Field modifications and conversions to Allied vehicles.

Granted it may have been useless for other thuings. But it does look like it did what it was supposed to do. I would assume too that there would have been some other obsolete tank chassis around that they could have used.

 

The problem with the BARV is that it its intended use is an extremely narrow niche. Amphibious assaults were hardly a common occurance. Clearing the beaches of stalled vehicles, stranded landing craft, etc., could be done with standard engineering equipment after the assault was complete. Outside of this niche there was no need for the BARV.

On the other hand, efficent ARV like the M32 or T2 (M3 tank hull) were very necessary to armored units on a virtual daily basis. Recovering damaged and broke down tanks, pulling tanks out of bogs and the like ARV were workhorses in high demand.

 

Wouldn't accuse you of that, it is a very interesting photo and I have it saved.

 

That is a fair point, however expect for the Pacific Island campaign amphibious warfare is in itself a Niche usage, but was pivotal. It could be argued that Landing Craft- Parachute forces and a host of other military one shot deals used during the Normandy/Scheldt and Rhine crossing were a narrow niche.

The background of the BARV goes back to Dieppe Raid of 19-8-42, on the raid Canadian Infantry and RE were slaughtered on the beach and were unable to support the tanks of 14th Can Btn. Also carried in the LCT were a number of D7 bulldozers which were intended to assist in the operation and to assist re-embarkation of tanks after the raid and push off LCTs after loading, no doubt the Wehrmacht would have been grateful for the D7s left behind.

View attachment 5400

The unarmoured D7s failed to even be landed and for the operators it was just as well as they would have been dead in moments. Of the many lessons learnt at Dieppe one of the first was need for an armoured dozer.

View attachment 5401

and because tests found that standard bulldozers whether armoured or not tended to damage LCT if used to push them off the beach a new vehicle was developed, sometimes called the porpoise (a name also used for a floating ammo sledge) the Caterpiller BARV was hoped to resolve the problem

View attachment 5402

Unfortunately it was too light and found it difficult to push a LCT off the beach it could manage LCVP and LCMs. The other development the Churchill based BARV was found to be problematic, exactly why I don't know but the Churchill BARV was revived to replace the Sherman BARV Post War (1950) but again it didn't work, possibly the diesel engines of the Sherman were found to be better at low speed.

View attachment 5403
The crew of 65ZR71 watch heicopters from HMS Bulwark approach from the Sea at Instow Training area.

The Sherman BARV did its job well on D.Day and in the other amphibious assaults in NWE (Scheldt and Rhine Crossings). As JC has already mentioned the Sherman BARV lasted to 1963 in British Service when it was replaced by the Centurion BARV which was similar in all respects, the Centurion BARV served until 2002 used during Suez and Falklands and was replaced by a few Leopard based BARVs.

ARVs could be and often have been replaced by unarmoured recovery and repair vehicles for the simple reason that it is almost impossible to hook up a disabled tank under fire and a great deal of research went on to find away of doing it. The Same applies to AVBLs often regarded as road blocks.

The point I was making about use of the M4 (the allies main battle tank) being used for conversions is that in 1944 during the "tank Shortage" the US critised the the British for converting M4s to ARV, BARVs and unarmed OP Tanks.

You can only convert obsolete AFVs to specialist roles if they are in as new condition and are closely related to current gun tank. If there had been a dedicated repair recovery and refurbishment facility set up in the UK in 1943 -44 the shortage of tanks would have been largely mitigated.

The only large scale refurbishment that took place in the UK during this period was a number of M3s used as training vehilces were rebuilt as CDL tanks. Many of the US built M31s were converted straight off the production line (from M3A3 and A5) although some M3 were refurbished by tank manufacturers prior to conversion.

In the UK many Rams were converted to Kangaroo but mostly they were out of reserve stock that had not been worn out in training,

Steve

 

NT

 

Rocket gun carrier at Bengal Air Depot in India

 

The Grant CDL (Canal Defence Light) was a special vehicle mounting a turret in which was located a powerful searchlight that was supposed to dazzle an enemy during night operations or illuminate targets at night.


The device known under the cover name Canal Defence Light was one weapons of World War II that was destined hardly ever to be used. In essence it was a simple idea, in which the normal gun turret of a tank was replaced with another housing an intense light to illuminate battlefields at night. All manner of tactical ploys were advocated for its use, ranging from simply blinding an enemy to providing general target illumination.

