The nicely obscure whatzis...

By The Armorer on February 2, 2007 | | Comments (29)

As I expected, you guys collectively pretty much nailed it, if missing some of the fiddly details. It is in fact an airbrushed photo for an advertising brochure.

J. Walter Christie was a pretty talented designer of tanks. But, as happens to many people with talent, he got a little messianic now and again. That photo represented one of those ideas which just couldn't get out of his head.

He was fixated on developing a light tank that could be carried under a plane. You'd spin the tracks up to high speed, then the plane would skim along the ground, the tank would touch, the pilot (or tanker) would release, and voila! Aerial deployment of tanks.

Oddly enough, the Army never showed much interest in the concept, much less actually designing an aircraft capable of it. I'll let the pilots among us discuss all the technical reasons why even if technically feasible (an arguable question for the tech at the time) it's such a bad idea from so many perspectives. Not the least of which is flying some lumbering transport aircraft just feet above ground that is anything flatter than a runway.

That's a drawing of a M1940 Christie tank (which was never built) grafted on to a picture of a YB-17 as already determined by the Smart Guys in the comments.

Well done.

And now for something complete different.

So, whatziss?

You guys are always whining about scale, etc - so here's some context.

Here's a larger view, as if that's going to help.

Share This Article:

Categories:

29 Comments

By Pogue on February 2, 2007 8:42 AM
A nice little model of an M102 next to a magnetic stress ball covered in ball bearings?
 
By Neffi on February 2, 2007 9:26 AM
Tiffany egg from the company's 'minimalist' period...
 
By MajMike on February 2, 2007 10:14 AM
a Tempest hardened pomegranate?
 
By John of Argghhh! on February 2, 2007 10:17 AM
Heh. How many people remember what "Tempest Hardened" means...
 
By wolfwalker on February 2, 2007 10:17 AM
Hints please: Whole object, or component of something bigger? Weapon, weapon component, mechanical thingy? Oh, and you need a digital camera with a better macro mode. :-)
 
By John of Argghhh! on February 2, 2007 10:20 AM
In reverse order... my Canon EOS Rebel camera is just fine. It's the operator who sucks. Component. Modern. European.
 
By Eric Wilner on February 2, 2007 10:27 AM
Pincushion? Beryllium sphere for a shuttlecraft?
 
By Bruce Quam on February 2, 2007 11:00 AM
Warhead submunition for a Roland antiaircraft missle?
 
By Will the Sea Scout on February 2, 2007 11:00 AM
Some sort of scouring shot for cleaning out a really foul rifle barrel?
 
By WereKitten on February 2, 2007 11:03 AM
WEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!! The camera operator SUCKS! gotta love an operator who sucks.
 
By Casey Tompkins on February 2, 2007 12:06 PM
Geez, Eric, everybody knows a Beryllium sphere is used in the main engines, not the shuttlecraft! Some people... ;) Now I normally stay away from the more abstruse "whatzit" posts, but assuming the ball bearings aren't a red herring, I'd hazard it's part of a beehive round or anti-personnel grenade, in the manner of the old Shrapnel rounds.
 
By Rod Thorsen on February 2, 2007 12:51 PM
BB Cheeseball.
 
By KCSteve on February 2, 2007 12:54 PM
(ahem) With regards to yesterday's Whazzit?, while he seems to have covered how they were supposed to get the tank off the plane (thus allowing them both to land), how did he intend for them to take off? Also, a modern LAPES drop is pretty much what you described. Way back when they were developing it I happened to work at USAYPG (Yuma Proving Ground) and got to see one. Cargo plane comes into view flying low with tail doors open. Plane dives at the ground and somehow manages to level off looking like it's lower than it would be with gear down. Little bitty drag chute appears at tail of plane followed immediately by full chute and something very tanklike. Plane bounces up to a more reasonable altitude (tanklike vehicle also bounces, but not as high). Plane goes into steep climb and exits area. Basically the unload the cargo plane without bothering to (quite) land - or slow down. Now, as to today's item: Looks to be a lump covered in shot. Since it's egg-shaped and appears to be covered all over I'm guessing it's intended to distribute said shot over the entire area in a grandly egalitarian manner. Bursting charge out of the Euro version of a Bouncing Betty?
 
