The gun eventually mounted on the T24 was a derivative of the T13E1 lightweight 75mm gun used on the B-25H Mitchell medium bomber. Work on the T24’s 75mm gun took place at the Rock Island Arsenal in Illinois.
#M4 sherman commander copoula series
The T24 was powered by the same dual Cadillac Series 42 V-8 gasoline engines as the M5, but Cadillac installed an improved transmission on the T24. Designers also incorporated wider tracks on the T24 to reduce ground pressure and improve cross-country mobility. A new torsion bar suspension replaced the older vertical volute system found on the M5 and gave the new tank a better ride and a more stable gun platform. The T24 was equipped with a larger three-man turret (the M5 had a smaller two-man version) to mount a 75mm gun. Cadillac modified the design by sloping the armor, a move that increased protection but kept weight in check. To speed up development, Cadillac incorporated a hull design intended for a self-propelled artillery system. An officer from a tank battalion uses an M24 to familiarize riflemen of the 39th Infantry Regiment, 9th Infantry Division, with the new Chaffee light tank, 31 January 1945. A month later, on 29 April, the Army approved the T24’s design and assigned the Cadillac Motor Car Company (which also produced the M5) of General Motors the task of developing the tank. In March 1943, the Ordnance Department authorized development of a new light tank designated the T24. As a result, M5s would remain in tank and cavalry reconnaissance units until the Army could replace them with an improved light tank.Įarly experiments to simply mount a 75mm gun on an M5 chassis proved feasible, but the larger gun took up so much space within the tank and added such a significant amount of weight that machine guns and other features had to be eliminated, something the Armored Force was not willing to do. Nevertheless, the Army still believed light tanks could fulfill a valuable role, particularly reconnaissance missions, as long as they avoided direct confrontations with enemy armor. Not only was the M5 outclassed by German tanks and unable to defend itself against them, it was also vulnerable to antitank guns and field artillery. Over the course of development, the T7 was transformed from a light tank to a poorly performing medium tank, and only seven production vehicles were accepted by the Army before it was canceled in March 1943.Ĭombat experience in North Africa in 1942-43 proved that the Army’s light tanks, even the improved M5A1s, had little value on the battlefield, even in a scouting role. When the T7 was standardized later in the year, it was redesignated as the M7 medium tank. By August 1942, the T7’s weight had grown from fourteen tons to twenty-nine tons when combat loaded.
Armored Force requirements necessitated the addition of increasingly heavier firepower (first a 57mm weapon, then a 75mm main gun) and increasingly larger engines for better performance. Recognizing the M3 design was almost obsolete in 1941, the Army began work on a replacement light tank designated the T7 in February 1941. This photograph shows an M24 (left) with an M29 Weasel tracked vehicle during a demonstration at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, in 1944. Army began development of the M24 Chaffee light tank in March 1943 in an effort to replace the M5 Stuart. The result was the M24 Chaffee, which entered service in late 1944. In 1943, the Army began developing a new light tank to replace the Stuart. While it was a mechanically reliable vehicle, and fairly fast and maneuverable, the Stuart‘s design dated back to the 1930s, and it was all but obsolete by late 1942 as its thin armor, high silhouette, and light 37mm main gun made it a liability to its crew. Army relied on the M3/M5 Stuart series of light tanks for cavalry reconnaissance missions.
0 kommentar(er)
