Com-Central.net

Dennis_Smith · ***Power User*** Offline Joined: Mar 17, 2006 Posts: 192

Was rooting around in an antiques store today and saw a model that I had never seen before.

Thought you guys might find it interesting, so I asked to take a picture.

JeffStringer · ***Power User*** Offline Joined: Jan 24, 2006 Posts: 637

Always wanted one of those. How much did they want for it?

armyjunk2 · ***Power User*** Offline Joined: Sep 22, 2006 Posts: 1416

Dennis, did you buy it?

Neil_Baumgardner

Oh yeah, the T92 kits have been discussed a few times. Here's a link, although it looks like the pictures are now broken:

www.com-central.net/in...hlight=t92

Neil

Dennis_Smith · ***Power User*** Offline Joined: Mar 17, 2006 Posts: 192

Thanks for the info. I had never seen a tank with twin 50 cal. cupolas before.

Jeff, they wanted $27 for it. Looked like parts missing, too.

Sabot

There were two kits of the T92, a tank that was to be the successor to the M41 Walker Bulldog. The one above was made by Tamiya and boxed by them as well as Hawk in 1/50th scale.

The second kit was made by ITC/Ringo and was 1/24 scale. I've got two of the 1/50th kits and two of the 1/24th kits.

It does not have twin .50 cal cupolas. One cupola has a .30 cal in it.

I have photos of the remaining tank on display at Aberdeen.

MarkHolloway

I think that info on the side is all BS. Wasn't in WW2 and certainly wasn't 240mm. I don't think it was based on an M26 either.

Sabot, I just finished reading Hunicutt's Light Tank Vol 2 and there was a prototype with twin Cal .50's. but it got changed to Cal .30.

Neil_Baumgardner

Good catch. There was a T92 240mm Howitzer Motor Carriage developed during WWII - but this obviously isnt it.

Someone didnt do their research way back then, but OTOH this was pre-Hunnicutt so...

Neil

MarkHolloway

Good investigating, Neil!

[img]http://www.com-central.net/modules/coppermine/albums/userpics/10924/normal_scan%7E0.jpg[/img]

Dennis_Smith · ***Power User*** Offline Joined: Mar 17, 2006 Posts: 192

Thanks for clarifying that. Been scratching my head all afternoon.

Some of the sites I've visited say it was the forerunner of M114 APC

piney

real bummer having a kit I remember from my youth in an antique store Sad

Piney

bsmart

- Neil_Baumgardner

Good catch. There was a T92 240mm Howitzer Motor Carriage developed during WWII - but this obviously isnt it.

Someone didnt do their research way back then, but OTOH this was pre-Hunnicutt so...

Neil

I think the reference to WWII is to the concept of Tank Destroyers not a vehicle number in and of itself (the purpose of the WWII T92 sure wasn't to destroy enemy tanks Rolling Eyes

)

I can see some folks postulating a connection between the T92 and the M114 but I think they have it wrong. I see the T92 as a counterpoint to the M114, the way the M18 or M36 was a counterpoint to the M8 armored cars in the Tank Destroyer units. The T92 program was killed by the PT-76. When the US found out that the Soviets had an amphibious light tank a mandate came down that ours had to be amphibious also. There was no real hope of doing that to the T92 so it was shelved and the next iteration was the M551

MarkHolloway

I think the T-92 competed against the M-41 tank for a contract.

JeffStringer · ***Power User*** Offline Joined: Jan 24, 2006 Posts: 637

- MarkHolloway

I think the T-92 competed against the M-41 tank for a contract.

I would have voted for the T-92 just on looks alone.

Great info guys!

Sabot

- MarkHolloway

I think the T-92 competed against the M-41 tank for a contract.

The T92 was developed as a replacement to the M41. As stated above, the amphibious PT-76 appeared and the T92 Airborne Drop Tank was cancelled.

Only two were built, one with tracks that came in 8 foot sections similar to an Ontos or SPAT (as seen on the boxart). The other used a track system from the M24 Chaffee as seen in the photo above and on the example in APG.

Com-Central.net

Select Language

Login

`±`Recent Visitors

`±`User Info-big

Com-Central.net

Select Language

Login

±Recent Visitors

±User Info-big

`±`Recent Visitors

`±`User Info-big