By J.M. Heinrichs on February 2, 2007 2:02 PM
1. Tempest 1 or 2? 2. Radar cross-section/signature test target. Cheers
 
By Toluca Nole on February 2, 2007 3:13 PM
"It's all ball bearings these days! Maybe you need a refresher course."
 
By Eric Wilner on February 2, 2007 6:59 PM
But, Casey, it's too small to be the sphere for the main engines! Gotta be for something smaller, like a shuttlecraft or maybe a space bike. Hmmm... unless that's a full-size howitzer, and those planks are a lot bigger than I'd assumed. It does have a bit of the "explosive covered with ball bearings" look to it, but isn't the ratio of explosive to ball bearings rather high?
 
By wolfwalker on February 2, 2007 7:30 PM
I dunno how small ball bearings can get, but those look kinda small for ball bearings to me. Maybe it's some kinda lightweight scattergun round, loaded with birdshot? No idea why they'd do something like that, but sometimes the military runs the durndest experiments...
 
By SangerM on February 2, 2007 7:42 PM
>Heh. How many people remember what "Tempest Hardened" means... I lived in that world for a bit... How about a AT PC (80286) computer in a heavy green box that had about 50 screws in the top cover, and all sorts of steel parts and some stuff that looked like steel wool on the inside... INSIDE a SCIF. What nitwits... talk about 400 toilet seat.. On the other hand, the Army bought a toy in the early 80s called TEAMPACK (AN/MSQ-103), a tactical MI track/shelter mtd radar direction finding system. Supposedly, it was discovered that if you got close enough (within a couple hundred meters, I guess), you could recieve information about the targets it was DFing--emitted from inside the shelter (tempest NOT being installed properly apparently). Our unit had to stop using them for a bit.... Go figure...
 
By Trias on February 2, 2007 8:36 PM
well they are fixed in place so the bearings aren't actually used to minimise friction. So i leap to assume this is some kind of bomb which explodes the bearings out to rip people to shreds, much like those nice terrorists in Israel do.
 
By BillT on February 2, 2007 11:03 PM
One of KtLW's famed armored meatballs. Don't ask...
 
By SangerM on February 3, 2007 2:27 AM
Hey, BilltT, that sounds like my Grandmother's knedlick (Passover chicken soup dumplings)... Straight to the bottom of the stomach....
 
By Eric Wilner on February 3, 2007 8:53 AM
Waitaminnit... Could those ball bearings actually be meant to function as ball bearings? Is this the spherical bearing for some sort of tilty-swivelly joint? Little hardened steel balls surrounding a big hardened steel ball, magnetized for ease of assembly? (But then I contemplate how the outside of the thing would be constructed, and I don't see how you'd keep some subset of the little balls from flying off in the event of impact.)
 
By Casey Tompkins on February 3, 2007 10:55 AM
Eric, I stand corrected. Yes, it could be for a space bike. :) wolfwalker raised a point I hadn't thought of, but should. Those spheres are small for anti-personnel. Hmmm. Is that a 1/35 scale model next to the whatzit, or is it a 1/6 GI Joe howitzer?
   
By Justthisguy on February 3, 2007 8:19 PM
I think the Soviet Russkis actually did test the freewheeling tracks air-dropped from five feet up tank. Once. Ren and Stimpy did an episode in which they joined up with the Armored Parachute Tank Corps, or something like that.
 
By Justthisguy on February 3, 2007 8:25 PM
Y'all do realize, of course, that JoA may just be funnin' us? I mean, that may not be any kind of weapon at all, maybe just an objet d'art his Gramma gave him, which has had some of its shiny thingys fall off, during the passage of the years?
 
By Rod Thorsen on February 3, 2007 8:38 PM
Ya know JTG might be on to something. You remember those objects d'art that were real popular back in the 70's? You'd press your hand or face into it and a 3-d image would remain. So armouror, how 'bout you slam this into your face and than tell what you see? :^)
 
By Rod Thorsen on February 3, 2007 9:04 PM
Just kidding of course.
 
By ibm on February 3, 2007 10:14 PM
Possibly the guts of a grenade of some sort but IIRC most light grenades are wrapped in layers of prefragmented (partially) wire not ball bearings.