Cromwell Mk. VI - The Close Support Cromwell

[Raptor5255]

[Would you like to see this in-game?]

• Yes
• No

Cromwell Mk. VI on a Type F hull. The Type F had sideways swinging hatches for the two hull crewmen which meant that there were now only two hull stowage boxes from the original four on the earliest hull designs and three on the rest. To compensate for this, two stowage boxes were attached to the turret sides. This tank is also fitted with a Normandy exhaust cowl. - IWM (KID 961)

History
The Mk. VI was a Close Support variant of the A27M Cromwell which mounted the OQF 95mm Tank Howiter Mk. I capable of firing Smoke, HE, and Hollow Charge (HEAT) shells. The standard ammunition loadout that crews trained with was 28 (55%) High Explosive, 18 (35%) Smoke, and 5 (10%) Hollow Charge rounds.

The howitzer itself was originally developed by taking part of the barrel of a QF 3.7-inch anti-aircraft gun, the breech mechanism of the 25 pounder howitzer, and the recoil mechanism of the 6 pounder anti-tank gun while the ammunition was modified from that of the QF 3.7-inch mountain howitzer.

341 Mk. VIs were built across C, D, E, and F Type hulls and were given to the Squadron HQs of the Armoured and Recce Regiments at the rate of two vehicles per HQ (*Armoured and Recce Regiments of 7th Armoured Division, the Recce Regiments of Guards, 11th, and 1st Polish Armoured Divisions, and the Armoured Regiment of 1st Czechoslovak Independent Armoured Brigade).

In-game
I think the Mk. VI would be best suited at a BR of 3.0 or 3.3 as, while it’s as speedy as the other Cromwells and has decent penetration, it would also have a slower reload and muzzle velocity. These characteristics combined with the nature of HEAT shells means it would be overall more difficult to use effectively than the 75mm or 6pdr tanks.

Depending on what changes are made to the tree in the future it could either be foldered with the Crusaders or with the other two Cromwells.

Ideally, I think it would make a great addition alongside the Centaur Mk. IV as an upgrade from the Centaur and foldered with it.

Specifications
Crew - 5
Weight - 28t
Length - 20’-9”
Width - 10’
Height - 7’-8”
Engine - Rolls-Royce Meteor 27L V12 (600hp)
Max speed - 32mph (52km/h) to 40mph (64 km/h) depending on hull Type.

Armament
OQF 95mm Tank Howitzer Mk. I - (Ammo: 51)
2x Besa 7.92mm MG - 1 co-axial, 1 hull-mounted - (Ammo: 4950)
2-inch Bomb Thrower - Smoke - (Ammo: 24 bombs)
Max elevation/depression - +20/-12.5
Magnification - 1.9x-3.5x

Cromwell Mk. VI abandoned at Villers-Bocage being checked out by the Germans. This photo gives a good view of the different aperture and mantlet of the 95mm armed tanks.

Ammunition
Shell H.E./A.T. - Hollow Charge - 50/50 Pentolite - 110mm penetration at 30 degrees to vertical (approx. 127mm at 90 degrees) with a muzzle velocity of 1̶0̶7̶5̶ ̶f̶t̶/̶s̶e̶c̶ ̶(̶3̶2̶7̶ ̶m̶/̶s̶e̶c̶)̶ 1700 ft/sec (518 m/sec) as per image of manual kindly supplied by l2ulan.
Shell Mk. IA - High Explosive - Filled with Amatol - 1050 ft/sec (320 m/sec)
Shell SE Mk. I - Smoke - 655 ft/sec (199.6 m/sec)

Armour
Hull Front - 64mm
Upper Hull Nose - 30mm
Lower Hull Nose - 57mm
Hull Sides Upper - 44mm
Hull Sides Lower - 32mm+14mm
Hull Rear - 32mm
Hull Roof - 20mm
Engine Deck - 14mm
Turret Front - 64mm+12.7mm carbon manganese backing plate
Turret Sides - 51mm+12.7mm carbon manganese backing plate
Turret Rear - 44mm+12.7mm carbon manganese backing plate
Turret Roof - 20mm

Images

A Cromwell VI CS of 11th Armoured Division on the quayside at Travemunde on the Baltic, 3 May 1945. - IWM (BU 5278)

Cromwell tanks of 7th Armoured Division in Hamburg, 3 May 1945. - IWM (BU 5103)

Cromwell, Sherman, and Challenger tanks of 8th Hussars, the armoured reconnaissance regiment of 7th Armoured Division, massing at Brunen in preparation for the next stage of the advance into Germany, 29 March 1945. In the foreground is a Mk. VI. - IWM (BU 2729)

Captain L Cotton MM with his Cromwell VI tank, ‘Old Bill’, and crew of 4th County of London Yeomanry, 7th Armoured Division, 17 June 1944. - IWM (B 5682)

Vehicles crossing a scissor bridge near Raamsdonck - IWM (A70 189-2) IWM (A70 189-3)

Sources
Cromwell Series Tanks (Cromwell VI and Centaur IV) - British Wartime Manual - images of manual kindly supplied by l2ulan
British Battle Tanks: British-Made Tanks of World War II - David Fletcher
Cromwell Tank: Vehicle History and Specification - David Fletcher
Cromwell and Centaur Tanks British Army and Royal Marines North-West Europe 1944-1945 - Dennis Oliver
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wUWTjJq1so - Tank Chats #32 Cromwell | The Tank Museum
Churchill Tank: Vehicle History and Specification - David Fletcher (Information on 95mm Howitzer)
<95mm Howitzer armed Churchills - 95mm Howitzer armed Churchills. - S. Osfield (Information on 95mm Howitzer)
Panzerserra Bunker- Military Scale Models in 1/35 scale: Cromwell - A27 cruiser tank - case report
A27M Cruiser Mk.VIII Cromwell (1943)
Cromwell tank - Wikipedia
Ordnance QF 95 mm howitzer - Wikipedia

[FlyingOstridge]

Thought they only wacked a 95 mil on a Centaur. Very cool. Very Naice.

