Could Britain have deployed the heavily armoured Centurion MBT in time for the closing years of WWII? I know I could GOOGLE this, but I like to hear about from tank aficionados. :mrgreen:
She’s a beaut! sigh…
I was under the impression that a few were deployed during the close of WW2! Maybe I was wrong.
I did see a documentry about tanks on the discovery channel. One of the drivers of the centurion said it had to be one of the best tanks ever produced however he said it’s alot like learning to ride a bicycle backwards. :lol:
Opinions vary, but 5 or 6 CENTURION Mk 1, with 17 pdr and 20mm co-axial cannon, were rushed to the continent at the end of the war.
They arrives too late to see action.
If we had been able to field them in significant numbers a year earlier, then I think it quite possible that the conflict in Western Europe would have moved into Germany months sooner.
One of the telling holdups for Allied forces was the inability of our armour to punch through the German defences without significant losses, thus leaving too few resources to exploit any breaks.
Actually, information of the Centurion during WWII is limited and overshadowed by it’s contribution to warfare from Korea and the Sinai Desert to the jungles of Vietnam…
But development began in 1943, the first examples were rushed into production maybe in late 44.’ It would have been tough to get reliable examples fielded before mid 1945…
In any case, she was an excellent tank that favored crew survivability and adaptability. And I’d make love to her if I could… :lol:
From: “British and American Tanks of World War II”, by Peter Chamberlain and Chris Ellis, Arco Publishing Company, 1975, (p 52)
From: “British and American Tanks of World War II”, by Peter Chamberlain and Chris Ellis, Arco Publishing Company, 1975, (p 53)
Probably a latter variant of Centurion (Mk III?) with 83.4mm gun (20-pounder)
Centurion Variants still in service with Israel Defence Forces:
Nakpadon Heavy Armored Personnel Carrier
http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/vehicles/engineer_vehicles/nakpadon/Nakpadon.html
Nakpadon Heavy Armored Personnel Carrier
http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/vehicles/engineer_vehicles/nakpadon/Nakpadon.html
Both the Nagmachon and Nakpadon are burdened by excessive weight, the latter probably weighting as much as 55 tones. The Nagmachon retains the upgrades Centurion’s 750hp AVDS diesel. The Nakpadon uses the 900hp AVDS 1790-6A power pack of the Merkava Mk 1. The current suspension used by the vehicles is a hybrid, based on the cold Centurion system, but incorporating hydraulic bump stops. Road wheels tend to show signs of severe wear, wheel tires typically being almost totally destroyed by excessive thermal and mechanical loading. As funds become available, Merkava style suspension and all steel road wheels are being retrofitted.
The Nakpadon can take 10 troops more and it’s equipped with four M240 7.62mm machine guns and grenade launchers. Due to great armored protection, it is weighs 55 tons, being the VBI weighed already constructed. To compensate the weight, the engine 750 diesel AVDS of hp was changed by a AVDS used 1790-sa of 900 hp in the Merkava Mk 1.
Puma Heavy Armored Personnel Carrier
http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/vehicles/engineer_vehicles/puma/Puma.html
Puma Heavy Armored Personnel Carrier
http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/vehicles/engineer_vehicles/puma/Puma.html
Although the Nagmachon was a step forward compared to the Nagmasho’t, it was still a stop gap solution to fielding a satisfactory personnel carrier with enough protection to the crew and mounted soldiers. In the already acquainted way of ‘telescopic development’ a further carrier was developed using the Centurion chassis.
The result was a sleeker vehicle with a lower silhouette, in effect reducing the silhouette of the vehicle and therefore increasing its survivability. Survivability was further enhanced by using armor of the third generation, which was denser than the previous kinds of armor used.
The resulting vehicle had a major drawback, however as there was no rear entry or exit for the infantry troops. As a result, the mounted troops had to egress over the roof and the top of the hull, exposing the disembarking troops to enemy fire. The risk of exposing the troops was found to be a very important drawback so much that the vehicle was judged unsuited for the APC (armored personnel carrier) role.
