Sherman Crab T147955 “Avalon” Overloon. Regiment? Damage?

[Alex van de Wetering]

The dark rectangular mark could be the name or another marking painted out, that happened quite often after a vehicle was struck off strength

I can confirm that it actually says "Avalon" in white in a picture of it early in it's museum life. I have no clue why it shows up as a dark patch in later pictures, as this was already when it was a museum exhibit.

Summing up, we would need to get access to the war diaries of the two regiments mentioned above and see which Crabs were lost due to mines and/or enemy fire.

I was hoping the war diaries were to be found online somewhere, but no luck so far. I think I will send a request to the UK National Archives.

[Alex van de Wetering]

Attached are some close-ups of the impacts on Avalon. In the first picture you can make out a larger circle of small damages around some of the penetrations.

In case anyone wonders...that CSI-thingy is my lazy-mans tape measure for scale modelling....the small squares are 1x1cm. the larger ones 5x5cm.

Alex

Impact0.jpg Impact1.jpg Impact2.jpg Impact3.jpg Impact4.jpg

[Alex van de Wetering]

And some pictures of the inside. I am afraid the camera flash and rust makes the penetrations hard to see, so I added some arrows to make it a bit clearer.

Dommage1.JPG Dommage2.JPG Dommage3.JPG Dommage4.jpg Dommage5.jpg

[Jakko Westerbeke]

Originally Posted by Alex van de Wetering

And some pictures of the inside.

I hope you don’t mind me posting these, in which I think the scarring is much easier to see:

P1010031.jpg P1010019.jpg P1010024.jpg P1010053.jpg

The fact that the internal bracing has also bent in that last photo to me points to a projectile rather than a shaped charge striking it. I would more expect it to have simply been gouged out with a shaped charge. It also shows the downward angle: the damage to the brace is slightly below the hole in the hull side.

[Alex van de Wetering]

I hope you don’t mind me posting these, in which I think the scarring is much easier to see:

Well, I would have preferred if you had asked me first, than at the very least I could have added a watermark. Also at least one of the pics is the same....and the other failed to upload last night.

[Jakko Westerbeke]

Originally Posted by Alex van de Wetering

Well, I would have preferred if you had asked me first, than at the very least I could have added a watermark.

Sorry about that Watermarks are not something I normally bother with, so I didn’t stop to think other people might want to.

Originally Posted by Alex van de Wetering

Also at least one of the pics is the same....

You’re right, I failed to spot that it was already in your post.

Originally Posted by David Dunlop

If the brace on the right side is bent, and relates to the flail drive

Are you referring to the same brace I was? Because if so, that isn’t related to the flail drive but is a normal structural brace in Shermans, and I meant the bend in it in line with a penetration, which looks like it was made by the round coming through the side.

Originally Posted by David Dunlop

Be interesting to know if there is enough energy in an anti personnel mine to break a tank track link and cause little other damage.

Some can, but it depends on the type of mine, the type of vehicle and probably exactly where it blows up under the track and wheels. Impossible to tell, I’d say, without knowing all of these variables.

Originally Posted by Alex van de Wetering

I think the brace was either damaged by rounds coming through the sides, or from an internal explosion of ammunition.

You mean a penetrating projectile whose HE charge detonated, right? Because the interior of this Sherman looks too good for one whose 75 mm ammo had detonated. (Also: there was no 75 mm ammo storage in this area of a Crab, because the rounds went through the opening in the brace, meaning the flail drive chain case was in the way.)

Originally Posted by David Dunlop

Would you know if the Crab was intended to operate with a reduced ammunition load for the 75mm compared to the standard Sherman

See above: the right front ammo rack had to be removed to make room for the flail drive. Here is the right hull front interior on a restored M4A4:


(source)

The big white box just in front of the brace, with the silver-grey box stuck to its side, is an ammo rack for 75 mm rounds. You can just see the round retention clips through the opening in the brace. This whole rack had to be removed to make room for the flail drive, which goes through a rectangular hole cut in the hull side just in front of that brace.

Originally Posted by David Dunlop

I am just not sure how much extra weight the Flail System added to a Sherman

About two tons, I think.

Originally Posted by David Dunlop

nor how much internal space was lost for the modifications, nor what, if anything was given up to make the modification work.

Quite a bit, though of course the interior isn’t exactly spacious to begin with anyway. I built a model of a Crab with a partial interior (which I’d never have been able to do without Alex’s help, BTW), and was surprised at how much room that chain case takes up.

