50t Warwell Wagon in OO Gauge

[JSpencer]

In 1940, a British tank troop was 3 tanks (German and US were 5) and the tanks at the start of WWII were generally quite light and few in number, I can see how they easily put a pair on a war flat. There were 5 troops for 1 squadron (15 tanks, US practice was 3 troops of 5). 3 tank squadrons plus 1 HQ squadron (no tanks except light ones).

The GWR doc must refer to Regimental HQ.

 

By 1944 this had changed somewhat. Each troop had 3 Shermans to which was added 1 firefly. Number of troops was 4 per squadron making a total of 16 tanks. So you would need 16 Warwells (7th armoured div was 3 Cromwells and a firefly per troop thought guess they use Warwells for the lot). There was also a command post unit per squadron adding 3 tanks, a command tank (extra radios) and 2 OP tanks (artillery) plus workshop lorry and a liaison jeep. A regiment will have 3 such squadrons (plus a whole host of other support vehicles which won,t be listed here).

 

The regimental HQ was 4 Sherman's, 1 half track and 1 command car. So you need at least 4 Warwells to do this train by 1944 instead of 3 Warflats early war.

 

Note we talk about just one regiment, you need 4 such regiments for an Armoured Division.

[Fat Controller]

Where was this train heading please ?

They wouldn't have added such info to the captions, give the amount of deception they were practicing as to where the landings would take place. The best you could hope for would be 'somewhere in England'.

Our village in Kent apparently had rows of inflatable tanks designed to confound German photo-reconnaissance flights, whilst the real tanks were holed up in Liss Forest and the New Forest.

[MatthewEWS]

Recieved my 2000s MoD warwell today. Stunning model,really impressed with it. Great work Hattons

[Trains&armour]

Yes, I had 6 Warflat wagons on the Rowlands Castle layout, along with a brake third SR coach at both ends, a scratch built ramp wagon and an old SR tools van.

 

For your interest here is a picture of Warwell wagons with Sherman tank loads. This picture was included in a booklet slightly post war, so late 1940's

 

regards

 

Pete

Nice one. You could model this as well, and it would give you some  leeway in how many (loaded) warwells you'll need.

Because these are  brand new tanks, fresh from the docks or holding area. The shipping protection is still in place, and the On Vehicle Materiel boxes  (OVM) secured to the engine decks contain all necessary parts to make the tank operational. These were not fitted in the US, because of the likelihood of them getting damaged or corroded by salt water during shipping. They carry no unit markings, only WD  t-numbers. Judging by the barrack like structures in the background, these are just being delivered to a British armoured unit or a commonwealth unit. Not to a US troop, because these are  M4A4's, (Sherman V in the British army). A variant primarily used by the  British armed forces and some other lend-lease receivers. Not used operationally by the Americans. And, depending on the number of tanks the unit in question still needed, the photo could be showing all of the tanks or just a small part of the delivery. 

 

So, it's up to you how many warwells you think you will need to portray a believable delivery. Probably part of a much larger train to start with, but being split up along the way in shorter rakes to supply specific locations. 

(One snag. All of the above is only valid for WWII, and in case of the M4A4 not before July 1942...)

 

 I also found this, a great shot of the way Shermans were shackled. If you look carefully, you can see that the gun tube has been secured as well:

(Source  National Archives: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20170405142415/http:/www.ingenious.org.uk//media/4.0_SAC/webimages/1995/_723/3_GW/R_B_/14/1995_7233_GWR_B_14250_3.jpg)

[JSpencer]

Nice one. You could model this as well, and it would give you some  leeway in how many (loaded) warwells you'll need.

Because these are  brand new tanks, fresh from the docks or holding area. The shipping protection is still in place, and the On Vehicle Materiel boxes  (OVM) secured to the engine decks contain all necessary parts to make the tank operational. These were not fitted in the US, because of the likelihood of them getting damaged or corroded by salt water during shipping. They carry no unit markings, only WD  t-numbers. Judging by the barrack like structures in the background, these are just being delivered to a British armoured unit or a commonwealth unit. Not to a US troop, because these are  M4A4's, (Sherman V in the British army). A variant primarily used by the  British armed forces and some other lend-lease receivers. Not used operationally by the Americans. And, depending on the number of tanks the unit in question still needed, the photo could be showing all of the tanks or just a small part of the delivery. 

 

So, it's up to you how many warwells you think you will need to portray a believable delivery. Probably part of a much larger train to start with, but being split up along the way in shorter rakes to supply specific locations. 

