If the new upgunned turret is heavier (and it would have to be), the speed would drop to be even slower probably requiring a new engine and rear hull extension.

Paul

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #63 on: January 03, 2020, 04:15:07 AM »
"Bolted on"?
Umm, I see a shitload of big ol' rivets in that close up pic with the only bolts appearing to be related to the suspension.
Rivets can be drilled out and then replaced with a spacer and replacing the side armour if a wider gap in the side armour is desired for new suspension units.

But that's not the way to do it, I don't think, because maintenance of the M4 bogie units would be essentially impossible under the skirts. Better, perhaps, to strip off the skirts, weld on new armour to replace the value of the skirts, then bolt the M4 bogies onto the outside of the new armour.

But, in the long run Volkodav is right, the Matilda was a dead end. Too tightly integrated with the small turret ring to take much upgunning. You'd need to increase the turret ring and then lengthen the vehicle to accommodate the driver, who sits right in front of the turret ring in the Matilda. Definitely not worth it. If the new upgunned turret is heavier (and it would have to be), the speed would drop to be even slower probably requiring a new engine and rear hull extension.

Paul

That's where the GM6046 comes in  ;)

Offline Old Wombat

  • "We'll see when I've finished whether I'm showing off or simply embarrassing myself."
  • "Define 'interesting'?"
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #64 on: January 04, 2020, 12:18:46 AM »
I have a Matilda & a cheap-ish Centurion which I'm going to bash into a "super"-Matilda (one day) using the Cent's (modified) Horstmann suspension but, yes, it will be bigger, with a bigger turret ring & bigger gun ... &, maybe, the GM 6046 diesel.
"This is the Captain. We have a little problem with our engine sequence, so we may experience some slight turbulence and, ah, explode."

Offline tankmodeler

  • Wisely picking parts of the real universe 2 ignore
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #65 on: January 06, 2020, 11:22:07 PM »
That's where the GM6046 comes in  ;)
They are a LOT bigger than the twin Bedfords in a regular Matilda II plus the tranny & differential are also in the rear. You're gonna have to really bump out the arse end to get all that in there.

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #66 on: January 08, 2020, 05:21:08 PM »
Actually rereading the entire topic I found photos of the AEC power pack the JCF provided « Reply #35 on: December 19, 2016, 12:50:17 PM »

Just having a quick look now and I found these

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adEy5j4XiJk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKgcpK5WYiA

If anything the AEC look wider than the 6046, I will have to go into Puka next time I'm in Vic and see if they have any info.

Rereading this topic from the start it has been going around in circles for about seven years, I may need to do some deep diving into technical info on engine bay sizes, box size of the engines discussed, suspension attachment info etc.

Offline tankmodeler

  • Wisely picking parts of the real universe 2 ignore
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #67 on: January 09, 2020, 04:18:40 AM »
Actually rereading the entire topic I found photos of the AEC power pack the JCF provided « Reply #35 on: December 19, 2016, 12:50:17 PM »

Just having a quick look now and I found these

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adEy5j4XiJk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKgcpK5WYiA

If anything the AEC look wider than the 6046, I will have to go into Puka next time I'm in Vic and see if they have any info.

Rereading this topic from the start it has been going around in circles for about seven years, I may need to do some deep diving into technical info on engine bay sizes, box size of the engines discussed, suspension attachment info etc.
It may be wider depending on how the shafts fed into the transmission, but I'm pretty sure its a lot shorter in height and length than the GM. Which is good because while you can make an engine bay higher and longer, it's essentially impossible to make an existing tank wider for a wider engine.

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #68 on: January 09, 2020, 04:46:29 AM »
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #69 on: January 12, 2020, 11:02:11 AM »

Offline Rickshaw

  • "Of course, I could be talking out of my hat"
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #70 on: January 12, 2020, 11:22:09 AM »
Found some more interesting sites but not the engine dimensions I am looking for.

As in the engine compartment or the engines themselves?

If it is the former, just measure a model and do the maths.  If it is the latter do the same and half the measures for width.


Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #71 on: January 12, 2020, 01:49:13 PM »
Found some more interesting sites but not the engine dimensions I am looking for.

As in the engine compartment or the engines themselves?

If it is the former, just measure a model and do the maths.  If it is the latter do the same and half the measures for width.

