Jump to content


Photo

Suggestions for Updated WW2 Data Book


  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

#1 Mark 1

Mark 1

    Corporal

  • Members
  • 87 posts

Posted 13 March 2009 - 10:25 PM

Since Bob is putting the updated World War II data book together, I thought this might be the right time (last chance?) to make a few observations / suggestions.I considered putting these into an email, but thought the public forum might be a better way, as some inputs may be worthy of debate or correction if others have differing data.I am going to offer some generalized suggestions in this post, and plan to follow-up within the thread with suggestions for a few specific individual nations and their forces.General Suggestions- Infantry with SMGs: Many nations have SMG squads listed among their infantry forces. Yet, as far as I know, in WW2 the Soviets were the ONLY nation that regularly equipped entire squads with SMGs. All of the other major powers, and several of the minor powers, provided SMGs to one or two men per squad at most (often the NCOs), except in some roles where small detatchments of specialists might be carrying SMGs.So ... could we get some Rifle + SMG and Rifle + SMG + LMG squads? These should appear for Germans, British, US, Italians, Finns, Romanians, and probably some others too. Also could we get some SMG-armed crew or sapper or demo-team support squads? These might appear for French, Hungarians and Japanese, in addition to the ones above.- HMG identification: The term Heavy Machine Gun was first coined to refer to rifle-caliber machined guns that happened to be heavy. Later (and today) it refers mostly to larger caliber machine guns. In the data books it is not clear whether guns that are identified as HMGs are in fact ~.30 cal or >.50cal. Could the caliber be added in to the name or description of the HMGs (without adding a new column), to help us more easily identify the guns being described?More to come on particular nations ...-Mark 1

#2 Bob Benge

Bob Benge

    Mein Panzer Guru

  • ODGW Staff
  • 1,157 posts
  • LocationLas Cruces, NM

Posted 14 March 2009 - 11:43 AM

Hi Mark,On the SMG issue. SMGs are already included in the calculations for the rifle squads. We actually went over this a while back when we went to MP2. Lest we forget Sgt. Saunders. :) As for the nations that have SMG squads, they had a TOE that we found that included an SMG squad when we created the squads, so that is why they are included in countries other than Russia.As to the term HMG: this is another area that we had a good long conversation on with a few other scholars and gamers. Your are correct to a degree, except that some called different caliber MGs different things. It is purely dependant by country is some respects. The Germans are a prime example as they called the bi-pod MG34/42 an LMG where a tripod MG34/42 was classed as a MMG or an HMG. It is technically it is an GPMG. Mal Wright had done a very good article on this which gave distinctions to the different MGs. I also ran across an US Army - Marine? article that went over this topic. Suffice it to say the lines are not clear. So the designations used are by the country or in some cases best available info. The designations have no influence on the stats of the guns though so changing them will not effect our numbers. :)

#3 Mark 1

Mark 1

    Corporal

  • Members
  • 87 posts

Posted 14 March 2009 - 01:06 PM

bbenge wrote:

On the SMG issue. SMGs are already included in the calculations for the rifle squads.

Fair enough. That's the best way to handle them. Just was not aware they were already included. Helps me when basing any new infantry units.

As for the nations that have SMG squads, they had a TOE that we found that included an SMG squad when we created the squads, so that is why they are included in countries other than Russia.

Interesting! So I guess I will have to go off and do some more digging into infantry squad-level TOEs! So much to learn ...

Your are correct to a degree, except that some called different caliber MGs different things. It is purely dependant by country is some respects. ... So the designations used are by the country or in some cases best available info. The designations have no influence on the stats of the guns though so changing them will not effect our numbers.

This is much as I thought. My suggestion is to add, somewhere, some indication of caliber (but hopefully without adding the burden of a whole new column). I have already been in some discussions with gamers who asserted that I, or they, should be using one line-item from the list vs. another, based on assumptions about HMG meaning it was a .50cal vs. a .30cal etc. I know that some nations called .30cal weapons HMGs because they were heavy in weight. But some gamers can't accept that without some debate, and friction can arise when they don't know the modello or Mk number of their opponent's kit, but see them using a line marked "HMG" for a .30cal weapon. All I am suggesting is adding ".50cal" or "7.62mm" or whatever in the descriptions of HMGs somewhere, to clarify matters and prevent arguments.-Mark 1

#4 Mark 1

Mark 1

    Corporal

  • Members
  • 87 posts

Posted 14 March 2009 - 02:08 PM

United StatesSome suggestions that come to mind when reviewing the US list:- Rifle Squads: We could use some squads equipped with M1903 Sprinfields or P17 bolt-action rifles on the list. Early war gamers trying to playout scenarios for the US Army in the Phillipinnes, or USMC initial actions on Guadalcanal, or many what-if's about Wake, or Hawaii, or even the Pacific Northwest, are kind of out of luck with the current list. I mean, how can we have an upgrade to Cavalry when we don't even have bolt-action rifles? Posted Image- 75mm Tank Gun M2: I dare say this gun appears in the wrong places on the list. Particularly, it does not appear on the early model M3 Mediums when it should (US M3, M3A1-A2, and though I haven't gone through the UK list extensively, the Grant/Lee I & II). But then it DOES appear on the earlier model M4 Mediums (M4, M4A1, M4A2) when it should not. The M2 gun was installed on M4s during development. It can be seen, with its muzzle-weight, on pictures of the T6 prototype vehicle. It also appears to have been used in the first few production vehicles. The 2nd M4 production tank, an M4A1 that was shipped to the British and now resides at Bovington, appears to have the M2 gun (although the muzzle weight has been removed). But this tank also has direct visions slots in the glacis and twin fixed hull MGs fired by the driver, clear indicators that it was not the same M4A1 Sherman that actually rolled into action with US and British armies. I am quite confident that the vast majority of Shermans that fought overseas, whether M4, M4A1, M4A2, M4A3, or M4A4 (or their British equivelants) were equipped with the 75mm Tank Gun M3. While clearly evident in pictures of early model Grant/Lees, have you ever seen a picture of a Sherman in a combat zone that had a muzzle-weight? I would be very interested if you have.- 37mm Gun (Tank Gun M5 or M6 and Towed Gun M3): I feel the AT performance of this gun is under-rated in the stats. Today, the stats of this gun (AP OV) vs. two other common guns of similar caliber are:US 37mm L53: OV = 4German 37mm L45: OV = 4British 2pdr: OV = 6Now let's look at the actual performance of these three guns:US 37mm: MV = 2,600fpsGerman 37mm: MV = 2,427fpsBritish 2pdr: MV = 2,600fpsPenetration data:US 37mm with AP vs. RHA: 100m = 76mm 500m = 59mm 1000m = 43mmUS 37mm with AP vs. FH: 100m = 57mm 500m = 39mm 1000m = 34mmUS 37mm APCBC vs. RHA: 100m = 66mm 500m = 58mm 1000m = 50mmUS 37mm APCBC vs. FH: 100m = 65mm 500m = 49mm 1000m = 49mmGerman 37mm APC vs. RHA: 100m = 64mm 500m = 52mm 1000m = 40mmUK 2pdr with AP vs. RHA: 100m = 82mm 500m = 63mm 1000m = 46mmUK 2pdr with AP vs. FH: 100m = 62mm 500m = 50mm 1000m = 38mmUK 2pdr APCBC vs. RHA: 100m = 73mm 500m = 65mm 1000m = 57mmUK 2pdr APCBC vs. FH: 100m = 76mm 500m = 67mm 1000m = 57mmYou will note that, with the exception of comparing US AP vs. FH armor against the German APC, in all cases the US 37mm is between the performance of the two, and is generally closer to the British gun's performance than to the German gun. (Source: Bird & Livingston's WW2 Ballistics: Armor and Gunnery, 2nd Ed. Not the world's greatest source, I admit, but at least it gives a reasonably robust set of data to back it's conclusions.)While the 37mm towed AT gun was quickly dropped in favor of the 57mm, the same gun appears on more than a dozen US vehicles on the list that remained in action through the end of the war. It's performance is rather important in any advance-to-contact battle in ETO.- Littlejohn adapters: I have not found any listings for US 37mm guns nor British 2pdr guns with Littlejohn adapters, nor firing APCR through the normal barrels. Did I miss this? Not such a big deal for the US unless I want to toss some M22 Locusts out of a plane somewhere, but for British A/C units in Italy it might be a real shortcoming. But it is not my intention to go through the British list, so I'll just leave it as a mention.Just some ponderings...-Mark 1