(One snag. All of the above is only valid for WWII, and in case of the M4A4 not before July 1942...)

 

 I also found this, a great shot of the way Shermans were shackled. If you look carefully, you can see that the gun tube has been secured as well:

1995_7233_GWR_B_14250_3.jpg

(Source  National Archives: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20170405142415/http:/www.ingenious.org.uk//media/4.0_SAC/webimages/1995/_723/3_GW/R_B_/14/1995_7233_GWR_B_14250_3.jpg)

 

Overall I agree but generally one tank squadron alone would require 15/16 tanks, so I doubt a Warwell train would have been split up. In general, a unit would be supplied with the same tank. A British Sherman tank unit would have been all M4 or M4A1 or M4A2 or M4A4 (normally the latter in most cases as the US gifted us with almost the entire production of these tanks, the most awkward to maintain thanks to their multi bank car engine based motor - the US generally kept the best M4A3s to themselves).

Only M4s and M4A4s were converted to Firefly's so later M4A1 and M4A2 units could find themselves being mixed with 2 hull types.

 

The M4A2s (Diesel engine variant) were used in the Desert and then Italy, so it is possible this type were generally shipped straight out there and it may not be a common occurrence on UK soil.

When the Desert Rats (7th armoured div) were returned to the UK for preparation for Normandy, they left their Shermans in Italy and were equipped with Cromwells, leading to some rather furious tankers ("....they expect us to fight with these ruddy things....").

 

1944 was 3 Shermans + Firefly to a troop. By 1945 this became 2 Shermans + 2 Firefly's to a troop. Comets were delivered end of 1944 and used only by the 11th Armored Division but these could go on Warflats.

 

Churchills were kept in specialized Brigades, retained the older 3 tanks a troop and had no Firefly's (which made encounters with Pathers a nightmare), however Units often had a mix of types by 1944 as older tanks were up armoured and sometimes up gunned (some retained the old 6 pounder due to its better anti tank performance vs the standard 75mm.

Warwells with these tanks could be really mixed.

 

Then there are tank destroyers, M10 in US parlance which briefly became Wolverines in UK parlance before being up gunned to 17pdrs (Achilles). And finally Sextons (24 pounder) or Priests (US 105mm) gun motor carriages (light artillery on Sherman/M3 based chassis).

 

Edit: also M4 also existed in a composite form mixing late M4A1 front hull with the M4 rear hull. Both types shared the same motor, only M4 (Sherman I) was welded hull while M4A1 (Sherman II) was cast.  I see airfix kits Sherman advertised as Sherman I/II (basic kit) and Sherman III (with landing craft) but it is just an early Sherman I version only (and not particularity accurate). Composites were often converted to Fireflys.

Edited June 28, 2017 by JSpencer

[GreenGiraffe22]

I see Oxford Raul's MS. 1 has come in to stock at Hattons in what looks like a totally different colour, I assume Hattons model is more accurate given OR's record of inaccuracies... But would it be possible for Hattons to post a photo of theirs and Oxford Rails side by side here for comparison?

[Roy Langridge]

I see Oxford Raul's MS. 1 has come in to stock at Hattons in what looks like a totally different colour, I assume Hattons model is more accurate given OR's record of inaccuracies... But would it be possible for Hattons to post a photo of theirs and Oxford Rails side by side here for comparison?

 

Have you seen this post? http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/119214-oxford-rail-announces-warwells/page-2&do=findComment&comment=2755125

 

Roy

[GreenGiraffe22]

Have you seen this post? http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/119214-oxford-rail-announces-warwells/page-2&do=findComment&comment=2755125

 

Roy

Ah, missed that! Thanks

 

Edit: I say missed, clearly forgot because I replied to it at the time haha

Edited June 28, 2017 by GreenGiraffe22

[MarkSG]

Changing tack slightly from tanks and other MOD loads, what sort of things would have been carried on those taken into BR ownership?

 

I presume that the simplest answer to that is "anything that needs a well wagon to be in gauge", but it would be helpful to know what sort of loads typically fell into that category.

[Fat Controller]

Changing tack slightly from tanks and other MOD loads, what sort of things would have been carried on those taken into BR ownership?

 

I presume that the simplest answer to that is "anything that needs a well wagon to be in gauge", but it would be helpful to know what sort of loads typically fell into that category.

I'm not sure I've seen any photos of any carrying out-of-gauge loads; many became Bogie Bolster Bs, with either a level floor between the two end platforms, or with high bolsters in the well and lower ones on the ends.

