Chieftain build by Phil Woollard.

[Phil Woollard]

The water cans, black plastic generally with a white cross to denote drinking water, and you could taste the plastic! The British army use colour coordinated metal tag labels denoting the fuel type, for example yellow for diesel, red for petrol ( full cans referred to as "packed" ) so the general Jerry can colour is always NATO green but factory painted over a red oxide base , the red oxide is also used for the inside surface of the can, this flaking off in use causing fuel delivery blockages, so a screened funnel was always used. I use the standard Jerry cans at home all the time and the flaking paint is a pain!

[Stephen White]

Phil, good call.

I don't recall ever seeing a white cross on British water jerry cans. The Wehrmacht certainly did use it but they used the same steel jerry cans for both water and POL so there was obvious scope for confusion. In case there was any lingering doubt, the British water containers helpfully had "Water" embossed on the side. On a replen, the commander and operator would take care of refuelling, the gunner would help with ammunition and food stowage and the poor old driver had to take the water can to the one water bowser at the end of the line and lug the full one back, in the dark, stumbling over fallen trees, ruts and falling into mud pools. Great fun.

JerryCan-1_480x480.jpg (27.48 KiB) Viewed 371689 times

[andymusgrove]

Hi Phil

Hmm interesting you say about using a filter. When we used to run through a rolling replen. The fuel cans were upended over the fuel caps and left to drain whilst changing another can etc etc. No filters...... ever seen. Most likely should have been used... just saying.

Also water cans were only ever black, no white paint that i ever saw

Cheers.
Andy

[Phil Woollard]

I can only find historic evidence of the metal type with the white marker. I will keep looking.

[Stephen White]

Phil, Andy, this is where you have to be careful with sources. As I mentioned, the Wehrmacht painted water jerry cans with a white cross because they used the same containers for water and fuel, with the obvious scope for cock up. Your first photo is DAK. The second photo shows a can used on a restoration (Universal Carrier?) As such, it doesn't give a reliable indication of what was used in service. As Andy says, never seen a white cross on a water can in our time.

[Phil Woollard]

I'm going to paint them pink!

[Mark Heaps]

During my time in service from 1985-2007, I also never saw a British Army water jerry can with white paint. I did however experience metal "fuel" jerry cans with paint markings on them whilst crewing the ARRV indicating the oil type or pre-mixed coolant it held. Jerry cans were easier than drums to stow, (and allowed us to hold more) , and the contents enabled us at times to return tanks to action without having to tow them back to the repair vehicle, or allowed the stricken tank to limp back to the repair vehicle whilst we stayed up with the squadron to recover any bogged-in vehicles. Only ever it saw it once on a Challenger 1 and that was a tank "thirsty" for that particular sort and we could not get a replacement pack at the time.

On the subject of replens, there were several types, static, rolling and battle.

I stand by to be corrected by Stephen White if we were doing it wrong, or there were others, but my experience was as follows.

Static - ( Tanks stay still, replen vehicles are moving ) - Driver goes off with water can(s) and shopping list. Rest as Stephen described.

Rolling - ( Replen vehicles are static and the tanks are moving ) - Driver stays in his seat, gnr goes off with water cans and shopping list. Ammo first, commander assisting getting them onto the turret roof and down to the loader, loader stowing them away. Then fuel, commander assisting with that, loader continues stowing until completed. Then pick up rations, water cans, mail, shopping order and gnr.

Battle - Pull up between two trucks, ammo one side, fuel the other. As soon as the ammo was on board, you moved out so the next tank could get in. Stow the ammo and rejoin the battle.