#5 Mark 1

Mark 1

    Corporal

  • Members
  • 87 posts

Posted 15 March 2009 - 03:19 PM

ItalySome suggestions that come to mind when looking through the Italian list:Several vehicles have multiple entries. I am not sure if this is deliberate, out of concern that readers may know these vehicles by different names. But I do not find this multi-listing repeated on other nations' lists, so perhaps it is just a by-product of multiple contributors and not enough editing. In any case, I thought I might call these up while an edit pass is underway.- The L3-35 tankette, also known as the CV35, is listed as:-- Carro Armato L3-35 -- Carro Armato L 35-- Carro Veloce L3-35 II/CV.35I believe these are all supposed to be the same vehicle, even though the second one shows slightly different stats.- The L6-40 light tank is listed as:-- Carro Armato L40-- Carro Armato L6- The M11-39 medium tank is listed as:-- Carro Armato M11-39-- Carro Armato M 39- The M13-40 medium tank is listed as:-- Carro Armato M 13-40-- Carro M 40This is double listing is repeated also for the medium tanks M 14-41 and M 15-42.- The heavy tank P26-40 is also double listed, as:-- Carro Armato P 40-- Carro Pesante P 26-40It also appears that at least one truck SPG is repeated:- The Autocannone 75 (75mm gun on a truck) is listed as:TANK DESTROYERS-- Autocannone 75(This listing shows it carrying an L36 gun. The only L36 in Italian service was the captured French gun, which they did not mount on trucks. If this is a reference to captured Free French portee'd 75mm guns, a bit more explanation might be added to make it clear.)SELF PROPELLED GUNS/HOWITZERS-- SPG Truck 75mm(This listing shows it carrying an L27 gun, which is proper for the vehicle the Italians called the Autocannone 75.)So also under ARTILLERY there may be a couple of duplicate listings:- The Italian 65mm infantry gun appears to be double-listed:-- Field Gun, 65mm-- Infantry Gun, 65mm- The Skoda 100mm Howitzer also appears double-listed:-- Field Gun, Obice da 100/17 M.14-- Field Howitzer, 100mm m/14That is all of the multiple listings I was able to find. In most all cases the duplicates have the same values, and are not so much in error as just confusing.Under INFANTRY WEAPONS there is one listing for an ATR:- ATR, Solothurn: AP OV = 2The Solothurn S118 AT rifle fired the same 20mm x 138b round as German and Italian 20mm AA guns. In Italian service the ATR fired the same AP rounds as Italian auto cannons (the Germans used different ammunition than the Italians for their auto cannons). Yet the Italian Breda 20mm gun is listed with an AP OV = 4, while the ATR has AP OV = 2. Is this superior AP performance due to the multiple hits expected from an auto cannon? I have not observed 2x nor a straight +2 AP performance advantage with other auto cannons (vs. equivalent ROF 1 or 2 guns).Also, I would suggest adding another ATR to the Italians list. After the 1939 Polish Campaign, the Germans sold several hundred captured wz. 35 AT rifles to the Italians. In general, the Solothurns were used in North Africa, and the wz. 35s were used in Russia. The same values as on the Polish list could be used, as the Italians fired captured Polish amunition. (And BTW, the Polish 7.92mm ATR is given an AP OV = 4, while the Solothurn 20mm ATR is an AP OV = 2! It is true that the Polish ATR was the best of the 7.92mm ATRs, but still ... 2x of a 20mm ATR?!?)More generally, I fear that the Italians have been short-changed on anti-armor firepower by the lack of Effetto Pronto ammunition for many guns on the list. Effetto Pronto (Quick-Acting, a reference to the improved fuze in 2nd gen Italian HEAT rounds) were the Italians' primary AT rounds by 1942.Here are the listings for guns that do not have an HT OV value, that I believe should:TANKS- M13-40 (in whatever name it is listed)- M14-41 (again under whatever name)- M15-42 (under whatever name)- P26-40 (under whatever name)TANK DESTROYER- Autocannone 65- Autocannone 75- Carro Commando Platone 47/32- Semovente L40ARMORED CARS- Autoblinda 43OBSERVATION/COMMAND/RECON VEHICLES- Autosharianna 42(d)- Camionetta Sertica AS 37- Carro Armato M15-42 Cmd- Semovente L40 CmdARTILLERY- Infantry Gun 65mm (under whatever name)- Obice da 100/17 M14 (under whatever name)- Field Howitzer 75mm M14- Field Howitzer 75mm M37- Infantry Gun 75mm (L13)(By the way, what is the gun ref'd as Infantry Gun 75mm that shows an L36??)(The 65mm infantry gun should also get an APHE round (AP OV). These were issued prior to the EP rounds becomming available. Standard issue was 12 APHE rounds per gun.)ANTI-TANK GUNS- ATG 47mm Breda (properly called the M35)I have not listed the Moutain Guns in 100mm and 75mm, because while I expect they could fire the EP rounds, I don't know they were issued EP rounds.Posted ImageJust for fun I've inserted a scan from a British intelligence bulletin that diagrams the 100mm EP round.I believe the 47mm EP round was issued beginning in mid-1942. The 65mm EP round started appearing in March of 1942. I don't know exactly when the 75mm or 100mm EP rounds started appearing, but I believe test firings were conducted against T-34s in the second half of 1942 -- the 75mm round was found to be insufficient, while the 100mm round was deamed effective. I have pictures from some of those tests if you'd like to see them.Hope that helps.-Mark 1

