Pendraken Miniatures Forum

Pendraken Rules! => Blitzkrieg Commander IV => BKC-IV Rule Queries => Topic started by: Cross698 on 21 May 2019, 11:29:02 AM

Title: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Cross698 on 21 May 2019, 11:29:02 AM
In the British List the Crocodile is not "TOUGH" unlike the Churchill Mk VII. Is this to reflect the armoured trailer? :'(
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Big Insect on 21 May 2019, 11:33:46 AM
Yes.
Hits on the trailer will usually KO the tank (apparently) and I suspect that any other AFV flame-throwers are all equally vulnerable.

Cheers
Mark

In fact I did at one point consider the idea that an exploding fuel trailer would also suppress (automatically) all other units (friends & foe alike) within 5cms. But that might have been seen as a bit too granular.
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Cross698 on 21 May 2019, 11:49:16 AM
Thanks. The drivers were trained to negotiate the tank in such a way as to keep the trailer protected, so you could argue that the movement of a Crocodile was only 10cm, rather than 15cm. Well the German Players at our club will be happy! :-
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: fsn on 21 May 2019, 12:03:36 PM
Quote from: Big Insect on 21 May 2019, 11:33:46 AM
Hits on the trailer will usually KO the tank (apparently) and I suspect that any other AFV flame-throwers are all equally vulnerable.
I thought that the Crocdile was designed so that if the trailer was disabled it could be disengaged from within the vehicle, and the Churchill could then fight as a normal gun tank.

Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Dr Dave on 21 May 2019, 01:03:04 PM
Yep, the trailer can be ditched and you're left with what is a mkVII minus the bow MG.

I assume that the trailer is low profile if it is being targeted and hence making the Churchill non-Tough?
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Cross698 on 21 May 2019, 01:53:40 PM
Can you target the trailer separately? Probably easier to just have the stats as it is. The armoured fuel pipe went under the tank and then came up into the firing position and believe the trailer could be disconnected from within the tank. Certainly the Bobbin had charges that could be operated from inside the tank. I suspect the Churchill was safer than the Panzer III flame tank or any other tank that had the fuel contained within the body of the tank. But although dodgy either  , at least the Churchill had good armour.
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Big Insect on 21 May 2019, 02:21:53 PM
Nope - you cannot target the trailer separately! The cheek  :'(

Far to granular for what we are looking to achieve.

It's triggered an interesting thought though ... I wouldnt want to be an Infantry unit assaulting a Crocodile or any other AFV flamethrower unit ... as the risk of self-annihilation would probably have been quite high  :o
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Cross698 on 21 May 2019, 03:08:14 PM
Perhaps a template explosion! Any unsaved hit roll one dice and on a score of 6 it goes up! Could be the basis of a scenario!
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Dr Dave on 21 May 2019, 03:59:54 PM
Quote from: Cross698 on 21 May 2019, 03:08:14 PM
Perhaps a template explosion! Any unsaved hit roll one dice and on a score of 6 it goes up! Could be the basis of a scenario!

So you can't target the trailer. But Jerry does get the benefit of it not being as well armoured as the tank -  like he is targeting it, except without the disadvantage of it being low. I'd point out that it's a troops of 3-4 vehicles all having their trailers targeted. Is it drifting from a bttn / brigade level game into skirmish?
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Cross698 on 21 May 2019, 04:06:20 PM
Well FWC does have suggested skirmish rules!
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Raider4 on 21 May 2019, 04:38:58 PM
Quote from: Dr Dave on 21 May 2019, 03:59:54 PM
. . . I'd point out that it's a troops of 3-4 vehicles all having their trailers targeted.

Well, it could be. I've always looked at it as 1:1 on vehicles/guns etc., and 1 stand = 1 section/squad for infantry.

Otherwise the vehicle units don't make any sense to me.
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Wulf on 21 May 2019, 06:49:00 PM
Everything you ever wanted to know about the Churchill Crocodile...

