American World War 2 Tanks That Need Adding to War Thunder

Toreno

In this 4th episode of my series looking at World War 2 Tanks That Need Adding to War Thunder, we take a look at American tanks of the World War 2 period!  So join me as we take a look at the many unique but flawed Marmon-Herrington designs, various variants of the M3 Lee and M4 Sherman that are still to be added, tanks that could have replaced the Sherman and some rather cool amphibious and flamethrower tanks!  Also just to confirm tank destroyers, SPG's, armoured cars and anti air vehicles will be looked at in a future episode!  Support me at ⬇️ ☕Buy me a Coffee➡️ buymeacoffee.com/Toreno  Social Media ⬇️ 🦋Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/toreno.bsky.social 🌍Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Toreno4 📸Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/toreno170 🐘Mastodon: Toreno17@mastodon.social 🧵Threads: https://www.threads.net/@toreno170  Tanks featured in this episode ⬇️ CTL-3 CTL-6 CTM-3TBD Christie M1932 “Flying Tank” T9 Light Tank M22 Locust M3 Stuart M5 Light Tank M24 Chaffee T24E1 M24 with SD.KFZ 8 halftrack suspension M24 with 28 inch Grousers M24 with 2 x 4.5 inch Beach Barrage "Old Faithful" rockets T24 with T122 machine gun mount CTMS-ITB1 MTLS-1GI42 M3 Medium "Lee" and "Grant" M3A1 Medium Tank M3A2 Medium Tank M3A3 Medium Tank M3A4 Medium Tank M3A5 Medium Tank T6 Medium Tank (M4 Sherman Prototype) M4 Medium Tank M4A5 M4A6 Medium Tank M4A1 (76M1) M4A1E6 M4A3E4 Sherman 17-Pounder Sherman T34 Calliope Sherman T40/M17 "Whizbang" T7 Light Tank T7E1 Light Tank T7E2 Light Tank T7E3 Light Tank T7E4 Light Tank T7E5 Light Tank M7 Medium Tank T20 T20E3 T22 T22E1 T23 T23E3 T23E4 T25 T25E1 T1E2/M6 Heavy Tank T26E2/M45 Medium Tank M3E4 T86 T86E1 T87 LVT(A)(4) with 75mm howitzer LVT(A)(1) with M24 Chaffee turret M24 with flotation device M4 Sherman with T6/M19 Flotation Device M18 GMC with T7 Flotation Device T88 GMC with T7 Flotation Device M3 Stuart with bow mounted flamethrower E9-9 Mechanized Flame Thrower Sherman with bow mounted flamethrower Sherman Crocodile T33 Flame Thrower tank T68  #warthunder #tanks #us #american #usa

Transcript

00:00:00Continuing my series on World War 2 tanks that need adding to War Thunder, we now move on to

00:00:05American World War 2 tanks, and you would think there aren't many American tank types left to add,

00:00:10but there are still a whole bunch of American variants to existing tanks like the Sherman,

00:00:15and even a few whole new tank types, with some of these being prototypes,

00:00:20but others were accepted into service and built in large numbers.

00:00:24So we'll start off with some of the American light tanks, or more specifically light tanks

00:00:29developed by the Marmon-Herrington Company, who built a large variety of different tank types in

00:00:35large numbers, like the CTLS-4T and CTLS-4TAC, the former being fitted with a left-mounted turret

00:00:43and the latter a right-mounted one, and 474 of these were built, primarily for the Dutch and Chinese,

00:00:50but when the latter rejected these tanks, 240 entered US service as the T-16, with many serving

00:00:57in Alaska until 1943. Unfortunately, the T-16s like most Marmon-Herrington tanks were only

00:01:04armed with small cannibal machine guns, so probably couldn't be added, but there were a few of their

00:01:09tanks that were armed with more substantial weapons, and these could be added, like the CTL-3,

00:01:15a tank derived from the CTL-1 that had been developed for Persia, and five CTL-3s would be bought by the

00:01:23Marine Corps in 1937. The CTL-3 was a very light two-man tank, coming in at just five tons, which

00:01:31was a desirable trait for the Marine Corps due to a weight limit for unloading tanks from ships and

00:01:37lighters. This meant the tank had very limited armour, coming in at a maximum of 12.7mm, and it

00:01:44was found in testing in 1938 that even .22 calibre rounds could cause bullet splash through the vision

00:01:50ports, so overall this was an extremely vulnerable tank. That said, it was also pretty speedy,

