Comments for Okay, a new whatziss for you!

Okay, a new whatziss for you!

2008-07-21T09:51:31Z

XBradTC got it correct when he called it for the T-28. I figured someone from the tracked combat vehicle fraternity was going to get it. Hard to take a pic of that thing where it wasn't going to be obvious to anyone who ever saw the lone survivor.

The T28 sitting in front of the Patton Museum of Cavalry and Armor is the lone survivor of two prototype vehicles. She was designed to be used to break through the German bunker defenses of the Siegfried Line.

Built like a German tank destroyer, it had no turret, which lowered the profile, and saved the weight and developmental complexity of the turret - the weight savings being tossed to give it more armor.  Its total weight when fully equipped was 95 tons, making it the heaviest armored vehicle we ever built.  She was also designed to use existing M4-series Sherman parts where possible, to save development and production time.

Not having anything spiffy like the composite armor of today, the T28 relied on brute force, with the armor in the frontal aspect being up to twelve inches thick. This was believed to be proof against the German 88mm cannon mounted on the Tigers.   Her dual-track system was intended to give her a ground-pressure similar to the Sherman for cross-country mobility. In fact, she actually had a slightly lighter ground-pressure.

Heh.

Then, the geniuses in charge put in a puny gas-burning Ford GAF V-8, delivering all of 410 hp, Given the low gearing required to get the thing moving, that powerplant gave it a top speed of a whopping 8 mph. A scorcher.   The low power also means she wasn't able to climb over very much, and going uphill was a wheeze-inducing activity, too. Then her width and weight also meant she wasn't going to get over many bridges... and at the same time, as mentioned, her obstacle crossing ability was meager, and you begin to understand why only two were built and only one survives.

To get past the bridge (and transportability) problem, her outer set of tracks was removeable, and could be towed behind the beast as a trailer. This facilitated bridge crossing and fitting it onto a trank transporter or train.  Heh.  With a top speed of 8 mph with a requirement to disassemble and assemble them at bridges, if they'd landed on D-Day they might not have made it to the Siegfried Line before the war was over anyway...

Her main armament was a 105 mm T5E1 gun and she carried a .50 caliber M2 machine gun, operated by the tank commander. She would have fought as a component of a team consisting of regular armor and infantry - the latter to defend her while she went about her business, as a lumbering behemoth like this was not nimble enough to fight a mobile battle. She's a frontal assault vehicle, pure and simple. An irresistable force to be applied to immovable objects, to answer that age-old question.

The original plan was for a production run of 25 vehicles. In the event, only two were ever built, and neither of them saw combat. One was damaged by an engine fire during trials and was scrapped. The other one vanished from sight and memory (both having been recorded as having been scrapped.

Then someone found her in a field at... Fort Belvoir, Virginia. Just sitting there, unlovely and unloved.

So, here's a new whatziss for you -

These things - those two things that look somewhat like power plant cooling towers - what are they for? Any ideas?

Comment from Ymarsakar on 2008-07-23

2008-07-23T16:39:58Z

Personally, I always thought T for the RUssians stood for "Tank number...".

Comment from CAVSCT on 2008-07-22

2008-07-22T21:30:24Z

They are capstans for vehicle recovery operations, they are for use with wire cable as opposed to chains and attach to the drive sprokets as mentioned by Blake in the first responce. Unfortunatly the military has gotten away from this concept and things like this are few and far between these days. It is a simple concept and if used properly is is very effective. It can be used to recover other vehicles if necessary by breaking track and having the drive sproket run free, but the base/winch vehilce must be securly anchored. This is a time consuming method, but it beats doing it by hand.....

Comment from J.M. Heinrichs on 2008-07-22

2008-07-22T21:03:14Z

The "T" designation was generally used for prototypes and pre-production kit. When the kit was accepted for service, the designation changed to "M". And the numbers did not generally carry over.

Cheers

Comment from AFSister on 2008-07-22

2008-07-22T18:21:20Z

Keith and I sought out the tank in question at the Patton Museum last night. Found it.. and looking at those damn "reactor" thingies did us NO good. AT ALL.

You sucketh, Armorer...

Comment from BillT on 2008-07-22

2008-07-22T06:38:33Z

Heh. I knew JMH would sniff that one out. The original designation for the Pershing was T-26. Good Wikipedia article -- especially if you're wondering how the heavy tank (T-26) turned into the medium tank (M-26) -- and how the Army wound up with so many different tanks named "Patton"...