 
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Cross698 on 21 May 2019, 07:02:12 PM
Very good. Bovington is a great museum.
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Dr Dave on 21 May 2019, 07:04:09 PM
Since the trailer is the source of its vulnerability in the rules compared to a normal mkVII if it dumped the trailer after flaming it would revert back to being tough.
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Wulf on 21 May 2019, 07:04:19 PM
Quote from: Cross698 on 21 May 2019, 07:02:12 PM
Very good. Bovington is a great museum.
I added another video
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Cross698 on 22 May 2019, 07:39:02 AM
Quote from: Wulf on 21 May 2019, 07:04:19 PM
I added another video

Very interesting.
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Big Insect on 22 May 2019, 08:55:05 PM
You cannot dump the trailor .... come on chaps ... this is getting down to a "how much ammo can an infantry man carry" level  ;)
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: fsn on 22 May 2019, 09:26:10 PM
Quote from: Big Insect on 22 May 2019, 08:55:05 PM
You cannot dump the trailor ....

"Once the trailer ha expended its contents, or if it became damaged or caught on an obstacle, it could be disengaged by means of a quick release, activated by a Bowden cable. In theory it was then possible for the tank to continue in action as a conventional gun tank ..."
David Fletcher. Churchill Crocodile Flamethrower, Osprey, 2007

Sorry.  :-[
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: pierre the shy on 23 May 2019, 03:27:45 AM
Quote from: Cross698 on 21 May 2019, 07:02:12 PM
Bovington is a great museum.

Understatement of the year  ;)

Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Lord Kermit of Birkenhead on 23 May 2019, 06:20:21 AM
Quote from: Big Insect on 22 May 2019, 08:55:05 PM
You cannot dump the trailor .... come on chaps ... this is getting down to a "how much ammo can an infantry man carry" level  ;)

6 20 round magazines, 1 50 round belt (4 BIT), 2 grenades an a 66 rocket, from the 70's. For WWII - 110 rounds, 2 Bren Mags and 2 grenades, appropriate info for "Black Op's", Force on Force or Chain of Command - not I suspect for BKC.

On Crocs - a very low percentage of hits were on the trailer, something like 10% - so the argument is rather academic. Removing the tough characteristic looks good to me.

IanS
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: fsn on 23 May 2019, 06:41:58 AM
I really don't have a dog in this fight, except the one of historicity.

Crocodile - not tough. OK. Whatever. However, the Crocodile should, IMHO be able to ditch the trailer and then serve as a "tough" tank - without a bow MG. The trailer was designed to be jettisoned.
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Dr Dave on 23 May 2019, 07:30:57 AM
I'd have thought is was just like any "deploy" action in the rules. I think the "too much granularity" argument is a bit thin when there are dozens of special rules now and the bttn/brigade commander gets to orientate the template of his strafing Typhoon support.

An sdkfz7 gets to drop off its 88!  ;)
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Cross698 on 23 May 2019, 07:32:51 AM
Quote from: Wulf on 21 May 2019, 07:04:19 PM
I added another video
Excellent.
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Big Insect on 23 May 2019, 10:30:08 AM
Dr Dave - the Crocodile is a distinct 'unit' it is very different from an sdkfz7 that gets to drop off its 88.
I do not disagree that the trailer could be ditched - but that was when it had run out of 'juice'.

But it's your call - however the core rule is that the Crocodile is a distinct unit for our purposes and cannot drop its trailer, because it doesn't run out of fuel from the trailer - so why would you want to drop the trailer?
Just to make it Tough by dropping its ability to use it's Flamethrower capability seems a bit like cutting your nose off to spite your face IMHO

Mark
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Dr Dave on 23 May 2019, 12:44:21 PM
Quote from: Big Insect on 23 May 2019, 10:30:08 AM
...I do not disagree that the trailer could be ditched - but that was when it had run out of 'juice'.

...so why would you want to drop the trailer?
Just to make it Tough by dropping its ability to use it's Flamethrower capability seems a bit like cutting your nose off to spite your face IMHO

Well, they'd drop the trailer if they got it snagged crossing rough ground - not simply because they'd run out of juice. But in game terms if you've got a Croc in a tank fight and are being flanked dropping the trailer to regain tough sounds like a good reason to me. I've modelled mine so that I can drop them off.
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Big Insect on 23 May 2019, 02:01:35 PM
Interesting approach - as you are going for a defensive approach, rather than on offensive one.