#6 Bob Benge

Bob Benge

    Mein Panzer Guru

  • ODGW Staff
  • 1,157 posts
  • LocationLas Cruces, NM

Posted 16 March 2009 - 02:43 AM

Hey Mark,A note on the Small Arms: the small arms table lists for squads is semi generic. The stats are derived from the actual weapons listed though. I was originally going to provide a complete list of small arms for each country, but there was a stiff resistance to this by some due to loss of simplicity and that the page count and book would have ballooned even further which would have caused some economic issues. Meine Truppen will have this expanded small arms info in it when we can get it out as it is more in the realm of this scale. Meine Truppen is our fire team equivelant and 1"=25yd optional addition to Mein Panzer that will be out eventually. I will be looking over this great info over the course of the week. I will warn that much of the AP ratings have been fleshed out ad naseum as I have and others have gone over this aspect many, many times before. With that said, I am not discounting I have another typo or two that I haven't caught and will be reviewing your info. As an FYI; we have been using an amalgam of at least 3 independent sources for AP ratings and have factored in angle of penetration where necessary as listed in the sources. The angling factor formula is based on the real world formula but downgraded slightly to produce a little more penetration at higher angles than reality. This was done as a playability issue and is set in stone. FYI, a couple of my resources for AP are the Guns vs. Armor website, Chamberlain's Encyclopedia of German Tanks of WW2 and American and British Tanks of WW2 (can't remember the author). I use a few others also that I can't remember at the moment. I wish I did have Bird & Livingston's WW2 Ballistics: Armor and Gunnery, 2nd Ed. While it may be a bit controversial it does have some info that no one else has. I had been looking for the book for the past couple of years when I was working on the WW2 Secret Weapons book. I had sent a request to the Aberdeen Proving Grounds Tank Museum trying to find the penetration info on the US 105mm gun that was going to be used in the Super Heavy T-95 GMC and they recommended that book for the info. Sooooo, if you have a chance, would you mind sending me the data on the US 105mm when you get a chance? ;)

#7 Mark 1

Mark 1

    Corporal

  • Members
  • 87 posts

Posted 16 March 2009 - 08:44 AM

bbenge wrote:

A note on the Small Arms: the small arms table lists for squads is semi generic.

