DogDodger

Thanks! Suddenly I understand what they were talking about with the wedges.
Here's the full report. Let me know if I messed up something in the translation.

the strv 103 is faster to lay against a stationary target from the short halt than the M60A1 AOS
eat shit, stabilization havers

What a coincidence! In MI you have an M48 with a T95 turret, and in WV we have a T95 with an M48 turret.

What a coincidence! In MI you have an M48 with a T95 turret, and in WV we have a T95 with an M48 turret.

I played this very ideologically incorrect game in the 90s which I am sure is 100% historically accurate.
 

I know there are one or two of these weird combinations in Kentucky.  Here in Michigan, we have an even weirder version of this.  I took this picture in Armada Michigan a couple years ago. 
 

Above looks like a D, for identification purposes.

This one always gets me. McNair gets a lot of press here, but even if people aren't privy to the facts that the turret front plate on the Sherman was removable so they could use the 75 mm gun, a 105 mm howitzer, or an ordnance similar to the 3" antitank gun; or that weapons suites considered for the Sherman included the British 6-pounder antitank gun or even dual 37 mms (used by the infantry as antitank guns); or that work on what would become the 76 mm gun began as soon as it was realized the 3" antitank gun wouldn't fit in the turret, just look at what the US was actually fielding. The medium tank M2 and the light tanks M2A4-M5 were armed with a 37 mm antitank gun, and though the medium tank M3 did have a 75 mm gun that could fire decent HE as well as comfortably take on most tanks, when the designers couldn't put that gun in a turret they kept a turret anyway and armed it with a 37 mm antitank gun. And the first WW2-era attempt at a heavy tank? BOTH 3" and 37 mm antitank guns...

That's the other end of the opposite torsion bar.

Leo 2A6 lower plate+weld

 
Side add-on modules

 
 
Glacis add-on armour

 
 

The glacis add-on armour from the previous post is the bit where the driver periscopes are located on. The previous photo is the right front.
 
 
Random Leo 2A4 pictures

 
 
 
 
 

 

 

 
Tubes on top of the gun are for training/demo blanks
 
 
Random Leo 1V pictures



 
 
 
 
Random Leopard PRTL photo

Camera crapped out when I wanted to take more photos.
 
 
 
Another random Leo 2A4 photo

This one always gets me. McNair gets a lot of press here, but even if people aren't privy to the facts that the turret front plate on the Sherman was removable so they could use the 75 mm gun, a 105 mm howitzer, or an ordnance similar to the 3" antitank gun; or that weapons suites considered for the Sherman included the British 6-pounder antitank gun or even dual 37 mms (used by the infantry as antitank guns); or that work on what would become the 76 mm gun began as soon as it was realized the 3" antitank gun wouldn't fit in the turret, just look at what the US was actually fielding. The medium tank M2 and the light tanks M2A4-M5 were armed with a 37 mm antitank gun, and though the medium tank M3 did have a 75 mm gun that could fire decent HE as well as comfortably take on most tanks, when the designers couldn't put that gun in a turret they kept a turret anyway and armed it with a 37 mm antitank gun. And the first WW2-era attempt at a heavy tank? BOTH 3" and 37 mm antitank guns...

This one always gets me. McNair gets a lot of press here, but even if people aren't privy to the facts that the turret front plate on the Sherman was removable so they could use the 75 mm gun, a 105 mm howitzer, or an ordnance similar to the 3" antitank gun; or that weapons suites considered for the Sherman included the British 6-pounder antitank gun or even dual 37 mms (used by the infantry as antitank guns); or that work on what would become the 76 mm gun began as soon as it was realized the 3" antitank gun wouldn't fit in the turret, just look at what the US was actually fielding. The medium tank M2 and the light tanks M2A4-M5 were armed with a 37 mm antitank gun, and though the medium tank M3 did have a 75 mm gun that could fire decent HE as well as comfortably take on most tanks, when the designers couldn't put that gun in a turret they kept a turret anyway and armed it with a 37 mm antitank gun. And the first WW2-era attempt at a heavy tank? BOTH 3" and 37 mm antitank guns...

Myth: During WWII, American tanks weren't supposed to fight enemy tanks. That's what TDs were for.
Chieftain rejogged my memory of this in his little video on the history of TDs.

The May 1951 version of TM 9-729 for the M24 Chaffee notes that "The use of any fluids (water, antifreeze compound, or ammudamp) in ammunition box cans has been discontinued. All ammudamp cans will be completely drained of ammudamp fluid." So it seems that the US discontinued wet stowage even in tanks already using it not long after WW2.

Christie's tanks did generate a lot of initial enthusiasm in the combat branches. MG Campbell King thought they could be the main component of the mechanized force, and Infantry Chief MG Stephen Fuqua wanted some as fast breakthrough or flank actions. Cavalry officers were perhaps the most excited. Some biographers claim Patton, who was very enamored with the Christie tanks, may have helped finance Christie, though Patton's son denies this claim. Cavalry MAJ CC Benson was a strong proponent of the Christie tanks in articles in the Infantry and Cavalry Journals: In 1929 he even wrote that Christie's tank should be called the Model 1940 because it was that far advanced. Actual experience with the product, however, was deflating. In 1932 Cavalry MAJ Robert Grow complained about the tanks in use with Detachment for Mechanized Cavalry/Detachment, 1st Cavalry (Mechanized): "On only one day were all four Christies running...I complained bitterly that the Christie was not built as a fighting vehicle but only as a mobile 'cradle for an engine.'"

I'm sure a few tiger tanks broke through some bridges...
 

Nice link. Gilbert has a separate mention of Shermans helping Pershings up hills in Marine Corps Tank Battles in Korea:

But spelling skill, maybe 70%.

Nice link. Gilbert has a separate mention of Shermans helping Pershings up hills in Marine Corps Tank Battles in Korea:

Nice link. Gilbert has a separate mention of Shermans helping Pershings up hills in Marine Corps Tank Battles in Korea:

Heavily used T-28 track pins.
 

Indeed. Hunnicutt relates: "As the tactical situation grew worse with the German advance [through the Ardennes in December 1944], the 740th [Tank Battalion] moved to the Ordnance Vehicle Depot at Sprimont, Belgium to draw whatever combat vehicles were available...Two brand new M24 light tanks were at the depot by mistake. Part of the original shipment of 20 M24s to Europe, two had ended up at Sprimont through a shipping error...The M24 light tanks were particularly popular despite their low slung appearance that caused some recognition problems with the accompanying infantry. On several occasions they were stalked by bazooka teams from the 30th Infantry Division and the 82nd Airborne Division who mistook them for German Panther tanks. As a result, the two little tanks were nicknamed 'Panther Pups' by the battalion."

Indeed. Hunnicutt relates: "As the tactical situation grew worse with the German advance [through the Ardennes in December 1944], the 740th [Tank Battalion] moved to the Ordnance Vehicle Depot at Sprimont, Belgium to draw whatever combat vehicles were available...Two brand new M24 light tanks were at the depot by mistake. Part of the original shipment of 20 M24s to Europe, two had ended up at Sprimont through a shipping error...The M24 light tanks were particularly popular despite their low slung appearance that caused some recognition problems with the accompanying infantry. On several occasions they were stalked by bazooka teams from the 30th Infantry Division and the 82nd Airborne Division who mistook them for German Panther tanks. As a result, the two little tanks were nicknamed 'Panther Pups' by the battalion."