AHC: StuG Sherman
- Thread starter Life In Black
- Start date
The USN is upgrading 5/25s to 5/38s. The gun is 142" long and weighs a little over 2,000lbs. It's 27" shorter and only 300lb heavier then the 3"/50 used on the T24/T40 and M10.
The problem is not so much the dead weight but the recoil force generated by such a large gun; it's probably more than the suspension can handle.
Suitable weapons would be the 90mm M3, replacing the M36 with a simpler, cheaper vehicle, and the 105mm M4 howitzer, replacing the turreted M4 variants. Such could be put into production in late 1942 or early 1943, as soon as Sherman production reaches sufficient quantities.
NothingNow
Banned
Agreed, but a Sherman/Grant StuG would have the advantage of being able to afford maximum armor thickness in the 120-140mm range, and over-all thicker armor versus the M36's comparatively thinly distributed armor, and open turret.
Now, if the whole thing were stretched a good couple of feet, and you went with a superstructure like the one used on the Jagdtiger, you probably could fit the 120mm M1, but it'd take serious hits to maneuverability and it'd have to sacrifice armor protection or take a massive hit to it's power to weight ratio. That said, it would be comparatively easy to fit a 105mm gun to it, but with the Priest and Sherman 105, (Now with Optional Jumbo package!) already evident, it's kinda a waste of a good hull. the 90mm or 120mm Jagdsherman is a better investment, but not by much over some of the ideas discussed.
Now, a 76mm or 90mm armed Grant/Lee? That'd be a decent prospective 2nd line modification, and a good stopgap for decent tanks, as would a casemate version of the Stuart, both serving as a rather inferior supplement to the M10, M18, M36, and M4, but still useful ones.
Edit: thinking about it, as it was, the 90mm gun was capable of killing even Jagdtigers, even if it couldn't reliably penetrate the glacis plate at range. IMO while there might be a case for the Jagdsherman in general use with the US, the casemate Grant/Lee would probably be a lend-lease only thing, and the sort of thing the Free whatevers would get, while major powers got real front-line kit instead. I'll probably use the idea for my Latin Pact project, if I ever get around to that as well.
Last edited:
Interesting idea although I think the Stuart is probably too small for any worthwhile casemate retrofit that does not involve basically rebuilding from the tracks up.
One very easy option, with direct parallels in history, would be to take the M-7 Priest (an already modified M3 and later an M4) or in the case of Commonwealth forces, the Sexton, and replace its 105mm/25pdr artillery piece with a suitable AT gun. In the case of the US this would probably be the 90mm and in the case of the Commonwealth the 17pdr or new 20pdr depending on when you see the conversion happening.
What you end up with is essentially something very similar in appearance and capability to the German Nashorn panzerjäger. Whilst neither of these vehicles really fits with US/UK/Commonwealth tactical AT doctrine, they may be a good export option.
Last edited:
While at the same time requiring it to either fire or manoeuvre, but leaving it incapable of doing both at the same time. If WW2 drags on longer (and with greater numbers of Panthers), the US won't try for a new tank, they'll simply borrow the Sherman Firefly from the British (those 17pdrs were hard on the crews, but boy were they effective, in a couple of cases single tanks aced against Panthers).
Having thought this through a little further, I would refine my proposal to a M7 Priest converted to carry the British 17-pdr.
The Brits were the first to field the US designed M7 Priest in North Africa in 1942 and found it extremeny useful. However, the design was by no means perfect; the biggest drawback being the US 105mm Howitzer's ammunition which had no match in the UK inventory. Ammunition supply was therefore problematic and an unwelcomed burden on the logistics supply system. This situation was never really resolved until the introduction of the 25-pdr armed Sexton which like the M7 was intended to be built on an M3/M4 platform. In the end most Sextons were built on Canadian Ram & Grizzly hulls - themselves copies-ish of the M3 and M4 respectively.
Virtually all of the now redundant M7 Priests in UK/Commonwealth service were converted into Kangaroo troop-carrying APCs. Given the retasking of these vehicles, it is not inconceivable that some may have been converted into SP AT vehicles mounting the excellent 17-pdr gun.
