Any More Funnies?

I have seen pictures of the tank conversions known as Hobarts Funnies. I recall the 'flail tank' for knocking out landmines and beach protection and the 'carpet tank' for laying a carpet of canvas over barbed wire emplacements.I believe they also converted a number to lay bridges. Any posters know of any others?

It is also stated that the US troops took so many casualties because they did not have the same 'funnies'as the British. Is this correct?
The only funny claimed to be a US design is the swimming Sherman tank. Is this also true?

Regards Graham

 

I have often wondered if the Sherman BARV (I think thats right), Matilda Flail tanks, Churchill Crocodile and Churchill AVRE vehicles counted as funnies, does anyone know for sure?

The bridge layer you are talking about I believe is one of the AVRE (Armoured Vehicle Royal Engineers) which had bridge attatched to the front with a hinge and a winch attatched to the front end so that it could be lowered into position. The vehicle was armed with a Spigot mortar and an MG IIRC. To be honest I don't know half as much as I should about this particular vehicle, only what I have picked up from my Dad and the old matchbox model (which I tried twice to make when I was much younger and fluffed up both times, I think I may try again one of these days).

Another vehicle was the Churchill Ark Assault Bridge


There are loads of Churchill varients, just a question of which count as funnies:
http://www.jed.simonides.org/tanks/charlie/churchill_series/churchill-series.html

 

I have seen Shermans outfitted to be a flail tank,in fact i've only ever seen Shermans outfitted for the Flail idea, which is in all reality, quite amazing.

 

According to "79th Armored Division: Hobo's Funnies" by Nigel Duncan they include the:

Sherman DD
Valentine DD
Sherman CDL (Canal Defense Light)
Lee / Grant CDL
Churchill AVRE
also with the AVRE:
Small Box Girder bridge
Elevatable Goat
Bobbin (carpet layer)
AVRE sledge
Conger (rocket propelled snake for clearing mines)
Churchill ARK
Sherman ARK
Sherman plow (mine plow several variants)
Churchill Crocodile
Sherman Crocodile
RAM Kangaroo
Terrapin (a DUKW in British serivce)
Buffalo (a LVT 1 -4 in British service)
Sherman fascine carrier
Churchill Scissors bridge
Churchill Great Eastern (rocket propelled bridge)

I'm not sure I got them all but, that's the vast majority of them. Interestingly, the division never did operate as a whole. It was parcelled out as needed for various operations, a brigade here, a brigade there....

 

It's the 'Elevatable Goat' that really interests me...

 

Am I wrong or was the crab not mentioned yet?


Most German defenses were quickly overrun because they could not stop the incoming British, who used specially modified tanks, called "Hobart’s Funnies." These were specially armored vehicles named for their inventor, British General Percy Hobart, and had many different forms. The Duplex Drive tank (DD tank) had a collapsible flotation device and was the only Funny used by the Americans. The others, used wisely by the British were the "Crocodile" (a flamethrower tank), the "Crab" (a minesweeper with flailing chains), the "Flying Dustbin" (a mortar tank) and the "Bobbin" (a tank that laid down artificial road).
http://www.angelfire.com/ct/ww2europe/1944b.html

[ 02. December 2003, 02:02 AM: Message edited by: KnightMove ]

 

The DD was a british design. It was originally to based upon the Valentine Gun Tank. But eventually was used on the sherman. It was the only funny to be used by the Americans.

 

Thanks for the replies so far

It would seem that the opinion is that the Sherman DD tank was the 'only funny' used by the US on D-day then.

So why was this

I would have thought that the Allies chief of staff would have all had meetings together and the benefits of the 'funnies' would have been talked about at length.
Was there a lack of heavy capacity landing craft available to the US troops, or was it the terain they were tasked to capture that led them not to use funnies?

It just seems odd not to use such useful available kit.

Regards Graham.

 

I'm posting this without referring to sources ; going only from memory.

The 'official' reason for the US non-use of 'Funnies' was imcompatibility of parts and lack of training ( ie for the Churchills ), hence the use solely of the Shermans ( or mis-use, as many were launched too far from the shore ).

