Com-Central.net

Joe_D · Posted: Fri Aug 01, 2008 9:52 pm Post subject: Something old

Spotted this pulling into Richardson tank park yesterday,

I knew it was coming after talking with one of the Museum Specialists the day before. I was there checking on, what else, some M60's. I didn't expect it that morning and figured I'd be on my way home before it got there. Lucky me the driver came in early.

Panzer IV Side

Panzer IV

Joe D

Doug_Kibbey · Posted: Fri Aug 01, 2008 9:58 pm Post subject: Re: Something old

The resemblance to this one taken at APG last year is striking. Better Bob not see this. Not that it's likely it would have remained at either place for much longer.

Joe_D · Posted: Fri Aug 01, 2008 10:06 pm Post subject: Re: Something old

Yep,

Bob's been "Jacked" Laughing

,

This old Girl doesn't roll, Transmission is locked. They had to lift here up with an M88 and pull her with the 5 ton from what I was told, Wasn't there at the time, was getting my DD214 Smile

.

Joe D

Neil_Baumgardner · Posted: Sat Aug 02, 2008 4:56 am Post subject: Re: Something old

Yeah... Sorry to see that one go... She was recovered from Tunisia... Thankfully I did manage to get a full walk-around a few years ago...

Good side

Bad side

But at least "we" (Ordnance Museum) still have the hyrdro-static drive PzKpfw IV Ausf FG... Which is a little more interesting to me personally, wasnt cut open, has a turret shield, and in general in better condition IMO...

Neil

Dontos · Posted: Sat Aug 02, 2008 9:06 am Post subject: Re: Something old

I heard that 'she' will be exhibited beside the Tiger 2.
More info as I get it.

Don

Neil_Baumgardner · Posted: Sat Aug 02, 2008 1:43 pm Post subject: Re: Something old

Makes sense. Do you think the staff will try to create a similar cutaway/interior display - or cover over the cutaways?

Neil

Dontos · Posted: Sat Aug 02, 2008 3:00 pm Post subject: Re: Something old

- Neil_Baumgardner

Makes sense. Do you think the staff will try to create a similar cutaway/interior display - or cover over the cutaways?

Neil

I hope it will remain open & viewable, but that in itself means 'she' will need more than just an exterior cosmetic resto.

Remember the Tiger 2 got a fairly extensive restoration, upon arrival here. Although the engine compartment remained untouched, the turret work is fairly detailed, having spent some time in the Tiger 2 interior.

A turret stand was fabricated for the Tiger 2, which still exists in Richardson MP.

I assume the Panzer IV's interior will need significant preservation work, to reverse the effects of Mother Nature.

Stay tuned....
Don

Neil_Baumgardner · Posted: Sat Aug 02, 2008 5:07 pm Post subject: Re: Something old

More on the "new acquisition."

www.armorfortheages.co...alpage.htm

BTW, not sure if its an F2 (as listed on armorfortheages) or not. FWIW, the Ordnance Museum said it was an Ausf G...

Neil

Garry_Redmon · Posted: Sun Aug 03, 2008 12:51 am Post subject: Re: Something old

As you have learned, the Armor for the Ages site is back up with photos of the Panzer IV. I'm not sure at this time if the correct designation is F2 or G. Typically, a Panzer IV with the 75/L43 with globular muzzle brake has been designated an F2. The F1 version had the 75/L24. Otherwise they were the same. The one wrinkle is that early versions of the G also had the same muzzle brake. The G version had the side vision ports on the turret removed, as does this one. So, I guess it is a G.

The cutaway sides will be left open and fitted with plexiglass the same as the Tiger II. How extensive the cosmetic restoration will be is the curator's decision.

The curator requested the Pz IV and traded our Dodge maintenance truck for it.

Joe_D · Posted: Sun Aug 03, 2008 1:04 am Post subject: Re: Something old

Garry,

No, I didn't drive anything, though I'm sure "OB" would have let me If I had been able to stay longer.

I saw the maintenance truck, I think Knox got the better of the deal, although the truck did run and was in much better shape. Does that mean if I find an old Dodge WC I can trade it for an old tank at APG Wink

?