The idea of mounting powerful searchlights on tanks was first mooted during the mid-1930s by a group of interested civilians who ’sold’ the idea to the War Office in 1937. The War Office carried out a series of development trials under conditions of great secrecy, and by late 1939 a turret was ready for production. The secrecy continued with the project being known as the Canal Defence Light, or CDL. The first turrets produced were for the Matilda II infantry tank, and all that the fitting of a CDL involved was the removal of the normal turret and its replacement by a new one, though changes had to be made to the Matilda’s electrical systems as well, In the turret the searchlight was positioned behind a vertical slit in which was a shutter. In use the searchlight was switched on and the shutter was opened and closed very rapidly to provide a flickering impression to an observer in front. This flickering made the range of the CDL light difficult to determine, and anyway the light was so powerful that it was difficult to look into the beam even at quite long ranges.

Some 300 CDL turrets were ordered to convert Matildas to the CDL role, and one brigade of Matilda CDL vehicles was based in the UK and another in North Africa. The military planners were determined to use the impact of the CDL units to the full and constantly awaited the chance to use them to maximum effect. That chance somehow never came and the North African campaign was over before the CDLs could prove their worth. However the Normandy landings lay ahead, and it was planned to use the CDLs there. But at the same time it was felt that the CDL turrets should be placed on something rather more up-to-date than the slow and stately Matildas, so Grant tanks became the chosen carriers.


Thus the CDL was carried throughout the war but sparingly used. However, the idea certainly attracted attention. The US Army was most impressed by what it saw of the CDL at various demonstrations and decided to adopt the CDL for itself, and thus produced 355 CDL turrets for mounting on otherwise obsolete M3 Lee tanks. These were used to equip six tank battalions for special operations in Europe. The cover name T10 Shop Tractor was used for US CDL vehicles. The U.S. Army already had two battalions equipped with the CDL in June 1944 but never considered using them on D-Day. Instead the CDLs were used for the relatively unexciting task of providing ‘artificial moonlight’ to illuminate the crossings of the Rhine and Elbe in early 1945.

The US 738th Tank Battalion (spec) manned the CDL (Canal Defence Light). This was an M3 Lee/Grant chassis, mounting a modified turret containing a 13,000,000 candle power arc lamp reflected through a mechanical shutter. This weapon induced blindness and disorientation, and the flickering prevented the enemy from identifying its source and location.

The first use of the CDL was against German frogmen, who were attempting to destroy the Ludendorff Bridge at Remagen. The device worked as intended, and the frogmen were quickly rounded up.

2007 October 03 « War and Game

 

Photo of a US M3A1 T10 Shop Tractor has the external 75mm gun shield and .30cal ball mount in the turret.
View attachment 5464
The flicker device of the CDL in particular induced short term blindness in troops with pale eye colouration, it did not work as well on people with brown eye colours- it is therefore surprising that some British CDL were sent to India in 1945.

 

Matilda CDL

 

Bren Carrier with 14 PIAT launchers 1944

 

Excellent an original photo of Conger, With the men around it being US soldiers I would assume this is an exhibition hopefully of an inert unit. On the occasion of its use in Holland, the d**med thing blew up prematurely taking out two Churchill AVREs 6 trucks and a Farmhouse, along with numerous personel.

There was a Conger mounted on a Canadian Ram tank but I think the designers had come to their sences. The US had a similar design called the Dragon M1 and M2 but again it was not used.

 

Looks like there is a whole lot of what appears to be a firehose in front LOL.

 

The hose was the line the liquid explosive was pumped, about the worst thing to do with Nitro is presurize it!

The Conger was a primitive verson of the M125 demolition line charge and rocket system used by the Marine Corps. Sometimes fitted to LVTE-1 Engineer landing craft used in Vietnam, the rockets were nicknamed "Zuni" which I think is a character from a 1960s kids cartoon -possibly fireball XL5

I'll try and upload on the Conger and Dragon later

 

U.S version developed under the NDRC and the M10A1 was built by M.W Kellogg Co. had 500 feet of 3inch firehose and carried 2250lb of nitro-glycerine pushed through the pipe by compressed air- which is beter than pumping but only just so.
View attachment 5529
View attachment 5530
The British conger towed by a Churchill AVRE.
View attachment 5531
Rocket launcher on the right spare rocket stowed on teh left, hose line just off center
View attachment 5532
Conger on a Canadian Ram Tank, whether British or Canadian I don't know dated 1946.
View attachment 5533
Steve