±Recent Visitors

Recent Visitors to Com-Central!

±User Info-big


Welcome Anonymous

Nickname
Password

Membership:
Latest: sercrets
New Today: 0
New Yesterday: 0
Overall: 6646

People Online:
Members: 0
Visitors: 266
Total: 266
Who Is Where:
 Visitors:
01: CPGlang
02: Home
03: Community Forums
04: Photo Gallery
05: Community Forums
06: Home
07: CPGlang
08: CPGlang
09: Community Forums
10: CPGlang
11: CPGlang
12: Community Forums
13: Photo Gallery
14: Home
15: News Archive
16: Home
17: CPGlang
18: Community Forums
19: Community Forums
20: Community Forums
21: Tell a Friend
22: Home
23: CPGlang
24: Home
25: Home
26: Community Forums
27: Home
28: Photo Gallery
29: Home
30: Your Account
31: Home
32: CPGlang
33: CPGlang
34: Community Forums
35: Community Forums
36: Home
37: Community Forums
38: Photo Gallery
39: CPGlang
40: CPGlang
41: Community Forums
42: Home
43: Home
44: Community Forums
45: Photo Gallery
46: Community Forums
47: Community Forums
48: News
49: Community Forums
50: Community Forums
51: Member Screenshots
52: Home
53: Community Forums
54: Home
55: Community Forums
56: News Archive
57: Community Forums
58: Photo Gallery
59: Home
60: Photo Gallery
61: Community Forums
62: CPGlang
63: CPGlang
64: News Archive
65: Community Forums
66: Community Forums
67: Community Forums
68: CPGlang
69: Photo Gallery
70: Photo Gallery
71: Photo Gallery
72: Community Forums
73: Photo Gallery
74: Photo Gallery
75: Community Forums
76: Community Forums
77: Home
78: Photo Gallery
79: CPGlang
80: Community Forums
81: News Archive
82: Photo Gallery
83: Home
84: News Archive
85: Home
86: Home
87: News Archive
88: Community Forums
89: CPGlang
90: Photo Gallery
91: Home
92: Home
93: Member Screenshots
94: CPGlang
95: Home
96: CPGlang
97: Community Forums
98: CPGlang
99: Community Forums
100: Community Forums
101: Community Forums
102: Home
103: Community Forums
104: Photo Gallery
105: Photo Gallery
106: Home
107: Community Forums
108: Downloads
109: Community Forums
110: Home
111: Community Forums
112: News
113: Home
114: CPGlang
115: Home
116: Member Screenshots
117: Home
118: CPGlang
119: Photo Gallery
120: Home
121: CPGlang
122: CPGlang
123: Home
124: Home
125: Home
126: Community Forums
127: Downloads
128: Photo Gallery
129: CPGlang
130: CPGlang
131: CPGlang
132: Photo Gallery
133: Photo Gallery
134: Home
135: CPGlang
136: Community Forums
137: CPGlang
138: Home
139: Downloads
140: News
141: CPGlang
142: CPGlang
143: Community Forums
144: Community Forums
145: Community Forums
146: Community Forums
147: News Archive
148: Home
149: Photo Gallery
150: Member Screenshots
151: Community Forums
152: Community Forums
153: CPGlang
154: Home
155: Community Forums
156: Home
157: Community Forums
158: Community Forums
159: Home
160: Home
161: Community Forums
162: Photo Gallery
163: Photo Gallery
164: Photo Gallery
165: Community Forums
166: Photo Gallery
167: Photo Gallery
168: Community Forums
169: Community Forums
170: Home
171: Community Forums
172: Photo Gallery
173: Home
174: Community Forums
175: Community Forums
176: Photo Gallery
177: Community Forums
178: CPGlang
179: Photo Gallery
180: Home
181: CPGlang
182: Community Forums
183: CPGlang
184: Home
185: Community Forums
186: Community Forums
187: Community Forums
188: CPGlang
189: Photo Gallery
190: Community Forums
191: CPGlang
192: Community Forums
193: Community Forums
194: Home
195: CPGlang
196: Photo Gallery
197: Community Forums
198: Community Forums
199: Photo Gallery
200: Community Forums
201: CPGlang
202: Community Forums
203: Community Forums
204: Home
205: CPGlang
206: Home
207: News
208: Photo Gallery
209: Community Forums
210: Photo Gallery
211: Community Forums
212: Community Forums
213: Community Forums
214: CPGlang
215: News
216: Home
217: Photo Gallery
218: CPGlang
219: Member Screenshots
220: Photo Gallery
221: Photo Gallery
222: Community Forums
223: News Archive
224: News
225: Community Forums
226: CPGlang
227: Photo Gallery
228: Photo Gallery
229: Community Forums
230: CPGlang
231: Home
232: Community Forums
233: Home
234: Home
235: Community Forums
236: CPGlang
237: Photo Gallery
238: Community Forums
239: Community Forums
240: Community Forums
241: Photo Gallery
242: Home
243: News
244: Home
245: Member Screenshots
246: Community Forums
247: Community Forums
248: CPGlang
249: Home
250: Community Forums
251: Home
252: Member Screenshots
253: Community Forums
254: Community Forums
255: Home
256: CPGlang
257: Photo Gallery
258: CPGlang
259: Community Forums
260: Community Forums
261: CPGlang
262: Community Forums
263: Community Forums
264: Photo Gallery
265: Home
266: Home

