Chinese Eye Chieftain

[John Clarke]

As I always tell my managers, we're right behind you.

I think Kian been a bit of a cheap sake though, just giving you just the copy of the No1 certificate after all the hard work you've put in.

[Mark Heaps]

Well done Stephen,

01 where it should be.

Why so late in reporting deployment ? Delayed at Wolfgangs or a Lay-by Lil ? Or just what you were used to, getting the other tanks deployed out in front of you ?

Mark

[John Clarke]

The master of stealth Mark.

I should be bringing up the rear guard next week.

What are the differences from the prototype?

[Stephen White]

Three of my crew were around to help with the unpacking. Cheerful lot, my crew. They'll need new headgear, probably Mr Dibb's Helmets, Crewman, AFV.

I went into Modeller's Loft in Bournemouth and couldn't have had a better service. Nothing was too much trouble. The head on the left was from a Wehrmacht bandsman. They willingly decapitated the figure to release the head sculpt. They have a huge range of stock and a strong online presence. Highly recommended if you haven't already used them. The other two lads came from Machine-gun.fr, another great European source of 1/6th stuff, if you don't fancy dicing direct with HK/CN.

[John Clarke]

Great looking heads Stephen, No3 three is the spitting image of a guy called George at work. No2's going to have face ache if he keeps that grin going though

[Christian Steinhauer]

Very nice heads but the man in the middle reminds me on Stan Laurel

[Mark Heaps]

Good expressions on those heads.

From left to right
Gunner - The eyes have that 1000 yard stare
Commander - Big cheesy grin from a young Rupert commanding a tank for the first time.
Loader - The young Rupert wants that ???

[John Clarke]

Very nice heads but the man in the middle reminds me on Stan Laurel

Your right "Sorry Ollie"

Rupert " "If you wouldn't mind gunner, could you pop a HE over there towards the enemy,,,,, thanks awfully"

What happen to real names like "Wilco" "Clarkey" "Smiggy" and "Smudge"

[Stephen White]

Now to the hard-core stuff. I've established the specific Chieftain to model: 01FD12, my own 0B as OC D Squadron, 4th Tanks. Then I've established a particular point in time to model - October 1987. It's important to do that for Chieftain, which was modified out of exitstence, in order to transform a generic model into an accurate and honest replica. The next task is to establish exactly what was and wasn't on the vehicle at the reference time, ie the build standard.

British tanks have a "log book", the so-called AB413. I haven't yet found 01FD12's 413, which would have listed all the modification states but you can get near enough by looking at the generic development programme for Chieftain and confirming by photos. If anyone wants help in doing this, I can give you the relevant tables. The result is not simple (nothing ever is with British tank development). That's not a criticism as it shows that the Ministry of Defence was prepared to put considerable and sustained effort into keeping us tank crews equipped with tanks which over-matched the opposition in firepower, protection, mobility (and I hesitate to add reliability).

So after some research, this is the record of 01FD12's service to October 1987

Vehicle History

• Built under contract FVP/44/67 between Jan-May 71, batch of 40 Mk 3/S, Serial range 01FD00-01FD39.
• In service as 01FD12: 01 Mar 71
• 4 RTR 29 Aug 86
• 2 Army Del Sqn (Veh Stock) 07 Nov 89
• Vehicle Depot Ludgershall 14 Nov 91
• ABRO Bovington Planned Repair 20 Jan 92
• ABRO Bovington Planned Repair 05 Aug 94
• 2 Army Del Sqn (Veh Stock) Date Not Recorded

BUILD STANDARD

As Built: Mk 3/S
• Equip code: 0300-2036.
• Power Pack: L60 Mk 6A 650hp
• GU Engine: Mk 10A
• Hydraulic Starting System Mk 5
• Comdander’s Cupola No 15, Mk2
• Parking Brake 12:1 ratio
• Headlight/IR Light System Twin Units
• Main Engine Air Cleaner Low Loss
• NBC System No 2 Mk 1
• turret/hull breathing, ME cut-out switch, electrical improvements, Comd’s firing handle, new gunner’s elevation handwheel, anchor block for HESH extraction tool. TLS mounting

As Modified: Tank Combat 120mm Gun Chieftain Mk7/4 (C) (TOTEM POLE complete).

