Greetings all,

Here's a picture of the M7 Priest I'm working on for the LCM 3.



Question - I have some ammunition loads behind the vehicle. Where exactly would a vehicle be parked within the well? Would it be OK where it is or could I put it further forward as I'd like to get in two extra supply loads.

Cheers

Al

Sorry, here's a better picture of what I mean. I'd like to have 4 pallets behind the vehicle - would that be OK.



This would mean the vehicle woudl be much further forward???

Cheers

Al

Greetings, Al!
I really am enjoying watching this build come together, mate...nice looking M7, Bro, and you already know what I think of your ammo loads!
As far as a designated load placement, my friend, I don't think that there was one, because I've seen photo's of these boats loaded with everything but the kitchen sink (and some with! ) because what you have to remember is, that's what these boats were designed to do...haul as much and as many vehicles as you possibly can at a time while maintaining the ability to safely operate the vessel. Loads were planned and built rather hastily for the most part, as the main objective was to get the stuff on shore with the troops ASAP...so, your desire to place more ammo loads at the front of the craft would be ok, mate, and if you think about the physical dynamics of the loading principle, makes more sense that way...once the craft is on shore the vehicle can be pulled out first and get to work, while the pallet cargo is unloaded second...and more than likely the weight of the ammo loads would be sufficient to keep the boat from listing, with the vehicles weight aft.
~Gunny

Hi Gunny,

Great, that's what I was thinking - the weight of the boat engine/stern would balance the weight of the vehicle even if it was at the front and the weight of the ammo would help as well.

M7 needs some mods - there's supposed to be some trunking running from the top engine vent into the fighting compartment, so that it acted as the second stackn,but I haven't see a photo to give me an idea what it looks like - still hunting!!

Cheers mate.

Al

MmmHmm, I know what you're saying, mate...I'll do some checking in my references today and see if I can come up with anything to give you a hand.
~Gunny

Hi Gunny,

Great - I got specs for all the other stuff courtsey of 'The Bear' but I haven't seen how the back plate should look. I may mean re-doing the fighting compartment to a greater height, but sure it's all a learning experience!!!

All help most welcome.

Here's a link to some stuff over on the Big A which will help explain my thinking or lack of it!! LOL.

https://armorama.kitmaker.net/forums/77576&page=1

Cheers

Al

I have a pic of an LCVP (I know it's not an LCM) that had a jeep in the front with about 20 Marines behind. Looks lke the jeep was suppoed to roll out first and the Marines would haul out everything in the craft.

So loading a ehicle up front seems to make sense

Hey Al,

Since the M7 and the M4 shared the same chassis, you can use the M4's wading trunk setup as a reference. Here's a link I found for you.

M4 Sherman

Kenny

Hi Kenny,

Thanks for that link. When the Americans used the M7 in the Pacific I believe they just fitted it with two stacks. I have a second stack I could use, but it's not quite the same arrangement the British and Canadians used in Normandy.

There was some kind of trunking that fed back into the fighting compartment, which then acted as the second stack if you know what I mean. It was probably some sort of boxed structure but I'm trying to get an idea of the dimentions. Was it as wide as a stack but just linked into the fighting compartment or was it a thinner, tapering type of structure.

It would make life easier if I could just add another stack but then it wouldn't be correct. Making the link between the rear vent and the fighting compartment also makes me think that I've made it too low as the venting hole would really sit just about on top of where the rear plate is now, another puzzel solved!!! The light finally comes on!!! LOL

Rebuilding the extended armour is no problem, but I need to know the dimentions of the trucking that was used. If it was as wide as the ordinary stack I can probably just alter the second stack and feed it into the fighting compartment. If it was a square thinner structure I'll need to scratch it.

Hope this makes sense. Trouble is I haven't seen a picture or diagram of how it actually looked.

For Alan: Vehicle up front will also look better as I can have some activity going on in the cargo area.

Cheers all

Alan.

This is purely conjecture, and I'm sorry to go against what you all think, but I would suggest that a tank or SPG loaded right forward on a relatively small craft like an LCM would place the centre of gravity too far forward, and the bow would dig into the water excessively. The vehicle would weigh a LOT more than a marine engine.

I may of course be barking up completely the wrong tree - wouldn't be the first time! :-)

I'm thinking the same as Ripster here.
In any sort of weather the bow would dig into the waves and swamp the boat, and, even if it did reach the beach the Priest's weight right forrard would cause it to ground way offshore possibly causing the Priest to sink as it drove off the ramp (The ramp angle would change as the weight left the boat) then they'd have to motor further in to dump the stores.
I think the vehicle should be as far back as possible.
Tom

Hi Tom and Graham,

Thanks for that. I don't know whether you are right or not but it is a good point. My first instinct had been to place it at the rear of the craft which was why I asked the question as from amodelling point of view it would suit me better to have it further forward.

Lets see what other opinions come to light.

Cheers

Al

When all's said and done, don't be a rivet-counter! Build her the way that she looks best to you would be my advice

Looks great so far Alan.

Just keep a few things in mind Alan, as I'm not saying what's right or wrong.
Loading a landing craft or any small boat was a lot more than just pouring cargo in it, or on it. The LCM-3 was rated to carry 1 30 ton tank OR 60,000 lbs of cargo. (I don't know about the British Navy, but the US Navy has always been a stickler for the difference between OR and AND, not meaning the same thing or combination of them) The main thing is the center of gravity. Since a small craft has three main areas that affect it's stability.
One is fore and aft, one is port and starboard, and the third is up and down, maintaining a proper free-board.

Since the M7 Hull is a tight squeeze, it's basically already along the center line, taking care of the port or starboard listing or rolling. If it is placed too far forward, it will cause the boat to assume a nose down attitude causing waves to break over the bow ramp, possibly swamping or sinking the craft, especially in heavy seas. In addition, it would defeat the design of the craft, not allowing the craft to reach the beach close enough for the ramp to be effective.

Hi Dave,

Many thanks for that, food for thought.

Cheers

AL

Greetings all,

Firstly thanks to eveyone for their views. Having thought about it here's my take on it.

As I'm having to re-build the extended armour to take into account the venting system into the fighting compartment it's now my opinion that the vehicle would be unsuitable for an LCM to carry. There'd be little room to actually load it because of the modifications. The extended armour (Now much higher) would act like a sail and that the only way to transport it reasonably safely would be to load it to the back of the boat.

I'm not saying it couldn't be done, just that it's unlikely given the sea conditions on the day and historically I believe they all came ashore from LCTs.

An alternative space had been ear-marked on the Dio and I'll probably now load the LCM with either a couple of Bren Carriers or a Bren and a small Armoured Car plus some stores and troops which might be more appropriate.

Thanks again for your thoughts.

Cheers

Al