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

[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

[David Herbert]

I have just cross posted with David D.
The "flail beam" he refers to is just a casing that encases the flail drive chain that takes the drive from the input shaft flange at the back of the tank transmission to the outside of the RH upper hull. There are no gears involved until the gearbox on the end of the flail drum., just chain drives and the universal jointed shaft on the RH boom. The case has not moved away from the side of the hull. That flange is just the join between the two sections of the case to allow it to be assembled into the hull. The gap between the case and the oversized hole in the hull is because the hole is quite crudely hand cut by oxy-acetylene torch in the side of a complete tank, not in a proper factory setting so was cut oversize to allow some latitude in accuracy. The gap is protected by the armoured box on the outside.

Once a projectile has penetrated the outer hull, it could be going in almost any direction so do not infer anything from where it goes next or the internal damage.

David

[Alex van de Wetering]

Me again, Alex. Your worst nightmare.

don't worry...I enjoy this kind of brainstorming very much!

There is indeed a gap between the chain drive case and the hole in the right side of the hull. I know from the crab manual (and I think also from the one Crab in Bovington), that this gap is supposed to be covered with steel blocks/plate, although I am not sure if all Crabs had this, or only later production ones.
The chain box is also fixed on the outside of the hull through springs to an angle iron. This fixation is still present on the Overloon example, so I don't think the gear is pushed inwards. The flange you see in the pictures is a flage to connect to pieces of the chain drive box together, it's not supposed to be flush with the inside of the hull sidewall.
The part of the chain case on the outside of the tank does shows some damage with the rearmost panel bent inwards. I always thought this was a result of the drive shaft snapping, but it could well be that this is indeed damage from projectiles.

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.

Thanks David.....exactly my thought. The story is that Avalon was put out of action by a Panzerfaust that ignited some of the ammunition inside. At least that's the story that is spread on the web and probably also in the museum.

[David Dunlop]

Alex.

I whole-heartedly agree with the importance of finding War Diaries for the British Army units using Crabs at Overloon, to clearly establish who lost what, where and when. It would be great to have enough detail in the diaries that the lost equipment was identified by WD Number and or Name, if not in the daily reports, perhaps the status summaries that were submitted back up the system showing what was lost, damaged and in for repairs from time to time.

Currently, while doing Family Genealogy research in various archives in England that have no on-line access, I am finding many of them are either running with very low staffing or are closed even to staff to do research. That might be a similar situation for the archives you would need to work with.

Closer to home, however, you might be able to do some useful research outside the traditional military domain, that might help confirm the exact location of where AVALON came to rest.

Hanno recently posted some updates on COOKIE confirming it was brought in from another area and parked close to AVALON in the early stages of the evolution of the museum. Lets assume that was done as the easier option at the time, than trying to move AVALON, and the location of where AVALON is resting in those early photographs, is indeed her final resting place. If that final resting place can be located and confirmed, that is invaluable information for confirming what might be found in any War Diaries. Lets also assume for now, AVALON came to rest not too far from the current museum location.

If you look at the early photos, to the far left of AVALON in the background, there is a long, prominent ridge. It is hard to see details in a couple of the photos, but in one, the Sun is at a low enough angle to throw some good shadows that suggest the ridge has a number of finger-like protrusions extending from it. AVALON is definitely in a low spot in the foreground and in a couple of photos showing the background to the right side of AVALON, a smoother rise is noticeable.

What I am wondering about is the history of the Overloon Battle area. Was it/is it private land, or has it always been owned and managed by some level of local or national government, like a Forestry Department, Bureau of Natural Resources or some other agency? If any of the latter, it might be worth contacting them to see what information they might have about the battlefield from a purely geographic nature. Survey maps, or geographic maps of the area done in a small enough scale that they could pick up the differences in height seen in the early photographs of AVALON? And the older the better.

If such maps exist and copies can be made, my next step would be to identify the exact current location of the museum on the maps and use that as a centre starting point, searching in a spiral outwards.

The early photos with people visiting AVALON and COOKIE show no signs of developed roads. Would people have wanted to walk a great distance through the woods to get there in casual clothing, or were they transported in close enough for a short walk? Perhaps older survey maps might show trails or roads that could have been used to get people close enough to walk in.

Local maps might help rule out a lot of areas quickly. More interesting areas could be covered quickly from the air once the leaves have fallen, either by small aircraft or a drone. Best done in the early morning or evening when shadows are longest and provide the best contrast detain. Those ridges to the left of AVALON would be a key target to look for from the air. Once that has narrowed things down more, go in on foot and see what turns up.

Do you know if Holland ever undertook a national Aerial Photographic Survey anytime from 1945 to the advent of Satellite Imaging? If they did, that archive would be a goldmine of information to look at! Canada did a lot of Oblique Angle Aerial Surveys in the 1920’s but the details of that type of air photo are limited. In 1948, and again in 1964, the Canadian Government did complete aerial surveys of Canada using vertical camera imaging with an overlap rate sufficient to permit excellent stereoscopic imaging. Most of the work was done by the RCAF using modified Lancasters, but a private company called Spartan Aviation was also involved using Mosquitos and Hornets for a while.

Anyway, Alex. Food for thought. One does not always have to look for military things in military sources.

Cheers for now,

David

[David Dunlop]

David H.

Thanks for the clarification of the hull opening for the beam assembly. Must have made for a very dusty interior!

Would you know if the Crab was intended to operate with a reduced ammunition load for the 75mm compared to the standard Sherman, and not withstanding the field expediencies of individual crews? I am just not sure how much extra weight the Flail System added to a Sherman, nor how much internal space was lost for the modifications, nor what, if anything was given up to make the modification work.


David