I do not think there were very many tank on tank engagements last 1950 in Korea. So the 75 mm gun of M24 light tank was sufficient for engaging field fortifications with good protection against small arms and mortars. The French found theUS M24 light tank of great use at Dien Bien Phu. The Chafee remains in use 75 years after introduction
Last edited:
By 1950 the M4 was ten years from its specifications and start of prototype. Between that & its derivation from the M2 Medium tank it was a mature tank. With 30,000+ changes in major components and fine detains. The M26 & Centurions were a few years younger, and development had slowed to a crawl from 1945. Compared to the improvements in the M4 piled on during wartime the other two had hardly reached the three year mark in development.
90% of the tank battles were during the Pusan perimeter phase & then the breakout. By sputum the NKPA tank park was destroyed. The Chinese brought few to none with them. After that the UN tanks were mostly in the infantry support role.
If anything the British should have went with their A23 proposal for a Cruiser derived from the Churchill. That would give the British a real Sherman-equivalent without needing to adapt a Soviet tank.
Diesels have some advantages over gasoline engines. Generally the studies show tank fires are dominated by ammunition ignited. The advantage of Disel fuel over Gasoline is less than many people. I've read both Soviet Army tests, and tests by US based insurance underwriters that show fuel fires are more dependent on the amount of vapor in the fuel tanks than the type of fuel. Soviet tests suggested you had to have 75% of the tank filled with vapor before catastrophic rupturing of the fuel container occurred.
Cant say about the Brits. The US had reasonably well sloped armor on the M2 Medium & sloped frontal gracias. The M4 followed the French practice of curves all over the turret vs sloped angles. In general the French inter war went with combinations of slopes and curves. Prewar German designs had a lot less slopped sections and few to no curves.
The Brits of 1940 had a great 57mm caliber cannon. They just neglected to get it into large scale production soon enough. Like the Germans they stuck with their existing 37mm & short 50 7 75 mm guns longer than necessary.
A frequent proposal for a 80 year retroactive redo of Brit tanks.
The T-34 and KV-1 didn't fundamentally change British ideas or teach them something they didn't already know. Fuel availability concerns and the need to churn as many good engines as possible ASAP precluded any introduction of diesel engines. One for the Churchill failed, and the proposed diesel Meteor would have taken too long to get in production without disturbing the production of its gasoline brother. The experimental Ricardo I and H-type diesels of 1940-1941 would have been great but they received no interest and the Brits had other priorities.
The men responsible for procurement mostly neglected the crews' pleas for sloped armor because they were obsessed with keeping the hull MG, which mount would have been too difficult to rework for a sloped plate. They also did a shoddy work at experimenting it on Cromwell and Comet, merely placing an addon plate at an angle instead of redesigning the entire front with an homogenous sloped plate, so the obvious merits in protection weren't demonstrated. The Brits always wanted big guns, but didn't have suitable tanks to fit them in yet.
You need something other than getting T-34s or KV-1s for testing early to make the British change their minds.
The men responsible for procurement mostly neglected the crews' pleas for sloped armor because they were obsessed with keeping the hull MG, which mount would have been too difficult to rework for a sloped plate. They also did a shoddy work at experimenting it on Cromwell and Comet, merely placing an addon plate at an angle instead of redesigning the entire front with an homogenous sloped plate, so the obvious merits in protection weren't demonstrated. The Brits always wanted big guns, but didn't have suitable tanks to fit them in yet.
You need something other than getting T-34s or KV-1s for testing early to make the British change their minds.
The Matilda I I, Churchill, Cromwell and Comet definitely did have a basket. Never seen inside a Valentine or Crusader so not certain but I reckon yes.
Crusader Mk V "Special"
In September of 1941 the British Gov't. received a gift from the workers of the Soviet Union, a brand new T-34 medium tank fresh from the factory. British engineers immediately went over the the tank with a fine tooth comb and recommended building a copy of the T-34 with some modifications.
The proposed British T-34 copy was to be powered by the new Rolls Royce Meteor 12 cylinder engine and would have a suspension similar to that of the Crusader Mk III but with an extra road-wheel added like that of the Russian T-34. Armament was to be a licensed built copy of the American M2 75 mm cannon and secondary armament would be one or two Besa MG's.
The Us entry into the war in April of 1942 brought a halt to the production of the Mk V Special and only one prototype was made.
So the POD here is the Soviets send a T-34 tank to Britain much earlier than IOTL and a later entrance of the US into the war but the tank never goes into mass production.*
* I made this pic over a year ago for the Alt-AFV thread, the OP of the thread Claymore felt the British would've put the tank into production but I thought Churchill being a strong anti-communist wouldn't like the idea of Britain copying a commie tank.
Basically it's a sloped armoured Crusader with a T-34 turret and a US designed gun, a tank that uses designs from the three major Allied powers.