I'm looking for block length for the base AEC and Leyland engines, though ideally I would like some dimensioned engineering drawing for the power packs as also for the 6046.  I have now found multiple references to the AEC / Leyland power packs being the start point for the GM 6046 but no confirmation that they were the same size.  May have a chat to some RAEME contacts and see if any of them can access data at the Armour Museum.

Looking at the suspension set up there are two full bogies in the middle and a half bogie at the read of each side, there is also a separately sprung wheel between the idler and first bogie, this appears to give enough space for three HVSS units on each side.  The other possibility that comes to mind is using M-2/3 light tank suspension bogies, three per side, though it may not be up to the 25ton weight of the Matilda, even with the extra bogie.

An interesting comment on one of the links I provided was that fitting the 6pdr in the original turret was never attempted, though it may actually have been possible considering the Soviets fitted a 76mm.

The other thing, which is not something I had previously considered, is that apart from its armour advantage, the matilda was also much more reliable than its cruiser tank contemporaries, its only real down side was its low speed.


Offline jcf

  • Global Moderator
  • Turn that Gila-copter down!
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #72 on: January 13, 2020, 12:18:28 PM »
6-71TA Automotive drawings, not exactly the 6-71 used to make the 6046 but it should help:
https://www.powerlinecomponents.com/literature/detroit_diesel/ddc_drawings/10678B00ID.pdf

This page on Detroit Diesel in WWII has some interesting stuff:
http://usautoindustryworldwartwo.com/General%20Motors/detroit-diesel.htm



“Conspiracy theory’s got to be simple.
Sense doesn’t come into it. People are
more scared of how complicated shit
actually is than they ever are about
whatever’s supposed to be behind the
conspiracy.”
-The Peripheral, William Gibson 2014

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #73 on: January 14, 2020, 01:44:58 PM »
Thanks  :smiley:

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #74 on: January 15, 2020, 02:43:33 AM »
Is there a good book available on the Matilda II tank?
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline tankmodeler

  • Wisely picking parts of the real universe 2 ignore
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #75 on: January 16, 2020, 01:37:28 AM »
Is there a good book available on the Matilda II tank?
Not terribly new ones, I don't think.

There is an old Armour in Profile 15 from the 60s.
There is Bryan Perrett's Armour in Action 2: Matilda (Hardcover, ISBN 9780711004054 Publisher: Ian Allen, 1973).
Infantry Tank Mk I/Ii Matilda Militaria 418 Janusz Ledwoch British Infantry Tank
Modelling The Matilda Infantry Tank (Osprey Modelling #5) M. Bannerman
The Matilda Infantry Tank in Australian Service Museum Ordnance Special Number 13 Paul Handel

That's all I could find. They vary in  usefulness depending on what you want them for.

Paul

Offline Jeffry Fontaine

  • Unaffiliated Independent Subversive...and the last person to go for a trip on a Mexicana dH Comet 4
  • Global Moderator
  • His stash is able to be seen from space...
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #76 on: June 12, 2023, 03:12:27 AM »
Short video on the specialized infantry support Matilda tanks developed by the RAAC during WW2 to fight in the jungles of the SWPA:

Odysee > Tanks Encyclopedia > Kit Bashing Down Under | Matilda Frog, Matilda Dozer and Matilda Hedgehog in Australian Service
"Every day we hear about new studies 'revealing' what should have been obvious to sentient beings for generations; 'Research shows wolverines don't like to be teased" -- Jonah Goldberg

Offline raafif

  • Is formally accused of doing nasty things to DC-3s...and officially our first whiffing zombie
  • Whiffing Insane
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #77 on: June 12, 2023, 07:50:11 AM »
Is there a good book available on the Matilda II tank?

I have the New Vanguard book (like the Osprey series) on the Matilda by David Fletcher & Peter Sarson.  Covers the Mk.1 through to the engineering versions. :smiley:

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #78 on: June 12, 2023, 07:54:24 AM »
I suppose there is also this:

All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #79 on: June 12, 2023, 07:55:27 AM »
And this:

All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline M.A.D

  • Also likes a bit of arse...
  • Wrote a great story about a Christmas Air Battle
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #80 on: June 12, 2023, 09:53:23 AM »
Some interesting reading:  https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/Australia/aus_matilda

How ingeniously simple was that mud scraper!

Thanks for sharing GTX

MAD
« Last Edit: June 12, 2023, 09:59:05 AM by M.A.D »

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: Matilda II ideas and Inspirations
« Reply #81 on: June 13, 2023, 12:00:40 PM »
I suppose there is also this:



I need this!