Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Armor Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: British tank names
AussieEngineer    5/8/2005 9:18:10 AM
Most british tanks since the beginning of WW2 have names starting with C, crusader, cromwell, churchill, centurion, cheiftan and now challenger. Is this related to the idea of cruiser tanks, as cruiser begins with C? Also why the shift in names from leaders to "challenger"?
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3   NEXT
MERKAVAbestinworld    RE:matilda, valentine, stuart.   5/14/2005 8:39:35 PM
Naming tanks with "c" starting words comes, I think, from a naval tradition dating around 1900 of naming ships made during the same period or from the same family with same letter starting words: Albion, Argonaut, Abukir, Amphitrite, Andromeda, Agamenon, Arrogant, Astraes, Apollo, Aeolus, Andromache, Ariadne;Indefatigable, Intrepid, Iphogenia, Ilustrious, Irresistible, Implacable; Repulse, Ramilles, Resolution, Revenge, Royal Oak, Rainbow, Retribution
 
Quote    Reply

shawn    RE:matilda, valentine, stuart.   5/15/2005 4:50:25 AM
For British naming nomenclature, I think the the use of 'C' stems from these tanks originating from the Cruiser line of 1939-1940 Cruiser, Convenator, Cromwell, Centeur, Crusader, Comet, Challenger, Centurion and Chieftian. Obvious odd-men out are the Churchill and Conqueror - although I think the infantry Churchill was more in homage to Sir Winston (who you could never describe as having a 'cruiser' type character, battleship more likely) than to keeping with naming conventions at that time. For aircraft naming - I admit I went a bit overboard, especially with the Lightning - I blame late night web surfing as an excuse. But American naming nomenclature at the time, however, was not standardised. The Curtis P-36, for example, had the Hawk as a marketing name, so all models were called 'Hawk', including the P-40 (P-36 with in-line engine). The Bewster Buffalo also had its nickname given to it while in Brisith service, as did the Douglas Boston. I am unsure as to whether the B-24 Liberator ganied its name first in USAAF or RAF service, although a couple of web sources seems to indicate that it gained the name in British service: http://www.b24.net/aircraft.htm "In March 1939 the US Army Air Corps ordered seven YB-24s, and these were delivered in 1940 with additional fuel and equipment and pneumatic de-icer boots, but without fixed outer-wing slots. Only a month later, in April 1939, the French ordered 175 Model 32s in a version designated 32B7, but that country collapsed before delivery and the UK took on this contract, while ordering 165 on its own account. Of the 165, 25 were retained by the US Army and eventually 139 were delivered to the RAF as the LB-30 (Liberator British type 30), with the British designation Liberator Mk II." http://www.acepilots.com/planes/b24.html "The Army ordered 120 examples of the B-24A in mid-1939. Twenty of these ended up in British service, known as Liberator I. "
 
Quote    Reply

AlbanyRifles    Shawn   5/15/2005 10:15:19 AM
I gotta go dig up my book on the USSAF in WW II which talked specifically about the developmen tof the B-24. I seem to recall that the Liberator was a company name. Industry often came up with the name which was adopted buy the military. So when it entered Brit service, it already had the name. The Douglas Boston was the British name for the Douglas A-20 Havoc.....it started out as the DB-7 (Douglas Bomber Model 7) for the French Air Force. So while the British called it the Boston, the USAAF called it the Havoc. This also flows to the name Liberator I and Liberator II. The Brits did not use the letter/number designation of the US. It was a name followed by a Roman numeral. It usually was the name that the US (whether military or corporation) had given the plane. As for the Buffalo......you can have that.
 
Quote    Reply

flamingknives    RE:British Tank Nomenclature   5/15/2005 1:25:00 PM
British 1930's-1940's Nomenclature was a horrible morass. The US system, while confusing to a novice, (e.g. The Bradley is M2, M3 and M6, umpteen versions of the Humvee are various strings of alphanumeric gibberish) is at least logical and internally consistant.
 
Quote    Reply

shawn    RE:British Tank Nomenclature   5/16/2005 3:23:55 PM
flamingknives said: "British 1930's-1940's Nomenclature was a horrible morass. The US system, while confusing to a novice, (e.g. The Bradley is M2, M3 and M6, umpteen versions of the Humvee are various strings of alphanumeric gibberish) is at least logical and internally consistant." While you are referring to the current US system, the system that it replaced could have thought the British lessons in confusion. There was an: M1 carbine, M1 rifle, M1 submachinegun, M1 combat car, M1 76mm tank gun, M1 155mm Howitzer, M1 8 inch Howitzer, M1 240mm Howitzer, M3 light tank, M3 medium tank, M3 75mm tank gun, M3 90mm tank gun, M3 half-track, M3A1 reconnaissance vehicle, M3 Carbine and M3 submachinegun! Then there's the derivatives, such as the M4A3E8. Add into the mix two .30 inch bullet calibres, (.30 cal rifle, and .30 cal Carbine), and you kinda know why the US Army had to have the best quartermaster corps of World War 2...
 
Quote    Reply

AlbanyRifles    RE:British Tank Nomenclature   5/16/2005 3:44:06 PM
Ah, but see, within the US Army, that was not confusing. You left out the M1 helmet. Seriously, it was not a problem. In the Amry of WW II, if you said M1, people knew you meant the rifle. The others were always referred to by their caliber. Same with the other items...the type of unit your were in was what you said....but the M1 howitzer was usually called The Pig, and the rest were unprintable. The derivatives were just later marks and how they were designated. The Brits would us Cromwell Mk VIII or something which an American would find confusing but Americans liked their systems just fine. And there was a real difference between the 30-06 rifle cartidge and bullet and the .300 Winchester carbine round. Once again, it was not hard to keep separate. And BTW, aren't .303 (rifle and BREN) and 7.92 (BESA MG) two different .30 caliber bullets?
 
Quote    Reply

Yimmy    RE:British Tank Nomenclature   5/16/2005 8:05:27 PM
"And BTW, aren't .303 (rifle and BREN) and 7.92 (BESA MG) two different .30 caliber bullets?" I'm not quite sure what you mean by that. But, .303 isn't a .30 cal bullet, it is .311. I assume the 7.92mm round you mean is the German one, not .30 cal either.
 
Quote    Reply

AlbanyRifles    Yimmy   5/17/2005 11:52:43 AM
My point was that the .303 caliber rifle round was a different round than the 7.92 BESA vehicle machine gun....both are rifle caliber rounds used in machine guns but were different calibers....just drawing out the point that there was the same thing in the UK Army which the US Army was accused of. And to be more particular (and semantical), the US only used 30-06 in all of our light machine guns and rifles. We used a .300 Winchester in our carbine...not a rifle cartridge.
 
Quote    Reply

oldbutnotwise    RE:Yimmy   5/17/2005 12:30:25 PM
not quite as simple as that, the besa was only fitted to tanks not provided to infantry the standard rounds for the footies were the .303 for the lee enfield, .303 for the Bren, .303 for the vickers, .303 for the lewis 9mm for the sten and lancaster and 38 for the revolvers, the besa was 7.92mm and 17mm ps the Churchill was not named after winston but john according to official channels
 
Quote    Reply

oldbutnotwise    RE:Yimmy   5/17/2005 12:33:42 PM
corection the besa was 7.92 and 15mm not as i said 17 sorry
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics