RMASG Centaur.

[Sgt.Squarehead]

Nice to see another one return from the gloom.....Smashing work and just the inspiration I need, I've got a few unfinished of my own. 

[Kingsman]

Right.  Trackguards. 

 

It seems that the flat-top trackguards were introduced towards the end of Type C hull production and were standard on Type D hulls.  Centaur IVs were built on both Type C and D hulls.  Tamiya have kitted a Type D, so the flat-top trackguards are correct.  Any Centaur IV with sloping trackguards must therefore be a Type C hull.  Flat trackguards could be C or D, although D is more likely.  I believe all the CS, both Centaur and Cromwell, were built by Fowlers: the 2nd largest builder of Centaurs behind Leyland.

 

So, unless you've backdated the engine deck to a Type C you still need the flat-top trackguards. 

 

The hull gunner's vision periscope was reintroduced at about the same time as the revised trackguards, but photo evidence says that RMASG tanks with late Type C and Type D hulls had it removed along with the MG.

[Bullbasket]

18 hours ago, Hamden said:

 

Nice progress

 

 Roger

Thanks a lot Roger.

 

John.

 

 

[Bullbasket]

16 hours ago, Das Abteilung said:

But hold on!  Hunter - as kitted by Tamiya - and Vidette (at least) did indeed have flat-top trackguards.  A couple of the memorial Centaurs in Normandy still have the full front sloping trackguards fitted.  Hard parts to source for a restoration.

 

....as did Hood.

[Bullbasket]

12 hours ago, Das Abteilung said:

So, unless you've backdated the engine deck to a Type C you still need the flat-top trackguards. 

No need. It's already a Type C. Tamiya got it wrong with regards to the engine deck for the tanks that they covered on the decal sheet for the Cromwell. They all had Type D. But fortunately, it was correct for the Centaur, or at least for the one that I'm building. Accurate Armour did a replacement engine deck to convert the C into a D, but still got the panel lines in the wrong place. They compounded the error by including it in the conversion for the type F.

 

John.

[Bullbasket]

16 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

Nice to see another one return from the gloom.....Smashing work and just the inspiration I need, I've got a few unfinished of my own. 

Thanks Sgt. When this is finished, it will be two down, six to go, unless I find some more unfinished works lurking at the back of the cupboard.

 

John.

[Bullbasket]

Just to clarify what I said earlier with regards to the engine decks, this is taken from my WIP of the Cromwell Vllw.

 

  Tamiya engine deck, as per the kit.

                                                                                                                        Accurate Armour replacement deck to convert to a D type, but the panel lines for the forward parts of the outer hatches are too far forward.

 

John.

[phildagreek]

Smart work.

[Kingsman]

Thanks for posting the engine deck diagrams.  Very useful.

 

Now, does anyone have any pics or drawings of the Centaur-type idler tensioner?  I hoped the Centaur Dozer at Bovington did, but it has the Cromwell type - and the flat-top trackguards.  Would MG Cars possibly have changed this when they did the dozer conversion?  The info I've found suggests that only Centaurs III and IV built as Cromwells IV and VI had the Cromwell type adjusters.

 

I've worked out from photos and the 2 Bovington tanks that those with the Cromwell type will have a small semicircular protuberance(!!) at either end of the lower front plate.  This is the substantial swivelling casting on which the idler axle is mounted.  I believe it is visible at all tensions.  Photos of tanks known or believed to be Centaurs don't seem to have this object visible, so is that a frontal identifying feature?  Or did Centaurs have the same casting but just a different method of adjusting it?

[Andrew Jones]

The Centaur idler adjuster was internal , alternative parts are provided in the kit , for a Centaur idler omit parts C26, C27 and D17 and add parts A16 to the front plate [ these are the covers for the internal adjuster access points ]. You should probably also remove the rachets moulded on the hull sides behind the idler mounts.

 

Andrew

[Bullbasket]

5 hours ago, phildagreek said:

Smart work.

Thanks Phil, appreciate it (and stop blaming the dog every time 🐕).

 

John.

[Kingsman]

It all falls into place in my simple brain now.  I'd seen the idler adjuster bosses (parts A16) on the glacis of Crusader but not realised what they were.  I think they're the actual adjusters, though, not covers for them.  They have a square drive hole in the centre, presumably for a square drive tool of some sort instead of the "hockey stick".  Although that could just be to remove a cover to access an adjuster nut beneath.  I haven't noticed a different adjuster tool stowed externally.

 

Yes, the hull side ratchets and lock bolts would have been entirely superfluous on a Centaur.  But I'm still thinking that something is missing from the kit for the Centaur option.  If the idler arm pivoted internally there should be a curved slot for it in the hull side plating, presumably with a sliding shield.  If it pivoted externally, as did Cromwell's, then there should be a pivoting arm on the outside.  The kit has neither.  Although I suppose they would hardly be seen behind the idler, but with the front trackguards cut back the area is quite visible.  I presume Centaur had whatever arrangement Crusader had, via Cavalier.  I'll have to poke my camera under the Crusader (and Covenanter?) when I'm next at Bovington again next weekend.  Can't find any informative pictures online.

[Bullbasket]

The whole question of what is and what isn't right for a Centaur/Cromwell is a minefield because of the upgrades and rebuilds. I have a photo in a book of a very early Cromwell with sloping track guards, still in front line service in Holland in late 1944 and the crew are using a "hockey stick" to adjust the track tension.

