EnsignExpendable

Aw man, I was just in the war museum a few years ago, I would have purchased a whole bunch of stuff if I knew they made copies.

T-80 OP, please nerf.

Very nice images! I haven't been able to find the Ram or Sexton manuals, unfortunately. Do you have paper copies or a PDF?

I saw a photo of the Sexton pilot with T54E1 tracks as well (it originally had WE210 tracks like the Ram), so I guess upgrading pilots wasn't that uncommon?

Supremacy of glorious T-72 over filthy Kharkovite tractor

On 8/4/2018 at 6:06 PM, whelm said:

Direct vision ports, what looks like a hatch in the side of the hull, and twin front MGs? This must be a very early specimen.

Check out my underbarrel grenade launcher

Are they stuck behind the Buk that crashed into a building?

4 hours ago, Sturgeon said:

Aluminum tracks for the M60 (includes track weights): http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/b008723.pdf

The most surprising thing about this is that the Americans include metric measurements. 

Ooh, good stuff, especially about the T-34. Now I know what it was doing while Lulworth was waiting for it to arrive for trials. Interestingly enough, January of 1945 (when these trials ended) is also the last time Lulworth's schedule mentions anything about a T-34. I guess they got tired of waiting.

A wehraboo read my blog while sitting in that vehicle.

Good find. I think either here on in the books thread is where it belongs.

Two more fine additions to my collection. These are just collections of documents, but pertaining to the designers behind the T-34 tank (Koshkin and Morozov) more so than the vehicle itself. Also photos, but the photos are not very high quality.

The obvious solution is to store the taller infantrymen horizontally.

The Americans had addon armour developed for the M10 GMC. It was trialled but never deployed IIRC.

75 mm gun with a cast hull, but a travel clamp in the front? If I'm not mistaken, that's a Grizzly!

Woah, those photos look amazing! Most of the ones I see have been taken with the contrast cranked all the way up and are completely unusable

LAC's slides look like ass. Here's an image of a prospective Canadian squeezebore weapon, and this is after I cleaned it up.

Ooh, very interesting photograph. Do you have other results from that test?

I'll see if they have any Ram or Grizzly books the next time I'm there. I don't think they do, otherwise I would have bought them.

My local model store has a pretty good selection of them, I can always go check it out

Also hmm, 47,000 lbs seems like way less than a combat loaded Sexton. A fully loaded one weighed 57,000 lbs in the synthetic tire trials.

Which book, Canada's Pride or one of the minor ones?

I'm actually doing some research on the Sexton right now, and the suspension and running gear are a sore point, specifically synthetic tires. They seem to do a lot better in some conditions, but a lot worse in others. The Sexton also used the Lee style bogeys for a lot longer since it was lighter than the Sherman.

Yes, the armour thickness changed, and also the casting was variable thickness anyway. I like how people confuse the Grizzly and the Ram and write that the Grizzly had 3 inches of front armour. So many books falsely state that the Grizzly was called M4A5, I think the confusion stems from there.

@whelm I write quite a lot about the Ram on Russian sites, may I post the image you cleaned up? I will credit you under whatever name you provide.