Whelmy

Member
  • Content count

    1,626
  • Joined

  • Last visited

medal

Community Reputation

1,512 Outstanding

3 Followers

About Whelmy

  • Rank
    Group captain
  • Birthday

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

13,676 profile views
  1. March 1945 Memorandum Secret SD 7 55/8010/1 (SD 11) CMHQ About general protection against shaped charges. Under the Panzerfaust section "Estimated protection required against faustpatrone 60" A minimum of 8 in. of armour plate (homo hardened) is necessary to defeat this weapon. Approximately 2 in. of armour plate exsists on the sherman, therefore the equivalent of at least 6 ins of armour plate must be added. As a very rough approximation, 6 in. armour plate is equivalent to 7.1 in mild steel and in turn equals 11.3 ins of dry quartz sand. Therefore a minimum of 12 ins of sand is required before and hope of success can be entertained.
  2. The boiler plate used on it was from a repair shop to a German electric plant if I recall. Semi related, when testing HEAT and trying to find ways to protect against it, a very rough approximation given was 6 inches of armour plate was equal to 7.1 inches of mild steel, which in turn was equal to 11.3 inches of quartz sand. in terms of protection.
  3. The T1E1 was armed with the 90mm T7 (which is just the M3 really before it was standardized) The M6E1 was to have both .50 cal's removed and replaced with a single .30 cal. They mentioned wet ammo stowage as well as this was around the period the T26 was going to have it as well. They ended up removing that in the T26 so they could fit more rounds in, but the M6 may have ended up with it with the ammo stowed along the floor. Not mentioned anywhere but highly likely would be the removal of the last .30 cal on the lower nose as that was semi fixed and only the driver could use it. Just like they ended up removing them from the M3 and M4 and plating/welding the holes over. Other then that it's the same I believe, no mention if it was planned to be uparmoured, or if they had any hulls with the extra 9500 lbs of armour added they could use.
  4. Canada reported 62 deg a second when tested before shipping over.
  5. Traverse rates and elevation rates
  6. Ammo stowage location in pilot test. All rounds stowed in 30 round magazines. They also had armored ammo bins with doors to stow them in. On guns 4 magazines 120 rds. Turret floor 8 magazines 240 rds. N.S. sponson 14 magazines 420 rds. O.S. sponson 28 magazines 840 rds. Below turret on floor 10 magazines 300 rds. Total 64 magazines 1920 rds.
  7. January 1944 "In view decreased requirements quadruple mountings by reason our not equipping CMP? and in view probably increased interest 21 army group in this mounting which for them must be fitted by them with polsten instead of hispanos. Suggest total order skink tanks be fitted with hispano M2S? from quantity now under order by you from USA production and that equivalent number of quadruple mountings be shipped to UK less guns and saddle but with Polsten saddles for fitting with Polsten here (.) Tools spare parts solenoids etc should be in appropriate scales for use with these guns in skink tanks Therefore recommended you do no repeat not order further hispano guns from USA production." The turret was designed in mind to take most 20mm guns. This is what made switching to the polstens easy. "Mantlet is cast and has been designed for ready adaption to any type of 20mm gun by substitution of cradles special to any of the 20mm weapons."
  8. The earliest Skink mounted the 20mm Hispano guns and they had a 50 round box belt feed, work was progressing on a 200 rd box. The polsten guns had to use a 30 rd magazine instead, but they felt the 50 rd box could be converted for use with no difficulty. Reload rate of 15 seconds was accomplished in testing and was felt this number could be improved by a well trained crew. Most sources will list one loader, but it was actually a gunner, the loader - wireless operator and commander - loader. so each of them serviced two guns each.
  9. High praise Short timeline up till summer 1944
  10. 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