00:01:56capable of a top speed of 31 miles per hour or 55 kilometres an hour. Great for getting around the

00:02:02battlefield, but the armament is unfortunately a little bit on the light side, having one 50KL

00:02:08M2 Browning machine gun and two 30KL Colt machine guns mounted at the front. That said, the 50KL can

00:02:14penetrate up to 29mm of armour at 100m, and we do have the M2A2 in-game that also uses a Browning

00:02:2250KL machine gun as its primary weapon. And the CTL-3 would actually have an advantage in that its

00:02:2850KL covers the entire front side of the tank, while the M2A2's 50KL machine gun, despite being

00:02:34in a turret, only mostly covers the left side of the tank, with very limited traverse towards the right.

00:02:41Bearing that in mind, in-game this would of course be a 1.0 tank due to its low armour and a limited

00:02:46armament, but it could still see some minor successes in the early tiers, especially with its

00:02:52quick speed and fast firing albeit less powerful weapon. In real life the Marine Corps was not

00:02:57particularly happy with the CTL-3, seeing the design as too light and fragile for a fighting vehicle,

00:03:04and it was pointed out that the 5 tonne limit was far too restrictive compared with what the Navy

00:03:08could actually deal with, so the search was on for a new tank, but due to rapid rearmament brought

00:03:14about by the start of WWII, more CTL-3s and later CTL-6s would be bought, while the existing CTL-3s

00:03:21would be upgraded. Meanwhile, the search for a heavier tank led to the Marines buying yet another

00:03:27Marmon-Herrington design, the CTM-3TBD medium tank, which was essentially an upgraded CTL-3 with a new

00:03:35suspension system, but also now armed with two 50 calibre Browning machine guns fitted in a turret,

00:03:41improving the usefulness of this tank compared to the CTL-3, while three 30 cal Colt machine guns

00:03:47are mounted at the front of the hull. Yeah for some reason Marmon-Herrington tanks mostly used the

00:03:52Colt MG38B2 machine gun, which is based off of the Browning 1917, but the parts between the two are not

00:03:59interchangeable, so it just seems like a worse machine gun overall to be honest. Unfortunately,

00:04:05it still only has 12.7mm of armour and a two man crew, while the top speed should be slightly reduced

00:04:12due to the additional weight from the turret, but it should still be a pretty fast tank.

00:04:17Again, like the CTL-3, this could be a 1.0 tank, keeping most of the rather good top speed while

00:04:22having a much better turret mounted armament, and it would be nice for this rather unknown tank to be

00:04:27added to War Thunder. In real life, only 5 CTM-3TBDs would be built, and like with the other Marmon-Herrington

00:04:35tanks, it was not particularly well liked, only really being kept around due to a lack of anything

00:04:40else being available. Naturally, once the Marine Corps started to receive much better M2A4 and M3

00:04:46light tanks, these rapidly replaced the Marmon-Herrington vehicles, with the majority being stationed

00:04:52in Samoa in the Pacific, and these were scraps from 1943 onwards. So, the Marmon-Herrington tanks

00:04:59we've looked at so far haven't been particularly impressive, and their medium tanks that we will

00:05:04look at later were not very good either, but they did also produce a far more known light tank,

00:05:09the M22 Locust. Now this tank is already in game, but we could potentially get the initial prototype of

00:05:16this tank, the T9, which came about after a request by the British Purchasing Commission in 1941 for a

00:05:23tank that could be deployed by air. Initially, Walter Christie, who we have covered extensively in my

00:05:29American Interwar Tanks episode, was approached to present a design, which made sense as he had

00:05:35previously made the Christie M1932 flying tank, giving him a head start over other designers. So Christie went

00:05:43away and produced a pilot model, but this didn't meet requirements and would have required a

00:05:48specialised aircraft to be developed for transporting it, so this design was knocked out of the running,

00:05:53but could be added if required. At this point Marmon-Herrington were approached and produced their own

00:05:59design, with a wooden model made in 1941 and a proper pilot model in April 1942, known as the T9. Now in

00:06:08many respects the T9 is actually superior to the production version it would be developed into,

00:06:13as it features a powered traverse system for the turret, and the elevation whilst stabilised,

00:06:19allowing for more accurate shooting, especially when on the move, while an additional two 30k machine

00:06:24guns are fitted to the front of the hull, boosting firepower against soft skin vehicles. You can also see

00:06:31that the armour profile for the front is different, being more flat sided for the main superstructure,

00:06:36compared to the sloping of the M22 design, but to be honest with the armour maxing out at 25.4mm and

00:06:43usually being just 12.7mm thick, it's unlikely this will make a huge amount of difference.

