Matilda Infantry Tank Mark III with OQF 6 Pdr Mk.III

[Would you like to see this in-game?]
  • Yes
  • No
0 voters
                  Matilda Infantry Tank Mark III with  OQF 6 Pdr Mk.III 

Vehicle design and service history:

The Matilda was a respectable infantry tank during the early second world war, but as the armour thickness of german armour progressed the 2-pounder became increasingly ineffective at its role as an anti-tank weapon. Because of this attempts were made with most British tanks in service at the time to upgrade them to carry the QF 6-pounder so that it could effectively engage the enemy enemy armour along with having a more effective HE shell for Close support. Unfortunately in regards to the Matilda, the small cast turret made this impossible, whilst still maintaining crew ergonomics.

The small size of the Matilda’s turret was initially intended to save weight, as well as properly balance the gun. Due to this, it would not be suitable for straightforward up-gunning regardless of how desirable that would be. This created a conundrum where the only alternative would be to fit a larger turret, with a proposed solution involving the fitting of a 6-pounder mounted in a A24/27 cruiser tank turret. This combination would not be straightforward, as the turret ring for the A27 was 57 inches in diameter compared to that of 54 for the Matilda, but existing photographic evidence does prove the two were mated, either through enlarging the Matilda’s turret ring or superimposing it onto the hull in a similar manner to a Churchill Mark III prototype of a similar vein. This prototype would never end up being anything more than a footnote though, as by the time it was tested in 1942 the desired role it would have filled was already fulfilled by the Valentine MK IX, which could carry the 6-pounder in a well-protected turret.

Vehicle Specification:

Weight 24 tons

Length 6.0 m

Width 2.6 m

Height 2.46 m

Crew 4 (driver, gunner, loader, commander)

Armour 20 to 78 mm max

Main armament OQF 6 pounder - L36,5 - 64 rounds

Sec. armament 2x 7.92 mm Besa machine gun 2,925 rounds

Engine 2X Leyland 6 cyl. Diesel engines rated at 180 HP total

Transmission Wilson epicyclic pre-selector gearbox, 6 speeds

Suspension Coil spring

Operational range 257 km

Speed 26 km/h (on road)

Steering system Rackham clutch

Additional image showing side profile:

Sources:

4 Likes

hell yeah

1 Like

This looks hilarious. +1

1 Like

Definite +1 for me

1 Like

A much better-suited armament for the Matilda. Encountering the current Matilda III at low tier is a nightmare with their thick armor. Likewise, when playing it the gun is so sad to use and you just end up being a bullet sponge. The discrepancy between armor and firepower has been a long-standing problem with some vehicles in this game.

The 6-pdr should create a much better balance between the armor and firepower and make this new Matilda far more enjoyable to play.

2 Likes

I’d love to see this tank regardless but think about the uptiers. Then your mobility trade-off for better armour would be worthless and the you may as well take out a Cromwell 1 or a Sherman 2 anyway. I’ve also never really had much of a problem with the 2-pounder since at 2.7 there’s still a lot of light tanks even if you’re not in a downtier and the reload is great.

I wonder what BR it’d be at.

+1

So it would be just a worse verion of the Matilda. Worse turret, worse gun…

wouldnt the gun be better?

2 Likes

No. it only uses solidshot, which is horrible.
The 2pdr at least has a decent APHE.

I’m afraid it’s a resounding no from me, there is just too little information to suggest this was ever a proposed gun tank, and not either one of the remotes or a similar test bed. which matildas were used for. not only is there a lack of a coax which was a major nono, but by the time this was done matilda parts were becoming scarce and Vulcans etc had moved on, so it would seem very unlikely they would take such a step backwards. add to this that the thing is never mentioned in tank board minutes or dtd minutes would indicate more that it was signals or mexe in charge. one thing for certain is its not the black prince as that has been fully covered

2 Likes

This is a nonsense.

The game already has a lot of vehicles that only had a single prototype, or even vehicles that were not finished, or vehicles with very little known information.

2 Likes

yes it does, and good, but this is NOT a prototype tank, but likely part of the signals black prince project which included remote control dummy target tanks. if Gaijin implement it as a tank - which is unlikely, and it turns out it is the dummy target tank then they will remove it, which is an expensive endeavour for them. The vehicle followed on from the Edward and Oswald models in 1938 before being cancelled complete in 1942
image


image

1 Like

None of the fake vehicles were removed, only some were access restricted, but you can still research/buy a bunch of them.
Both Ho-Ri, Ostwind II, Kugelblitz turret rotation, E-100, Kronshtadt, R2Y2 just to name a few.

Yes but at least E100 was a tank etc., not a remote-controlled target…

there are any number of vehicles not added but going out of the way to add a tank…that’s not a tank…might be a stretch

2 Likes

None of the documents you provided prove that the tank in OP’s post is a remote controlled one.

Also, even if it were a remote controlled tank, why the heck would they swap the turret? it makes no sense.

1 Like

The steering system and controls.

the initial set was Oswald and Edward, these were in Vickers light tanks
the system was pretty crude and very bulky. it worked by a series of servo arms and air bottles that inflated and deflated rubber balloons that were used to push and pull tillers and brakes.
this led to space problems, hence they moved to a larger vehicle and plonked this lump on top
the 6pdr gun is a fake, there is no coaxial, the upper scopes are removed there is no cupola etc.

The purpose of black prince was to be driven by a crewman squished in, who would then get out near a front line, the vehicle would then be driven by remote control to draw enemy fire and identify where anti tank guns were, ideas such as flamethrowers were mooted but never tested. the valentine black prince was built but that was a crewed vehicle.

2 Likes

Valentine BP?!

Anyway, why does the turret changed on the Matilda BP then?

If it is meant to draw enemy fire, why would they put a less protected turret on top (which was needed for Cromwell tanks), with a more potent gun that would never be used, and most likely be destroyed too. It would be just wasting resources.

And not just that, but also the converting from original turret to Cromwell turret would take up many manhours of work too.

valentine BP is the flamethrower vall’s tested by PWD

The turret is big enough to hold all the gear in it. - this is clunky stuff, and you still need to fit a crewman in there to drive it to its departure point.

the turret is odd for sure. but the gun would be a dummy weapon. the 6pdr was in desperately short supply for every vehicle, let alone for tinkering and such.
sadly as with nearly all these papers that survived the ‘see attached drawings and photos etc’ did not. spend enough time in the archives and you get used to it I guess.

one telling feature is the lack of cutout under the gun for depression and the lack of a coaxial, the brits were obsessed with tanks having a coaxial or bow gun - very much not added here

while there are plenty of surviving tests on the matilda BP, tests, dates, what wires. fuses and gubbins it needed the pictures are what is needed, if they survive, and where to find them.
there is a lot more on beetle that carried over when BP was stopped

3 Likes

After chatting with Ed, I have to agree putting a hold on this until more information is found. If this was intended as a gun tank then it’s fine as it falls under the partial prototype category.

If it does end up being a fake turret purely intended to hold the Black Prince remote control equipment then it shouldn’t be added.