Staff Online:

No staff members are online!
T1 heavy tanks, extra armour?
The AFV ASSOCIATION was formed in 1964 to support the thoughts and research of all those interested in Armored Fighting Vehicles and related topics, such as AFV drawings. The emphasis has always been on sharing information and communicating with other members of similar interests; e.g. German armor, Japanese AFVs, or whatever.
Post new topic    Reply to topic    Printer Friendly Page     Forum Index ›  AFV News Discussion Board

View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
whelm
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Dec 09, 2013
Posts: 6

PostPosted: Sat Jan 30, 2016 6:05 am
Post subject: T1 heavy tanks, extra armour?



The Ill fated M6 series of tanks always seems to have something new pop up the more I dig.

For instance in may 1942 the British reported the following

"T1 Heavy tank. Rowbothac? and Colonel Green have both had an opportunity of trying out the heavy tank T1 (Now known as the M6) with the electrical transmission. We hear very glowing reports of it. Ordnance will be going intro production of this tank with both types of transmissions. I.e. the torque converter with Cletrse gearing and the all electric. As many as possible will be the electric transmission but in early stages they cannot get enough electric capacity to fit all tanks.

General Barnes and Colonel Christmas state that the armour thickness of this tank can be increased to give a 5 inch armour basis over almost all the front of the tank and 4 inches all around the turret. The sides can be 3 inch basis all over, or alternatively 3.5 around the fighting compartment and 2.5 around the engine. The full 3 inches all around would be preferable.


Both Barnes and Christmas are terribly anxious that we should place a requirement for the heavy tank, pointing out that we should start getting them in the autumn, which means a ? by the spring of 1943. They are getting plenty of experience with the pilots and feel this tank might be of intense value because the Assault tank cannot be in theatre of war by the spring of 1943. to feel that this tank should be of great value in the limited numbers in which it will be available. It's armour basis is far superior to the M4 medium tank, which can be fitted with a 3 inch gun with certain sacrifices. We feel the later is, of course, very desirable also. We have cabled recommending you to place a definite requirement.


August 1942 the British report the following:

"Drawings for the new armour thickness selected by the U.S. from British specification are in hand. It is now intended to standardize on these thicknesses for all future tanks of this type. The increase in weight of the additional armour is estimated to be 9500 pounds. This brings the total weight of the T1 type up to 66.25 short tons."


The U.S. ended up selecting the specs on the right I assume.

i.imgur.com/aqxKVGn.jpg


T1E1 log book entry, confirms the extra weight of the armour. unsure of the date (summer 1942?)

i.imgur.com/BWmWxG1.png

This was from September 1942 I believe. Confirming the new weight

i.imgur.com/J1m2Mby.png



In January 1943 they planned on redoing the turret and the front hull to a degree.

i.imgur.com/U1r6qTm.png

The surviving turret trainer would appear to have been done to that spec? as it no longer carries a 37mm but a .30 cal. I wonder if any of the production turrets ended up with the change.

Does anyone know if they ever went ahead with that new armour scheme? quite an increase in weight. Or more likely with the fact production stopped at 40 odd vehicles that nothing would have changed due to the time it would require to retool the lines etc?
Back to top
View user's profile
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    Reply to topic    Printer Friendly Page    Forum Index ›  AFV News Discussion Board
Page 1 of 1
All times are GMT - 6 Hours



Jump to:  


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum