I've never liked the vertical armor faces on the Churchill. So, much as I did with a Matilda Mk II, I'm going to upgrade the armor to something slanted. I might change the main gun to the 17pdr - there'd actually be room in the new, larger turret. :)
(https://i.imgur.com/ALad9pF.jpg)
Churchill Upgrade_000
This is the model I've got in the SSR, so this is with what I'm working. I'd have preferred a 1/35 scale, but the prices are ruinous, so ...
More pictures when I have some solid progress. So far I'm still ruining sheet plastic in an attempt to find a profile that I like. :)
Churchill upgrade - give him a bigger cigar?
;D
Quote from: Scotaidh on October 20, 2018, 02:29:09 PM
I might change the main gun to the 17pdr - there'd actually be room in the new, larger turret. :)
Not sure the turret ring could be enlarged enough on the Churchill ? That's why the Black Prince was wider as far as I know. Having said that I do like the idea of an improved Churchill :thumbsup:
Quote from: zenrat on October 20, 2018, 04:40:08 PM
Churchill upgrade - give him a bigger cigar?
;D
I didn't think there were any cigars larger ... :D
Well, the Carpet Monster has eaten three sets of road wheels and a drive sprocket. I have searched until my legs cramped, and given it up. I've contacted Hornby to see if they can help me, but that was a week ago and no - other than automated - response. I guess I'm down to scratching replacements, so I'm looking at my small-diameter tubing. :/
I also ordered a 1/35 Churchill from evilBay. That arrived yesterday, and you know? It's still small. :/
I already have a completed 1/72 Churchill Mk VII, completed OOB with one tiny variation - it's got stripes of black paint on it. I'd wanted my up-graded one to sit beside it, to show ... I dunno, just to be a pair, I guess.
Now I can't decide if I want to a) finish the 1/72 Upgrade; and b) if the 1/35 should be OOB and sit next to my OOB Chieftain and Challenger.
Thoughts?
While looking at the Churchill kit box art, I wonder if combination of a Char B1 (hull) with the Churchill's tracks would be feasible?
Quote from: Dizzyfugu on November 09, 2018, 04:53:35 AM
While looking at the Churchill kit box art, I wonder if combination of a Char B1 (hull) with the Churchill's tracks would be feasible?
Probably, but you might need to make the tracks longer.
Well, I used a Dustbuster to reclaim most of what I'd lost to the Carpet Monster - I only needed to fab three road-wheels. Now the hull's together I can get on with the turret.
(https://i.imgur.com/cC4fL7k.jpg)
Churchill Upgrade_013
Side-skirts added - I haven't decided yet whether or not to smooth and angle them. Thoughts?
(https://i.imgur.com/kHdAe2v.jpg)
Churchill Upgrade_014
Turret now has a floor and I've removed the bustle-tub so I can increase the turret's effective size without increasing the turret ring.
(https://i.imgur.com/hCBwKpA.jpg)
Churchill Upgrade_015
If you look closely under the gun tube, you can see that I cut away the lip under the gun, I did that because with the lip the gun was limited to about -2 deg elevation, which is stupid. I haven't yet decided if I'm going to replace the gun tube - I'd like to "Firefly" it, but it's so small that I'm worried I'll duff it.
Glad you've found the bits :thumbsup:
Quote from: Scotaidh on November 24, 2018, 06:14:35 AM
Side-skirts added - I haven't decided yet whether or not to smooth and angle them. Thoughts?
Not sure what you mean ?
Quote from: NARSES2 on November 25, 2018, 06:44:01 AM
Glad you've found the bits :thumbsup:
Quote from: Scotaidh on November 24, 2018, 06:14:35 AM
Side-skirts added - I haven't decided yet whether or not to smooth and angle them. Thoughts?
Not sure what you mean ?
Well, my original plan was to add slanted plates to the ends of the hull and the sides of the turret, to make them more ballistically effective.
