Author | Message |
---|---|
◊ 2017-01-21 22:21 |
In Tripoli![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Not sure what to interpret from the tank name ![]() - 1950s casual racism?? Or that particular tank was worse than the rest?? Two more same/similar in the sequence ![]() ![]() |
◊ 2017-01-21 22:53 |
here DSL, have a go of ID it http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/gb/A27L_Cruiser_MkVII_Centaur.php http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/gb/A27M_Cruiser_MkVIII_Cromwell.php http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/gb/A24_Cruiser_MkVII_Cavalier.php your only challenge is to figure it if this is a Cavalier, Centaur or a Cromwell ![]() -- Last edit: 2017-01-21 22:57:18 |
◊ 2017-01-21 23:02 |
If you leave the responsibility to me, I'll just toss a coin a couple of times .... |
◊ 2017-01-21 23:04 |
DSL let's get this methodical if you compare the graphics of the 3 types Crowwell (and later Centaur) had that distinct air intake behind the turret does the one you post it have it ? http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/gb/A27M_Cruiser_MkVIII_Cromwell.php -- Last edit: 2017-01-21 23:05:56 |
◊ 2017-01-21 23:16 |
and the biggest clue for the ID ![]() Centaur had no hull MG while the Cromwell did have it Centaur http://tank-photographs.s3-website-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/centaur-tank.jpg Cromwell Link to "www.tanks-encyclopedia.com" |
◊ 2017-01-21 23:20 |
So Cromwell?? I'll see if there's anything showing intake (or not) behind turret ..... |
◊ 2017-01-21 23:20 |
Cromwell it is no wonder most britsh tanks were ditched after american Sherman were available... even in middle of war they still have bolted turrets instead of welding ![]() and they had crazy designations too, here the complete one /vehicle_549415-Leyland-A27M-Cruiser-Tank-MkVIII-Cromwell-MkIV-1943.html -- Last edit: 2017-01-21 23:25:11 |
◊ 2017-01-21 23:58 |
No clear shot of rear of turret to show intake (or not). 2nd thumb is as good as it gets. |