Carrier with Bofors!

dave king · #1 19-01-06, 00:13

I am currently scanning a large album from a recently-deceased ex-gunner officer, and it includes some shots (taken in Canada, circa 1941-42, as far as I can date) of a Universal Carrier with a 40mm Bofors.

Was this just a trial? Anyone have any info?

* I note that the serial number on the carrier is visible in one shot: 41-1-1389.

Thoughts? Comments?

Thanks in advance!

Shot 1
Shot 2

Alex Blair (RIP) · #2 19-01-06, 00:33

Quote:

Originally posted by dave king
I am currently scanning a large album from a recently-deceased ex-gunner officer, and it includes some shots (taken in Canada, circa 1941-42, as far as I can date) of a Universal Carrier with a 40mm Bofors.

Was this just a trial? Anyone have any info?

* I note that the serial number on the carrier is visible in one shot: 41-1-1389.

Thoughts? Comments?

Thanks in advance!

Shot 1
Shot 2

Hoi dave
That is not a Universal carrier...(Too many bogies) and its not a T 16...Wrong bogies..
And the engine has been moved to the normal drivers position(See rad) same as in the two pounder ,but on the right rather than the left..and the crew compartment is oversized and...and....and...
I don't know what it is...
HMMMmmmmmmm...

servicepub (RIP) · #3 19-01-06, 00:47

Hi Dave,

Roger Lucy is working on a book for Service Publications on Canada's Secret Weapons. Roger has come across some information on this as well as one bad photo of the beast on Parliament Hill in Ottawa. I am sure that he will provide more info in a post.
I would appreciate hi-res scans of these photos for use in the book, or I will buy them outright if you pan on selling them.

Thnx,

Clive

Roger Lucy · #4 19-01-06, 01:18

The project stems from a November 1941 request from the British the Ministry of Supply that Canada do some trials of the 40mm Bofors, on a tracked SP mount, in ice and snow conditions. The Bofors and Loyd were married at Petawawa by a couple of artifacers - the gun carriage was bolted directly to the chassis. It tested in an A/Tk role on 18 March 1942.. Reasonable results were obtained, when the vehicle was braced securely four rounds, fachieved four hits on a tank target at 600 yds. On 23 March, the vehicle was sent to the Proving Ground in Ottawa, for to test its road and cross country capabilities. On the whole, it seems to have performed satisfactorily. When the tests were completed and the vehicle disassembled on 5 June, 1942.

Canada had no requirement for tracked SP 40mm as it could not keep up with road convoys.

If these pictures were taken at Pet there may be a few others showing trials of experimnetal equipment.
Roger

dave king · #5 19-01-06, 04:42

Thank you, gentlemen! I knew that I could turn to the MLU Forum for the "straight dope!"

Clive, more than happy to oblige. There are several other shots of the beast (the two I have posted are by far the best); sadly, Col. Nelson didn't caption or date the shots...but I will try and determine location by using context of the other photos in the album.

Col. Nelson joined the Canadian army as a drummer, aged 15, in 1935; he passed away on Jan 1st of this year. A more warm, lively and downright funny man I've yet to meet.

Gunner · #6 19-01-06, 16:05

Hi Roger et al.

First, thanks to Dave King for preserving Col Nelson's photos. I met the gentlemen a couple of times and he was always a source of interesting tales. I wish I had had a chance to discuss the photos with him when he was alive... we are losing so much of our corporate memory. More incentive to caption my own photos!

Roger; from the point of view of an Instructor-in-Gunnery, I would like to add some observations re: the SP in question:

As you noted there was no useful role for the 40mm on a carrier... it could not keep up with convoys, had no ammunition storage (AA guns eat ammo at a prodigious rate) and it would suffer from terrible inaccuracy; four successful shots at a stationary target at 600 yards is hardly an adequate test of accuracy. Without some method to lock out the suspension or stabilise the gun platform (outriggers, leveling pads, etc) the gun wouldn't hit a canary going 3 mph at 200 inches!

Imagine the work out for the gunners if the platform wasn't level; cranking that gun around is hard work, especially uphill... maintaining an accurate track while cranking uphill and trying to control the downhill swing a 180 degrees later would be murder.

For any useful AA capability the SP would have to have a fast "coming into action" timing... less than one minute would suffice at WWII engagement ranges. This requires a large well trained detachment (the artillery have "detachments", the Navy and armoured corps have "crews"). The truck mounted Bofors could carry a full detachment of seven, the SP carrier looks like four would be a pinch.

Picture, if you will, a Lloyd carrier burdened with a 1 ton gun, add on four burley soldiers and basic kit (another 1/2 a ton) and then slap on a trailer with 1 ton of ammunition and all the gun stores and personal kit of the detachment. Maybe we add another carrier with just ammo and stores and three more men... the truck version was a better solution. For armoured formations the tank mounted version was much more useful as it had onboard hydraulics, however, it still suffered from leveling problems.

The right decision was made to scrap the 40mm Lloyd SP.

Hope this helps with your research.

By the way, is the David gun part of your book?

Cheers! Mike

Roger Lucy · #7 19-01-06, 17:10

Mike,
You have come to pretty well the same conclusions that Tommy Burns did when he wrote a paper on AA tanks for the AFV Users Cttee in December 1942 (hence the Skink - which had a very high rate of traverse, although they never did complete the development of a sight to engage high speed targets before it was cancelled.) In addition open topped AA AFVs were considered just too vulnerable to ground attack a/c.
Canada was not too warm and fuzzy either about the truck mounted Bofors twhich he British Ministry of Supply ordered in September 1942, and only adopted them in September 1943 in order to c0onform with British scales of issue.

The problems you describe with levelling, and with crew accomodation were also the downfall of the 3.7 inch Ram SP.

Yes I have lots to say on the David, and the Canuck gun as well.
Roger

servicepub (RIP) · #8 19-01-06, 18:55

Quote:

Originally posted by dave king
I will try and determine location by using context of the other photos in the album.

From Roger's comments it is probably safe to say, Petawawa (but maybe Orleans) Ontario and, judging by the snow, the time frame would be Feb-March, 1942.