Com-Central.net

I have been going thru many a photo. I havent seen this on any other Shermans. The EZ8 at the Post HQ/Colors, it has a lift ring on the port side of the turret? Does anyone know why it was added and what purpose it serves? I know from Doug K. (and others) the vehicle is still used by the MP's, etc...
SR

- SHAWN

I have been going thru many a photo. I havent seen this on any other Shermans. The EZ8 at the Post HQ/Colors, it has a lift ring on the port side of the turret? Does anyone know why it was added and what purpose it serves? I know from Doug K. (and others) the vehicle is still used by the MP's, etc...
SR

Shawn,
Do you mean the one on Brooks Field at Ft. Knox? I though it had "Thunderbolt" on it now. Not used by MP's, of course, but is just a parade ground guardian and I think they might still use it for a "retreat gun" in the evenings. Used to have a gas-powered simulator on main gun, but I think this is done "through the tube" now.

Don probably knows a lot more about this vehicle than I....

This was present on the early 76mm turrets. The T23 tanks - from which this turret was adapted - had this lug and fittings on the opposite side of the turret. The idea was that a small frame could be mounted in the fittings and anchored on this lug to allow a tank to lift out its own engine, using the turret to pivot it off the side. T26 tanks - including I think the M26 at the museum - had this as well. Anyways, it is believed that the first Sherman 76mm turrets were actually left over T23 castings and thus included this lug.

KL

Kurt do you happen to have a photo? I havent seen this particular ring on any turret-- prototype or production turrets. It isnt present on the starboard side of the same Sherman. It isn't on the M26 either indoors or outdoors at the museum. ????



Yes, Doug, that is the one.

Here's a picture of an M4A3w76 of the 9th AD in Korbecke, Germany 1945 and it has one of the earlier 76mm turrets with the extra lifting eye. This style of turret shows up in a fair number of WW2 pics.

There are others in existence. See my Picasa album at;
picasaweb.google.com/gebinder01

Go to the album "M4A3 Shermans in Nebraska", then page down to the M4A3E8 in Tecumseh, NE for a batch of photos.

Gary

Shawn:

I found photos of the M26 outside the museum. It doesn't have the fittings, but on the left side of the turret there are two pads where the clevises for the frame would be welded on.

The fittings are shown about 3/4 of the way down this page:

www.ferreamole.it/imag...m26_01.htm

On the right side, in about the same relative position as the Sherman, the anchor lug is welded on.

afvdb.50megs.com/usa/p...rshing.jpg

KL

Thanks Kurt, I appreciate this. Please tell me more about this feature on the turret.
I spent the other day looking thru Sherman pics. I found a few, but less than more. I didnt find alot. I found 8, one pic being a FM/TM picture, but no consistancy, the other FM/TM pics didnt have the eyelet. It was more of a puzzle-- not specific to any unit, various battalions had them-- lead me to more assumptions. I generated more questions than I had answers.

I noticed that I only found this turret on the A3 models. I didnt see it on any A1 models. Is it safe to say the origianl contract for the M4A1/76 and the T23 overlapped and the A1's were completed with a "revised" (whatever?) T23 turret? As the contract was renewed and implementation of up-gunning was put into full swing, coupled the cancellation of the T23, the we go back and use the original T23 turrets?
I didnt see this on any M4A1's only on M4A3's, is this an accurate finding?

I only saw it on the turrets that had the split circular loaders hatch.
It isnt even a feature on the M4E6 turret (only 2 produced?).

So with the T23, how many were actually produced? I have a request for 288, where all 288 manufactured (at least the turrets?)? The eyelet isnt a part of the casting, it is a feature added to the casting. How many could have been welded with this feature, etc.?

Are there any photos of this A-frame in use? I take it, it had been a good theory, but it was more cost effective to leave such intended maintenace to the unit's maintenace sections?

(I take all this and a 1.25 and I can buy myself a Coke... that is what one of my professors use to tell us in re: value of her lectures, but back than I think soda's were .50!!!-- "You take what you've just learn and 2 quarters and you can go down to the vending machine and buy yourself a soda")
off topic-- That is the only thing I ever remember from her class too!! I really didnt like her...
SR

Kurt,
footnote: the photos I had/have been going through are WW2 photos...

The ring was so John Wayne could have this on his key chain

"I didnt see this on any M4A1's only on M4A3's, is this an accurate finding?"

I think so. Each plant had it's own subcontracts for parts. PSC - who built the M4A1(76) used USC to make new turrets for them. Detroit Tank Arsenal made the T23 and thus probably already had turrets in house, in the pipeline, or in development (unknown exactly) when they started making M4A3(76)s.

"I only saw it on the turrets that had the split circular loaders hatch."

Yes, and not even all of them. The oval hatch turrets were a different part number.

"So with the T23, how many were actually produced?"

On the Limited Procurement contract, 250, plus a handful of the various prototypes.

"The eyelet isnt a part of the casting, it is a feature added to the casting. How many could have been welded with this feature, etc.?"

All of them -??

"Are there any photos of this A-frame in use?"

Not on a Sherman - the set up was incomplete. There might be one in Hunnicutt's Pershing.

"I take it, it had been a good theory, but it was more cost effective to leave such intended maintenace to the unit's maintenace sections? "

I haven't seen any explanations.

KL