Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Tanks of the Commonwealth in WWII thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 59
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Churchill NA 75 conversion using Sherman gun and mantlet to correct the deficiencies in the Churchill Mk IV's armament and frontal turret protection.         

The Ram makes a long dead bit of my anatomy wiggle. Just  so... Because it is Canadian , but it is not quite ALL Canuck.   I want to hug it, but it says "No you are American!", and I sa

The armor is thicker in the unedited version.

Some ram clips out of war time videos

Spoiler

 

 


Factory work, plane flying over formation of Ram's and then one going full tilt

 

Spoiler

 

Kangaroo crews showing how many they jammed into them

 

Spoiler

 

 

small clip after the sherman flail

 

Spoiler

 

Small training clip, Rams loaded with guys all over it.

 

Spoiler

 

Factory workers examining Rams at Borden

 

Spoiler

 

Shermans and Rams saluting with guns in parade.

 

Spoiler

 

couple seconds of a Ram driving by firing.

 

Spoiler

 

McNaughton looking at Ram suspension.

 

Spoiler

 

sons of King Ibn Saud of Saudi Arabia looking over Ram tank

 

Spoiler

 

Rams on landing ships for exercise pirate

 

Spoiler

 

Victory bond drive, Ram used as display

 

Spoiler

 

Another exercise for d-day with Rams going by

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

Rams firing smoke, crossing a bridge and the end of the video has the waterproofed ones dropping off the landing ships and lining up to fire on the beach after.

 

Spoiler

 

Ram assault bridge

 

Spoiler

 

Bonus Captured Italian SPG in use

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 5 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...

Yes they are nice stowage diagrams, I had paid to have two different 6 pdr mounting part lists scanned at the Aussie archives and they host everything like that after on their site which is nice. Bonus was the stowage stuff included in the papers.

 

JA9rYKY.png

 

Po1gbEV.jpg

 

0AZbFKW.jpg

UGrgnwB.jpg

 

 

they are nice for layering as well to compare and get a idea on rough slope for the different sections (in front of driver and cupola)

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, EnsignExpendable said:

It's interesting how the Australians have so many Ram docs, I guess they consulted Canada on their modernization of the Medium Tank M3 modernization, but decided to go their separate way with the Sentinel.

Same reason the Ram I had the 2 pdr, no tank mounting existed for the 6 pdr. Canada's waiting on the UK who say they are working on it but it's not materializing so they go ahead and design their own. Australia wants the 6 pdr in their tank so they ask Canada for drawings to see how they manged it.

 

seoHcRg.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kangaroo with what looks like an engine change or some sort of major mod. exhaust soot on the rear upper plate, and what looks like the two exhausts sticking out of the rear engine deck plate. Only thing I can think of is an engine change to something like the Fords who's exhaust normally comes right out the lower rear plate on the M4A3, so instead of cutting 1.5 inches of steel to make an opening, they just piped it up and out of the engine cover.

 

Edit: Turns out that exhaust mod was done specifically to Ram towers only it seems, I suppose for clearance issues or wadding requirements?

 

ctOYKDg.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Ram makes a long dead bit of my anatomy wiggle. Just  so...

Because it is Canadian , but it is not quite ALL Canuck.

 

I want to hug it, but it says "No you are American!", and I say "But wait, so are you!".

As it waits, I say " And my relatives are Canadian (A lie, as we were chased out by the British)" Thus is the Ram lulled.

Link to post
Share on other sites

qKaVnd3.png

 

KmOvucW.png

 

xSUS9oo.png

N2PfJ1S.png

 

 

Taking known dimensions from primary sources on the Ram OP and regular Ram I + II to come up with numbers. Hull height is to the highest point at the turret ring, Turret height is to top of periscope over cupola and top of periscope on turret roof. No idea on actual roof height but you could probably make a rough estimation using the known heights, the photo with the turret removed and the measurements from the suspension. Hull width is the side hull cast in bulges, versions with the door in place are wider still. You can see in the photo how the actual overall width is lower everywhere else on the hull.

 

Question remains if they had measured to the older style periscopes or the newer taller ones.

 

Spoiler

tfQWbqI.png

DrGYhfa.png

uxHWm5N.png

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Similar Content

    • By SH_MM
      Found a few higher resolution photographs from the recent North Korean military parade. We didn't have a topic for BEST KOREAN armored fighting vehicles, so here it is.
       
      New main battle tank, Abrams-Armata clone based on Ch'ŏnma turret design (welded, box-shaped turret) and Sŏn'gun hull design (i.e. centerline driver's position). The bolts of the armor on the hull front is finally visible given the increased resolution. It might not be ERA given the lack of lines inbetween. Maybe is a NERA module akin to the MEXAS hull add-on armor for the Leopard 2A5?
       
