Chieftain build by Phil Woollard.

[John Clarke]

I can only answer that with the word "WHY". The Morris 1000, my first car. Handled dreadful, electrics woeful, heater awful, if you didn't maintain the swivel pins, the front wheels fell off. The only thing I can remember that was good about it was that you could dismantle most of it with a 1/2 inch AF spanner.
But getting back to the thread, "Chieftain Build by Phil Woollard " if you have any influence over the detailed parts that will be supplied with the kit. Can you ask for components like the head lamps, Spot lamp etc fittings to be hollowed out with bezels supplied, Solid lumps like below are a pain to convert.

[Phil Woollard]

Now that's a beast John, see you alone have experience of owning one already so you know what you are talking about! Reference influence and asking, you have just asked so job done, I'm sure the powers to be at HQ are listening intently to our requests and they will do what they can in the given envelope. I do agree for a few more seconds on the big 5 axis machine little touches like that make all the difference.

[Mark Heaps]

Most breakdowns on any armoured vehicle were due to leaks. They were not used enough to ensure the seal got lubricated and held. The fitter section vehicles very rarely broke down, not because they were being better looked after but they generally got more use in barracks, trundling up and down the tank park to lift decks or packs.

[Phil Woollard]

Thank you Mark, I looked at buying a 432 a while back, the owner had cut the fire wall out between the engine and the crew compartment so that he could get to the frequent leaks without taking the pack out every five minutes. He had used a gas axe and made a right mess of it!

[Mark Heaps]

Rumour had it that one unit in germany had a test track around the perimeter of the camp with a lot of railway sleepers to really exercise the running gear regularly and they had extremely few breakdowns, and the CO had so much of a private income that he paid for the extra track mileage his vehicles did.

Cannot vouch whether it was true or just duty rumour.

[Phil Woollard]

I,m starting at the beginning with my research of the Chieftain, it makes for fascinating reading and you find lots of interesting images on the interweb.

[Phil Woollard]

I am considering installing the L60 motor, gear box and the auxiliary/ generator motor but have no idea as yet if there will be enough room once the electric motors and gearboxes are fitted.

[Phil Woollard]

The four 58 webbing kits arrived yesterday, they just need packing out, I will make the poncho rolls which could also be used around the vehicle for photo shoots, and some beautiful chieftain examples that have caught me eye.

[Stephen White]

Great Phil, lot's of interesting stuff.

The "bum roll" was a widely despised bit of kit. I threw mine away, as did most tank crews. The infantry did need it but tended to fix it above the kidney pouches.

The "flaky tank" - museum exhibit, not really appropriate for an operational tank. Does raise an interesting point about "chipping" though. It can be grossly overdone. Yes, a badly applied coat of paint may have flaked but in general, scratches were about all that you saw. The only generic examples of military kit where chipping is really appropriate are the late war Japanese Air Force aircraft, where paint quality was a real issue. On Cold War British tanks, probably need to be very restrained indeed.

Mk 11. I hope someone does offer a STILLBREW upgrade. If anyone is contemplating doing a Mk 11, they will also need to consider replacing the light projector with TOGS (Thermal Observation and Gunnery System).

The NBC pack was also upgraded from No 6 to No 11 but the changes were internal. By the time the Mks 10 & 11 were in service, the Army was fully converted to the CLANSMAN radio system, replacing the earlier LARKSPUR. Externally, there were changes to the antennae, antennae bases and mountings.

We also need to find a source of denims (one piece tank crew coveralls), black for the World's oldest armoured regiment and green for the Donkey Wallopers sorry, old habits, the Cavalry.

[Phil Woollard]

Stephen, did all the MK 11 examples have TOGS, the MK 11/2c vehicle certainly had everything, the MK 11 being a MK 8 with IFCF? My current reference material indicates that it's list of the Marks is only a guide.
I'm happy to reproduce the tog systems but the loss of the stowage to me is a disadvantage as I like to add the human factor to the models to help bring them to life. I think I need more reference books.
The flaky paint example is just that, an example of very rough paintwork.
I like the idea of the ponchos being used as tarps up against the side of the tank and feel they will add to the stowage somewhat, correct or not I think they will look good, where the tank crew members fixed the bum roll makes sense, I hated the bloody thing around my arse and used bungees to keep it tight.

[Mark Heaps]

Unless you actually served on a Stillbrew with TOGS and wish to recreate that vehicle or want something different to the standard Chiefy model, why do it ?
They were limited issue and covered until production of the Challenger 1 could be ramped up to replace the Chiefy. The first unit I was attached to, QRIH in Münster early 1987, we were sending back Chiefys without Stillbrew or TOGS and getting Challengers as replacements. If I remember correctly, the Stillbrews with TOGS went to the Berlin Squadron.

[Phil Woollard]

Private reasons for considering the Stillbrew and Togs. Also exploring lots of possibilities by throwing ideas around.

Here's a nice example of excellent external/storage or stowage, and quite a lot of wear and tear. The photo is maybe Germany or the FIBUA on Salisbury plain, I reckon the latter.

[Mark Heaps]

Early version of DEFWES ?

[Stephen White]

Mark yes, that's SIMIFIRE, which used an eye safe laser projector and four receivers on the turret to allow simulated engagements. My squadron did the first troop trials. It was utterly useless. It was followed by SIMFICS, which was equally useless, designed to operate with IFCS, the Improved Fire Control System. The photo shows a Chieftain Mk 3C of the Queen's Own Hussars, on exercise in Germany in 1978. Having been around for the least successful tank training kit, I was on hand for the introduction of a real world beater. DFWES (Direct Fire Weapons Effect Simulator) is made by SAAB in Sweden and is streets ahead of the US equivalent, MILES. DFWES again uses laser energy to simulate direct fire weapons but it has two great advantages: every individual and vehicle in a battle group can be equipped to shoot and be killed and the gunnery is an accurate ballistic representation. That means crews have to practise their real gunnery skills or they miss. I was privileged to command the first UK OPFOR (Opposition Force), a professional enemy, and we were deployed to Canada to fight force on force exercises against the visiting battle groups. Hundreds of vehicles and well over a thousand troops fighting in an area the size of Wales, it doesn't get much better than that. DFWES had its opponents, some clinged to the idea that nothing could beat live firing but on a range, the enemy doesn't shoot back or do the unexpected.

DFWES

Phil, IFCS came in from about 1980 onwards and was retro-fitted to Marks 5-8, making all of them Mark 9s. It followed the introduction of the TLS (Tank Laser Sight, which replaced the .50" ranging machine gun). IFCS was designed around a digital ballistic computer, which improved gunnery accuracy and speeded up engagements (when it worked). Mk 11 was the designation for Mk 10 Chieftain converted to TOGS, so by definition, all Mk 11s had TOGS.

Lastly, ponchos. We had two options to build a home from home. The tank sheet was a huge piece of canvas designed to cover the whole turret during transport. It could be stretched over the main armament with the gun rear, allowing three of the crew to sleep on the (warm) back decks. (Drivers tended to sleep in their cabs for short halts. If you'd been a bit too enthusiastic with refuelling, you also lay in a pool of diesel. If time allowed, a tank bivouac could be erected against the hull side. It was a great bit of kit, a hangover from WW2. It had floor, sides and roof and was reasonably weatherproof.

[Phil Woollard]

Now that's the Kind info we need to put an AFV together. I'm beginning ( and sometimes glazing over with so much technical info) to understand this complex fighting system.
You Chieftain experts will have to cut us lesser mortals some slack whilst we build our chosen vehicles or many could be put off posting altogether!