Tips

Please take your time and read the blog rules

Apr 28, 2013

Priory_of_Sion's American Vehicle Q&As

Author: Priory_of_Sion

Well here I go attempting to answer the questions I think I can answer. Questions like will X be introduced and when are unknown to me.



Q:Why did America pursue autoloading designs and why weren't the accepted?
The advantages of autoloaders included a smaller crew, a smaller vehicle, and a very good burst of fire could be attained was the major reasons behind the pursuit of autoloaders. A combination of slow development, teething issues, and faster development and production of conventional designs spelled the doom of early American autoloaders.

The US never gave up on the autoloader though and now you can see it in use with the M1128 MGS.


Q:Was the M4 with the M26 Turret tested, if so how did it perform?
It seems like that vehicle wasn't tested. It was more of a test of wether an 90 mm Sherman was possible(it was). However M26 itself would be ready by the same time if production of the M4 90 mm was pursued, so it was abandoned

Q:What gun is mounted on this modified T34?
The_Chieftain said this when he stumped us NA Forum goers. 
"To put you guys out of your misery, it was a T34 with the T123E3 (T57 tank cannon) on a rigid mount "

Q: Is another US Heavy Line possible?
It is entirely possible. The US had designs such as the K Proposal, the TS-6, and the T96. However it would be a stretch and isn't likely to happen(at least not within the foreseeable future) in WoT IMO.

Q: Why did American tanks have unusually heavy turret armor compared to other nations?
The US adopted the practice of hull down fighting early on. The heavy turret armor combined with good gun depression means that American Vehicles can hull down over hills exposing only their heavy turret armor.

Q:Why did the M60 have thin hull armor compared to its Soviet counterparts?
It really didn't. The first M60 was only slightly less protected than the T54(The M48 was more protected than the first M60s as well) while later versions such as the M60A1 were on par with their Soviet counterparts. 

Q:What could be some US Premium TDs?
Well any of the vehicles I proposed in my 3rd TD Line thread are all possible candidates except for the higher tiered ones. The M56 Scorpion is likely and the T88 is already planned. The T88 however might become an artillery piece for all I know.

Q: Are there any plain silly US tank proposals?
The US had a bunch a stranger projects including nuclear powered tanks(TV-8 and R-32), twin gunned tanks(the SARAH), the half AFV/half helicopter FALCON, the ASTRON Project, and the Yoh tanks are all some weird designs. 

I am planning on an article for these guys so no pics for now.

Q: Was the early Cold War 90 mm gun effective versus T-54/55s? Also how was the penetration of the "long" 90 mm guns?
The HEAT rounds were more than capable of defeating the frontal armor, you still need to fire a good shot. Otherwise it would be best to use flanking maneuvers to fire into the weaker side armor. The T-54 armor was extremely tough and it wasn't until the late 1950s that US tanks could defeat T-54 with relative ease without HEAT with the 105 mm M68.

The Penetration figures for the 90 mm guns is very close to historical already in game. 

I would also like to point out that in 1949 a British Liaison questioned the use of the 90 mm gun in the M46 Patton, he pointed out the 20 pounder was a more effective weapon. However 'Murica went along with the 90 mm.

Q: What was the actual T110E3 suppose to be like?
The T110E3 would be fairly mobile for a ~50 ton vehicle and could easily reach 30 km/h+ speeds. It would have thick armor but not the 300+ we have in game. The mantlet however is extremely thick(229 mm) and heavy(2 tons). The gun was to be the T123(aka M58) 120 mm.

Q: Any info on the T42 Medium?
The T42 was born out of the T37 Light Tank. It retained the overall dimensions of the T37 but had thicker armor and a 90 mm gun. The hull and the gun are the same as the T69 without the autoloader. The turret design is the same as the top turret on the M46.

