• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


Community Reputation

1,544 Outstanding


About Whelmy

  • Rank
    Group captain

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

13,898 profile views
  1. Turret rotation was 18 deg with an aced crew when it was released. I got them to correct that now it's 23.5 deg/s. Mobility I brought up as well, they increased the top speed to 25 mph, but the tank could actually do 27-28 mph for short bursts. I pointed out the incorrect turret front and they did change~sort of correct parts of it, but other area's on it are still weaker then it was in reality. Basically a 76mm front + 76mm inner mantlet would be more correct as far as I can tell. The upper hull sides are still to low, they were listed as 76.2 to 50.8 mm in thickness, and I pointed that out to them and even provided a report where they "accidentally" shot one in a training mishap that put a 2 pdr round through the side hull and they said that area was meant to be 76.2 to 70 mm in thickness in construction, actual measured out to 70mm I question the driver's vision door as well, I believe it's actually thicker then 50mm
  2. They had a stabilizer in some of the 90mm T25's The M26 with the 105mm Howitzer (M45) they stated a stabilizer was a requirement, it had one. They did work on the T26E3 with a fully integrated fire control system, that included a fully stabilized gun installation including range finder, computing sight and sided tracking in azimuth. (No idea how far that went) semi releated, they installed some for testing in the M18 as well and found it really helped. Future production of it was recommended to have it installed.
  3. Those one's don't really have a source beyond Canadian Microfilms as they are not really in a category or provided with notes etc, just randomly "oh look a penetration chart"
  4. It states in the first paragraph notes taken from "Tank guns and ammunition, office of the Chief of Ordnance, 3rd may, 1945"
  5. I stuck it up on the forums here or on WoT's before. Along with the T29 version of the scan. Here's the un chopped version
  6. http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/turret_types/75mm_turrets.html you can see the inside of a 75mm turret with the area shaved out on the inside. also the diagrams in the other link show it was not entirely shaved off as some areas are still 3 inches looking. so it's complicated.
  7. they had to shave away armour in locations under the welded on armour. as it was no longer 3 inches they added the extra plates. down to 2 inches. so 50.8 cast + 44.45 cast = 95.3 mm or 50.8 cast + 39.1 rolled = 88.9 mm
  8. https://www.scribd.com/doc/30827701/Applique-Armor-on-M4-Series-Medium-Tanks
  9. I don't think they will ever move it. Better chance of just having Ram's added to the UK tree. Latest patch added the stabilizer and corrected the ammo locations in the vehicle.
  10. I see they used the Scan I made of the T30E1 line drawing in that video.
  11. The M6A1 at present does not have a stabilizer in game. From the manual. Page 25 source Technical manual, Heavy tanks M6 and M6A1 https://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USA/ref/TM/pdfs/TM9-721.pdf
  12. Doesn't help some places may be listing a top speed for a different type of terrain. Tanks will often have listed in the manual Maximum sustained road speed expected cross country speed Those don't always indicate the actual top speed the vehicle is capable of for short periods either. This is often not listed. The Canadian Ram is a good example. Manual and spec sheets list a 40kph / 25 mph maximum sustained road speed. sustained being the key word " sus·tained - continuing for an extended period or without interruption." While it's actual maximum speed for short periods was higher, What the maximum was I do not know but they had Ram's with turrets towing the 17 pdr behind them tested at speeds of 28 mph as an example.
  13. The M6E1 was the plan to update all the M6 series, so I imagine they would have used all hull types if they went forward with it. (so cast like on the M6 and welded like on the M6A1) + the removal of the dual .50's replaced with a single .30 cal. and the turret replaced with the T26 and 90mm with possible wet ammo stowage. other then that there are no other changes that I know of. The 9,500 extra pounds of armour was what the US decided on for production vehicles after reviewing British requirements. So more turret armour, more hull side armour.