I hadn't really considered the sides of the hull, especially those protuberant intakes. A part of me wants to add angled plates to the sides (as well as to the turret, which I'm working on now). Adding slanted side-plates would make the tank harder to kill but would complicate the build.
That looks interesting. How about a different turret, maybe from a Comet or a Sherman Firefly?
Quote from: Dizzyfugu on November 25, 2018, 10:03:21 AM
That looks interesting. How about a different turret, maybe from a Comet or a Sherman Firefly?
Well, the turret will look different. I'm trying to do something related to this:
(https://i.imgur.com/RbjmPKb.jpg)
my conversion of a Matilda Mk II. the cannon barrel broke off and vanished during a move. To salvage it I dressed up the turret and hull, drilled into the breech and glued in a pick-up-stick which I then dressed up to be a hi-velocity 40mm firing Sabot and HE.
That's kinda what I'm trying to do with this beast.
Sloping the side armour is more problematic than it looks.
1.) It increases the width well past the rail-tunnel limit which restricted the width of British armour (until they threw it out & went to road transport).
2.) Unlike the Matilda (which I note you didn't slope the sides of) the sides of the Churchill aren't skirts, they are actually the sides of the mid-lower hull, the hatch in the sides is the primary crew access/egress point & needs to be kept.
3.) the light panels over the tracks are removable & need to remain so for track maintenance.
Not saying it can't be done but the above points (especially 2 & 3) need to be kept in mind when doing so.
Just quickly off the top of my head; I'd suggest cutting out the side panels & making them the bottom of the sloped armour, add flat upper plates & triangular ends ... or you could reverse the side-panel/flat plate arrangement.
I thing she'll look ugly but the Churchill was never a "pretty" tank, anyway. ;)
Quote from: Scotaidh on November 25, 2018, 09:57:40 AM
Well, my original plan was to add slanted plates to the ends of the hull and the sides of the turret, to make them more ballistically effective.
I hadn't really considered the sides of the hull, especially those protuberant intakes. A part of me wants to add angled plates to the sides (as well as to the turret, which I'm working on now). Adding slanted side-plates would make the tank harder to kill but would complicate the build.
I understand now, thanks :thumbsup:
I think Mr Wombat has answered the question as far as the hull is concerned, but they might look neat on the turret
Morel work done - I know it's slow, but I really don't want to duff this. I've also re-thought every aspect of this build, time and again, and probably will until I finally decide "Enough!"
I apologize for the picture quality - I really must get a tripod.
(https://i.imgur.com/hI22tNe.jpg)
Churchill Upgrade_016
Plastruct to the rescue! It occurred to me that extending the turret both fore and aft should have some benefits - moving the gun mount forward should increase the available recoil-distance. Okay, that decreases the available elevation, but most tank battles aren't long distance shoots, they're more like knife-fights - too close, and the quickest blade wins. Anyway, this is my solution. I'm still deciding whether or not to make the turret wider.
(https://i.imgur.com/F8w5zbJ.jpg)
Churchill Upgrade_017
A bit of putty and see the turret in place. Still the 75mm cannon - the replacement is still in the works, 'cos I don't want it to look stupid. There's a bit of slope on the turret face - there will be more. The turret bin will also go back on - I think all tankers agree that more stowage is always needed.
(https://i.imgur.com/oxT0zsq.jpg)
Churchill Upgrade_018
So far not too great a departure, but I like it.
Nice one. :thumbsup:
For extra stowage, you could add baskets on the rear sides of the turret.
For more hull protection, you could add spaced armour panels to the sides, as long as there was a hinged section over the side door. They wouldn't add much protection against KE rounds, but they're very effective against HEAT rounds from Panzerfausts and Panzerschrecks. You could do the same to the sides of the turret too actually, then have improvised stowage in the gap between the panels and the hull/turret (you KNOW they'd do it... ;) ).
I like the sloping glacis: it's basically what was done to the Cromwell/Comet-style hull to develop the Centurion. I'd like to see this done to a Comet actually: the hatches would need some careful thinking about though...