At the same time, IDF’s Combat Engineer Force, had a requirement for a heavily protected vehicle to support their frontline tasks. It was decided to adapt the new vehicle to their task. The vehicle was named Puma, which is an acronym for Poretz Mokshim Handasati (minefield break through vehicle).
S!
Jesus, Eller…you live in a tank factory??? :lol: :lol:
You know anything about then…
:lol: :lol: :lol: …Oh no, just a long time interest of mine 
You should take my ‘how weapons work’ course, i just did an essay on comparing the T-72M versus the M1A1 Abrams.
The CENTURION BARV (Beach Armoured Recovery Vehicle) only retired from the British Army in the last few years, and one remains in service with the Royal Marines.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BARV
These pictures are from the Tanx Heaven site, which has some interesting pictures of other tanks as well:
have a look in the reference pictures, as many seem to be of real vehicles instead of models.
Thanks GEORGE. Excellent info there!
Hi “Student-scaley”
Is this a course that you are taking in the Army or a Military Academy? It sounds like a difficult one. Your essay on the T-72M versus the M1A1 Abrams must relate to their use in the recent Gulf Wars.
I hope that you do well on it.
Thanks for the links “FluffyBunnyGB”
Very interesting site.
I didn’t know that Ossie Orsbourn was interested in military history (see links below from tanxheaven.com).
Centurion Mk.1 (A41) UK
Pictures by Ossie Orsbourn
Bovington Tank Museum
http://tanxheaven.com/cent/a41mk1/a41mk1.htm
Centurion Mk.6 FV 4011 UK
pictures by Ossie Orsbourn
http://tanxheaven.com/cent/fv4011mk6/fv4011mk6.htm
And More
http://tanxheaven.com/referencepictures.htm
My pleasure Nick
I only regret that I could not find more on the early WWII variant of the Centurion. Later models are not a problem. The Tanxheaven site had some interesting photos though.
Hi “Student-scaley”
Is this a course that you are taking in the Army or a Military Academy? It sounds like a difficult one. Your essay on the T-72M versus the M1A1 Abrams must relate to their use in the recent Gulf Wars.
I hope that you do well on it.
-[/quote]
My course is War Studies at king’s College London, i got a 2:1 for it, not bad. I wasn’t looking at the Gulf, i was actually comparing their intended usage in the European theatre assesing how the relative doctrine of the US and Soviet Armies affected their tank design.
My pleasure Nick
I only regret that I could not find more on the early WWII variant of the Centurion. Later models are not a problem. The Tanxheaven site had some interesting photos though.
-[/quote]
Well, I had the same problem. I can only assume that none saw combat although a few were deployed for that reason…
I also know the Australians used the Centurion in Vietnam and favored it’s thick armor, and the way she could take a BP-40/RPG7 and still run…
Hi “Student-scaley”
Is this a course that you are taking in the Army or a Military Academy? It sounds like a difficult one. Your essay on the T-72M versus the M1A1 Abrams must relate to their use in the recent Gulf Wars.
I hope that you do well on it.
-[/quote]
My course is War Studies at king’s College London, i got a 2:1 for it, not bad. I wasn’t looking at the Gulf, i was actually comparing their intended usage in the European theatre assesing how the relative doctrine of the US and Soviet Armies affected their tank design.[/quote]
Congratulations
From what I’ve read at your college’s website, it appears to have a very high rating. Same goes for the Department of War Studies and the University of London as a whole.
