MLU FORUM  

Go Back   MLU FORUM > MILITARY VEHICLES > The Gun Park

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-09-18, 23:11
chrisgrove chrisgrove is offline
Chris
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Ashford, Kent UK
Posts: 105
Default Sloping back gun tractors

OK, I'm only a modeller (but with 30 years in the army behind me). Everything I have read says that the sloping back to the various gun tractors were designed to make it easier to decontaminate the vehicles in the case (which seemed quite likely at times) of chemical warfare. Once chemical warfare seemed to be less likely, square back FATs were produced.

In addition, a limber beside the gun was a lot less conspicuous than a gun tractor. If the gun line came under enemy fire, it would seem safer for the gun tractor to be some distance away at the wagon lines and thus less likely to be targetted.
Chris
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-09-18, 07:10
Lang Lang is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Brisbane Australia
Posts: 1,675
Default

Chris

My two cents worth is the sloping back/chemical warfare theory does not hold water. The back only makes up about a third of the horizontal surface area and a flat roof would be just as easy to wash down.

Guns can only be inconspicuous until the first shot is fired then they are immediately the subject of counter battery fire. A relatively large percentage of all artillery resources are solely dedicated to this task. If the object is aerial surveillance camouflage before firing then the trucks will certainly be in the hiding plan.

The truck "wagon line" will always be very close (less than 100 metres usually from the guns) if they are not co-located. The driver is a gun-number and must run back from parking the truck when they come into action. If it is open country you may as well leave the trucks behind the guns. If there are a few trees it is wise to take advantage of them.

All the crew gear is also carried in the truck and they must have their living arrangements very close to the guns to come into action within a couple of minutes day or night.

None of this seems to have any bearing on the sloping back design. The 18 pounder ring theory still gets my vote from those offered so far.

Lang
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-09-18, 08:01
Owen Evans Owen Evans is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: North Vancouver, BC
Posts: 307
Default MCC Quad Prototype?

Thought these photos of supposedly prototype Morris and Guy Ant gun tractors might be of interest. Also, the CDSW gun tractor here: http://www.mapleleafup.net/forums/showthread.php?t=6333 also has the sloping back...sort of.

What's the framework on the back of the Guy GT 'prototype'?

Owen.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg MCC Quad Artillery Tractor.jpg (56.5 KB, 4 views)
File Type: jpg Guy Ant Artillery Tractor.jpg (60.3 KB, 7 views)
__________________
1940 11 Cab C15
1939 DKW KS200
1951 Willys M38
1936 Opel Olympia
MVPA # 39159
MVT # 19406
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-09-18, 08:57
Lang Lang is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Brisbane Australia
Posts: 1,675
Default

After 300 years of towing guns maybe the gunners wanted to keep looking at something that resembled a horse's a.....?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-09-18, 10:59
David Herbert David Herbert is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Ayrshire, Scotland - previously Suffolk
Posts: 563
Default

Just to throw something else into the discussion, quite a lot of modern Humvees have a sloping back. There is no practical reason for it that I know of but at least early on that was the default rear body design.

The two 'prototypes' in post #18 were obviously only intended to be tractors to directly replace horses. The fact that they could easily be used to carry stuff seems to have not yet been noticed.

David
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-09-18, 12:36
rob love rob love is offline
carrier mech
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Shilo MB, the armpit of Canada
Posts: 7,594
Default

It's almost like they took the guy ant prototype and simply made it bigger. It looks like the rear deck has brackets that are holding legs similar to that used on mortar tripods. I can't place what artillery equipment used those legs.

Re the HHMWVs, they sloping back is on the "slantback" hardtop only. I suspect the slantback was simply so the gunner in the turret ring had an unobstructed view to the rear if he wanted it, or that the hatchback simply gave a little protected cargo room than a flat cargo bed. Kind of the same reason they made car trunks into hatchbacks.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-09-18, 13:14
Ed Landstrom Ed Landstrom is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: south-west Ontario
Posts: 63
Default

To confirm the theory that the sloping back on a Humvee was to give the gunner an unrestricted view to the rear, I was told the same thing by a Humvee driver, so it was what they were being told in training. Specifically, it was designed so that the gunner could fire over the rear with the vehicle parked nose-down on the reverse slope of a berm, using the berm for cover, with the rear of the vehicle facing the enemy. It seems like a rather infrequent use to base a vehicle design on, unless American forward bases are designed with protective berms that would fit this use.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-09-18, 16:02
Hanno Spoelstra's Avatar
Hanno Spoelstra Hanno Spoelstra is offline
MLU Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 14,866
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lang View Post
None of this seems to have any bearing on the sloping back design. The 18 pounder ring theory still gets my vote from those offered so far.
I think this subject is being beaten to death. The sloping back was designed to accommodate the gun's mounting base. Period.

Note: when the design and use of field guns evolved, the design and manufacture of Field Artillery Tractors apparently had to catch up later. Also, don't forget that it is often more effective to keep manufacturing a proven design, rather than disrupt mass production of an otherwise adequate vehicle. This is what helped to win the war: while the Germans were designing new tanks, the North American arsenal of democracy mass-produced an adequate medium tank.

HTH,
Hanno
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-09-18, 21:44
David Herbert David Herbert is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Ayrshire, Scotland - previously Suffolk
Posts: 563
Default

A Sherman has a sloping back too.....

David
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 08-09-18, 01:04
Lynn Eades Lynn Eades is offline
Bluebell
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tauranga, New Zealand
Posts: 5,541
Default

....And you know why, David. A completely different reason to the FAT, Hummer etc.
__________________
Bluebell

Carrier Armoured O.P. No1 Mk3 W. T84991
Carrier Bren No2.Mk.I. NewZealand Railways. NZR.6.
Dodge WC55. 37mm Gun Motor Carriage M6
Jeep Mb #135668
So many questions....
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Wanted: Re: BSA Parabike manual link and T shape bracket Danny Burt For Sale Or Wanted 7 20-12-15 20:19
Could it be a Gun Tractor Rusty The Softskin Forum 13 13-01-08 22:49
17 pdr tractor DaveCox The Softskin Forum 3 18-06-04 14:18
LAA tractor DaveCox The Softskin Forum 8 16-06-04 18:44
F.A. Gun Tractor James E. Roy The Softskin Forum 23 27-04-03 21:17


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 05:28.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Maple Leaf Up, 2003-2016