Quote from: Scotaidh on November 09, 2018, 04:06:58 AM
Well, the Carpet Monster has eaten three sets of road wheels and a drive sprocket. I have searched until my legs cramped, and given it up. I've contacted Hornby to see if they can help me, but that was a week ago and no - other than automated - response. I guess I'm down to scratching replacements, so I'm looking at my small-diameter tubing.
Back in the days when I did 1/76th/72nd wargaming, newbies would always ask "why doesn't the British player use Churchills given their heavy armour?" This is the reason. Everybody had one, and only one, 80% Churchill in their scrap box vainly waiting for the lost wheels to magically re-appear. They never did... :banghead:
There are some excellent original drawings of the bare Churchill hull on this thread, which really help you visualize what's going on with it:
http://forum.worldoftanks.eu/index.php?/topic/176933-rl-churchill-cromwell-armour-plan/
Quote from: Weaver on December 02, 2018, 05:01:22 AM
There are some excellent original drawings of the bare Churchill hull on this thread, which really help you visualize what's going on with it:
http://forum.worldoftanks.eu/index.php?/topic/176933-rl-churchill-cromwell-armour-plan/
Thanks - I'll have a look.
Quote from: Weaver on December 02, 2018, 04:51:48 AM
I like the sloping glacis: it's basically what was done to the Cromwell/Comet-style hull to develop the Centurion.
Me to :thumbsup:
Quote from: NARSES2 on December 02, 2018, 07:12:04 AM
Quote from: Weaver on December 02, 2018, 04:51:48 AM
I like the sloping glacis: it's basically what was done to the Cromwell/Comet-style hull to develop the Centurion.
Me to :thumbsup:
Looking at the cross-sections of the Churchill in that link, you could make the top and bottoms of the pannier sloped with a rounded outside face. Could be cast as one piece with the outer rounded part thicker than the top and bottom sides. The runners for the tracks wouldn't be that hard to mount with different length legs to where they attach to the 'cast' part.
Much more PSR under my belt, and plenty still to come.
(https://i.imgur.com/ashxSlX.jpg)
Churchill Upgrade_028
Angled plates added. As I said, lots more PSR in store! :)
AA Tank turret ? Could be one.
I'm enjoying watching this build, keep up the updates :thumbsup:
I'm attempting to add armor to the sides of the hull ... Where's Hercules when you want him?
(https://i.imgur.com/9illZkN.jpg)
Churchill Upgrade_032
An attempt to upgrade the vehicle's hull side armor ... Not brilliant, but I'm not sure what else I can do ...
(https://i.imgur.com/FkRck5P.jpg)
Churchill Upgrade_033
The problem is that the top track-covers need to remain removable to service the tracks. Also, the crew hatches on each side were a primary means of getting in and out. Then there's the air filters on the sides of the engine compartment ... :-\ What's a mother to do?
(https://i.imgur.com/1auS0rp.jpg)
Churchill Upgrade_035
For some reason, I still really like the look of the original cannon, even though I did say I wanted to put in a 17pdr ... I think I need a trip to my LHS for some inspiration - and tubing. ;)
In that link Harold (Weaver) posted, you can see where you could attach the additional armour. Here's a quick sketch I did after I tried to explain how I would modify the Churchill side armour to something with sloping sides. The top sketch is how the Churchill armour was (according to the link) so your pieces would be better attached to the top and bottom corners of the pannier part.
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fvillage.photos%2Fimages%2Fuser%2F8f3973c9-3f0e-4b54-80e2-017121c0bf9f%2F393405ff-eefa-44c2-a4c3-016093f029ea.jpg&hash=dc3b846a9f6814fc3c1122c64117b04ec2f76342)
Turret's got the look of a larger Crusader turret in some ways
(https://i.imgur.com/tvs7RuI.jpg)
Churchill Upgrade_036
I decided to go a different way with the side armor. I like the look of this much better. Ditto the improved air intakes/filter units. ;) Still working on how to do the side-tank crew hatches.
