M3 Grant and M4 Sherman Family of Vehicles

[GTX]

T53 = M4A4 with 90mm M1 anti-aircraft gun.  An attempt to copy the germans in use of anti-aircraft guns as anti-tank guns.

Regards,

Greg

[GTX]

Two more of the M53 (second is actually the M53E1):




Regards,

Greg

[dy031101]

This display piece is allegedly an example regunned by the ROCA with captured Japanese 105mm infantry howitzer (the ROCA M10s were purchased as non-militarized articles, so the Americans had the main guns sabotaged before the transfer).  17 were built, but unfortunately all save one were "recycled" for scrap metal.

[Weaver]

I'd be more scared of that guy standing on the turret than the tank itself!

[rickshaw]

I've toyed for several years with the idea of an M3 Grant armed with twin 6 Pdr's with autoloaders (a'la the original "Firefly" wheeled SPAT gun which the British developed).  I'm unsure whether to put them on the centreline or in sponsons on each side of the vehicle.  If its the latter, you'd need separate gunners for each gun and they'd be able to engage independently.  If it was the former, they'd be under the control of a single gunner and would be used in salvo fire on a single target.

[NARSES2]

I've toyed for several years with the idea of an M3 Grant armed with twin 6 Pdr's with autoloaders (a'la the original "Firefly" wheeled SPAT gun which the British developed).  I'm unsure whether to put them on the centreline or in sponsons on each side of the vehicle.  If its the latter, you'd need separate gunners for each gun and they'd be able to engage independently.  If it was the former, they'd be under the control of a single gunner and would be used in salvo fire on a single target.

Are you taking about using twin 6pdr AT guns or the existing twin 6pdr automatic coastal defence gun ?

[rickshaw]

I've toyed for several years with the idea of an M3 Grant armed with twin 6 Pdr's with autoloaders (a'la the original "Firefly" wheeled SPAT gun which the British developed).  I'm unsure whether to put them on the centreline or in sponsons on each side of the vehicle.  If its the latter, you'd need separate gunners for each gun and they'd be able to engage independently.  If it was the former, they'd be under the control of a single gunner and would be used in salvo fire on a single target.

Are you taking about using twin 6pdr AT guns or the existing twin 6pdr automatic coastal defence gun ?

The "Firefly" was a wheeled SPAT mounting the 6 Pdr AT gun with an automatic loader.



The twin 6 Pdr Harbour Defence Gun:



Mounted a different gun, with a shorter barrel, even if it was the same calibre.

[NARSES2]

I knew the coastal defence gun was a "different" gun which is why I asked. Apparently rate of fire was 120 rounds per minute. With that expenditure you would need to have the fixed emplacement to support it.

I was aware of the Firefly but didn't realise it had an auto-loader. Thanks for that bit of info might help with something else 

[Sauragnmon]

I still toy with the idea of an M3 carrying a 17pdr in that main gun mounting - I know it's in the "not bloody likely" category because of the length of the gun and the recoil, but still, it'd just look pure sadism.  That and you could put a 40mm or some 20mm's in the turret and use that for anti-infantry work.

[dy031101]

I still toy with the idea of an M3 carrying a 17pdr in that main gun mounting - I know it's in the "not bloody likely" category because of the length of the gun and the recoil, but still, it'd just look pure sadism.  That and you could put a 40mm or some 20mm's in the turret and use that for anti-infantry work.

I now think the US 76mm M1 gun might be more likely...... (although you can still scroll down further to see a mental note of a M3 with 17 pounder).

40mm might be too big for that secondary turret...... maybe a twin 20mm or .50 cal. MG?

[Joe C-P]

I've thought about replacing the 75mm of a Sherman with a pair of 37mm, though I can't quite explain why.

[Sauragnmon]

To my knowledge, the original Grant/Lee had a 2pdr in the turret, which is a ~40mm bore.  Twin 20's would be a rather rapid barrage.

Check out the Sherman Skink - that was a rather brutal design they had, with four 20's in the turret for AA purposes.

And yeah, I know, the US 76 probably would have been more likely, but hey, just the thought of a 17pdr on a M3 makes me grin a little.  The only Shermans I like are Fireflies, what can I say?  Well, and Skinks, and the Jumbo.

[dy031101]

To my knowledge, the original Grant/Lee had a 2pdr in the turret, which is a ~40mm bore.

Oh, you meant the 2 pounder...... yeah, I think that'll work.  I was under the impression that you meant the Bofors, which I think might be a rather large beast.

Twin 20's would be a rather rapid barrage.

Hehe, it probably would have made more sense on the Asian battlefield than it would in Europe.

The only Shermans I like are Fireflies, what can I say?  Well, and Skinks, and the Jumbo.

Jumbo Fireflies?  

Actually the 77mm HV might be easier to handle within a tank.

[Jeffry Fontaine]

How about the 17 pdr in a priest or sexton?

With HVSS suspension :^)

[Mike Wren]

How about the 17 pdr in a priest or sexton?

the Canadian proposed a 17 pdr Sexton in 1943, but it would have slowed 25 pdr production so never went further... shouldn't have been too difficult as the first 17 pdr towed weapons were mounted onto 25 pdr carriages as Pheasant interim AT guns.

See the very interesting book Secret Weapons of the Canadian Army published by Service Publications for more info.