Mark

[Stephen White]

Spot on Mark. How many years have garages had fuel pumps? When I first started out, our primary resupply vehicle was the redoubtable Stalwart. They carried "packed fuel" ie fuel in jerrycans. You humped the cans onto the back decks, drove down the line, poured in the fuel as Mark describes and tossed the cans into a designated area for the admin troop boys to collect. At the next Stolly, you took on boxed ammunition and did likewise. We would have had to ask the Russians to hang on whilst we got ready for the next round. It was rare to take on a realistic battle day's worth of supplies, so rarely got a feel for how long it would really take. For that reason we would top up with battle replens as often as possible but that meant holding supplies forward, close to the squadron, making them vulnerable. Then, alleluia, along came two innovations which should have been introduced much sooner. They were the UBRE (Unit Bulk Refuelling Equipment), a large tank, self-contained pump and hoses, which could be fitted on the back of the Stolly. You could run two tanks past at a time, one on either side. At around the same time, some genius came up with the idea of "wine racks", a container which stowed unboxed ammunition. Now we could load ammunition straight into the turret. Unboxing ammunition takes time, as we knew from our annual live firing camps, so this was another "giant step for mankind".

[Mark Heaps]

With packed fuel, I agree that that would be the time limiting factor and would be the priority. I did experience using packed fuel once and IIRC it was done as a training exercise to show to the sqn, a how to do it and b how it would affect the replen.
With UBREs, the crews needed seconds to open the fuel filler covers on the approach to a rolling replen, the pod ob ( UBRE operator) would be putting the hose in the one closest to him, the commander would take a hose over to the far side of the vehicle.
That together with the "wine racks" meant ammo was the priority as the time limiting factor and the loader needed time to stow it away and know exactly what was where. Projectiles were easy but in the heat of battle, I imagine it could be quite easy to grab the wrong bag charge and load it. Also not all may have fitted in the ready racks, ready bins and required the turret being traversed to access the other stowage points.

[Phil Woollard]

Tasty examples. After much thought I think I would like to aim for Tango 34 Bravo, the BATUS example MK10 so not to far from a MKV but things could change.

[Mark Heaps]

Tasty examples. After much thought I think I would like to aim for Tango 34 Bravo, the BATUS example MK10 so not to far from a MKV but things could change.

Hi Phil,
Tango 34 Bravo is pre-callsign change but not a BATUS example, no zap number, and not a Mk10, no MRS mirror. 30 is a BATUS example, post call sign change, and looks like a Mk11. Callsign and zap number indicate Troop leader of 3rd Troop in Squadron 2 of the Medman exercise. Could be B or D Sqn, depending on whether the operating unit used the rectangle or the lazy D.
Edited - most likely B Sqn, call sign surround on turret is square, the one on the track guards is rectangular which indicates they used the lazy D to avoid confusion.

[Phil Woollard]

Hi Mark, the Chieftain encyclopedia lists that example as, and I quote.... " Chieftain MK10 BATUS British Army unit at Suffield in the 1990's" so is it feasible, can I use this example in the confidence that it is correct but for the call sign, it's very confusing you know, good job we got "the men in black" (and green coveralls) to sort this lot out!

[Mark Heaps]

Hi Mark, the Chieftain encyclopedia lists that example as, and I quote.... " Chieftain MK10 BATUS British Army unit at Suffield in the 1990's" so is it feasible, can I use this example in the confidence that it is correct but for the call sign, it's very confusing you know, good job we got "the men in black" (and green coveralls) to sort this lot out!

For me not feasable, paint scheme looks BATUS but no zap number. Also no MRS mirror shroud. If it was a BATUS vehicle then a gate guard that has been stripped for parts. If you want a BAOR ( British Army Of the Rhine ) vehicle then base colour green as delivered with black patches to break up the outline. The BATUS camouflage looks visually good but it was not used in Europe. BATUS in Canada was a training area. Do you wish to replicate a training vehicle or an operational vehicle ?

[Mark Heaps]

Having to think back a bit, as finished after 22 years service in Feb 2007. Last MedMan maybe 2004, IIRC the gate guard, a CR1, had a zap number and we had to scavenge a part off it to get a tank operational.

[Mark Heaps]

download/file.php?id=23424&mode=view

That is what I think a Chiefy should look like. Green, black and dirty