Is this a shot test

[Bob Moseley (RIP)]

Hi Dale - you will see on most Carriers these dimples. This was their method of quality control where .303 shots were fired at the hull to test the bullet proofing of the metal.

Bob

[Dale Jordan]

Thanks Bob . If It failed the test , I wonder if the scraped the complete hull or just replaced the armor in that area .. Dale

[Justin Pollard]

Hello Dale,

From what I've worked out the steel was test shot before the plate was fitted to the carriers, probably during manufacture whilst the plate was just flat, as I have seen test marks where it would be impossible to do once the hull was welded together.

Regards
Justin.

[Michael R.]

How interesting. This "test shot" business ... is this a country specific quality assurance method?

I am intrigued by the thought that a rifle round was discharged against a hull plate, and the same plate eventually ends up as a portion of an assembled hull. Is this an urban legend or factual?


There are regularly spaced hardness standard testing marks on Canadian light armour plate as well as the more commonly visible and commented on straightening marks. The American owned company responsible for heat treating and straightening 45,000 tons of wartime production Canadian light armour plate stamped their company logo into the plate. Some side plates on Canadian U.C.'s also display a four digit serial number.

As for an assembled Canadian production vehicle showing hardeness testing tool marks attributed to a fired rifle round, or a documentation trail to support the theory, that is quite elusive.

Bob, Justin, can you elaborate?

[rob love]

I think I have to concur with Micheal on this one, unless someone comes up with some other evidence. I think this is an old wives tale.

I have used left over carrier armour as targets at shooting matches. In one case, hundreds of rounds of all calibers were fired at the front armour off a mk1. The Boyes rifle penetrated as to be expected, and one smaller round penetrated through the armour near where the vision slot was (I'll assume that the cutting process for the slit weakened the armour very locally) but other than those, all any of the small arms did was scratch the paint.

I have also noted the dimples on the right side armour to be very evenly laid out. So, as Micheal said, does anybody have documentation as to what exactly the hardness test was?

[Lynn Eades]

Hi. The "test" on Australian, New Zealand and Early British built carriers, leaves an obvious dent in the plate. It is nicely rounded, and I do not believe for 1 second that, it is the result of being shot at by a bullet from a firearm. I do believe it is the result of a mechanical device, something like a spring or air propelled bolt, designed for the purpose. Bob where is your evidence? I dont recall (this is my out) seeing anything like it on Canadian armour.

[Nathan Clark]

I agree with Bob on this one, I believe that the test holes were done with a firearm, most likely with a 303 as Bob suggested. My proof to this theory is the fact that all test holes done on 1824 in particular still have trace elements of lead in the test holes and they are not all unison in size or shape. If they were done with a punch or a rivet gun etc. all the holes would be perfect and unison in shape. I know for a fact that the holes were put in 1824 before construction and are not battle or post-war related because they are mostly in spots that would be impossible to shoot or 'test' once the carrier was assembled. The steel in a LP2a would have been designed to stop rounds up to .303 in calibre so if you were going to test the steel during construction, if would have been quite simple to just discharge a .303 at it and find out wouldn't it?

Nathan