Joe D

Garry_Redmon · Posted: Sun Aug 03, 2008 1:19 am Post subject: Re: Something old

Maybe. I'm not sure why they made the trade. Just conjecture on my part, but since the APG material will be transferred to Fort Lee which will be the center of the new Transportation, Quartermaster and Ordnance command, maybe they needed that type of vehicle for their new museum. So, if you find a vehicle they need, maybe they will trade you for it. Got room for an Elefant in your front yard? Smile

Neil_Baumgardner · Posted: Sun Aug 03, 2008 3:52 am Post subject: Re: Something old

Yeah, for better or worse... The Ordnance Museum needs softskin vehicles - having apparently given up most/all in the 1970s or so before Dr Atwater arrived... So its missing a good chunk of the Ordnance materiel story...

Neil

bsmart · Posted: Sun Aug 03, 2008 11:15 pm Post subject: Re: Something old

As I understand it although it is a 'trade' it was viewed as a chance to material that is appropriate for the mission of each museum in the collection into the museums collection. Ordnance is about support, not tanks as such. So getting maintenance vehicles is important.

At the same time the Museum understands that they need to group exhibits into priority groups and all will probably not be sent to Ft Lee due to space and budget constraints.

I think I mentioned a while back that the Czech S-35 is going back home to Europe ( I think Slovakia but it may be another part of the old Czechoslovakia) It may already be gone

And just to be clear all the above is my opinion and interpretation of conversations I have had with folks at Aberdeen. It has NO official standing at all.

Neil_Baumgardner · Posted: Mon Aug 04, 2008 11:37 pm Post subject: Re: Something old

My $0.02, thoughts, clarification, etc...

Ordnance is about Combat Services Support, yes... But in terms of equipment it is now a relatively minor "customer" or "user" of vehicles, whereas in the past (prior to the establishment of the Army Materiel Command in 1962) it was a major _buyer_ , as well as tester & evaluator, of equipment.

Almost all of the equipment in the museum dates from this period. Most of the US vehicles, firearms, etc date were first bought by & evaluated by the Ordnance board at APG. After 1962, AMC took on responsibility for buying vehicles & equipment, although vehicles continued to be tested at APG... As such many of those items continued to be passed on the Ordnance Museum...

Similarly, all of the foreign equipment in the Ordnance Museum was tested by Ordnance Technical Intelligence or later the foreign military intelligence outfits at APG...

However... Sometime in the 1970s most if not all softskins in the Museum's collection were let go for whatever reason - even though photo evidence shows there were once a considerable number of softskin vehicles in the museum's collection prior to the move to the current location (from another part of the post). I will freely admit & note that the Ordnance Museum became somewhat unbalanced at that point - not telling the whole story of what the Ordnance Corps bought, testes & used...

IMO, while I regret the loss of the PzKpfw IV, the acquistion of the Dodge truck probably helps to rebalance the museum's story (regardless of location)...

Now whether or not articles tested at APG - which are really part of the APG story, not really the Ordnance Corps story - should go to Fort Lee as well is a much more messy discussion that potentially leads to some messy outcomes I dont care to get into just yet...

Neil

clausb · ***Power User*** Offline Joined: Jan 25, 2006 Posts: 146

- Garry_Redmon

As you have learned, the Armor for the Ages site is back up with photos of the Panzer IV. I'm not sure at this time if the correct designation is F2 or G. Typically, a Panzer IV with the 75/L43 with globular muzzle brake has been designated an F2. The F1 version had the 75/L24. Otherwise they were the same. The one wrinkle is that early versions of the G also had the same muzzle brake. The G version had the side vision ports on the turret removed, as does this one. So, I guess it is a G.

It doesn't make much sense to try to distinguish between an F2 and a (early) G as they were for all intents and purposes the same vehicle. An Ausf. G is by definition an Ausf. F with a longer gun and the associated changes to ammo stoorage etc.

The F2 designation only came about because it was decided to start Ausf. G production before the Ausf. F production order had run its course. Hence, for a short period in 1942, the F2 designation was used to make apart the Ausf. F tanks with the short gun and (F1) and those with the long gun (F2). Once they started on the Ausf. G production order, the Ausf. F2 designation was dropped and all the vehicles with long guns produced on the Ausf. F production order was re-labelled Ausf. G.

So all Ausf. F2s are by definition Ausf. Gs Smile

cbo

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