 

John.

[Kingsman]

Well I think we're stuffed then ................  Although allegedly all Cromwells, even the early slopy-trackguard ones, had the "hockey stick" mechanism.  Finding such an early one in action must be unusual.  I know that a bunch were declared unfit, marked as unarmoured and relegated to training because of armour flaws.

 

Perhaps more out of the ordinary is that the slopy-trackguard memorial Centaur "Seawolf" has the hockey-stick adjuster.  I can't make out which it has in the period photos and whether it is actually the same tank.  Memorials are not to be trusted.

 

But If I'm going to use the worm adjusters I'd like to have the rest of the mechanism correct.

[Bullbasket]

This is the photo that I was referring to.

[Redcoat2966]

On 9/17/2018 at 6:43 AM, Bullbasket said:

The whole question of what is and what isn't right for a Centaur/Cromwell is a minefield because of the upgrades and rebuilds. I have a photo in a book of a very early Cromwell with sloping track guards, still in front line service in Holland in late 1944 and the crew are using a "hockey stick" to adjust the track tension.

 

John.

Hi Chaps.....I think I'll leave mine on the kit.....for the pure reason those dam brackets took some time to put together and I ain't taking them off.......😁

 

Simon.

[Bullbasket]

1 hour ago, Redcoat2966 said:

Hi Chaps.....I think I'll leave mine on the kit.....for the pure reason those dam brackets took some time to put together and I ain't taking them off.......😁

 

Simon.

I don't blame you.

 

John.

[Redcoat2966]

Hi John, yeah....they were a tough one's to do as I wanted to have one set working so I could pop the tool in after painting....many an hour screaming and swearing

 

Simon.

[Bullbasket]

12 hours ago, Redcoat2966 said:

Hi John, yeah....they were a tough one's to do as I wanted to have one set working so I could pop the tool in after painting....many an hour screaming and swearing

 

Simon.

I know what you mean. I am not a fan of a lot of the etched brass, but see it as a necessary evil. Some of the parts are so small and even though I don't have fingers like sausages, I struggle with them.

 

John. 

[Redcoat2966]

Hi John.........I agree, it's needed on some areas of some kits.........I start to draw the line at replacing perfectly good engine deck hinges with brass.......I would prefer if Voyager had supplied the rear fenders. I know they also sell a fender kit, but as the Centaur (possibly 😁) had the rear step one's; it wouldn't have hurt them to put them in this PE set. I mean replacement hatch covers would have been helpfull for those wanting to have them open.....but hinges.....you really need that special tool I've seen for putting those together....I think I'll stick with my new method of grooved rod....lot cleaner......

 

Simon.

[SleeperService]

Another cracking thread! Good to see British armour getting some love.

 

I have all the answers you need. Send me your e-mail addresses @Bullbasket and @Redcoat2966 and I'll send you a file to unzip and marvel at. I'm nicholasDOTperry198ATbtinternetDOTcom

[Bullbasket]

37 minutes ago, SleeperService said:

I have all the answers you need. Send me your e-mail addresses @Bullbasket and @Redcoat2966 and I'll send you a file to unzip and marvel at. I'm nicholasDOTperryATbtinternetDOTcom

email inbound.

[Bullbasket]

Accurate Armour supply you with the bracket that fixes to the engine deck for the wire that attaches to the trunking, and four etched turn buckles. Getting this all attached was a complete PITA, but I achieved it with some copper wire and a lot of super glue, although the wire is a bit slack.

I then turned my attention to the pioneer tools, removing the kit's attachment parts with a sharp blade, and then fixing them in place using the parts from the Eduard set.

 

I returned to the turret to finish off couple of jobs. Centaurs carried an extra aerial base on the LHS, just in front of the commander's hatch. Fortunately, Tamiya included this in the kit. I also used the B set aerial from the kit as although the cage is a little of the thick side, once clamped in the chuck of my mini drill and spun up against a sanding stick, it doesn't look too bad. Incidentally, anyone who's interested, Accurate Armour do a set for British aerial bases. The A set is in resin and the cage for the B set is 3D printed.

Final item on the turret was the searchlight. Again, I used the kit item as it comes, but added the two handles on the back from the Eduard set. This item isn't shown on the Tamiya instructions, but it is in the kit. The position is different though to that of the Cromwell. It's still on the LHS, but further to the rear.

 

Final job was to load it up with some stowage. I chose to use poetic licence here and took ideas from photos of different Centaurs. Who knows? Maybe at some stage, the Centaur that I was modelling was loaded in this way. At the rear on the RHS, I glued an ammo box next to where the tow rope ends were located. I made a frame from thin card to accommodate four jerry cans (Italeri) and fixed them at the rear of the track guard. On top of the engine deck I glued some equipment which came from Value Gear with a camnet in front. At the front I covered up the fact that I didn't attach the two side lights or the bolt heads for the track guard brackets with a camnet on the LHS and a small tarp on the right. The camnets come from a Scottish company which I believe is no more.

 

 

And that concludes the build. After it's had a wash and brush up, it will be onto the painting. Thanks for looking.

 

John.

 

[SleeperService]

27 minutes ago, Bullbasket said:

email inbound.

Wrong address sorry. BT or Yahoo killed that one.

 

nicholasDOTperry198ATbtinternetDOTcom should work.

[Badder]

Hi John,

Fantastic build. She's gonna look wondeful with some paint on, I'm sure.

 

Rearguards,

Badder