Q: How was the armor of the T95 Medium?
The T95's frontal hull ranged from 76 to 127 mm on the LFP at a slope of 45 degrees and 95 mm on the upper plate at a slope of 65 degrees. The side armor is pretty weak. The strongest point of the side hull armor is 102 mm at a zero slope, most parts of the side armor are much weaker being 37-51 mm thick at a zero degree slope. The armor is rolled and cast homogeneous steel, silica fused armor was planned but the T95 was cancelled before that could be done.

The turret armor of the T95 is extremely good. The mantlet is upwards towards 381 mm thick and the frontal turret is 178 mm thick at a 60 degree slope. 

Q: What is likely to happen to the T23?
If the T23 is not included in a second US Medium line it is safe to say it will NOT be a tier 8 or tier 7 premium. The historical T23 would have a 560 hp engine and the 76 mm gun, that would be way too underpowered for a tier 7. If the T23 becomes a premium it would likely be a tier 6.

Don't worry though, the US has enough medium designs to use as a tier 7/8 premium medium.

Q:What ever happened to the T110 series?
A full wooden mock-up was produced but by that time the M103 was being put into service and the US shifted from the heavy T110 series in search for lighter weight heavy gun tanks(such as the T96, T77, and the XM60).

Q: What does all the Ms, Ts, Es, and As stand for?
I don't exactly remember the exact meaning but here is what they approximately mean. 
M~= Production Model
T~=Test
E~= Modification
A~=Version

Q: What guns could be on the M41 Walker Bulldog in WoT?
My speculation is that the stock gun is the T94 from the upgraded M24. The historical M32 gun is a must and has the same ballistics as the T71's top gun and is likely to be the middle gun. The M41 90 mm from the M48 Patton is also likely to be the top gun.

Q: Is the upgraded M46 the M47? If not what could become of the M47?
A common misconception is that the M47 is represented by the upgraded M46. This isn't exactly the case. You see the upgraded M46 is the M46E1 which is an M46 hull mated with the T42 turret. 

The T42 turret went under slight modifications before it was the same as the M47 turret. The M47 also has a unique hull which is slightly more effective than the M46 hull. IMO the M47 could be a tier 8 premium or possible a tier 9 regular tank in an alternate medium line. The M47 might still be redundant.

Q: Were there any plans to improve the T28/T95's mobility?
Short Answer: No. 

Q: Why is the 105 mm on the M103?
The T5E1 isn't on the M103 for historical purposes. It is there for grinding.

Q: Were there any US Superheavy tanks beside the T28/T95?
The US actually proposed a ~150 ton vehicle in 1945 sparked by the Maus, E-100, and to some extent the IS-3. It was a radical design using a semitrailer like hull layout. The planned armament was to be the 155 mm T7(with a minimum requirement of a 105 mm gun). The armor was to be as much as possible.

Q: Any info on the T77?
The T77 was an actual project using the M48's hull. It used a lightweight version of the turret used on the T57 and the same 120 mm gun. It used a rigid gun mount and fired an 8 round drum. 10 extra rounds were held in the turret and the hull. The project started in 1953 and ended in 1957 due to slow development and the changing requirements of the US Military.

Two T77 turrets were produced but were scrapped.

Q: How many rounds could the 90 mm Hellcat hold?
Not exactly sure, however it is doubtful that it could hold much than 30 rounds. 

32 comments:

  1. That proposed US superheavy might just beat the TV-8 in ridiculousness. -Platypusbill

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Strong the WTF in this one is.

      I'm guessing both sections were meant to have their own engines, going by those ventilation grilles...?

      Delete
    2. Just read about the TV-8. That thing is... AWESOME!

      -kariverson

      Delete
    3. basically a egg shaped tank with a nuclear reactor, capable of floating... def a WTF..

      Delete
  2. lots of interesting stuff i didnt knew. great post ;)

    ReplyDelete
  3. What is exactly this FALCON AFV/helicopter ? Do you have any picture ?

    ReplyDelete
  4. That supertank.. is just plain ugly.. i mean the KVs were ugly.. but this...