(https://i.imgur.com/onXMBJa.jpg)
Churchill Upgrade_038
New cannon installed, with thermal sleeve and fume extractor
(https://i.imgur.com/2QbFwFu.jpg)
Churchill Upgrade_039
The loader's hatch, was, as you all know, some raised lines on the turret - now scrubbed off. The new loader's hatch is made of the driver's hatch pieces - I'm boxing it in with small L-beam pieces, cut to fit in-situ, which is why it's not done yet - glue needs to dry. Also, I've marked on the skirt where the new crew entry hatches will be ... Not entirely happy with this, will keep exploring options to make it look better. Still to come, the driver's hatch, sighting systems, etc.
Starting to look the business :thumbsup:
Very modern looking turret
Noticed in the shops that there's a Haynes 'Manual' on the Churchill with lots of good detail photos and diagrams.
It's looking good. I'm tempted to suggest that there's so little Churchill left that it's not really a Churchill any more, but then when you look at some other highly modified tanks, like the various radical M-60 upgrades and the South African Olifants (Centurion) you realise that that's not totally unrealistic. Some countries find that they can build or buy in almost all the components to upgrade a tank, but if they havn't got a heavy steel industry then re-using an old hull is still an attractive (or the only) option.
In some ways it reminds me of what the Germans did in the Ardennes to make Panthers look like Tank Destroyers.
Quote from: Weaver on December 16, 2018, 07:47:17 AM
Noticed in the shops that there's a Haynes 'Manual' on the Churchill with lots of good detail photos and diagrams.
It's looking good. I'm tempted to suggest that there's so little Churchill left that it's not really a Churchill any more, but then when you look at some other highly modified tanks, like the various radical M-60 upgrades and the South African Olifants (Centurion) you realise that that's not totally unrealistic. Some countries find that they can build or buy in almost all the components to upgrade a tank, but if they havn't got a heavy steel industry then re-using an old hull is still an attractive (or the only) option.
Seen a
Magach lately? :) The
Oliphant is my inspiration for this build. I mean - the only tank in the world to feature a built-in bath-tub! How could you go wrong? :) I will admit that the turret rather got away from me - but I don't want to slag it and start over, although I probabaly should. I really don't want to buy another model just for the turret, either.
My intention here is the updating a museum piece into a (more) modern piece of kit. We'll call it the "Churchill Mk. MMXX Project" or something ... ;) I work in a shipyard, and having seen what some of those guys can do with a gas torch - it's almost beyond belief. I hear the phrase "It's only metal" all the time ...
So this Churchill will feature an up-rated power pack & transmission but keep the general 'sponson-hull' layout and track system. The armament has been updated - I mean, where would one even find parts for a Besa MG anymore? Collectors, yeah - might have as many as 5 complete weapons and a few parts, but then what? Just replace it with a Browning Ma Deuce or a minigun and call it good - 'specially since we now have stowage for a minigun's worth of ammo. ;) Also, since everyone is apparently 'going soviet' with a smooth-bore main gun - well, if I do the same then at least parts and ammo are available. much as it corrodes my soul to not have rifling.
Thanks for your comments - I do appreciate them, even if it seems as if I'm ignoring them. (I'm really not.)
Well, apart from not using the hull sides as part of the armour, you've gone for my suggested side structure, so I'm happy. ;D ;)
What size gun have you gone for, again? The 105mm L7 (& variants) are rifled; the L30 120mm rifle has replaced the smooth-bore L11A5 on British tanks; Cockerill Mk.III 90mm Low Pressure weapon is also rifled.
I'd highly recommend not going for the L30, unless you want to see your tank rolling away from the battle if it fires to its flank. ;)
Quote from: Old Wombat on December 17, 2018, 02:34:03 AM
What size gun have you gone for, again? The 105mm L7 (& variants) are rifled; the L30 120mm rifle has replaced the smooth-bore L11A5 on British tanks; Cockerill Mk.III 90mm Low Pressure weapon is also rifled.