  14. They are listings for thickness and angle. Here's an example of a captured M4 they had.
  15. A mashup trying to envision using the description of work they wanted done on the M6 would look like. At the very end of 1943 it was decided to look into modernizing the existing M6 heavy tanks. This involved placing a T26 turret with the 90mm on the existing hulls and the removal of the dual .50 cal hull MG's to be replaced with a .30 cal This would make an interesting vehicle in the game and could be competitive at a higher BR. 27 December 1943 Activities of General Barnes. Wrote Mr. Beasley the following directive: it is requested that you investigate the method of mounting the 90mm tank gun on the heavy tank, M6 and variations. It is understood that some 46 of these tanks are to be made under the present program mounting the 3" tank gun. It is desired to modernize these heavy tanks by supplying them with the new 90mm gun. At the same time the tanks should be prepared for water stowage of ammunition. It might be found best to remove the entire turret and replace it with the 90mm turret based on the heavy tank T26, with its superior mounting and sighting system. This angle should also be investigated. Prepare an OCM recommending the removal of the 3" guns and the mounting of the 90mm gun in these tanks. 21 January 1944 OCO-D Planning committee meeting. Reference is made to memorandum dated 27 December 1943 from General Barnes to Mr. Beasley reference the mounting of the 90mm gun on the heavy tank, M6. It is desired to modify the heavy tank, M6 series by supplying them with the 90mm gun. To accomplish this, it will be necessary to put an entirely new fighting compartment on the heavy tank, M6. Since the 90mm gun has been successfully mounting in the medium tank, T26, it is advisable to investigate the possibilities of mounting this turret, with it's superior mounting and sighting system, on the heavy tank, M6 also. In view of the facts stated above, it will be necessary to redesign the stowage in the heavy tank, M6 to accommodate 90mm ammunition. 25 February 1944 RAD 213-2 was issued to Baldwin Loco. Works for the preparation of engineering sketches and modification of one pilot heavy tank, M6 to mount a 90mm gun based on the medium tank, T26 turret, and re-stowage of the vehicle to accommodate 90mm ammunition. 10 March 1944 Monthly progress report. The 90mm gun based on the medium tank, T26 turret, is being mounted on the heavy tank series. layout drawings are being made in Development Branch drafting room and are nearly completed. This project was previously reported as being carried out by the Baldwin Locomotive Works, Eddystone, Pa. but since they are unable to undertake the project at the present time, a local facility, the Chevrolet Motor Division of General Motors Corp. has been obtained to do the work. The mounting of the 90mm gun on the heavy tank, M6 will consist of the following: A) removal of the present heavy tank, M6 turret and replacing it with a turret based on the medium tank, T26. B) The stowage of the hull will be rearranged to accommodate 90mm ammunition. C) The two .50 caliber bow machine guns are being replaced with a .30 caliber bow machine gun. The price proposal has been received from Chevrolet covering the building of a complete T26 turret for this heavy tank as well as for building the stowage arrangement in the hull. Work will commence on this project as soon as work terminates on two projects being built at Chevrolet now, which will be on or about 15 March. 10 April 1944 Monthly progress report. The project for mounting the 90mm gun based on the medium tank, T26 turret, on the heavy tank, M6 series. Has been cancelled by verbal order 7 March 1944 from Chief, Development Branch. The drawings which have been completed in OCO-D development Branch drafting room are being filed for future reference. Col. Robert J. Icks. stated that such a tank was actually tested, so while they canceled the program it seems the pilot may have squeaked by and been finished. And they went as far as to give it a designation (at least when mounted on the M6 hull) Sources History of the heavy tank M6, Declassified - DOD directive No. 5200.0, 27 September 1958 Weapon mounts for secondary armaments, Prepared for Detroit arsenal, Ordnance Corps, U.S. Army Contract No. DA-20-089-ORD-36713 AFV weapons profile No. 32, By Col. Robert J. Icks AFV situation reports, British
