AHC: Get A US Heavy Tank Operational by Battle of the Bulge

The US designed a number of prototype heavy tanks, in addition to the experimental T20 medium series that eventually led to the Pershing. Due primarily to shipping constraints, the US never got heavies into mass production, though they did eventually get the Pershing, which was arguably a heavy though it came from a medium tank lineage, out there in comparatively small quantities.

The challenge is to get something heavier than a Pershing into series production in time for it to be in the hands of troops by the time of the Battle of the Bulge. It doesn't have to replace the Sherman. There just have to be some present at BOB. Some possibilities: The M6 (probably up-gunned to 90mm gun), or maybe an earlier development of the T29/US T34 (very formidable tanks that barely missed World War II).

So, why does the US go with mass production of a heavy tank? Which one do they go with? How does having a few hundred or a thousand of them impact BOB and subsequent battles?
 
The US designed a number of prototype heavy tanks, in addition to the experimental T20 medium series that eventually led to the Pershing. Due primarily to shipping constraints, the US never got heavies into mass production, though they did eventually get the Pershing, which was arguably a heavy though it came from a medium tank lineage, out there in comparatively small quantities.

The challenge is to get something heavier than a Pershing into series production in time for it to be in the hands of troops by the time of the Battle of the Bulge. It doesn't have to replace the Sherman. There just have to be some present at BOB. Some possibilities: The M6 (probably up-gunned to 90mm gun), or maybe an earlier development of the T29/US T34 (very formidable tanks that barely missed World War II).

So, why does the US go with mass production of a heavy tank? Which one do they go with? How does having a few hundred or a thousand of them impact BOB and subsequent battles?

Actually SHAEF was offered a limited number of M6s upgunned to a 105mm Gun (not a howitzer but a long gun) and decided that the limited number of vehicles would not make it worth it. The turret would be the T29 turret and gun. The decision not to deploy a heavy tank was made based on several factors. Hopefully I will get time tonight to work up a posting on it but I wanted to correct the gun size mistake. It was possible to put a Pershing turret on a Sherman Chassis if you wanted to deploy a 90mm gun tank (There were already 90mm tank destroyers on Sherman chassis) but it was decided it was possibly top heavy so was not pursued. Both the Sherman and the Pershing had the same turret ring diameter (69" if memory serves me correctly) I'm pretty sure that dimension stayed the same through the M48 series.
 

Hoist40

Banned
There was also the T14 assault tank which was suppose to be able to be up gunned with a 90mm. One problem was that the original vehicle only had the V-8 Ford engine and was underpowered, it did have room for the V-12 Ford. However the V-12 Ford took longer to develop and would be needed for any heavy tank except the M-6 which used a different engine.

As for a reason why the USA would build heavy tanks, maybe the Germans managed to get a bunch of Tiger I’s to North Africa and had a major victory against US forces. This might cause a reaction to gets a US heavy tank into the field.

Edit
How about the Germans spearheading the battle of Kasserine Pass with a battalion of Tigers. It was not the major reason for the US loss but the US lack of a heavy tank was blamed
 

Hoist40

Banned
Would take longer to develop? My understanding was the V-12 was the original design and the V-8 cut down from it....

The V-12 was the original idea for an aircraft engine, but it was rejected and then Ford proposed a V-8 / V-12 for a Tank engine which was accepted. The first production was the modified V-8 tank engine which was very much needed for the Sherman and had a high priority. The V-12 Ford was developed after they got the V-8 in production and the V-12 was used in some experimental late war heavy tanks.

If they had a high priority for heavy tanks early then its possible that the V-12 would be put in production at the same time as the V-8. In my proposal for a North African campaign disaster which caused a heavy tank demand then probably the V-8 would come first since the Sherman was already in production and it needed a V-8 engine.

So it all depends on when the change in timeline occurs.
 
The V-12 was the original idea for an aircraft engine, but it was rejected and then Ford proposed a V-8 / V-12 for a Tank engine which was accepted. The first production was the modified V-8 tank engine which was very much needed for the Sherman and had a high priority. The V-12 Ford was developed after they got the V-8 in production and the V-12 was used in some experimental late war heavy tanks.

If they had a high priority for heavy tanks early then its possible that the V-12 would be put in production at the same time as the V-8. In my proposal for a North African campaign disaster which caused a heavy tank demand then probably the V-8 would come first since the Sherman was already in production and it needed a V-8 engine.

So it all depends on when the change in timeline occurs.
Thank you. That makes a lot of sense.
 
US armor changing won't affect the Battle of the Bulge that much in terms of duration or scale, the impact will come in 1945 and with the Battle of the Ruhr/crossing of the Rhine.
 
Top