The L11 was rifled. The L30 is basically just an update on it.
Quote from: Weaver on December 17, 2018, 02:41:39 AM
Quote from: Old Wombat on December 17, 2018, 02:34:03 AM
What size gun have you gone for, again? The 105mm L7 (& variants) are rifled; the L30 120mm rifle has replaced the smooth-bore L11A5 on British tanks; Cockerill Mk.III 90mm Low Pressure weapon is also rifled.
The L11 was rifled. The L30 is basically just an update on it.
My apologies, I mis-read my source material. :banghead:
Quote from: Old Wombat on December 17, 2018, 02:34:03 AM
Well, apart from not using the hull sides as part of the armour, you've gone for my suggested side structure, so I'm happy. ;D ;)
What size gun have you gone for, again? The 105mm L7 (& variants) are rifled; the L30 120mm rifle has replaced the smooth-bore L11A5 on British tanks; Cockerill Mk.III 90mm Low Pressure weapon is also rifled.
I'd highly recommend not going for the L30, unless you want to see your tank rolling away from the battle if it fires to its flank. ;)
Dang it, you lot are making me do research! ;) My smooth-bore remark was aimed at how much - to me, at least - the resultant cannon on my Churchill Mk. MMCC looks like the cannon on the Leopard Mk VI - short and thick.
I personally despise smooth-bores as I regard it as a 'quick, cheap, & nasty' solution to gunnery, as well as a technological step backwards - what's next, re-issue of the Brown Bess musket?
Researching British Tank Guns of WWII, I came across the OQF 77mm Gun Mk. II. As an upgrade of the 17pdr used in the Firefly Shermans, I like that, and it seemed the solution to your question. However, as it didn't come with either the fume extractor or the thermal sleeve, and the L7 did, for which (according to this site <http://www.pof.gov.pk/catalouge/Anti_Tank_Ammo.pdf>) the HE shell = 54lbs (and the APFSDS = 46lbs).
Long story short, I guess I'm going with the L7. :)
:thumbsup:
(https://i.imgur.com/imf0Y8j.jpg)
Churchill Upgrade_040
Side-hull escape hatches in place and driver's hatch installed.
(https://i.imgur.com/MjvwVqF.jpg)
Churchill Upgrade_041
I had to make a cut into the new glacis plate to accomodate the driver's hatch.
(https://i.imgur.com/NIh2S1c.jpg)
Churchill Upgrade_043
Side hatch detail
(https://i.imgur.com/zvHaR5f.jpg)
Churchill Upgrade_044
I kept the old exhaust - I didn't really have a better idea.
Wow. I'd be hard pushed to tell what you started with if I didn't know.
Fabulous.
:thumbsup:
It's certainly beginning to look the business :thumbsup:
It's so SciFi looking
Quote from: zenrat on December 22, 2018, 01:36:54 AM
Wow. I'd be hard pushed to tell what you started with if I didn't know.
Fabulous.
:thumbsup:
Weaver made a similar comment a while ago ... and it's starting to bother me. Your comments have led me to look at it with fresh eyes, so to speak, and I'm not happy with it. This model has gone out of control - really, just about the only thing left of an actual Churchill is the tracks, which was not my intent when I started. :angry:
So.
I'll finish this one, but I think I have it to do over so it really
is a Churchill with slanted armor.
Quote from: nighthunter on December 22, 2018, 05:21:42 AM
It's so SciFi looking
Thanks, but yes - you're right. It might as well be a hover tank armed with a rail gun, at this point - or (as those who read sci-fi armor stories will know) a "power gun".
Your real problem is that it's almost impossible to upgrade the Churchill without redesigning it from the ground up as something which isn't a Churchill.
Mr. Senior Marsupial, I do believe you are, at least partially, correct.
I was digging in my SSR, looking for greeblies for the Churchill, and I found my Dragon Challenger Mk II (1/72). That kit included some extra parts, which will make their appearance in due course. Just for fun, before re-stocking the Challenger, I taped the turret together and sat it on the upper hull.