[hmrspaul]

Changing tack slightly from tanks and other MOD loads, what sort of things would have been carried on those taken into BR ownership?

 

I presume that the simplest answer to that is "anything that needs a well wagon to be in gauge", but it would be helpful to know what sort of loads typically fell into that category.

The little batch of  DM3603xx of which Hattons have modelled DM360333 http://PaulBartlett.zenfolio.com/warwell/e8d5c2555 (and I think Oxford have 360329) were originally considered to be boiler carriers and some were written for return to Crewe etc. Later they carried items such as large diesel engines. I think we've discussed this earlier.

 

Paul

[gwrrob]

They wouldn't have added such info to the captions, give the amount of deception they were practicing as to where the landings would take place. The best you could hope for would be 'somewhere in England'.

Our village in Kent apparently had rows of inflatable tanks designed to confound German photo-reconnaissance flights, whilst the real tanks were holed up in Liss Forest and the New Forest.

 

Yes but it's now 73 years on and with freedom of information act in force now surely we can be told this today.  

Edited June 28, 2017 by gwrrob

[Trains&armour]

Overall I agree but generally one tank squadron alone would require 15/16 tanks, so I doubt a Warwell train would have been split up. In general, a unit would be supplied with the same tank. A British Sherman tank unit would have been all M4 or M4A1 or M4A2 or M4A4 (normally the latter in most cases as the US gifted us with almost the entire production of these tanks, the most awkward to maintain thanks to their multi bank car engine based motor - the US generally kept the best M4A3s to themselves).

Only M4s and M4A4s were converted to Firefly's so later M4A1 and M4A2 units could find themselves being mixed with 2 hull types.

 

The M4A2s (Diesel engine variant) were used in the Desert and then Italy, so it is possible this type were generally shipped straight out there and it may not be a common occurrence on UK soil.

When the Desert Rats (7th armoured div) were returned to the UK for preparation for Normandy, they left their Shermans in Italy and were equipped with Cromwells, leading to some rather furious tankers ("....they expect us to fight with these ruddy things....").

 

1944 was 3 Shermans + Firefly to a troop. By 1945 this became 2 Shermans + 2 Firefly's to a troop. Comets were delivered end of 1944 and used only by the 11th Armored Division but these could go on Warflats.

 

Churchills were kept in specialized Brigades, retained the older 3 tanks a troop and had no Firefly's (which made encounters with Pathers a nightmare), however Units often had a mix of types by 1944 as older tanks were up armoured and sometimes up gunned (some retained the old 6 pounder due to its better anti tank performance vs the standard 75mm.

Warwells with these tanks could be really mixed.

 

Then there are tank destroyers, M10 in US parlance which briefly became Wolverines in UK parlance before being up gunned to 17pdrs (Achilles). And finally Sextons (24 pounder) or Priests (US 105mm) gun motor carriages (light artillery on Sherman/M3 based chassis).

 

Edit: also M4 also existed in a composite form mixing late M4A1 front hull with the M4 rear hull. Both types shared the same motor, only M4 (Sherman I) was welded hull while M4A1 (Sherman II) was cast.  I see airfix kits Sherman advertised as Sherman I/II (basic kit) and Sherman III (with landing craft) but it is just an early Sherman I version only (and not particularity accurate). Composites were often converted to Fireflys.

Really enjoying this discussion.

In principle I agree with you, units being (re)equipped with new tanks wouldn't  have received their armour piecemeal. But that's not all there is to it. Some units would undoubtedly have been in need of replacements, because of wear an tear, accidents etc. Also units slated for deployment in the near future needed to be brought up to full strength.  Tanks currently in the workshops would have been replaced with new ones if there was any chance that repairs couldn't be effected in time.

In short, I think there is enough scope to model some short rakes of Warwells in a WWII setting.

 

As to loads for a Warwell, an Canadian Ram tank could be used to model something slightly different. Quite a number of them were shipped to the UK. And as it's essentially a Canadian design based on the american M3, somewhat of a Sherman look -alike, it also needed a Warwell for transport. Although not used as a gun tank, they were used in exercises and some of them were converted to op/command tanks with a dummy gun  and used operationally. As here:

(Source, national army museum: https://collection.nam.ac.uk/detail.php?acc=1975-03-63-16-226 )

The first three are Ram op/command tanks, the others Sherman gun tanks

 

Would add some variation to your rake of Shermans

(also used as turretless APC's, but that's another story)

 

And for something truly different looking on your Warwell, these:

(Source: By Unknown - http://media.iwm.org.uk/iwm/mediaLib//49/media-49649/large.jpg This is photograph MH 4105 from the collections of the Imperial War Museums., Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=25290923 )

A30 challenger, kind of a Sherman Firefly, but based on a lengthened Cromwell chassis. Quite high, so would have needed a Warwell for rail transport

(if it ever was transported by rail in the UK, no photo's known to me. Perhaps too long for a Warwell?)