If by this you mean I should use the generic bolt-action rifle table for US M1903s or P17s, I can accept that as perfectly reasonable.

Meine Truppen is our fire team equivelant and 1"=25yd optional addition to Mein Panzer that will be out eventually.

Yep. Gregory has approached me about possibly being a playtestor.CG Erickson (one of my gaming buds) and I played out an infantry-dominated game with MP prior to the move to squad-based infantry rules. In truth the rules played out quite well as they were. It was a fascinating action.But alas, I am a strong believer in squad-based infantry rules for my micro-scale wargaming. I really like combined arms gaming, and in many decades of experience I have concluded that fire-team based infantry rules make it impossible for me to mix tanks and infantry on board in company-sized units. I think infantry-only (or with very few vehicles in support) fire-team basing can be loads of fun. But I hold steadfast to my goal of battalion-sized combined arms wargames. That's MP, not MT, in my book. ;)

I will warn that much of the AP ratings have been fleshed out ad naseum as I have and others have gone over this aspect many, many times before.

No warnings necessary. I will never object if you stick to your guns. (Pardon the pun.) But I beg you to give me some of the data you use to make your conclusion if you decide my suggestions are wrong. I will always welcome new sources to expand my own knowledge of history. For me the gaming, and the discussion of the gaming, is not so much a competition as it is an excersize to gain understanding and insight. I often win (on the insight) even when I lose (in the game).

I wish I did have Bird & Livingston's WW2 Ballistics: Armor and Gunnery, 2nd Ed. While it may be a bit controversial it does have some info that no one else has. I had been looking for the book for the past couple of years when I was working on the WW2 Secret Weapons book.

My copy was given to me by Stephen Lorenze (author of the PanzerWar rules). Nice guy. I would be quite pleased to loan it to you for any reasonable timeframe if you'd like. I should be generous with the book, as it came to me as a gift from a fellow gamer through his generosity and enthusiasm to share sources of historical analysis. But I'm a bit too greedy to actually give it away! :woohoo:

I had sent a request to the Aberdeen Proving Grounds Tank Museum trying to find the penetration info on the US 105mm gun that was going to be used in the Super Heavy T-95 GMC and they recommended that book for the info. Sooooo, if you have a chance, would you mind sending me the data on the US 105mm when you get a chance?

Will do. But ...

I will be looking over this great info over the course of the week.

I also want to complete my review (and offer my suggestions) for the Romanian list before your review cycle is complete. So this will be my first priority for new posting. Please watch for another bit of blather...-Mark 1

#8 Bob Benge

Bob Benge

    Mein Panzer Guru

  • ODGW Staff
  • 1,157 posts
  • LocationLas Cruces, NM

Posted 16 March 2009 - 03:18 PM

Hi Mark,I have started going over the info you sent and...The 75mm M2/M3. I have added an entry for the M4-M4A1 Sherman that has the M3 75mm. The current entry now has the annotation of Early Prod. as the early M4/M4A1 did have the M2 gun for a short time. I verified this with British and American Tanks of WW2 by Chamberlain and Ellis. The M3 Grant/Lee entry gun was changed to an M2 as I thought this would be sensible considering all of my resources listed all of the M3 and variants as M2 or M3. I left the M3A1 and above as the M3.The 37mm gun issue. I did forget the APC ammo and am adding it with AP of 6. I am not however, changing its standard AP rating. Here's why;The 37mm gun is rated at 457m for 36mm at 0 degrees which is an AP of 4.The 40mmL50 (2-pdr) is rated at 457m for 47mm at 30 degrees which is an AP of 6 with the application of the angle penetration formula. I have this info from the the Guns vs. Armor website: http://gva.freeweb.hu/index.html and the aforementioned British and American Tanks of WW2 book. Actually I should add the APHV/APC which would be at 457m for 57mm at 30 degrees which is an APC of 7. I will have to add a note that the ammo was available L42. The Littlejohn squeeze bore ammo became available in 1943 and was used primarily on Armored Cars and the Tetarch. The info was found on the TMP: http://74.125.47.132...n&ct=clnk&gl=us and the Guns vs. Armor website. So the Littlejohn info will be added to the 2-pdr armored cars that don't have it already.That's all I had time for tonight. Boy you have made a lot of work for me now as I have to translate all of this to the US, UK and all of the lend lease countries. UGH! :)