Comment from J.M. Heinrichs on 2008-07-21

2008-07-22T02:33:48Z

Yes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M26_Pershing

Cheers

Comment from Ymarsakar on 2008-07-21

2008-07-21T22:30:43Z

Didn't they have a Pershing heavy tank in WWII, Bill?

Comment from BillT on 2008-07-21

2008-07-21T21:22:54Z

Although the purists will hammer me for using JS- instead of IS-...

Comment from BillT on 2008-07-21

2008-07-21T20:39:30Z

T-28. I thought those designations were Rusky?

Yes and no.

In WWII, we used M to designate a Medium Tank and T to designate a Heavy Tank; Russkies used BT for a Light Tank, T for a Medium Tank and then named Heavy Tanks after some famous figure and designated them by those initials -- the KV- series after Kliment Voroshilov and the JS- series after -- surprise -- Josef Stalin,

Comment from Fishmugger on 2008-07-21

2008-07-21T19:16:19Z

Thanks Bill,

My friend in Boston lives with a Russky and she ain't so clunky. I think she was mail order. He just giggles a lot.

Comment from Boquisucio on 2008-07-21

2008-07-21T19:14:45Z

Babalú!!!!

They are Conga Drums of course. The Goat Skins have whithered, of course over the passing of time.

Comment from kat-missouri on 2008-07-21

2008-07-21T19:06:12Z

Uh-uh...it's a T-28. I thought those designations were Rusky?

Then again, Bill's right. I figure if it looks like the ironmonger's hit the junk yard to put it together, I figure it's gotta be Rusky.

Comment from BillT on 2008-07-21

2008-07-21T18:45:00Z

This is a Russian tank built in America to penetrate the Siegfried line???

Nope, it's an American assault gun built in America to sit in front of the Patton Museum.

Kat just thinks everything chromed and clunky looks like Russky ironmongery.

Comment from rikkochet on 2008-07-21

2008-07-21T17:55:36Z

Looks like they've found a use for some old 12" mortars.

Comment from Fishmugger on 2008-07-21

2008-07-21T17:32:21Z

I'm so confused.

This is a Russian tank built in America to penetrate the Siegfried line??? How were they going to do that; run over the Third Army to get there?

I had a better time with the Argentine Colt 45.

Comment from kat-missouri on 2008-07-21

2008-07-21T16:49:11Z

Extra drums for the track? Just in case something gets damaged?

Comment from AFSister on 2008-07-21

2008-07-21T16:28:44Z

*winks at Mike*

Comment from Chuck Simmins on 2008-07-21

2008-07-21T15:26:16Z

Yeah, they look like things you see on the side of a ship, for tying lines to. Arranged like that, you could get quite a force multiplier effect using them as pulleys.

Comment from RetRsvMike on 2008-07-21

2008-07-21T15:19:06Z

why thank you AFSis!

Comment from Heartless Libertarian on 2008-07-21

2008-07-21T14:59:57Z

I'd guess they might have something to do with that winch looking thing at lower right.

Because I think winch equipped Strykers have something similar looking somewhere on the glacis.

Comment from AFSister on 2008-07-21

2008-07-21T14:47:52Z

They're binoculars for the larger-than-life men who call themselves "Tankers".

DUH.

Comment from BillT on 2008-07-21

2008-07-21T14:06:57Z

More like a Russky battery-pack for a Moskva digital watch...

Comment from kat-missouri on 2008-07-21

2008-07-21T12:59:53Z

Rusky boom box?

Comment from BillT on 2008-07-21

2008-07-21T12:41:15Z

Brake drums. They attached to the drive sprockets on the outboard tracks when they were towed in trailer mode -- the crew disembarked (except for the TC and driver), then wrapped ropes around the drums and dug in their heels when the T-28 slowed down so that the trailer/tracks didn't overrun the vehicle.

Yeah, yeah, I *know* it sounds like I made that up. But I didn't.

Comment from Blake Kirk on 2008-07-21

2008-07-21T11:30:01Z

I'll guess that they are self-recovery winching capstans intended to be bolted to the drive sprockets to provide some ability to get that monster unstuck. (A similar piece of kit was/is available for the M113-series vehicles.) God knows that in 1945 we didn't have an armored recovery vehicle capable of moving something that massive.