Unlike the US who preferred open-topped turreted tank destroyers, the UK did dabble in fixed gun AT armoured vehicles, such as the SP 17-pdr, Valentine, Mk I, Archer. This is probably as close to a StuG Sherman or StuG Lee/Grant as the Western Allies were ever likely to get.
The Brits were the first to field the US designed M7 Priest in North Africa in 1942 and found it extremeny useful. However, the design was by no means perfect; the biggest drawback being the US 105mm Howitzer's ammunition which had no match in the UK inventory. Ammunition supply was therefore problematic and an unwelcomed burden on the logistics supply system. This situation was never really resolved until the introduction of the 25-pdr armed Sexton which like the M7 was intended to be built on an M3/M4 platform. In the end most Sextons were built on Canadian Ram & Grizzly hulls - themselves copies-ish of the M3 and M4 respectively.
Virtually all of the now redundant M7 Priests in UK/Commonwealth service were converted into Kangaroo troop-carrying APCs. Given the retasking of these vehicles, it is not inconceivable that some may have been converted into SP AT vehicles mounting the excellent 17-pdr gun.
Unlike the US who preferred open-topped turreted tank destroyers, the UK did dabble in fixed gun AT armoured vehicles, such as the SP 17-pdr, Valentine, Mk I, Archer. This is probably as close to a StuG Sherman or StuG Lee/Grant as the Western Allies were ever likely to get.
Last edited:
As promised....
The Israelis on the other hand have a considerable track record of adapting any and all available AFVs to their own unique needs.
Just suppose that in the early 60s as the Centurion is entering front line service a number of Sherman hulls are made available for conversion into dedicated tank destroyers. Knowing that they face potential enemies on many fronts and that their armoured force cannot concentrate on more than one at a time, a plan is developed to increase the AT firepower of the Infantry formations who will have to conduct holding actions until relieved by the hard pressed armoured divisions. Enter the 90mm armed "StuG" Sherman; although not many were ever produced, they were a firm favourite of the infantry in the early phase of the 6-Day War.
Depicted is the 1st vehicle of the 2 platoon, 2nd Company, 2nd Battalion, Tank Destroyer Command attached to the Golani Brigade.
The Israelis on the other hand have a considerable track record of adapting any and all available AFVs to their own unique needs.
Just suppose that in the early 60s as the Centurion is entering front line service a number of Sherman hulls are made available for conversion into dedicated tank destroyers. Knowing that they face potential enemies on many fronts and that their armoured force cannot concentrate on more than one at a time, a plan is developed to increase the AT firepower of the Infantry formations who will have to conduct holding actions until relieved by the hard pressed armoured divisions. Enter the 90mm armed "StuG" Sherman; although not many were ever produced, they were a firm favourite of the infantry in the early phase of the 6-Day War.
Depicted is the 1st vehicle of the 2 platoon, 2nd Company, 2nd Battalion, Tank Destroyer Command attached to the Golani Brigade.
Last edited:
Many thanksIf I can free up the cash, I may have a go at the 17pdr Priest too.
I join in the general acclaim of your awesomeness, very impressive work there. I like your ideas and would love to see your take on some of the other assault gun concepts - the Priest-variant you mentioned sounds particularly cool - not least because it's one of those (initially seemingly) crazy ideas that just might work.
I join in the general acclaim of your awesomeness, very impressive work there. I like your ideas and would love to see your take on some of the other assault gun concepts - the Priest-variant you mentioned sounds particularly cool - not least because it's one of those (initially seemingly) crazy ideas that just might work.
Many thanks too
Having never really done that much in the way of AH modelling before, I am kind of taken with the idea now so any ideas you may have would be more than welcome. In fact I may even start my own thread on this topic... What do you think?Many thanks too
I'd say go for it! If you need new ideas for alternate armored vehicles, just ask!
OK. I just need a couple of more photos of works in progress and I'm there. I'll post a link when it's up and running.
OK. I just need a couple of more photos of works in progress and I'm there. I'll post a link when it's up and running.
Sounds good!
No time like the present!
For those of you with an interest in AH AFVs, please visit my thread at the link below.
https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=218561
Last edited:
True, although the 3.7" AA gun was a truly huge beast being almost twice the weight of the German 88mm - no doubt explains the equally huge dimensions of the Tortoise! Perhaps it would be too big for the M3/M4 chassis?
One thing is for sure though... you would not want to be on the receiving end