#9 gregoryk

gregoryk

    GQ3 Product Manager

  • ODGW Retired Staff
  • 1,048 posts

Posted 16 March 2009 - 04:29 PM

Mark,Thought I'd weigh in on the MT issue. There are a lot of things coming in the Meine Truppen package, and not all of them are strictly infantry-based. The game is designed to be used with MP2, but you can pick and choose what aspects you wish to use. That includes going to the fire team based size. In fact, much of the playtesting was done using squads vice fire teams. I think most people will find lots of things to keep them interested.Cheers,Gregory

#10 Harlan Garrett

Harlan Garrett

    Private

  • Members
  • 48 posts

Posted 30 March 2009 - 07:53 AM

Bob,Here is some information that I found on Achtung Panzer! (http://www.achtungpa...es/bulpanth.htm) about a shipment of Panthers that Bulgaria received from the Soviet Union. Sorry I did not get this information to you prior to publishing the new 2.2 WWII Data Book. Happy War Gaming,HarlanIn early 1945, single Tank Battalion with three brigades (two medium tanks and single heavy tank brigade) was formed and was to be part of the 1st Bulgarian Army (part of the 3rd Ukrainian Front). All the vehicles to equip those units were captured German vehicles delivered by the Soviet Union. On March 17th of 1945, first Panther was delivered. The crews of the First Tank Battalion arrived from Sofia to the frontline in Hungary on April 11th of 1945. Three days later at Pana Deveger they received their Panthers from the Soviet forces - total of 15 tanks (including the single one delivered in March). Crew training started immediately under the supervision of Soviet instructor. Crews liked their tanks but complained about Soviet radio equipment and requested that the German radios were to be delivered. The end of the war came before Bulgarian crews finished their training so they never entered active service. At the end of May of 1945, Bulgarian Panthers were taken by train to Sofia and transferred to the First Tank Brigade. On March 1st of 1946, there were 15 Panthers in service including 14 functional and one in need of repairs. From 1945 to 1948, Soviet Union supplied Bulgaria with 738 armored fighting vehicles - 398 T-34/85 tanks and 340 SU-76M self-propelled guns. Further use of 15 Panthers became pointless. Panthers were then burried along the Bulgarian-Turkish border as pillboxes, while their Maybach engines were removed. It was planned to mount them in locomotives but it was not realized. The total of Panthers delivered to Bulgaria is well known - 15 vehicles including early and late Ausf Ds, Ausf A and Ausf G. Bulgarian Panthers were painted in the standard "Russian grass green" as they were repaired and repainted before being delivered to Bulgarians.. In addition to Panthers, Bulgarians also used other German armored fighting vehicles including PzKpfw IVs. Article by Theodor Muchowski based on article "Medium Tank Panther in the Bulgarian Army" by Kaloyan Matev, "Model" Magazine, No.3/99.