In September of 1941 the British Gov't. received a gift from the workers of the Soviet Union, a brand new T-34 medium tank fresh from the factory. British engineers immediately went over the the tank with a fine tooth comb and recommended building a copy of the T-34 with some modifications.
The proposed British T-34 copy was to be powered by the new Rolls Royce Meteor 12 cylinder engine and would have a suspension similar to that of the Crusader Mk III but with an extra road-wheel added like that of the Russian T-34. Armament was to be a licensed built copy of the American M2 75 mm cannon and secondary armament would be one or two Besa MG's.
The Us entry into the war in April of 1942 brought a halt to the production of the Mk V Special and only one prototype was made.
So the POD here is the Soviets send a T-34 tank to Britain much earlier than IOTL and a later entrance of the US into the war but the tank never goes into mass production.*
* I made this pic over a year ago for the Alt-AFV thread, the OP of the thread Claymore felt the British would've put the tank into production but I thought Churchill being a strong anti-communist wouldn't like the idea of Britain copying a commie tank.
Basically it's a sloped armoured Crusader with a T-34 turret and a US designed gun, a tank that uses designs from the three major Allied powers.
All very true, but the M-24 got that lossy reputation in Korea because in the first few weeks it had to face T-34/85's, and they got killed. Penetration tables are sort of ideal examples, tanks are usually hit at oblique angles, other than just slope of armor, that further degrades penetration. Many T-34's could survive even a solid hit, while a Chaffe would be opened up like a tin can, by almost any hit from an 85mm AP round. The Army wasn't too pleased with the M-24's performance in Korea, with is why they replaced it with the M-41 Walker Bulldog, has fast as they could.
Garrison
Donor
Both very cool designs and it makes more sense that the British would take elements from the T-34 rather than just putting a copy into production.The sequel
Crusader Mk V I
From an alternate universe of an alternate universe where the Mk V was put into mass production and then upgraded and up-gunned with a 17 pdr in 1944.
The Soviets couldn't send a T-34 to Britain much sooner than September 1941. The T-34 didn't enter production till early in 1941, and the Soviets weren't allied with Britain till after the Nazi invasion, starting June 22. What I don't get with this thread is what do you need the Russians for? Everyone knew about the advantages of sloped armor, the reason every tank didn't have it was the designers didn't want to pay the cost of lost internal space. The British wanted a future medium tank to have a 3 man turret. They had their own engines, transmissions, and drive trains, they had the Christy Suspension system, and they wanted an American licensed gun. The only thing they really get out of the T-34, was torsion bar suspension, and even that they already knew about. There was nothing magic about the T-34, or the KV-1.Crusader Mk V "Special"
In September of 1941 the British Gov't. received a gift from the workers of the Soviet Union, a brand new T-34 medium tank fresh from the factory. British engineers immediately went over the the tank with a fine tooth comb and recommended building a copy of the T-34 with some modifications.
The proposed British T-34 copy was to be powered by the new Rolls Royce Meteor 12 cylinder engine and would have a suspension similar to that of the Crusader Mk III but with an extra road-wheel added like that of the Russian T-34. Armament was to be a licensed built copy of the American M2 75 mm cannon and secondary armament would be one or two Besa MG's.
The Us entry into the war in April of 1942 brought a halt to the production of the Mk V Special and only one prototype was made.
So the POD here is the Soviets send a T-34 tank to Britain much earlier than IOTL and a later entrance of the US into the war but the tank never goes into mass production.*
* I made this pic over a year ago for the Alt-AFV thread, the OP of the thread Claymore felt the British would've put the tank into production but I thought Churchill being a strong anti-communist wouldn't like the idea of Britain copying a commie tank.
Basically it's a sloped armoured Crusader with a T-34 turret and a US designed gun, a tank that uses designs from the three major Allied powers.
marathag
Banned
Army didn't much like the Bulldog either, pawning most off to Western Allies under the Military Assistance program.
It was around 5 tons heavier, faster and a slight upgraded 76mm gun(with stabilizer), but still poor HE and roughly same armor. Biggest problem was short range, not ideal for a recon tank.
By time McNamara was making decisions, he wanted everything to be air transportable, amphibious with NBC systems.
So you got the Sheridan, also not a good light tank
I drew that tank up almost a year ago for the Alt-AFV thread not this thread but I thought some folks here might find it interesting and that it would ad to the conversation.
As for why I made it, it's just a hobby of mine, I like to play "what if" and see if I can draw something from it.
As for why no one used sloped armour before the Sovs, nobody thought it was worth the taking up of internal space apparently.
Personally I think the T-34 is over rated.
Agreed, almost like somebody knew about sloped armour pre T34...... Sides may not be sloped but they are not on modern MBTs as well.....
You want sloped armour?
Agreed, almost like somebody knew about sloped armour pre T34...... Sides may not be sloped but they are not on modern MBTs as well.....
Last edited: