The gun’s elevation was not mechanical or geared in any way. It was almost cylindrical (slightly sloped) and large enough to accommodate the main gun and a coaxial machine-gun, as well as the gunner, loader, and commander. The hydraulically-powered three man fully traversing turret was cast in one solid piece of hardened steel.
This was a simpler set up which did not require the huge armored box to the right of the gun, it also meant the deletion of the steam port on the turret roof. Later models would have this replaced by the famous BESA 7.92 mm Machine Gun. These models are identified by a large armored block to the right of the gun, and a cast outlet on top of the turret for the steam given off by the Vickers MG to vent through. Early models of the Tank were equipped with a coaxial Vickers Water-Cooled. Generally, tanks of the time were equipped with a 37 or 47 mm (1.46-1.85 in) gun. The caliber seemed sufficient against most tanks of the time. The Matilda was a 60,000 lbs (27 tonnes) machine, armed with the new Ordnace QF 2-Pounder (40 mm, 1.57 in) gun. This was one of the many derivatives of the licence-built Swedish Bofors gun, which had an excellent rate of fire. However, it was too lightly protected to serve as an infantry tank. It incorporated twin diesel AEC C1 engines and a QF 3-pdr (47 mm/1.85 in) antitank gun. The third and last prototype, the A.7E3 (1933-37), probably had the biggest influence on the Matilda. It also had an impact on the A.14, A.16 and ultimately the Valentine. They were built from 1929 to 1933, incorporating elements which largely influenced the A.9 Cruiser Mk.I (notably the turret), and the A.12 Matilda, including the drivetrain, suspension, and part of the armor design. Three prototypes of the A.7 Medium Tank were built by Vickers, requested internally for potential Army contracts. The A.11 will be called Infantry Tank Mark I. This article will use the Matilda designation for the Infantry Tank Mark II (A.12). All that can be said is that they share a vague visual resemblance. The two vehicles shared almost nothing from the design or development points of view. It similarly shows the Infantry Tank Mark II being named Matilda, with the proposal to redesignate it as the Matilda II. There is a document, “‘Cabinet Officer Papers 120/354 August 1940 to September 1942: Tank Nomenclature and Classification”, that shows the Infantry Tank Mark I as being named the Matilda after June 1941 and proposing the use of Matilda I instead. There are similar designations used for the Infantry Tank Mark II as well, being called the Matilda Mk.II, Matilda II or Matilda Senior. By that time, the Infantry Tank Mark I was out of production and relegated as a training vehicle only. However, there is little proof that such designations were used for this vehicle officially before 1941.
Many sources claim that the Infantry Tank Mark I was also known as the Matilda, with several name variations being given, like Matilda Mk.I, Matilda I or Matilda Junior. If you spot anything out of place, please let us know! Hello dear reader! This article is in need of some care and attention and may contain errors or inaccuracies. A production order came soon after, Vulcan Foundry having to build the first batch of 140 units until mid-1938. The final A.12 prototype trials were passed with urgency. In fact, the A.12 was completely different from its “little brother” in terms of size, weight, drivetrain, armament and crew.ĭevelopment at the Royal Arsenal, Woolwich (which already designed the A.7) lasted until 1938 when war seemed highly plausible. During the very same year, another parallel specification (A.12) asked for a larger, better-armed model, derived from the A.7 prototype. The former Infantry Tank Mk.I was a product of the 1929 financial crisis, a rather limited and compromised vehicle, badly suited to real battlefield operations. Infantry Tank – 2,987 Built A complete overhaul of the infantry tank concept
0 kommentar(er)