  16. Since we have a M60 topic on mistakes here's one for the little Ram. Sources used are the spec sheet out of the archives, and "Canada's pride" The Ram tank and it's varriants I realize it's blurry so here's a typed out version Turret front 76.2 Turret sides 76.2 - 69.85 Turret rear 63.5 Turret top 38.1 Turret floor 50.8 - 38.1 (radio bulge) Hull front upper 88.9 Hull front lower 50.8 Hull sides upper 76.2 - 50.8 Hull sides lower 38.1 Hull rear upper 31.75 or 38.1 (hard to tell if it's a 1" 1/4 or 1" 1/2) Hull rear lower 38.1 Hull top 25.4 Hull top engine 12.7 Hull floor 25.4 - 12.7 Cupola 63.5 and from "Canada's pride" Cupola "With respect to the "Canadian M4" participants examined the hull mock-up and confirmed the use of cast armour, a 60 inch turret ring and the auxiliary machine gun cupola based on the M3's (with somewhat thicker armour)" Recall M3 lee had about 51 mm in it's cupola, the Ram's is 63.5 mm Gun elevation "Worthington noted that British designers were looking at achieving a lower depression for the main armament in vehicles, as much as 12.5 deg to the sides. this would require eliminating the machine gun cupola" "The Mark II had a -10 depress to the front, but only -7 deg 30 to the sides and rear" "At a final meeting on 11 December 1941, the Joint committee on tank design agreed that a -10 depression was acceptable" Later it seems to have dropped to -7.5, or at least the book is stating that the longer MK V was limited to that, perhaps the 2 pdr was the only one with the -10. I'll update with more later.
  17. Currently in game the only AFV using this weapon is the T95, but the possibility exists in the future that quite a few may end up using it. At the moment we only a have three types of ammo for it, the T29, T30 and T32. while in reality it had much more. The T32 is set as an APBC in game while it should be a APCBC shell. 39 lbs 4.25 lb  AP cap 3000 ft/sec If you want an APBC shell add the T37 round in, this was designed for the T5 gun series. 39 lbs 3000 ft/sec     The T5E1 also fired an APCBC-HE shell, called the T13 it was designed for the 105-mm AA gun T4, but as the T5 guns are direct copies of the T4 they were able (and intended) to fire the same rounds. Various mod marks of this round existed. T13 Muzzle velocity: 2950 feet per second (899.16 m/s) Weight: 41 lbs (18.5973 kg) T13      ? T13E1  ? T13E2  WD-9465 steel, thinner cap, superior performance against face hardened plate compared to E1 T13E3  WD-4370 steel, reduced explosive charge filling. single radius on projectile body T13E4  ? One of the earliest descriptions on the T13 round as for the T4 gun.     Early work and descriptions on one of the M6A2E1/T29 type turrets (there were various models) in 1944. Red lined area highlights the main type of ammo the T5E1 is intended to fire. Note the weight. The documents from the National archives on the history of the M6A2E1 have it's main round type as a 41 lb projecticle.     Here they state again the T5 can fire the T4 ammo, the T29 rounds were designed for the T4 gun.   Some penetration estimates done up by the army (Navy Ballistic complete)     If you want to go digging into the Aberdeen files at the national archives here are some test project numbers and names.   http://i.imgur.com/OGyAzCb.png T13E1 inert loaded for test, 41 lb weight. http://i.imgur.com/DxtnAm8.jpg T13E1 stability test   http://i.imgur.com/pSqKUa8.jpg T13E1 and E2 test     http://i.imgur.com/F4OxH7H.png T13E2 Vs T13E3 test     T13E1 being fired from the T5E1 gun at 2950 ft/sec for firing tables.   http://i.imgur.com/dUCgaZ0.jpg 105-mm T8 gun using the T13E4, note "ammo interchangeable with T5E1 gun"           Sources British AFV situation reports (various years / issues) Aberdeen log documents BRL report No. 620 Aerodynamic data for spinning projectiles 105-mm gun T8 history files Aberdeen T182 firing record. History of the M6A2E1