[PlayedStatue626-live]

+1 for all the Cromwells

[Ghostmaxi]

@Raptor5255

Shell H.E./A.T. - Hollow Charge - 110mm penetration at 30 degrees to vertical with a muzzle velocity of 1075 ft/sec (327 m/sec). 50/50 Pentolite.

Isnt that the same as in game? In game it has 110 at 90°.

[John_Sneeeeeeeew]

+1 need more CS tanks

[Raptor5255]

No, the values for the Alecto are incorrect. The 110mm figure is for a hit at 30° so for 90° it should be about 127mm of penetration.

The Alecto’s muzzle velocities are also incorrect as the Mk. II (for infantry) and Mk. III (for SPs) used bag charges within the case with the option of using 1-3 bags to alter the projectile’s range. The Mk. I fitted to the Centaur, Cromwell, and Churchill used a single-piece fixed round which is why its velocity is different.

A bug report was submitted for the Alecto’s underperforming HEAT a few years back. I don’t know if it was ever acknowledged but obviously nothing’s been done to fix it.

[Raptor5255]

It catches a lot of people out but the gunner’s sight on the turret roof and the hull mg (or lack of) are the main ways to differentiate them as shown here.

At the very least, if it’s got a Type F hull (sideways swinging hatches for both hull crew) you know it’s definitely not a Centaur.

[Raptor5255]

Mk. VI of 7th Armoured Division passing an abandoned RSO in Borken, Germany. Interesting that it’s got one half of a spare sprocket on either side of the turret.

IWM (A70 286-3)

[jon_man1199]

A +1 from me! More Cromwells for the win!

[WalletWorrier]

+1, I’d have it foldered under the Centaur

[l2ulan]

Big +1, 95mm vehicles are sorely missing from the UK TT, as are the Centaurs (and Cavalier) in general.

If I may I make a suggestion;

PS;

Gun sights fall below the default threshold, so would default to 1.9x-3.5x.

PPS;

Don’t forget the 2in bomb thrower and rear smoke generators!

[Raptor5255]

Thanks! That’d be my preference too and I don’t see any reason why that couldn’t be the case. Players have wanted the Centaur IV for ages and the VI is the perfect follow on for it.

[Raptor5255]

Thanks! I really need to get myself copies of these manuals. I notice it puts the muzzle velocity for the HEAT at 1700f/ps which is much more in-line with what I’d expect. I wonder if Fletcher and Harley accidentally combined the HEAT and HE to get 1075? Either way I’ll update my post accordingly.

I don’t see the PLM mount and the Vickers or Bren being added in anytime soon unfortunately, but I certainly wouldn’t mind seeing them added as a modification!

I didn’t even think about the bomb thrower but I hope that would be a given to be included. Like the PLM I don’t think we’ll see the smoke candles soon either but that’s another feature I’d very much like to see. Could even give the German mains a run for their money with setting smoke off.

For anyone who’s unaware of the smoke emitters, here’s a photo of the Germans testing them on Roy Dunlop’s tank near Villers-Bocage following the fighting there.

[l2ulan]

I have a report for the muzzle velocity on the 95 mm HEAT and Smoke rounds, feel free to support it.

Haven’t read Fletcher & Harley, tbh I try to only deal in primary sources. Maybe a wrong unit conversion?

The PLM is a rare sight but does get about. Would be lovely to see it in the Ground game as even the individual GO has a monstrous rate of fire.

@nathanclawfish made a bundle of reports for the inoperable smoke dischargers on British WW2 vehicles a while back, worth giving your support as having them in a WW2 match would mean they were actually good for something.

1. Challenger currently missing its ESS smoke dischargers
2. Avenger currently missing its ESS smoke dischargers
3. etc

[Raptor5255]

+1’d all three. Fingers crossed we’ll eventually get them.

It comes from British Battle Tanks: British-Made Tanks of World War II which is a decent book but I think it’s essentially a collection of info from some of Fletcher’s older books and just slightly updated and reformatted. It’s fine for it’s purpose but clearly isn’t to be taken as gospel.

I’ll admit I’m quite a fan of the double mounts sometimes seen on the Humber Scout Cars.

[Sea_Harrier_FRS1]

+1. Could we also get a Cromwell Mk.3 suggestion going? I want 600hp Cromwell with the 6pdr

[Raptor5255]

I might look into it but then we’re running the risk of me making suggestions for every Mk. of every tank that’s not been suggested yet…

…they’ve been surprisingly fun to research and type up

[WalletWorrier]

How is the Mk 3 different from the Mk I? The Mk I has 600hp and 6-pounder

[l2ulan]

Presumably later Marks may be more likely to carry the 6 pdr Mk 5 rather than the Mk 3 as modelled, but all 6 pdrs in the game use Mk 5 stats anyway so a Cromwell III would be functionally identical to the Cromwell I.

[FlyingOstridge]

Wrong.