Talk:Cromwell tank

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.

Contents

[edit] Origin of name

Was it named for Oliver Cromwell or Thomas Cromwell or someone else? And if Oliver, how'd it happen the name was changed from Cavalier to the leader of the Roundheads? -- orthogonal 12:26, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Rich tea man - the cavalier was the same hull but with the suspeension form the crusader. the cromwell and centaurs had a new suspension system. also there was an upsized crusader called the covenanter but was only used for training . The cavalier, centaur and cromwell were developments of this.

The Covenanter was *smaller* than the Crusader, although both were developed at the same time and shared the same turret design. DMorpheus 19:53, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
It would be Oliver as Thomas wasn't a fighting man. The "C" names all have a martial air to them, Churchill can also be taken as referring to the Duke of Marlborough and weren't picked with any particular party sensibility. GraemeLeggett 08:12, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Chice of image to illustrate

I'm not happy with the current image "Cromwell tank color.JPG".

  • Main gun - although the muzzle looks right it appears to be welded solid onto the front of the turret and lacks the co-axial Besa MG
  • Hull machine gun - a metal tube too long and fat for to be a Besa MG.

We need a better piccie for the article than this one - if we have to stick with it for the moment it should at least have some appropiate commentary added. GraemeLeggett 11:54, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Help

I need to know a lot about this tank. Please tell me what you know.

I'm pretty sure the bulk of what we can tell you is already in the article, with additional material on the external links. If that's not sufficient, you'll probably need to borrow or purchase a book on it. Oberiko 01:56, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Surviving vehicles?

Would it be of value, with quite rare armour such as this, if we had a subsection entitled surviving vehicles where a list of known tanks could be seen.--Gaspode the Wonder Dog 17:27, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

I suppose it depends on the number of them. If there are under ten, then it could contribute, but to much more then that and it starts overwhelming the article. The best solution would be to post a link to an external site which contains such information. Oberiko 23:33, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
I agree about the danger of overwhelming the article but on the other hand the sites that list surviving tanks are always lacking in detail and invariably incomplete. I think that this is just the sort of thing Wikipedia is good at. Worst case scenario if they got too big they could make their own page. Unless there’s any strong objections I’ll give it a try and see who it works for the Cromwell.--Gaspode the Wonder Dog 08:38, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
The armour world appears to lack a website as effective as britishaircraft.co.uk for listing survivors.GraemeLeggett 09:53, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] fastest ???

>The Cromwell was the fastest tank to serve in WW2 IS the word 'British' missed there ? 60 kmph cannot be the fastest tank! Just compare it to BT-7

The BT-7 maximum speed is running on roadwheels with tracks off; its more of an armoured car then.GraemeLeggett 10:09, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Continued use of the Liberty

Am I right in understanding that this continued to be used when it was somewhat past its best because Lord Nuffield had a vested interest in its continued production? I've heard something to this effect a couple of times but am unfortunately a bit short on remembering any useful details, but the impression I'm left with is that Nuffield could have produced Merlins instead of the Liberty but wouldn't, leading to the production of the somewhat underpowered A27L. If true, it sounds rather scandallous, but if false (or at least unsubstantiated or POV) obviously it's not something that could go in the article. Does anybody know anything more?
-- Chris (blather • contribs) 14:49, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't know anything about this particular case, but two things come to mind. First, you'll never be able to prove it one way or the other. Second, it wouldn't be the first time something like this was done. Military procurement is no more honest than anything else, and it would be naive to think that in wartime everyone puts aside their profit motives. Ever notice how many Ford trucks the Wehrmacht drove?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by DMorpheus (talk • contribs) 15:58, 1 September 2006 (UTC).
I think I'm easily shocked because I'm sometimes too naive and prone to assume good faith inappropriately! But the mention of those two dreaded words, "military procurement", soon disabuses me of such notions...
-- Chris (blather • contribs) 16:06, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cromwell in the IDF

From Moshe Givati - In their hands the steel was tempered [MoD 1998, p 20-21, 42]: Haganah members persuaded four British soldiers to desert with four Cromwell tanks; those were the last tanks that remained in a tank battalion camp in Haifa airport. On night 29/30 June 1948 three tanks were stolen (the engine of the fourth one didn't start); one got stuck in sand and was abandoned; the remaining two (Mk III and Mk IV) were brought to the Borochov neighborhood of Givatayim and hidden there from the British. The tanks were assigned to the 8th Armored Brigade (82th battalion, heavy tanks company) before Operation Danny (July 1948). The tanks were used in that operation, including an unsuccessful attack on Latrun on 18 July, and in some subsequent operations.

According to Oleg Granovskiy - Names, Designations and Service Figures of IDF Armored Vehicles (Russian; http://www.waronline.org/IDF/Articles/Armor/1948-1952_tanks.html), the tanks were retired in 1952.

The Armored Corps Museum in Latrun (Yad la-Shiryon) has two Cromwells: one with dummy gun Image:Cromwell-latrun-2.jpg and other Image:Cromwell-latrun-memorial-1.jpg which is a part of the WWII memorial along with Sherman and T-34-85 Image:WWII-Memorial-latrun-1.jpg. Wheteher these are the "original" two, I don't know. Bukvoed 10:13, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Imperial / metric

Being that this is a British vehicle, shouldn't the units be in metric first, and imperial second? Oberiko 13:53, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

They're known as Imperial units for a reason, and the UK hasn't quite gone wholly metric yet. GraemeLeggett 14:29, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Maybe, but they're officially metric and it looks like most other British vehicles have metric before imperial. Oberiko 17:01, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../c/r/o/Talk%7ECromwell_tank_d542.html"