Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [G104] Re: Wartime picture of wet stowage M4A3's with low bustle turrets

Expand Messages
  • Kurt Laughlin
    ... From: Mike Canaday ... has ... no ... And which we know, given both of our experiences with building weapons for the US
    Message 1 of 9 , Feb 28, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Mike Canaday" <mmcalc@...>

      > >I think it is one of those things where the M4A3(75)W was, by definition,
      > a
      > >tank with hull X, turret Y, interior Z, and so forth.
      >
      > Absolutely, I imagine some sort of waiver would have been required.
      > However, if the turret armor assembly is functionally the same, i.e. it
      has
      > the hatches required, the gun mount can fit,.the ancillary fittings can be
      > attached, and the armor requirements are met, then there would have been
      no
      > reason for tanks to not have used the low bustle turret, except that the
      > drawings undoubtly called for the turret casting to be the 78461 part.

      And which we know, given both of our experiences with building weapons for
      the US Government, is all the reason that is needed . . .

      > some possibilities:

      I gotta figger a post war scenario of some sort. It seems that all the
      configuration management controllers got fired on August 15, 1945. Look at
      the Tokyo Ordnance Depot rebuilds in Hunnicutt, or the "76mm/M34A1" tanks
      shipped under MDAP, the French and Israeli stuff, and so on. An M74 is a
      good example of how far "rebuilding" a Sherman can go while still under US
      control.

      > I would think that if the date of the photo is WWII the probability of the
      > last senario would go up.

      Yeah, but it looks too "peacetime" for me. If you look at the wartime
      training pics - even stateside - they don't look as spit and polish as these
      guys. But invariably at least a few wear helmets. That shot reminds me of
      the pics of the 1st AD visiting the 1939 World's Fair in NYC in their light
      tanks and combat cars. Tankers wearing neckties, Sam Browne belts, and
      cavalry boots . . .

      KL
    • Hanno Spoelstra
      ... *snip* ... I have seen pictures of a surviving Sherman in this configuration, too. Where did Tim Streeter photographed his example? Personally, I think
      Message 2 of 9 , Mar 1, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        At 23:17 28-2-2002 -0500, Mike Canaday wrote:
        >some possibilities:
        >
        >-wartime 2nd or 3rd eschelon cannibalization of a KO'ed tank
        *snip*
        >The existing example Tim Streeter photoed has the post war
        >engine deck torsion springs.

        >-a 5th or factory rebuild post war or wartime
        >much more likely, no foundries are producing 75mm turrets, and more 75mm
        >tanks are needed. A casting is a casting, if it meets the requirements.


        I have seen pictures of a surviving Sherman in this configuration, too.
        Where did Tim Streeter photographed his example?
        Personally, I think these were the result of a post-war rebuild, the engine
        hatch torsion bars are another clue to that. From what I know of rebuilding
        tanks in those days, no particular precautions were made to keep a certain
        turret matched to the hull it came off originally.

        Interesting stuff!
        Hanno
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.