Jump to content
Sturgeon's House
Jeeps_Guns_Tanks

The M4 Sherman Tank Epic Information Thread.. (work in progress)

Recommended Posts

41 minutes ago, EnsignExpendable said:

I wonder why the hull lifting loops are highlighted, but the turret ones are not.

Just a guess, but possibly a byproduct of when it was set on that concrete pad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All the 76mm M4A2s were Fisher,  and maybe all the large hatch 75mm tanks too, but not all small hatch M4A2s like that one were from Fisher.  Most small hatch M4A2s went to the UK if I recall right. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pedantically, Stansell and Laughlin assert that Pressed Steel manufactured "21 examples of the 76mm HVSS [M4A2] in the second quarter of 1945." But Fisher made upwards of 68% of M4A2s of all types, so Soviet tankers would have at least a very good chance of seeing vehicles from this factory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, DogDodger said:

Pedantically, Stansell and Laughlin assert that Pressed Steel manufactured "21 examples of the 76mm HVSS [M4A2] in the second quarter of 1945." But Fisher made upwards of 68% of M4A2s of all types, so Soviet tankers would have at least a very good chance of seeing vehicles from this factory.

 

 

I, of course, defer to the masters on that one. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a picture of a M4A3 in Kawkawlin Michigan (about a two and half hour drive from me) with an interesting gun mantlet.  I guess this was a conversion to add the direct telescopic sight to the gun mantlet.  For some reason, someone has stuck a tube into the gun sight hole.  According to Son of Sherman, most of these conversions stayed stateside and the early model sherman tanks in Europe just ended up getting an entirely new gun and mount to update them to the new standard.

 

m4a3-kawkawlin-2018-78w-1.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Next week I am driving to Lansing Michigan to visit a friend.  We plan to visit the Moist Towelette Museum at Michigan State.  

1 minute ago, EnsignExpendable said:

Maybe they thought it was a machinegun hole and put a fake MG barrel in there?

 

That's my thought as well.  It's pretty common on these display vehicles to see homemade attempts at recreating missing machine gun barrels, sometimes with comical results. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://yuripasholok.livejournal.com/10327126.html

https://www.facebook.com/udalostibrno/posts/1358930817507222

 

Quote

   Very interesting project, dedicated to the fighting in Brno, which occurred in the spring of 1945. Among those who liberated this Czech city, were M4A2 (76) W from the 46th Guards Tank Brigade of the 9th Mechanized Corps. By the time of joining fighting in the city, the brigade had only a dozen tanks, which, incidentally, made a very serious contribution to the victory. Tanks and their crews entered the very places where they fought, but already in the streets of modern Brno.

7793818_original.jpg

 

Spoiler

7794103_original.jpg

 

7794316_original.jpg

 

7794666_original.jpg

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, I'd have to go to Sherman Minutia or Son of a Sherman to identify that one, I lean towards M4, and I bet the "quick fix" upgrades were installed in Europe, they look clunky. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/28/2018 at 9:57 PM, EnsignExpendable said:

Hehe, cock

 

bIar1Dg.png

Funny/interesting: I came across this thread (and forum) when looking for information on the M4A4 to build a model of exactly this tank a while ago, and by now have managed to read it to the end and find … the tank that started me reading here in the first place.

 

It’s indeed a Sherman V, fitted with (the lower section of) the deep-wading trunks at the back of the hull. I could post more pics of this tank, if there’s interest, and of the other four (one Sherman V and three Crabs) that were close to it, and remained there for several years after the war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Similar Content

    • By Sturgeon
      The subject of this initial post is going to be much more specific than the title, but since it will probably evolve into an broader debate anyway I figured I might as well roll with it.
       
      Over the past few weeks, I've been watching the recent Burns' documentary on the Vietnam War. In it, I noticed something I had suspected for a long time: At the height of the M16's troubles in Vietnam, VC and NVA forces were primarily equipped with (probably Chinese) derivatives of the Type 3 milled AK-49. Almost all the images in the documentary up to 1969 of North Vietnamese forces that show enough detail to tell depict milled receivered guns with lightening cuts. Images from a quick GIS support this:
       

       

       

       

       

       







       
      Virtually all of these weapons are Type 3s, and it's very likely that the vast majority of them are Chinese Type 56s (which came in both removable, and fixed folding bayonet versions).
       