#11 Harlan Garrett

Harlan Garrett

    Private

  • Members
  • 48 posts

Posted 30 March 2009 - 07:58 AM

Bob,Here is some information that I found on Achtung Panzer! (http://www.achtungpa...es/bulpanth.htm) about a shipment of Panthers that Bulgaria received from the Soviet Union. Sorry I did not get this information to you prior to publishing the new 2.2 WWII Data Book. Happy War Gaming,HarlanIn early 1945, single Tank Battalion with three brigades (two medium tanks and single heavy tank brigade) was formed and was to be part of the 1st Bulgarian Army (part of the 3rd Ukrainian Front). All the vehicles to equip those units were captured German vehicles delivered by the Soviet Union. On March 17th of 1945, first Panther was delivered. The crews of the First Tank Battalion arrived from Sofia to the frontline in Hungary on April 11th of 1945. Three days later at Pana Deveger they received their Panthers from the Soviet forces - total of 15 tanks (including the single one delivered in March). Crew training started immediately under the supervision of Soviet instructor. Crews liked their tanks but complained about Soviet radio equipment and requested that the German radios were to be delivered. The end of the war came before Bulgarian crews finished their training so they never entered active service. At the end of May of 1945, Bulgarian Panthers were taken by train to Sofia and transferred to the First Tank Brigade. On March 1st of 1946, there were 15 Panthers in service including 14 functional and one in need of repairs. From 1945 to 1948, Soviet Union supplied Bulgaria with 738 armored fighting vehicles - 398 T-34/85 tanks and 340 SU-76M self-propelled guns. Further use of 15 Panthers became pointless. Panthers were then burried along the Bulgarian-Turkish border as pillboxes, while their Maybach engines were removed. It was planned to mount them in locomotives but it was not realized. The total of Panthers delivered to Bulgaria is well known - 15 vehicles including early and late Ausf Ds, Ausf A and Ausf G. Bulgarian Panthers were painted in the standard "Russian grass green" as they were repaired and repainted before being delivered to Bulgarians.. In addition to Panthers, Bulgarians also used other German armored fighting vehicles including PzKpfw IVs. Article by Theodor Muchowski based on article "Medium Tank Panther in the Bulgarian Army" by Kaloyan Matev, "Model" Magazine, No.3/99.

#12 Mark 1

Mark 1

    Corporal

  • Members
  • 87 posts

Posted 12 May 2011 - 07:34 PM

Returning to a discussion from a little while back …

United StatesSome suggestions that come to mind when reviewing the US list:
...
- 75mm Tank Gun M2: I dare say this gun appears in the wrong places on the list. Particularly ... it DOES appear on the earlier model M4 Mediums (M4, M4A1, M4A2) when it should not. The M2 gun was installed on M4s during development. It can be seen, with its muzzle-weight, on pictures of the T6 prototype vehicle. It also appears to have been used in the first few production vehicles. The 2nd M4 production tank, an M4A1 that was shipped to the British and now resides at Bovington, appears to have the M2 gun (although the muzzle weight has been removed). But this tank also has direct visions slots in the glacis and twin fixed hull MGs fired by the driver, clear indicators that it was not the same M4A1 Sherman that actually rolled into action with US and British armies. I am quite confident that the vast majority of Shermans that fought overseas, whether M4, M4A1, M4A2, M4A3, or M4A4 (or their British equivelants) were equipped with the 75mm Tank Gun M3.


The 75mm M2/M3. I have added an entry for the M4-M4A1 Sherman that has the M3 75mm. The current entry now has the annotation of Early Prod. as the early M4/M4A1 did have the M2 gun for a short time. I verified this with British and American Tanks of WW2 by Chamberlain and Ellis.


I have returned to this discussion because I have just happened upon the details of this issue.

I am not suggesting any further changes to the data book. It now lists the M3 gun for the M4 tank, and that’s fine. But I thought I might offer a record here in the forum of the more detailed information on the original question, just for the sake of completeness.

My source, in this case, was Rich Anderson, a noted author on military history. He and I had some discussion about this over on TankNet a few years before I raised it in this forum. At that time (2007) Rich was working as a researcher for the Dupuy Institute, and was (and still is) a very solid source for detailed information from the U.S. Government archives.

Rich was able to give me the hull numbers of every Sherman to be equipped with the M2 gun. It's a pretty short list -- there were only 3! Here are the details:

- T6: the M4 prototype, carried the M2 75mm gun. It never left the States. I have seen pictures of this tank, as referenced in my original post on this subject.

- M4A1 BRN T25189: the first M4A1 production tank, was shipped to Egypt as a training aide in August of 1942, prior to the shipment of 318 production M4A1s (all equipped with the M3 gun) in September. I have never seen pictures of this tank. No idea what finally became of it, but there appears to be no record (in the U.S. archives) of it having seen combat.

- M4A1 BRN T25190: the second M4A1 production tank. Christened “Michael”, it was sent to Britain as a Lend-Lease showpiece, evidently before T24189 was shipped to Egypt. It is still retained at Bovington. I have seen pictures of this tank, as I mentioned above.



-Mark 1
_________________
Mark 1




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users