 

But a M4 Composite Firefly would also look quite nice on a Warwell:

Sherman Firefly IC composite, 11th Armoured Division, 23rd Armoured Regt. Scratchbuilt

 

And some other useful suggestions for a Warwell load: 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/69664-a-nod-to-brent/page-1004&do=findComment&comment=2766938

Above post and onwards

 

And one thing I agree with completely: Avoid the Airfix Sherman! Reasonable for it's day (the early sixties...), but not up to scratch in the 21st century.

Millicast do a very nice range of British Shermans and other British armour.

[cctransuk]

 

Really enjoying this discussion.

In principle I agree with you, units being (re)equipped with new tanks wouldn't  have received their armour piecemeal. But that's not all there is to it. Some units would undoubtedly have been in need of replacements, because of wear an tear, accidents etc. Also units slated for deployment in the near future needed to be brought up to full strength.  Tanks currently in the workshops would have been replaced with new ones if there was any chance that repairs couldn't be effected in time.

In short, I think there is enough scope to model some short rakes of Warwells in a WWII setting.

 

As to loads for a Warwell, an Canadian Ram tank could be used to model something slightly different. Quite a number of them were shipped to the UK. And as it's essentially a Canadian design based on the american M3, somewhat of a Sherman look -alike, it also needed a Warwell for transport. Although not used as a gun tank, they were used in exercises and some of them were converted to op/command tanks with a dummy gun  and used operationally. As here:

Ram tanks of 3rd County of London Yeomanry1944.jpg

(Source, national army museum: https://collection.nam.ac.uk/detail.php?acc=1975-03-63-16-226 )

The first three are Ram op/command tanks, the others Sherman gun tanks

 

Would add some variation to your rake of Shermans

(also used as turretless APC's, but that's another story)

 

And for something truly different looking on your Warwell, these:

a30 challenger.jpg

(Source: By Unknown - http://media.iwm.org.uk/iwm/mediaLib//49/media-49649/large.jpg This is photograph MH 4105 from the collections of the Imperial War Museums., Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=25290923 )

A30 challenger, kind of a Sherman Firefly, but based on a lengthened Cromwell chassis. Quite high, so would have needed a Warwell for rail transport

(if it ever was transported by rail in the UK, no photo's known to me. Perhaps too long for a Warwell?)

 

But a M4 Composite Firefly would also look quite nice on a Warwell:

M4 composite firefly.jpg

Sherman Firefly IC composite, 11th Armoured Division, 23rd Armoured Regt. Scratchbuilt

 

And some other useful suggestions for a Warwell load: 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/69664-a-nod-to-brent/page-1004&do=findComment&comment=2766938

Above post and onwards

 

And one thing I agree with completely: Avoid the Airfix Sherman! Reasonable for it's day (the early sixties...), but not up to scratch in the 21st century.

Millicast do a very nice range of British Shermans and other British armour.

 

 

..... but we railway modellers can be pretty parochial - unless it involves railways. If it's olive green, runs on tracks and has a gun, it's a tank !

 

I know that there'll be a niche group of railway / military modellers who'll go to any lengths to get it right - but most will buy one or two Airfix kits, stick them together, spray then with a Halfords can of something vaguely olive green, and be blissfully ignorant of the fact that it's the military equivalent of Mallard in LBSCR livery !!

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[JSpencer]

..... but we railway modellers can be pretty parochial - unless it involves railways. If it's olive green, runs on tracks and has a gun, it's a tank !

 

I know that there'll be a niche group of railway / military modellers who'll go to any lengths to get it right - but most will buy one or two Airfix kits, stick them together, spray then with a Halfords can of something vaguely olive green, and be blissfully ignorant of the fact that it's the military equivalent of Mallard in LBSCR livery !!

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

Railway modellers go to great lengths getting buildings, scenery and even cars and buses correct. Why get it wrong with tanks?

[JSpencer]

Really enjoying this discussion.