      Interestingly, Type 1 AK-47s did actually see service in Vietnam as well - AFAIK the Chinese never made Type 1s, so this would necessarily have to be a Russian gun!


       
      OK, so what's the significance of all this? It's certainly no secret that the Type 3 AK was a prevalent rifle during this time period in Vietnam. Consider that, in contrast to the M16 of 1970, the M16 of 1968 and prior was a very troubled weapon. Bad ammunition, lack of chrome lining, and lack of support in the form of cleaning kits made the gun very difficult to use and keep clean. Due to teething troubles that had little to do with the design itself, the M16 failed right when soldiers and Marines needed the support of a reliable rifle most - in the brutal fighting of 1960s Vietnam. The rifle also had (minor) durability issues, on top of this. The lower receiver buffer tower was a weak point of the design, as were the handguards. The plastic bridges of the cooling vents at the top of the two piece handguards are in a number of photos shown to be broken off - not a good thing when it is these that are supposed to protect the rifle's gas tube from damage. There's little evidence to suggest that the durability problems were a significant issue (though they would be fixed in the A2 version of the 1980s), but on top of the functioning issues they must have given the US soldier or Marine of the time period a very negative impression of their weapon. This impression was only made worse by the ubiquity of the Type 3 AK among enemy troops.

      In contrast to the M16, the Type 3 AK was a weapon with nearly 20 years development behind it. What teething troubles there were with the Kalashnikov's basic design (and there were some serious ones) had been winnowed out and patched over long since. Further, the Type 3 AK with its solid forged, milled receiver represents perhaps the most durable and long-lasting assault rifle ever developed. This was not on purpose, in fact the Soviets desired a rifle that would be almost disposable. The later AKM, which perfected the stamped sheet metal receiver the Russians truly desired, was lifed by its barrel. When the barrel was shot out, the rifles were intended to be discarded (a practice that continues today). American rifles - including the M16 - were designed to be rearsenaled and rebarreled time and time again, serving over many decades and tens of thousands of rounds, potentially. The Type 3 AK, which was designed as a production stopgap between the troublesome Type 1 of 1947-1951, and the AKM, used a heavy-duty receiver not due to Russian durability requirements, but their desire for expediency. A rifle with a milled receiver could enter production - albeit at greater cost per unit - much earlier, while Russian engineers perfected the stamped model. As a side effect, they produced a highly durable weapon, whose receiver could serve virtually indefinitely (as the Finns proved recently).
       
      To US troops, this must have seemed like a huge slap in the face. Why did these rice farmers get a durable, reliable weapon, while Uncle Sam fielded the toylike "junk" M16 to his finest? On top of everything these troops were dealing with - body count quotas, vicious close-range ambushes, friendly fire, and all else, it's no surprise that the veterans who went through that feel very strongly about the M16. It didn't matter that the AK overall was a much less refined and effective weapon in theory than the M16, or that the M16 by 1970 was a quite mature and reliable weapon, the morale hit of having a rifle so inferior in reliability and durability gave the M16 a reputation in those early years that it has barely shaken even today. 
    • By Vicious_CB
      http://soldiersystems.net/2018/05/14/nswc-crane-carbine-mid-length-gas-system-testing-shows-increased-performance/
       
      So in Crane's testing of the URG-I vs M4A1, the numbers make sense except for this one. Maybe you ballistic gurus can answer this because I have no idea.
       

       

       
      How can you have 2 significantly different mean muzzle velocities at 100 yards when they both started off with nearly the same muzzle velocity, out of the same length barrels with the same twist rate? It cant be stability since that is based on starting velocity and twist rate.  Is there some kind of magic that the midlength gas system imparts on the bullet that causes it to have less velocity decay or is this just a statistical artifact? 
       
    • By sevich
      I realize that sandbags provide little to no armor protection, but soldiers still used them on tanks. Would they mitigate the effects of HE warheads, or the blastwave of HEAT warheads?
    • By Walter_Sobchak
      This is a must watch for all Sherman tank fans.  
       

×