1/144 Victrix Churchills?

[Mako]

Can the 1/144th Victrix Churchills be used to represent the later models (e.g. the Mk. VII with 75mm gun) used in Normandy and beyond, with plausible acceptability.

I admit to not being an expert on the model, but read that the later model was a bit wider than some of the earlier ones, and had much heavier armor on the front.

The Arrowhead Mk. VIIs look like another good option, but run about twice as much, though of course they are metal, which is nice.

Also, while I'm asking about Victrix, what do people think of the British and German infantry packs in this scale?

Do the have the requisite troops to make accurate and balanced, squads/sections, platoons/troops, and companies/squadrons, with the right ratios of rifles, SMGs, machine guns, and mortars, etc.?

Another option would be using the nice Pendraken minis, but they appear to be a lot thinner, so probably not compatible with one another.

[Jemima Fawr]

Can the 1/144th Victrix Churchills be used to represent the later models (e.g. the Mk. VII with 75mm gun) used in Normandy and beyond, with plausible acceptability.

I admit to not being an expert on the model, but read that the later model was a bit wider than some of the earlier ones, and had much heavier armor on the front.

Erm, not really.  The Mk VII had very obvious circular hatches on the sides and circular ports on the front, whereas everything on the previous marks were square.  The Mk VII's turret was also quite different, with a thick rim around the base and 'cheeks' either side of the gun-mantlet.

I shouldn't worry about it though, as they remained very rare right up to the end of the war, due to their being prioritised to the Crocodile regiments.  31st Tank Brigade only got their first Mk VIIs as part of the replacements following Hill 112 in mid-July 1944 and they were invariably used to equip Regiment and Squadron HQs and the occasional lucky Troop Commander.  In Italy 21st Tank Brigade did form the occasional complete Troop of three Mk VIIs, but never any more than that.

All marks of Churchill were 10 feet 8 inches wide.  The Mk VII did have considerably more armour - around 50% more on the front and 33% more on the sides, compared to the earlier marks.

[Mako]

Thank you for the information. I really appreciate it

So which Churchills would be most appropriate for Normandy - perhaps the Mark IVs or Mark VIs?

I read an account for Operation Blue Coat, and they mentioned that they had the latest Churchill models, which I took to mean the Mk. VIIs, because a lot more of those were made with the 75 mm gun.

Details for those used in the Hill 112 action would be especially appreciated.

[fred]

Despite the Victrix stuff being called 12mm they fit pretty well with 10mm metal manufacturers.

For example the Victrix PzIV seems pretty similar in size to the Pithead metal ones.

The Victrix infantry are pretty slim compared with metal figures, but are of similar height. I’ve painted up a number of the Germans, and quite liked painting them up. They have crisp but shallow detail compared with metal figures. As to poses, there is a decent mix, I would have liked a few more SMGs and a few more running poses. For me there are too many prone poses - I got an extra sprue to give me more standing figures for the bases I needed. Having the heavy weapons in the pack is good -but whether these are at the right ratio will depend on what scale you are building at.

I like the Victrix stuff, but did expect a lower price point and a bit more variety especially if I am having to buy 6 of the same vehicle (I suppose PSC 15mm has spoiled me!)

[NTM]

Marks of the various tanks in units can be found here

http://niehorster.org/017_britain/44-06-06_Neptune/Land/z_tanks_44-06-22_21AG.html

The following comes from Over the Battlefield Operation Epsom by Ian Daglish;

Final anticipated holdings of 7 & 9RTR

30 Mk III (14 converted to 75mm)
6 Mk IV
6 Mk V
16 Mk VI/VII

A ratio of 1 6pdr tank in 3 was finally settled on.

Something to note is that a Mk IV converted to 75mm was to all intents and purposes identical to a Mk VI.

Now the question is how to represent on the tabletop?
The Victrix kit only builds the 6pdr armed Mk III and AVRE. Changing the barrels could be an option but I imagine quite fiddly and perhaps not that noticeable. My preference would be to use Mk III for 6pdr and IV/VI for 75mm. been a long time since I used the scale so not sure on the various options in 10/12mm but I did like the Pendraken Churchill. Their III and IV models are both 6pdr armed but the distinctive turrets would work for me on the table.

Mark (Jemima Fawr) has a very good two part guide on his blog

http://www.jemimafawr.co.uk/2020/04/20/churchill-tanks-in-nw-europe-1944-45-part-1/

http://www.jemimafawr.co.uk/2020/04/23/churchill-tanks-in-nw-europe-1944-45-part-2/

[Jemima Fawr]

Thanks for the tip, NTM!

