|
Dragoon 45 -> RE: M4 Sherman Series not modeled accurately? (10/26/2004 3:24:12 AM)
|
The reason I started this thread, is to highlight what my research has found. The M4, M4A1, M4A2, M4A3, and M4A4 all had production versions with HVSS, 76mm gun, and wet ammo stowage. What I wanted to highlight was that all the different models of the Sherman built during the same time frame had the same capabilities, i.e. targeting, ROF, optics, etc. Each model was improved on over time, with each model receiving the same improvements, i.e. HVSS, 76mm gun etc. The M4A3 was not the third improved model of the original M4, in fact the M4A3 was the fifth production model due to the developmental time needed for the Ford tank engine, the GAA 500hp V-8.
The differences between the models were mainly type of powerplant and method of construction. Ford Motor Company which built most of the M4A3 series classifies the M4A3E8 as the prototype for the M4A3 with HVSS, 76mm gun, and wet stowage, according to the reference books that I have. Also the prototype for the M4A1 with HVSS, 76mm gun, and wet ammo stowage was the M4A1E8, and for the M4A2 it was the M4A2E8. What I was trying to bring to the attention of others was the apparent differences between the versions. An M4A1 76mm and an M4A3 76mm had the same armor and same fire control capabilities. The medium tank T-23 provided the turret that all the 76mm gun armed Shermans had. The original turret of the M4 armed with the 75mm gun was too small to take a 76mm gun, not enough room for the breach to recoil. So the designers took the turret of the T-23 medium tank and modified it to fit the M4 chassis. All the 76mm armed Shermans had the same turret and same fire control capabilities, the only difference being which version of the 76mm M1 gun was fitted to the turret. There was a speed difference between the models due to the different powerplants and transmissions used in the different models. The introduction of the HVSS improved the ride and also improved the ability to fire on the move, not that most crews tried that. But the only version of the Sherman that was not produced with HVSS according to my sources was the M4A6 which only had 75 total production vehicles.
The T-23 medium tank in its final form was equipped with torsion bar suspension (same as the Pershing), 76mm gun, thicker armor, and most importantly about a foot lower in height than the M4 series. Depending on sources, somewhere between 250 and 1250 of these tanks were built but never deployed in combat.
A 76mm armed version of the Sherman was developed in 1942, but did not go into production until early 1944. Stateside officials delayed the production due to the differences in doctrine between the Armor Forces and Tank Destroyer Command. They did not want to see a 76mm armed Sherman on the grounds that it would encourage U.S. Tank Crews to engage other tanks which under the then current doctrine was the job of the Tank Destroyers. Almost 1700 M-10's were built based either on the M4A2 or M4A3 chassis and a little over 1700 M-36's were built based on the M4A3 chassis. The M-18 was the only purpose built tank destroyer that had nothing in common with the Sherman chassis.
If you want some really arcane knowledge, there was even one version of the Sherman built for mine clearance work that had no tracks at all. It replaced all the running gear with a tricycle arrangement with three large (10' diameter) thick metal wheels, two at the front and one at the back, with the bottom of the hull being something like 8' off the ground. Another version tested the installation of the halftrack type suspension instead of the Verticle Volute or HVSS type.
|
|
|
|