TOTEM POLE “X” Modifications
Modification of sights from 4 Dot to 9 Dot (increased range APDS)

TOTEM POLE “Y” Modifications
Modification of sight mounts from No 34 to No 39 to provide TLS, plus turret air breathing and low loss air cleaner. Additional work to prepare for “Z” Programme:

• To Mk 3/S(Y)L “L Kit”:On completion of L kit fitting for TLS “C” or No 1 Mk1
• To Mk 3/S(Y)1 Fire Control Phase 1: On completion of TLS No 1 Mk2 or No 3 Mk1 vehicle changes and MRS preparatory modifications
• To Mk 3/S(Y)2 Fire Control Phase 1: On completion of TLS No 1 Mk 2 or No 3 Mk 1 vehicle mods and MRS installation

TOTEM POLE “Z” Modifications
Uprating of power pack, fitting of No 6 NBC pack and modification to metadynes. Additional work on “Z” TOTEM POLE and Mk 5 tanks to provide improved lethality (IFCS and Fin (APFSDS)).
• To Mk 7/L On completion of TOTEM POLE “Z” Programme and “L” kit fitting for TLS “C” or No 1 Mk1 (See above)
• To Mk 7/1 On completion of TOTEM POLE “Z” Programme and Fire Control Phase 1 (See above)
• To Mk 7/2 On completion of TOTEM POLE “Z” Programme and Fire Control Phase 1 (See above)
• To Mk 7/3 On completion of Fire Control Phase 2: TLS, MRS and IFCS installation plus limited cupola improvements
• To Mk 7/4 On completion of Improved KE Round Programme: sight graticule and ammunition stowage changes for APFSDS

In many ways, the final developments of STILLBREW and TOGS were more representative of the next generation of tanks, ie Challenger 1 and 2. Had the MoD been able to accelerate the introduction of Challenger 1, they would probably not have been needed. They were however urgently needed to combat the introduction of T-64B into GSFG. That being the case, 01FD12, as a Mk 7/4, really represented the fully developed Chieftain.

This represents the build standard of 01FD12 in October 1987. Subsequently, the tank would have received STILLBREW and possibly TOGS.
Note: date of conversion from Larkspur to Clansman to be established. Tanks modified for Clansman were identifiable by the letter “C” after its mark number.

I can also now put names to my crew:

Commander: myself
Loader: L/CPL Colin Clarke
Gunner: Tpr "Fletch" Fletcher
Driver: Tpr Gordon Irvine.

I could launch into the build but time spent in reconnaissance and all that......

[simon_manning]

Those head sculpts are so realistic its weird, strange but excellent at the same time, regards simon.

[Stephen White]

The Threat - what was Chieftain up against?

Initial design studies for Medium Gun Tank No 2, which became Chieftain, in the mid fifties were a response to NATO exploiting T-55, which was thought to over-match Centurion. In the course of its long service, Chieftain faced T-62, T-64, T-72 (in East German hands) and lastly T-80, which gives a measure of how long lasting it was and how successful its development was.

In the mid-eighties, the Soviet Union introduced a major advance in tank firepower in the form of T-64B.

It represented a very significant increase in the threat, to which Chieftain responded with STILLBREW armour, the APFSDS fin round and latterly improved night and poor light sighting with TOGS.

The significance of T-64B wasn't immediately apparent - it looked like any other bog-standard T-64:

T-64

T-64B

It started to come into service in GSFG (the Soviet Army in East Germany) in the mid eighties and Allied observers were quick to spot the crews working up on the ranges:

A series of observations revealed a previously unknown box on the turret top and a much larger gunner's sight optic:

The intelligence analysis revealed that T-64B was equipped with the 9M112 Radio Frequency Guided HEAT round, with a new day/night sight. The mysterious new box was the RF guidance emitter.

These required a new turret casting:

The Russians knew the new system as Kobra and in the West it became AT-8 Songster. With the T-64B's laser rangefinder, ballistic computer and met sensors, it matched the capability the Chieftain's TOTEM POLE programme had realised. It overmatched Chieftain's 120mm gun for range, the 9M112 manual claiming a maximum battle range of 4000m compared with Chieftain at 2000m at most. STILLBREW became an urgent necessity.

The significant handicaps of all T-64s, poor ergonomics, three man crew and autoloader all remained.