The majority types in 31st Tank Brigade at the start of the Normandy Campaign were 75mm-armed Mk III* & Mk IV(75), plus some Mk VI, with one tank per Troop of three being a 6pdr-armed Mk III or Mk IV.  The Mk IV(75) and Mk VI were identical - Mk IV(75) were upgraded Mk IV hulls, whereas Mk VI were factory-built with 75mm guns.  Each Squadron HQ included two Mk V with 95mm howitzers as the 3rd and 4th tanks.

There is anecdotal evidence to suggest that when 34th Tank Brigade arrived in July 1944 they had a higher ratio of 6pdr tanks, but the strength returns for 1st June and 1st December 1944 don't reflect that.

6th Guards Tank Brigade had already converted every tank in their orbat to a 75mm-armed model, but information received from Normandy, added to the arrival of 6pdr APDS, led them to rapidly swap one tank in each Troop back to a 6pdr model before embarkation to Normandy in late July.

Note that Mk III, Mk III* and Mk IV(75) suffered high attrition rates due to their age and mechanical wear & tear as much as enemy action, so steadily disappeared as they were replaced with new Mk IV, Mk VI and Mk VII tanks.  9 RTR reported losing its last Mk III/Mk III* just as they entered Germany in 1945.

I'm not sure what the anecdote means regarding the 'latest types' as they definitely weren't equipped with many (if any) Mk VIIs.  Perhaps they mean that they'd lost all the Mk IIIs and all the Mk IVs with short 6pdrs?

[Mako]

Thank you for the replies, links, and info.  I really appreciate it.

I was surprised to read that some units went back to the 6 Pdrs., after having the 75mm guns, but given the performance of the APDS rounds, I can see why.

Still, I hadn't expected that.

I'm also surprised to read about mixed troops too, making supplying ammo to the units that much more complicated too.

Of course, I can see why you'd want tanks with hot rounds when dealing with German armor.

[Jemima Fawr]

The long-barreled Mk 5 6pdr actually already had a very slight AP advantage over the 75mm when using the standard APCR ammo, but the APDS did make a significant difference.  However, the overwhelming mission priority was infantry support and the superlative US 75mm round was very much where it was at, so it was a careful balancing act.  In terms of ammo supply, it wasn't really all that much different to having troops of Shermans or Cromwells including a 17pdr tank.

In Italy Sherman units frequently had 75mm, 76mm, 17pdr AND 105mm guns all in the same squadron!

[Etranger]

The long-barreled Mk 5 6pdr actually already had a very slight AP advantage over the 75mm when using the standard APCR ammo, but the APDS did make a significant difference.  However, the overwhelming mission priority was infantry support and the superlative US 75mm round was very much where it was at, so it was a careful balancing act.  In terms of ammo supply, it wasn't really all that much different to having troops of Shermans or Cromwells including a 17pdr tank.

In Italy Sherman units frequently had 75mm, 76mm, 17pdr AND 105mm guns all in the same squadron!

The late Gerry Chester, ex NIH, stated that his regiment were quite happy with the AT performance of the 6 pounder (pre APDS!) as they knew that it had a decent performance even against Tigers. The combination of 6 pounder and 75mm guns in the same troop appeared quite satisfactory to them.  His website is archived here http://web.archive.org/web/20130620202136/http://www.northirishhorse.net/
 

[Jemima Fawr]

The late Gerry Chester, ex NIH, stated that his regiment were quite happy with the AT performance of the 6 pounder (pre APDS!) as they knew that it had a decent performance even against Tigers. The combination of 6 pounder and 75mm guns in the same troop appeared quite satisfactory to them.  His website is archived here http://web.archive.org/web/20130620202136/http://www.northirishhorse.net/

Yes and he was probably using the shorter Mk 3 gun! 

Bloody well done for finding the archived NIH site!  I thought it was gone forever! 

[Etranger]

Me too, but one of the ex-forces websites preserved it.

[NTM]

According to the structure listed on Gerry's site the 6pdr and 75mm tanks were in separate troops

http://web.archive.org/web/20110518073155/http://www.northirishhorse.net/articles/19.html

[Etranger]

Gerry's site? That was referring to Italy, not NW Europe. The troop composition changed  from time to time in Italy too, eg the short lived Sherman/Churchill mixed troop.

[NTM]

Yes Gerry not Harry good old auto correct.
Sherman/Churchill were not mixed in the same troop though according to the link.

[Jemima Fawr]

Yes Gerry not Harry good old auto correct.
Sherman/Churchill were not mixed in the same troop though according to the link.

Yes, Gerry's organisational information related mainly to units in Italy and specifically his own NIH, though there is a lot of info on the site relating to Churchills generally.  As mentioned above, the NIH established full troops of Mk VII and the other types also tended to be grouped as complete Troops of a single type.  I think Etranger meant 'mixed SQUADRON' when he said 'Troop'.