But if that's a house rule you want to play then by all means   :)
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Dr Dave on 23 May 2019, 02:44:32 PM
Mark, against jerries with faster tanks and higher cv you can't out manoeuvre them everywhere. Churchills are a terrific asset for the Brits if they refuse one flank and stomp on the other.
;)
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Cross698 on 23 May 2019, 03:11:57 PM
I have a separate trailer for mine, not for dropping off, but to add the trailer from 20cm, so initially it could be just another VII. 
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Lord Kermit of Birkenhead on 24 May 2019, 07:14:51 AM
Except that almost all VII's were Crocodiles...
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: fsn on 24 May 2019, 07:25:24 AM
I suspect that most German soldiers were not bothered about the mark of tank bearing down on them.
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Cross698 on 24 May 2019, 07:32:31 AM
Quote from: fsn on 24 May 2019, 07:25:24 AM
I suspect that most German soldiers were not bothered about the mark of tank bearing down on them.


True, but wargamers are!
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Lord Kermit of Birkenhead on 24 May 2019, 07:41:25 AM
Quote from: fsn on 24 May 2019, 07:25:24 AM
I suspect that most German soldiers were not bothered about the mark of tank bearing down on them.


They would be when the shots bounced off !
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Raider4 on 24 May 2019, 07:44:57 AM
Quote from: ianrs54 on 24 May 2019, 07:14:51 AM
Except that almost all VII's were Crocodiles...

Eh?? Are you sure? Doesn't sound right to me.
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Raider4 on 24 May 2019, 07:46:22 AM
Quote from: fsn on 24 May 2019, 07:25:24 AM
I suspect that most German soldiers were not bothered about the mark of tank bearing down on them.

Is that in the same way that all Allied soldiers thought every German tank was a Tiger, and every gun an 88?
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Lord Kermit of Birkenhead on 24 May 2019, 08:19:41 AM
Raider - that is based not the photographic evidence, there are III's IV's and VI's in Cleve, but no VII. Ok that isn't the best, but seems to be correct anecdotally. The reason for II and IV was to improve the AT capabilities of the troops, he 6pdr being better at that than the 75mm. Find any pictures of VII in tank rgt's is very difficult.

IanS
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Cross698 on 24 May 2019, 08:39:52 AM
All Mk VIIs had the crocodile fittings added at the factory, even if it wasn't to be used in this role. There were earlier models of crocodile, but thought all crocodiles that hit the beaches from 79th Division were Mk VIIs.
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Raider4 on 24 May 2019, 08:57:44 AM
Yeah, I can believe that all Crocodiles are Churchill VIIs. It's all VIIs are Crocodiles I have a problem with (in the same way that all thumbs are fingers, not all fingers are thumbs . . .).

There is a page on the Flames of War website that lists all British tanks in NWE at various points, but I can't locate it at the moment.
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Cross698 on 24 May 2019, 09:10:36 AM
I've seen images of Mk VIIs deployed as tanks, not crocodiles. My understanding that they were deployed into Churchill Regts as replacements.
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Dr Dave on 24 May 2019, 12:18:14 PM
From what I've read in the 9th RTR history (I think it was the 9th?) all of the troop and Sqn HQs had MkVIIs by war's end - so that's a 1 in 3 ratio or thereabouts.

But then there are Regts in Normandy that have their VIIs taken off them for issue as Crocs in the 79th AD.
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: fsn on 24 May 2019, 04:08:17 PM
Quote from: Raider4 on 24 May 2019, 07:46:22 AM
Is that in the same way that all Allied soldiers thought every German tank was a Tiger, and every gun an 88?
Sort of. I can see that Germans who had faced Crocodiles and escaped, would have been very wary of any oncoming Churchill, just in case, but I can't see them debating if the approaching  behemoth is a Mk VII or a Mk IX.
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Dr Dave on 24 May 2019, 05:27:32 PM
Many say that mark viiis never made it into service, but I've seen a picture of an viii in a twatted Jerry village.
Title: Re: Churchill Crocodile
Post by: Raider4 on 24 May 2019, 06:43:50 PM
Quote from: Raider4 on 24 May 2019, 08:57:44 AM
There is a page on the Flames of War website that lists all British tanks in NWE at various points, but I can't locate it at the moment.

Found it: link (https://www.flamesofwar.com/hobby.aspx?art_id=399). It does look like the VII was in the minority compared to the Crocodile, but they were there. Probably as replacements, as mentioned. III and IV seems to outnumber them both greatly either with 6-pdr or 75mm.