    ReplyDelete
  5. Has the superheavy a name?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, after WWII the AGF Equipment Review Board recommended development of a 25, 45, 75, and 150 ton vehicles. None of the initial vehicles got any sort of real designation.

      Delete
  6. Thank you for the explanation of the model letters.
    I still don't understand some names though. Like the /2 in the T25/2 or how the M40/M43 are 2 production models according to that explanation.

    -BigGary-

    ReplyDelete
  7. Can't wait for the curious US projects article :)

    ReplyDelete
  8. Thanks a lot for the answers. I'm looking forward to M41 Bulldog >_> And M47 would be awesome too...

    Judqment8
    EU

    ReplyDelete
  9. Thanks for answering my question about the M4 90mm. Well, since it's not been tested in field, do you think that theoretically it would have performed decently? Isn't the M26 turret a little too heavy for the M4?

    RedBear87 (EU)

    ReplyDelete
  10. Any info on the Super Pershing's gun?

    From what I've read so far it was meant to counter the Tiger 2 from a distance and that it was very similar to the 88/71! This means it should have more penetration that 170 in game.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I rather imagine that was supposed to be done with HVAP shells (as the Yanks called APCR at the time), you know... and THOSE have ~260 pen in-game.
      Oughta be enough.

      Delete
    2. US 90mm T15Ex guns never reached full potential as they had problems with AP shattering, hence somewhat unimpressive performances with AP even with quite high velocity.

      Delete
    3. The 105 mm T5E1 had shattering problems as well IIRC.

      Delete
  11. Great read. Thank you very much :)

    ReplyDelete
  12. One note, both 90mm and 105mm HEAT suffered from problematic fusing, it failed to fuse at angles greater then 60deg, meaning T-54/55/62 glacis would be a problem unless firing with minimal side angle.

    Real solution to those was actually 105mm APDS that could reliably kill T-54/55 frontally @ 1500-2000m depending where it hit.

    Re M48/60 armor - this one was actually quite good, introduction of M48 outclassed D-10T and D-25T guns, 1st one only being saved from replacement with D-54T by introduction of BK-5M HEAT ammo (1957-8 experimentally, 1961. en-mass).

    ReplyDelete
  13. Oooooo....i like that modified T34 with the other cannon, i think i'd enjoy my T34 more esthetically if they just did a simple model switch for THAT 120mm cannon. Well...even better they could implement that gun, just with a nerfed ROF. I don't know...ideas. :P

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The ROF is already nerfed enough as it is.

      Delete
  14. TV-1 or R-32 http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%90%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B9_%D1%82%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%BA

    TV-8 --- http://thedonovan.com/archives/2008/12/the_chrysler_tv.html

    ReplyDelete
  15. I wonder if Wargaming could combine the M26 and M46, since for all intents and purposes they are the same tank, and putting the M47 instead.

    ReplyDelete
  16. any possibility to get XM815 in game?

    ReplyDelete
  17. "Why did American tanks have unusually heavy turret armor compared to other nations?"

    As to your answer on this, I believe the Chieftain stated that it was common practice among all armor nations to conceal as much of your tank as possible and that the turret was the most vulnerable and indeed struck part of the tank.

    ReplyDelete
  18. "The historical T23 would have a 560 hp engine and the 76 mm gun, that would be way too underpowered for a tier 7."

    Yeah, true. But nevertheless, WG did put the pityful VK3002DB into tier 7, more engine power, but still not fast or agile and with a gun you also have on the StuGIII. :-(

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I see you did not play 3002. That tank rocks plain and simple and everyone crying about it should:
      - learn to aim or
      - stop playing mediums

      Delete
    2. Not like other meds of the tier (with the exception of the T20, and the DB has near triple its RoF) have a better gun, anyway...

      Delete
    3. That tank rocks nothing and is plain and simple a POS. Fact.

      Delete
  19. Semitrailer tank? Good lord, someone was dreaming.

    That thing would be a maintenance nightmare.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.