[David Dunlop]

Thanks for the photo, Jakko. Looks like the co-drivers position was also sacrificed with the flail installation, or got even more cramped than it otherwise was already!

David

[Hanno Spoelstra]

Originally Posted by Jakko Westerbeke

See above: the right front ammo rack had to be removed to make room for the flail drive. Here is the right hull front interior on a restored M4A4:


(source)

That link to photobucket may not show up on all browers. See my web page on Adrian Barrell's M4A4 restoration with interior photos here: http://www.mapleleafup.nl/sherman_sn5271/index.html

co_drivers_area.jpg

[David Dunlop]

I wonder how well the lower area of the interior has been cleaned over the years and if any of the things found there were kept by the museum?

Two things can happen with a solid shot round striking armour. At the very least, one hopes the energy transfer is great enough to spall a chunk of inside hull free to fly into the interior to do damage to crew and equipment. As the size and energy behind the round increases, full penetration of the hull will occur and the round itself will bounce around inside the hull, greatly increasing the damage risk to everyone and thing inside, until the energy is spend and the round falls to the floor, spent. Given enough size and energy, of course, the round will pass right through the vehicle struck.

Alex mentions no sign of exit holes on the left side of the hull, so if we are looking at 15 to 20mm round penetrations, and they all came at roughly the same time, there would have been a lot of metal flying around the interior of Avalon for several seconds. Unless lodged in soft metal somewhere, if would eventually fall to the floor.

If the brace on the right side is bent, and relates to the flail drive, could the damage be part of the overall effects of the Crab hitting a mine?

Mine fields typically have set patterns/spacing for maximum effect for a given number of mines. If mines are set in a cluster too close together, hitting one can trigger more in the group. That might have happened with AVALON, breaking the flail and the track on the right side. Depending on why she was at that location during the battle, the crew may have successfully abandoned AVALON. A short while later, a German vehicle arrives on the scene, assumes an active enemy vehicle has been spotted and fires a sweeping burst of cannon fire at it until realizing the Crab is already out of action and moves on.

Another possibility could be mines took the flail out somewhere else. AVALON was on the move to withdraw when she struck another mine that broke her track and she was abandoned.

One other point to consider. There are anti tank mines and anti personnel mines. It is not unusual for infantry to be able to move through an anti tank mine field because not enough weight hits the mine triggers. Leading infantry can walk an anti tank mine field without spotting anything and then wave vehicles through, only to watch as the mines start going off. Be interesting to know if there is enough energy in an anti personnel mine to break a tank track link and cause little other damage. AVALON could have been used to clear any type of mine field in a hurry, not just anti tank, so anything is possible without more detail.

Maybe some answers are still sitting at the bottom of AVALON?

David

[Alex van de Wetering]

I wonder how well the lower area of the interior has been cleaned over the years and if any of the things found there were kept by the museum?

David, when I was in the tank 10 years ago, the lower half of the tank was still filled with all sorts of litter from museum visitors; soda cans, snack packages and the like. I don't think the tank was cleaned all that often.....and they just closed up the hatches (except the escape hatch) to prevent visitors from entering (I am guessing somewhere in the 80's). However, I am sure a lot of stuff in the interior got damaged over the years in the museum from visitors breaking and stealing stuff, but also under influence from weather.
I am not aware of any remaining bits of Avalon in storage in the museum. The engine did get removed somewhere in the 90's/2000's and was in storage until a few years ago. It has since been sold and will hopefully power a restored Firefly soon.

I think both your suggestions on the final minutes of Avalon sound plausible.

If the brace on the right side is bent, and relates to the flail drive, could the damage be part of the overall effects of the Crab hitting a mine?

I think the brace was either damaged by rounds coming through the sides, or from an internal explosion of ammunition. I don't think damage to the flail itself could result in damage to the brace.

Regarding mine damage; I read somewhere that when the Germans also had a habit of fixing an extra mine or extra explosives to a mine in order to increase the blast disabling flail tanks.

[David Dunlop]

Me again, Alex. Your worst nightmare.

Take a look at the photos of the flail beam in Posts 29 and 32 that you and Jakko added to this thread. Doesn’t it look odd such a large gap to the outside is visible through the right side hull? My gut tells me that gap should not be there.