Your topic is interesting too. It has been awhile since I have kept up with Russian armour development. Some generalities that I seem to remember were that Soviet tanks tended to be more cheaply made and thus wore out quicker than western designs. They were not used as much in training in order to preserve their service life. This in turn affected crew readiness and proficiency. The tanks had low profiles and low well shaped turrets in order to present as small a target as possible. They carried very large guns, but because of the limited space in the vehicles fewer rounds could be carried than in their western counterparts. They also had a slower rate of fire and their sights were not as good. The turret’s low profile also limited the angle at which the gun could be depressed. This factor prevented them from concealing as much of their vehicle when in defilade (hull-down) position as their western counterparts. Lack of air-conditioning also contributed to crew fatigue in warmer climates. The lack of return rollers to adjust track tension also made the treads susceptible to snapping from harmonic vibration when driving at top speed for sustained lengths of time. Their light weight did give them good power-to-weight ratio and good range. Much the opposite could have been said of their western counterparts, but at the price of being more expensive and fewer in number. … Just some generalities circa 1970’s-80’s. The situation has probably changed somewhat since then.
At any rate, I wish you continued success in your studies.
[quote=“Nickdfresh”]
My pleasure Nick
I only regret that I could not find more on the early WWII variant of the Centurion. Later models are not a problem. The Tanxheaven site had some interesting photos though.
-[/quote]
Well, I had the same problem. I can only assume that none saw combat although a few were deployed for that reason…
I also know the Australians used the Centurion in Vietnam and favored it’s thick armor, and the way she could take a BP-40/RPG7 and still run…[/quote]
The Centurion was also the favorite tank of Israel’s Armoured Corps during the 1973 Middle-East War. It gave a good account of itself on the Golan Heights in the early days of that war.
The South African Army also used the Centurion (called the “Oliphant”) into the 1990’s.
A very successful design indeed.
It dose sound like a very interesting thesis I hope you did well on it.
The Olifant may have been up-gunned, up-armoured, up-engined and had it’s electronics modernised, but it is still to all intents and purposes a Cent and the SADF treadheads at Tempe were pretty handy at using them - ask the Cubans and the Russians !
It was due to be replaced by the Olifant 2B, and when the terrs became the govt they ordered many of them.
However cash became a bit short when there are all those Swiss bank accunts to be filled, and this excellent design has been relegated to a test bed for future armour.
We’ll see just how long money takes to filter through to the SANDF. - Top tip: Don’t hold your breath !
The Olifant is still in use as the RSA’s MBT now - or rather those that are currently maintained (:roll: ) are , and unless something very odd happens will remain so for a long time to come.
[quote=“Cuts”]
The Olifant may have been up-gunned, up-armoured, up-engined and had it’s electronics modernised, but it is still to all intents and purposes a Cent and the SADF treadheads at Tempe were pretty handy at using them - ask the Cubans and the Russians !
It was due to be replaced by the Olifant 2B, and when the terrs became the govt they ordered many of them.
However cash became a bit short when there are all those Swiss bank accunts to be filled, and this excellent design has been relegated to a test bed for future armour.
We’ll see just how long money takes to filter through to the SANDF. - Top tip: Don’t hold your breath !
The Olifant is still in use as the RSA’s MBT now - or rather those that are currently maintained (:roll: ) are , and unless something very odd happens will remain so for a long time to come.[/quote]
Very interesting information Cuts. Thanks.
So they are still in service with SANDF - amazing. Do you know if the Centurion is still in service with Sweden and Denmark? As of mid-1990’s they were (along with Jordan, Singapore and Israel).
Switzerland had used them into the late 1980’s if I’m not mistaken.
The Danes binned their Cents maybe eighteen years back, and now use Leo 1A5 DK and Leo 2A4 (upgraded to 2A5.) The latter had a small tank battle in FRY during UNPROFOR, in fact I met one of the tankies from the unit involved when he was overseas and he gave me a good run down of the contact.
The remaining Swedish Cents are used for mobilisation only, the last crews being trained on that panzer in 2000.
Otherwise they have their Strv 121, (Leo 2A4,) and Strv 122 (Leo 2 improved) as MBTs.
The Swiss use the Pz87, (licence built Leo 2A5,) but have mounted a 140mm main armament.
I was fortunate enough to visit their MBT trg facility and they can now do the majority of their trg in simulators, a considerable saving on fuel, maintenance, etc.
They can ‘field’ a complete BG in the facility and a number of other countries, including the Germans and Swedes, send their crews to Thun for trg.