In principle I agree with you, units being (re)equipped with new tanks wouldn't  have received their armour piecemeal. But that's not all there is to it. Some units would undoubtedly have been in need of replacements, because of wear an tear, accidents etc. Also units slated for deployment in the near future needed to be brought up to full strength.  Tanks currently in the workshops would have been replaced with new ones if there was any chance that repairs couldn't be effected in time.

In short, I think there is enough scope to model some short rakes of Warwells in a WWII setting.

 

As to loads for a Warwell, an Canadian Ram tank could be used to model something slightly different. Quite a number of them were shipped to the UK. And as it's essentially a Canadian design based on the american M3, somewhat of a Sherman look -alike, it also needed a Warwell for transport. Although not used as a gun tank, they were used in exercises and some of them were converted to op/command tanks with a dummy gun  and used operationally. As here:

Ram tanks of 3rd County of London Yeomanry1944.jpg

(Source, national army museum: https://collection.nam.ac.uk/detail.php?acc=1975-03-63-16-226 )

The first three are Ram op/command tanks, the others Sherman gun tanks

 

Would add some variation to your rake of Shermans

(also used as turretless APC's, but that's another story)

 

And for something truly different looking on your Warwell, these:

a30 challenger.jpg

 

(Source: By Unknown - http://media.iwm.org.uk/iwm/mediaLib//49/media-49649/large.jpg This is photograph MH 4105 from the collections of the Imperial War Museums., Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=25290923 )

A30 challenger, kind of a Sherman Firefly, but based on a lengthened Cromwell chassis. Quite high, so would have needed a Warwell for rail transport

 

(if it ever was transported by rail in the UK, no photo's known to me. Perhaps too long for a Warwell?)

 

But a M4 Composite Firefly would also look quite nice on a Warwell:

M4 composite firefly.jpg

Sherman Firefly IC composite, 11th Armoured Division, 23rd Armoured Regt. Scratchbuilt

 

And some other useful suggestions for a Warwell load: 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/69664-a-nod-to-brent/page-1004&do=findComment&comment=2766938

Above post and onwards

 

And one thing I agree with completely: Avoid the Airfix Sherman! Reasonable for it's day (the early sixties...), but not up to scratch in the 21st century.

Millicast do a very nice range of British Shermans and other British armour.

The A30 Challengers were assigned to heavy recon units equipped with Cromwells. No idea if they made it on to a Warwell either. Length should be ok though.

[Seanem44]

Got my warwells two days ago.  Three of them.  Due to having just moved in a new house I haven't really had time to inspect them, but they seem great from the outside

 

I plan on building a Minehead-esque layout where tanks train on the shore, so they will be offloaded at the station. 

 

I have an S15 which I am saying is on-loan to the GWR.  I think that will be the loco to pull the warwells.  Should look nice enough.

 

For those looking for some good Shermans.... this is from Oxford models.  Should be some good option for those that don't want to build.  I purchased a pair of airfix cromwells and an airfix Sherman, but am not liking them so I might go this route.

 

https://www.timetunnelmodels.com/live/catalog/order-oxford-76sm001-sherman-tank-10th-armoured-division-1942-late-2017-p-61396.html?osCsid=j1fgvj6f42l27vku43jhgdgoh2

[The Stationmaster]

Nice one. You could model this as well, and it would give you some  leeway in how many (loaded) warwells you'll need.

Because these are  brand new tanks, fresh from the docks or holding area. The shipping protection is still in place, and the On Vehicle Materiel boxes  (OVM) secured to the engine decks contain all necessary parts to make the tank operational. These were not fitted in the US, because of the likelihood of them getting damaged or corroded by salt water during shipping. They carry no unit markings, only WD  t-numbers. Judging by the barrack like structures in the background, these are just being delivered to a British armoured unit or a commonwealth unit. Not to a US troop, because these are  M4A4's, (Sherman V in the British army). A variant primarily used by the  British armed forces and some other lend-lease receivers. Not used operationally by the Americans. And, depending on the number of tanks the unit in question still needed, the photo could be showing all of the tanks or just a small part of the delivery. 

 

So, it's up to you how many warwells you think you will need to portray a believable delivery. Probably part of a much larger train to start with, but being split up along the way in shorter rakes to supply specific locations. 

(One snag. All of the above is only valid for WWII, and in case of the M4A4 not before July 1942...)