So, if Armortek were ever to release a modern, Russian tank, the most appropriate wouldn't be T-72, it would be T-64B. I doubt it will happen any time soon.

[Chris Hall]

Commander: myself
Loader: L/CPL Colin Clarke
Gunner: Tpr "Fletch" Fletcher
Driver: Tpr Gordon Irvine.

I never served, so I don't want to appear either stupid or elitist, but this made me wonder if there's any relative seniority in tank roles which defines rank ? For instance, I'd imagine that an NCO would take over from the Commander should the latter be incapacitated, so the loader is probably freer to do that. But I would have thought that, after the Commander, the Gunner was probably the most technically demanding job, deserving of a higher rank ?

Or is rank just based on length of service ? Or general proficiency ?

Or am I just talking rubbish ?

Ducking back below the parapet,

Chris

[Stephen White]

Chris, you’re certainly not talking rubbish, it’s a very valid question. I can only speak for the British Army but I suspect it’s pretty standard, for those nations who have four person crews.

Rank is less important than qualification in a tank crew. Royal Armoured Corps soldiers are (were) trained initially as drivers or gunners. After a year or so, they receive training to a higher level to qualify them in advanced maintenance in their primary trade. For those on longer engagements, they would expect to pick up their second trade. All soldiers would have received a basic training in signals ie radio operating and some will go on to learn advanced communications to equip them to operate in a command HQ.

Officers are trained in all the crew positions, driver, gunner, loader and crew commander. In addition, they learn to command a troop of three tanks. So those who rather condescendingly refer to them as Ruperts fail to recognise that a young officer has a lot to learn very quickly and he relies initially on having a good SNCO troop sergeant and a strong tank operator.

It’s true to say that the move from the driver’s or gunner’s seat into the Loader’s position is seen as a progression, not least because the loader is responsible not just for serving the weapons but also for assisting the commander with a range of tactical tasks. He is also the substitute commander. In due course, Loaders will receive formal training as crew commanders. These days, there is a lot more rigidity in how crewmen are employed, for good safety reasons. It is nevertheless the aim that any crewman should be able to serve in more than one crew position and the more senior to master all of them.

Beyond command of an individual tank, an NCO could expect to rise in rank with increase responsibility and the best command troops as staff sergeants. Officers go, onto become squadron seconds in command, squadron leaders and commanding officers. Whilst a soldier will spend a lot of time in a tank squadron, officers typically move every two, years either into a staff job in the regiment (eg as regimental signals or gunnery officer, intelligence or reconnaissance specialists and from captain onwards to be employed outside the regiment.

Ranks comes with time and qualification. The promotion to corporal and beyond is effectively tied to succeeding as a crew commander.

Now, what do people really think? There is a certain snobbery in tank crews. Driving - down below, never let the engineer on the bridge as the Navy would say. Always covered in muck. Gunners - children who like playing with guns. Lots of bullshit and masking tape, creases in their trousers, love to shout a lot. Signals- where the brains are and the only people you would trust to do the cooking. I’m now heading for cover......

[John Clarke]

Ahha "Ruperts", all makes sense now. Still a teams a team, and you've all got to work and pull together or the proverbial hits the fan.
(Not good buttoned down I'd expect)

It's very a kind offer of help with the stats of a particular vehicle Stephen, a pointer in the right direction would be very helpful.
My particular build would be 00 FD 96, I have a few photographs late 70's early 80's, though it's possible I think to get con'd sometimes depending on the angle of the shot, I have seen the same call sign and same camo on two different tanks at different times.
Therefore different crews and a differently equipped vehicle.

I'm probably not going to start the Chieftain right the way, though the bare metal will need treating.
While I'm planning the build and there's a lot to do, I have something physical to drool over.
I've just become the proud custodian of a Cent built by David Wilkins, If I can emulate some of his build qualities I'll be well pleased.

[Stephen White]

John, I've got some records for 00FD96 and will post something on your build thread. You're right to say you need to look closely at photos which appear to be of the same vehicle. The callsign system and formation indicators were intended to conceal and confuse but were often compromised by markings peculiar to a regiment. We were as guilty as any with our Chinese Eyes and unique vehicle names. In war, they would have gone but in many ways, the real battle was against SOXMIS in so-called peacetime. You really have to look closely to compare things such as camouflage patterns to establish whether you're looking at the same vehicle.