Tank Design Questions never asked!

[MartinCummins]

Thanks, Lauren,
1)-Yes, a cast inlet duct, drawing from near the ground, was originally used-Probably good protection from a flame-thrower. As you say, dust intake was excessive, and a fabricated trunk, with a rain/fragment cowl on top, was introduced. Air restriction was now excessive, and I have seen drawings with fillets mounted in the corners of trunk to improve air flow, plus sealing of junctions for wading, for the next version. However, I have not seen drawings of the (last?)type, havng the three apertures cut below the top entry, on the vertical side. Normally these had three bolted cover plates, concealing wire screens mounted over the openings. If these plates werre removed, air flow would be increased, but dust intake also. Perhaps these openings were to be exposed when it was hot, but with low dust being raised by track. I do not know if it was envisaged for use in a jungle,where these conditions might obtain?

2)-Somebody who used the jack! I had not thought of that use for packing, as the arms had no flat seating. I imagine also the situation might arise where a wheel had been damaged, and the track broken, so you would then need two pieces of packing?

3)-Interesting point. Also perhaps the Commander could scan a larger area, then using his optical sight to home into an area of interest.

4)-If the tank was Hull Down, and needed to idle the engine for turret movement, then a silencer might be an advantage. Small auxillary generators, with low noise, might have come later?

5)-Good point, as there would be less tendency to "trap" a projectile with an external mantlet. However, perhaps it would have to be thicker than an internal mantlet, so as to avoid being deformed into contact with the turret. How this affected the inertia of the gun, when firing on the move, I do not know, and also whether impact on the mantlet would damage the trunnion bearings, locking elevation?
Thanks for the mention of a file at National Archives-any idea of reference?

Richard-Thanks for correcting that point-I live only a mile or so from the Assembly Area of the Churchill & I had just gone along with that supposition!
Finally-another point-German tanks often had hinged (Elbow) aiming telecopes, wheras Britain had simple Telescopes. The German system would protect the gunner if a direct impact on the objective occurred. Also, perhaps not forcing the gunner to hunch if tall, and further enabling the tank to be less exposed in "Hull Down". You had to have an accomplished Optical Industry to produce the Elbow Telescope, though. Comments?

Many thanks to you both,
Martin Cummins.