previous post next post  

Stray voltage

By The Armorer on November 23, 2009 | | Comments (13)
I kinda like this - a new form of military commission.

Patrick Lasswell and 2000 Card Monte.

And because everybody is sending it to me anyway...




So, how do you take a mediocre tank like the AMX-13 and make it more mediocrerer [sic]?

Put the turret on a Sherman chassis, of course.

Share This Article:

Categories:

13 Comments

By BillT on November 23, 2009 9:13 AM
Back in the '50s and '60s, the Israelis used to put anything that could launch a can of *boom!* on a Sherman chassis. They would have put a friggin' *runway* on a Sherman chassis if they could've figured where to hang the windsock...
 
By John of Argghhh! on November 23, 2009 9:34 AM
*That* particular incarnation is Egyptian.  Which is why it's in an Israeli museum... next to the Syrian Panzer IV and StuG...
 
By SangerM on November 23, 2009 11:42 AM
The upgunned 'super-Shermans' were actually better tanks than the russian junk the Egyptains were using in '67.  For one reason, because the Russian stuff had too shallow a depression angle and had to come futher up on the dune to shoot across it, while the Israelis could just lay the gun across the front glacis almost, and shoot from almost full defilade....

Even so, that french/sherman hybrid is an abomination!  Ugh (though likey still better than a t55 in the sand)....
 
By eric on November 23, 2009 1:07 PM
and still they kicked ass! just to show that it's more than steel.
 
By Kevin on November 23, 2009 6:19 PM

This reminds me of a forgotten comedy classic, with (pre-pouty) Val Kilmer no less!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMNRo4ii2Pk&feature=related

Skeet Surfing!

Top Secret and Nick Rivers rules!


 
By jsallison on November 23, 2009 6:44 PM
The tank in the add is actually austrian, the SK-105 Kürassier. And except for the butt-ugly turret that requires the two crewmen to be hobbits and pretty much non-existent armor the amx-13 could give a creditable performance in its day given capable hands. Remember, that cannon was based on the Panther's 75L70, no slouch in the armament department, coupled with an auto-loader. Except for a tendency to go winchester in a hurry, (only had about a dozen rounds available at a time, iirc). I'd say otherwise an even match for the M41 Bulldog and a serviceable light tank. I'll give you that the israeli M50 (using the same cannon as the amx-13) is way more visually appealing than the egyptian amx-13 turret transplant (definetly something from the island of Dr Armoreau) but ya gotta respect the mad skillzors of the egyptian ordnance wallahs. ;)
 
By RetRsvMike on November 23, 2009 7:18 PM
need i remind you of the first rule of Armored Vehicle Identification flash cards?  "if it looks goofy, it's French!"
 
By jsallison on November 23, 2009 7:51 PM
quite so, but the amx-13 turret on an actual amx-13 sits on the rear of the hull, this one in the add is centered, more or less. Yes, I've actually crawled around on both, back in the day... though I will admit that placing an amx-13 turret on *any* hull is enough to makes ones eyes involuntarily cross...
 
By John of Argghhh! on November 23, 2009 8:26 PM
I was fixated on the turret, I admit it.

It's a dumb design, the articulated turret.  One good hit along the edges... and yer turret, however otherwise serviceable, ain't articulated.

And dumping the turret on a VVSS Sherman chassis?  Good golly.  At least the HVSS hulls had *some* cross country performance.
 
By Blake Kirk on November 24, 2009 8:52 AM
RetRsvMike wrote:  need i remind you of the first rule of Armored Vehicle Identification flash cards? "if it looks goofy, it's French!"

I dunno, the earliest Australian Army Fire Support Vehicle, with the 76mm gun turret of an Alvis Saladin armored car mounted on an M113 hull was pretty much a similar kludge.

And then there was the thing the Yemeni Army had for air defense, with an Emerson-built Vulcan turret mounted on a Russian-made BTR-152 armored truck.

And who can forget the M901 ITV/FIST-V?
 
By Colin on November 24, 2009 7:42 PM
Singapore just got rid of their AMX-13's for Leo 2's The AMX-13 105 was good for them, being light and capable of using small jungle trails. It was a case of having a tank where the other guy couldn't. Also the direct threat was the malaysian Scorpion armed with a 90mm Cockeril gun, so evenly matched, the Singapore army got more training time than the Malay tankers (I hear last year they got 3 rds per gun) So it was likely a case of who got the first hit.
 
By Attila on November 24, 2009 11:10 PM
Gaahhh! You had to go and remind me that I live 45 minutes from The Peoples' Republic of West Lafayette (Purdue being its capital). It's gonna cost me but the kid AIN'T goin' to Perdue. -Atilla

BTW, I'm in Singapore and it's frickin' HOT. Temperature-wise. Thanksgiving sushi in Osaka...woo hoo!

AABTW, the polar bear ad was gross, but seeing as how their numbers are increasing, we figured we'd keep the largest land carnivore under control.
 
By Cpl Mongo on November 25, 2009 11:14 AM
OMG,  RetRsvMike just rang my way back when bell!
I was the ID Honcho in my TOW Platoon in the '80s. It was my job to flash the troops ( figuratively speaking ) to keep them up to speed. I would have one Squad at a time in a class circle around a big easel and when I flipped the next picture they would all call out 'Friend' or 'Foe'.
The AMXs always got an enthusiastic 'Foe!'
I suppose I should have corrected them at the time but .......