(https://i.imgur.com/foNF3l3.jpg)
Churchill Upgrade_046
Side-by-each comparison: Churchill Mk. MMCC (green) to Challenger Mk II (grey) ;) ...
(https://i.imgur.com/9L0B7YI.jpg)
Churchill Upgrade_047
... and bow-on comparison
Somehow I don't thing the Challenger turret is all that much more accommodating to its crew than was the Churchill's ...
To my eye the hull is still recognisable as that of a Churchill's it's the turret that looks as though it's from a different era. Maybe a Crusader turret that's been widened a tad and had the rivets removed would suit it ? I say Crusader because it's already angled to some degree.
Meanwhile that "Churchill" turret might look good on a Centurion hull as an updated tank for modern armies that can't quite afford the latest gear ?
I'm not into armour these days so I have limited knowledge of the subject, but isn't the Conqueror the descendant of the Churchill
Quote from: Scotaidh on December 19, 2018, 01:35:46 AM
I personally despise smooth-bores as I regard it as a 'quick, cheap, & nasty' solution to gunnery, as well as a technological step backwards - what's next, re-issue of the Brown Bess musket?
The post-war trend to smoothbores started, IIRC, with the French, who realised that HEAT rounds work better if they aren't spinning. Rifled guns have to have the HEAT warhead mounted on ball-bearings to slow it's spinning down and that reduces the diameter of the charge, and HEAT effectiveness is directly proportional to diameter. This is why the British Army likes HESH so much: it actually gets
better for being spun (and is a generally useful HE round as a bonus).
Arguments in favour of smoothbores are:
1. HEAT effectiveness.
2. Barrel can be made and replaced in two pieces so the high-wear portion can be replaced more economically.
3. Same accuracy as rifled guns up to 2000m, which is beyond the typical European engagement distance. This is why British tanks with rifled guns accurate out to 3000m+ have sold so well in the Middle East with it's long, clear sight-lines. High-tech computerised aiming systems have significantly improved these numbers in the last couple of decades.
4. Easier to make guided rounds.
Having said all that, I prefer rifled guns (at least for high-velocity) too... ;)
Quote from: Scotaidh on December 22, 2018, 05:28:37 AM
Quote from: nighthunter on December 22, 2018, 05:21:42 AM
It's so SciFi looking
Thanks, but yes - you're right. It might as well be a hover tank armed with a rail gun, at this point - or (as those who read sci-fi armor stories will know) a "power gun".
Gauss Rifle, in other parlances, lol!
And, I'm calling this one done! A final pirouette for the camera, and off to her life as a display queen! :)
(https://i.imgur.com/6cTMpFV.jpg)
Churchill Upgrade_048
Original Churchill Mk VII and the new Churchill Mk MMCC, head on ...
(https://i.imgur.com/UikW78s.jpg)
Churchill Upgrade_049
... and the starboard flank ...
(https://i.imgur.com/RL6bJ0j.jpg)
Churchill Upgrade_051
... starboard stern aspect ...
(https://i.imgur.com/OUgf6IX.jpg)
Churchill Upgrade_052
... port rear view ...
(https://i.imgur.com/LpGwZIt.jpg)
Churchill Upgrade_053
... and finally, forward port quarter.
That's looking cool! :thumbsup:
Reminds me of the result of a hot night in the garage with a Churchill parked next to a M1?
Nice one - it certainly looks good now it's finished, and it'd make a nice JMN-teaser on a model-show stand as they tried to figure out what on Earth it was... :wacko: :thumbsup:
When they tried to upgrade the Churchill to a bigger turret ring, they had to widen the hull and the tracks and ended up with the Black Prince, which was rather overtaken by other developments. I wonder what the outcome might have been had the wider hull solution been adopted earlier in the Churchill's history, such as when they went from the Mk.III to the Mk.IV, for example.
Come out well