      Other details include an APS with four radar panels (the side-mounted radar panels look a lot different - and a lot more real - than the ones mounted at the turret corners) and twelve countermeasures in four banks (two banks à three launchers each at the turret front, two banks à three launchers on the left and right side of the turret). Thermal imagers for gunner and commander, meteorological mast, two laser warning receivers, 115 mm smoothbore gun without thermal sleeve but with muzze reference system, 30 mm grenade launcher on the turret, six smoke grenade dischargers (three at each turret rear corner)
       


       
      IMO the layout of the roof-mounted ERA is really odd. Either the armor array covering the left turret cheek is significantly thinner than the armor on the right turret cheek or the roof-mounted ERA overlaps with the armor.
       


      The first ERA/armor element of the skirt is connected by hinges and can probably swivel to allow better access to the track. There is a cut-out in the slat armor for the engine exhaust. Also note the actual turret ring - very small diameter compared to the outer dimensions of the turret.
       
      Stryker MGS copy with D-30 field gun clone and mid engine:

      Note there are four crew hatches. Driver (on the left front of the vehicle), commander (on the right front of the vehicle, seat is placed a bit further back), gunner (left side of the gun's overhead mount, next to the gunner's sight) and unknown crew member (right side of gun's overhead mount with 30 mm automatic grenade launcher mounted at the hatch). The vehicle also has a thermal imager and laser rangefinder (gunner's sight is identical to the new tank), but no independent optic for the commander. It also has the same meteorological mast and laser warner receivers as the new MBT.
       
      What is the purpose of the fourth crew member? He cannot realistically load the gun...
       
      The vehicle has a small trim vane for swimming, the side armor is made of very thin spaced steel that is bend on multiple spots, so it clearly is not ceramic armor as fitted to the actual Stryker.

       
      The tank destroyer variant of the same Stryker MGS copy fitted with a Bulsae-3 ATGM launcher.
       

      Note that there is again a third hatch with 30 mm automatic grenade launcher behind the commander's position. Laser warning receivers and trime vane are again stand-out features. The sighting complex for the Bulsae-3 ATGMs is different with a large circular optic (fitted with cover) probably being a thermal imager and two smaller lenses visible on the very right (as seen from the vehicle's point of view) probably containing a day sight and parts of the guidance system.
       

      Non line-of-sight ATGM carrier based on the 6x6 local variant of the BTR, again fitted with laser warning receivers and a trim vane. There are only two hatches and two windows, but there is a three men crew inside.
       
       
      There are a lot more photos here, but most of them are infantry of missile system (MLRS' and ICBMs).
    • By Toxn
      So I got a request recently from {NAME REDACTED} as to whether we have a how-to guide or something for competitions. After a few moments of bitter, bitter laughter at the decade-plus of my life that I've spent cobbling together things that can maybe, sort-of, squint-your-eyes produce a facsimile of a realistic vehicle, I thought I'd share my process:
       
       
      Note: I was half-right - we definitely have supplementary info for aspiring pretend tank designers pinned to this very board.
       
      Finally, I'm inviting our forum grognards and past winners to share their process for folk that haven't been here since before the last ice age, so that all can benefit.
    • By Proyas
      Hi guys,
       
      Does anyone know of any military studies that analyzed the reload speeds for different tanks? The question occurred to me when I watched this video tour of the T-55's interior: 
       
      https://youtu.be/TEDhB9evPvw
       
      At the 10:00 mark, Mr. Moran demonstrates how the loader would put a shell into the tank's cannon, and the effects of the turret's small size and of the loader's awkward seating make it clear that the process would be slow. My question is: how slow? 
       
      Side question: Am I right to assume that storing the tank shells all over the inside of the turret like that is an inherent design flaw of the T-55 that makes it inferior in that regard to modern tanks? 
       
      Thanks in advance. 
    • By Collimatrix
      Sturgeon's House started with a community of people who played tank games.  At the time, most of us were playing World of Tanks, but I think there were a few Warthunder and even Steel Beasts players mixed in there too.  After nearly five years, we must be doing something right because we're still here, and because we've somehow picked up a number of members who work with, or have worked with tanks in real life.

      I know that @AssaultPlazma served as an Abrams loader, @Merc 321 and @Meplat have helped maintain and restore privately-owned armor, and @Xlucine has volunteered in a tank museum.  I'm sure I'm missing several more!

      So, what are your favorite personal tank stories?

×
×
  • Create New...