To my tired eyes, there looks like a shadow outline around the edge of that hole which matches very closely to the heavy metal flange surrounding that beam. I think that flange was originally welded up against the inside of the hull and some external force has broken it free and driven it inwards about 4 or so inches.

If you take a look at the forward side images of that beam, there is a penetration hole with a slightly downward and inward angle. It looks like if that flange was flush with the inner hull, whatever penetrated the hull at that point, also put a notch into the flange beside the entry hole?

That would suggest the penetration hole preceded whatever event broke the beam free and pushed it inwards. It might also mean the large hole in the beam that entered the beam from the rear side and exited the front, may have happened when that part of the beam was still outside the vehicle.

David

[David Herbert]

The damaged hull brace mentioned above (just to the rear of the flail drive chain case) is part of the standard Sherman hull and I have no doubt that it was damaged by projectiles that penetrated near it and then hit it. It is not made of armour so would be relatively easily damaged (or repaired again !). The only damage that I see to the flail drive chain case is clearly from projectiles / shrapnel, not from mechanical failure of the drive.

Internal ammunition explosions usually result in the turret being blown off or at the very least a catastrophic fire. I see no evidence of either.

I doubt that an anti personnel mine would break a track but it is certainly not impossible. If an anti tank mine broke the track there would be obvious significant damage to the floor and probably the front bogie.

As for the angle of the penetrations, I doubt that the tank would have been on exactly level ground or at the same level as the gun firing at it. Also if it did loose it's right track before being fired at, the right side of the tank would have dropped as it rolled off the broken track by about 7cm on a hard surface and at least 30cm if the ground was at all soft.

David

[Hanno Spoelstra]

Originally Posted by Alex van de Wetering

I was hoping the war diaries were to be found online somewhere, but no luck so far. I think I will send a request to the UK National Archives.

This may be of help:

https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/...d-war-research

[Alex van de Wetering]

This may be of help:

Thanks Hanno; I visit the Archives website regularly.

These are the ones to study:

https://discovery.nationalarchives.g...ils/r/C4440973
https://discovery.nationalarchives.g...ils/r/C4440950

It says you can send a request for a quotation for a copy of the documents. Some members on ww2talk also offer to scan items in the National Archives; I just don't know the current options given the Covid troubles.


The recommendation for William Hall is available online though
https://discovery.nationalarchives.g...ils/r/C9050525
It does describe his actions at Overloon, but sadly there are no details on the name or census number of his tank.

[Maurice Donckers]

this flail could be Avalon , look at the mounting position of the track links on the turret , just it still has the cover on the front of the flail drive with 53 and 79th on . But off course there are more tanks with spare links on the turret .

[MicS]

Originally Posted by Maurice Donckers

this flail could be Avalon , look at the mounting position of the track links on the turret , just it still has the cover on the front of the flail drive with 53 and 79th on . But off course there are more tanks with spare links on the turret .

Maurice,

It cannot be AVALON, although the spare track links disposition does look similar. But the tanks have different types of commander's sights, i.e. the blade type sight on the photo with a group of troopers on it, and a vane type on AVALON:
Crab WD - Notes.jpg
AVALON - NationaalArchief2 - Notes.jpg

For more info on these two types, see (as always) the Sherman Minutiae page:
http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_m..._variants.html

Michel

[Maurice Donckers]

Yes I see , no weld remains left
But be careful , some turrets (I have 2) have both types mounted .

[Alex van de Wetering]

It cannot be AVALON, although the spare track links disposition does look similar.

Also; it has the Whyman lane marker system, which as far as I know was never fitted to "Avalon". The Westminster Dragoons War diary mentions the first fitment of the Whyman lane marker system on November 13, and on december 29 it reads "jig for fitting Whyman lane markers received and fitting begun".

However, it's still a very interesting picture....it appears on at least 3 websites, so I am not sure where it originates from; I am presuming the picture was taken in 1945, possibly even shortly after the war ended. It also shows that the fitment of the track armour and the storage bins on the hull sides are somewhat similar on Westminster Dragoon crabs.

[Alex van de Wetering]

Some more IWM pictures.

BU 1213
source: https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/i...ject/205206892
BU 1211
source: https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/i...ject/205206891

Both pictures are taken on 17 October 1944 near Venray. Again, not Avalon, but I do think these are A Squadron Westminster Dragoons.
It also shows that the tanks weren't yet fitted with the track link armour, which is something I presume was done about half november.....and a very faint number on the side of the turret, of the crab missing part of the armour around the flail gear-case.