 

 I also found this, a great shot of the way Shermans were shackled. If you look carefully, you can see that the gun tube has been secured as well:

1995_7233_GWR_B_14250_3.jpg

(Source  National Archives: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20170405142415/http:/www.ingenious.org.uk//media/4.0_SAC/webimages/1995/_723/3_GW/R_B_/14/1995_7233_GWR_B_14250_3.jpg)

 

Nice view of Acton Yard there

[Fat Controller]

I do like that photo of the row of Rams and Shermans parked 'en echelon' in a street; I bet those houses shook when they turned up. It's a wide street, as well; Royal Military Avenue, near Shornclffe Barracks, is of similar dimensions, though the style of houses is slightly different. I wonder where it was?

[Trains&armour]

I do like that photo of the row of Rams and Shermans parked 'en echelon' in a street; I bet those houses shook when they turned up. It's a wide street, as well; Royal Military Avenue, near Shornclffe Barracks, is of similar dimensions, though the style of houses is slightly different. I wonder where it was?

Tank Park in Navarino Road, Worthing.

The Regiment was billeted in the unfurnished houses in the road.

 

See here: http://www.desertrats.org.uk/bde/4thABartefacts2.htm

[Fat Controller]

 

Tank Park in Navarino Road, Worthing.

The Regiment was billeted in the unfurnished houses in the road.

 

See here: http://www.desertrats.org.uk/bde/4thABartefacts2.htm

 

'Mum. I've got a 48 hour pass. Can i bring some of my mates home with me?'

[Trains&armour]

Got my warwells two days ago.  Three of them.  Due to having just moved in a new house I haven't really had time to inspect them, but they seem great from the outside

 

I plan on building a Minehead-esque layout where tanks train on the shore, so they will be offloaded at the station. 

 

I have an S15 which I am saying is on-loan to the GWR.  I think that will be the loco to pull the warwells.  Should look nice enough.

 

For those looking for some good Shermans.... this is from Oxford models.  Should be some good option for those that don't want to build.  I purchased a pair of airfix cromwells and an airfix Sherman, but am not liking them so I might go this route.

 

https://www.timetunnelmodels.com/live/catalog/order-oxford-76sm001-sherman-tank-10th-armoured-division-1942-late-2017-p-61396.html?osCsid=j1fgvj6f42l27vku43jhgdgoh2

We'll turn this in to a Military modelling thread yet...

Very good  of Oxford to release a Sherman.

But a word of warning to all nitpickers out there. The kind of people that would never dream of running RTR loco  xxxx on their layout, because the livery it was released in was not carried before June 19xx etc.

 

The Shermans as illustrated by Oxford , with those markings and camouflage schemes, never set foot track on UK soil.

10th armoured division only saw service in the Middle east, being converted from 1 cavalry division in Palestine, 1941, and was disbanded in Egypt in 1944.

On the other hand, The Royal Scot's Greys did serve in Italy in 1943, and were returned to the UK in 1944 for operation Overlord. But, as already stated by JSpencer, tanks were not repatriated but handed over to another unit in that theatre.

You'll have to repaint and find new unit markings if you want to use the Oxford Shermans as an UK Warwell load. 

[Seanem44]

We'll turn this in to a Military modelling thread yet...

Very good  of Oxford to release a Sherman.

But a word of warning to all nitpickers out there. The kind of people that would never dream of running RTR loco  xxxx on their layout, because the livery it was released in was not carried before June 19xx etc.

 

The Shermans as illustrated by Oxford , with those markings and camouflage schemes, never set foot track on UK soil.

10th armoured division only saw service in the Middle east, being converted from 1 cavalry division in Palestine, 1941, and was disbanded in Egypt in 1944.

On the other hand, The Royal Scot's Greys did serve in Italy in 1943, and were returned to the UK in 1944 for operation Overlord. But, as already stated by JSpencer, tanks were not repatriated but handed over to another unit in that theatre.

You'll have to repaint and find new unit markings if you want to use the Oxford Shermans as an UK Warwell load. 

Very interesting.

 

This strikes me as odd that they would do this, given they are advertising a coming soon warwell with Sherman load.  That sherman appears stock.  I guess some Tamiya paint and a few decals would fix it, but then you might as well just buy a model at that point

[No Decorum]

I suppose what we would like from Oxford is a copious supply of Shermans with the packing case behind its turret like the one included with one of the Warwells.

[Seanem44]

I suppose what we would like from Oxford is a copious supply of Shermans with the packing case behind its turret like the one included with one of the Warwells.

Exactly.  Sadly, I have a hunch that won't be happening.  It could be they know the demand is there and are going to keep it paired with their warwells as a way to push sales.  I hope not.  I would preorder those Shermans right now...