Plausible, but the 'unofficial' view is that the Americans scoffed at the weird-looking special armour and rejected use of it out-of-hand as another eccentric British scheme....

 

So all the videocaps/pictures of the Sherman "crabs" are lend-lease British Shermans?

 

That's right, Leitung.

The Americans had earlier favoured large roller devices such as T1E1 'Earthworm' and T1E3 'Aunt Jemima'. These were cumbersome in use and so they then experimented with the British 'flail' equipment as originally used on the Matilda Scorpion. However, this proved time-consuming to develop satisfactorily, the British were 'already there' - so British-converted Shermans were used in NW Europe.

( It's only a model, but :

http://www.ww2modelmaker.com/modelpages/MIminesw.htm

)

 

Here is an awsome page for all sorts of armor, the link will take you right to the Sherman Crab.

http://www.nahverteidigungswaffe.de/ComWealthTanks/M4Crab-01.htm

 

The first time I heard that the Americans didn't use Funnies, I was very surprised esp when comparing the casualty rate from Omaha and Utah and Gold, Sword and Juno.

 

As an interesting reversal of this situation, the US made widespread use of bulldozer tanks, something the British did not adopt. Each independent tank battalion in the US Army usually had 5 such tanks attached (one per company and 2 at battalion HQ). These proved very valuable in combat operations.

 

The man himself...

http://www.softwhale.com/history/D-Day/MajGen-Hobart.htm

On D-Day strange canvas covered bathtub looking vehicles came in from the ocean and landed on the beach. One tank driver later said, "I still remember very vividly some of the machinegunners standing up in their posts looking at us with their mouths wide open."

General Eisenhower wrote after D-Day,"The comparatively light casualties which we sustained on all the beaches except Omaha were in large measure due to the success of the novel mechanical contrivances which were employed.... It is doubtful if the assault forces could have firmly established themselves without the assistance of these weapons."

 

From the article shown at the link above:

"The tanks were (fairly) water tight but would not float (probably no surprise!). So General Hobart's team attached the canvas flotation collars to displace enough water to keep them from sinking. It worked, at least in calm seas and for short periods. The problem on Omaha Beach was that due to danger from German guns, many of them were dropped by the Navy up to 12 miles off the beach and in ruff seas. Several swamped and sank. On Omaha only 2 of the 29 tanks made it to the beach (not all of them were lost due to sinking). On the other beaches they worked quite well."

Interesting. Fairly heavy losses in tanks, but even one tank will make a huge change in the deciding fact. Especially in the case of Omaha. I wonder how well they performed on that beach?

 

The bit in front of the tank is the T1E3 (M1),
According to Chamberlain and Ellis, 75 were built and used extensively in Normandy.

Also, the US built Mine Exploder (T2) Flail was used in NW Europe in "small numbers".

Mine exploders T1 and T2 were developed for M3 Medium and M3 Light tanks respectively.

Dozens of other types of mine clearing devices were trialed (all using the "T" designation) but all except for Mine Exploder T5E3 were cancelled except for copies of the British Crab devices.

T5E3 was ordered in limited numbers for attachment onto the standard M1 dozer blade.

 

If the US Army had used flail tanks on Omaha beach the casualty rate due to S-mines would have been very much reduced. This, assuming that the flail tanks had been able to land in front of the infantry.

Let's not forget also the various funny landing craft developed by the British which performed very well.

 

Ploughs were built and used on British tanks from the Matilda 1 on. However they were not intended for use as mine exploders, rather as engineering tanks for road building, rubble removal etc.

A small number of Churchill AVRE with Jeffries Plough for mine clearing were used by 79 Armoured division in the Normandy landings.

 

Interesting...

Churchill AVRE (Armoured Vehicle Royal Engineers)
A Churchill III or IV equipped with the Petard, a 290 mm Spigot mortar, throwing the 40 pound (18 kg) "Flying dustbin" with its 28 pound high explosive warhead. A weapon designed for the quick levelling of fortifications. It was designed after the Canadian failures at Dieppe and could also be equipped with numerous other attachments, such as mine flails, fascine rollers, explosive placers etc

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Churchill_tank



http://hsfeatures.com/churchillavrewk_1.htm