00:06:50Other than that its stats should be about the same as the M22, having a 37mm gun and coaxial machine gun,

00:06:56a maximum of 25.4mm of armour for the turret and nose of the tank, a top speed of 35mph and a crew of 3,

00:07:04though the weight is increased, being over the 7.9 ton limit that was set for the project.

00:07:10In War Thunder I could see this being a cool premium tank at 2.0, having most of the advantages

00:07:15of the M22 while being able to target enemies quicker and more accurately due to its powered

00:07:20traverse and vertical stabiliser, and all in all I think this would make for a very fun tank in the

00:07:25early tiers. In real life, while the tank had many useful features, these made the tank overweight for

00:07:31its intended role as an airborne tank, so a new modified design was made, which was the T9E1,

00:07:37which would remove the powered traverse, vertical stabiliser and hull mounted machine guns in order

00:07:42to cut down on the weight, while the hull was also redesigned to improve protection, and it was in this

00:07:48form that it would go into production as the M22, though it would only see limited service towards

00:07:53the end of WW2, with the design by now obsolete. So ultimately Marmon Herrington's tanks, while seeing

00:07:59service with US troops and even seeing combat against the Japanese in the Dutch East Indies,

00:08:04were not particularly good designs and were generally replaced as soon as better tanks came along.

00:08:09Of course however there were more light tanks than what Marmon Herrington produced in the early part

00:08:13of the war, like the more well known M3 Stuart and M5 light tanks. But to be fair, Gaijin has done a

00:08:20very good job of adding their major variants in game, with all of the major variants of the M3 Stuart

00:08:25already in game, if not in the US tech tree. While the initial M5 does still need adding,

00:08:31but its only difference from the in game M5A1 is using the M3A1 turret, so it's not a huge priority

00:08:38for adding. That said, when it comes to the late war M24 Chaffee light tank, there are quite a few

00:08:44experimental models that could be added. Starting with the T24E1, which was the first M24 Chaffee pilot

00:08:51model converted to use the Continental R975 C4 radial engine from the M18 Hellcat and a Spicer

00:09:00automatic torque converter transmission. Now as this was based off the initial pilot model,

00:09:05there are a few minor changes to the tank itself, for example a commander's cupola wasn't included,

00:09:10and a muzzle brake is installed on the 75mm gun, and the engine compartment at the rear is also much

00:09:16larger to accommodate the new engine. So looking at mobility first, this is greatly improved over

00:09:22the regular M24, now having a top speed of 48mph or 77kmh, compared to 35mph or 56kmh for the M24.

00:09:32So this will now be a true speed demon, being able to get around maps almost as handily as the M18.

00:09:39The rest of the stats are pretty much the same as the regular M24, and I could see this being a great

00:09:44light tank at 4.0 or higher, giving the US tech tree a ridiculously fast light tank for scouting and

00:09:50flanking in tier 2, whilst still retaining the good 75mm gun and 5 man crew, though still being easy to

00:09:57take down due to its thin armour. In real life the T24E1 was tested at the Aberdeen Proving Ground from

00:10:04October 1944, and was found to be far more mobile than the existing M24, but unfortunately the new

00:10:10transmission was found to be rather unreliable. That said, they must have really seen the potential

00:10:16in this new design because they tested it until November 1945. But with the M24 itself halting

00:10:22production in August 1945, and the war having been over for quite a few months by this point,

00:10:27there was just no demand for a new light tank, and so the T24E1 project was ended. There would

00:10:33be other attempts at improving the mobility of the M24, for example one variant that was tested

00:10:38and incorporated the suspension from the German SDKFZ8 half track, though the turret wasn't installed

00:10:45for these tests. Ultimately the new suspension didn't show much of an improvement so no other

00:10:50tanks were converted, but it could make for an interesting event tank. It was also possible to fit

00:10:5528 inch grousers onto the M24 tracks to help lower the ground pressure, much like the German Ostketten

00:11:02tracks for the Panzer III and IV, and this could be introduced as a modification that could be

00:11:07installed on existing M24s if the player chooses to do so. There were also various attempts to improve

00:11:13the firepower of the M24, for example this M24 was fitted with two T45 launchers, which could launch

00:11:2020 navy 4.5 inch beach barrage or old faithful HE rockets, which had just under 3kg of TNT explosive

00:11:28filler. Compare that to the M8 rockets from the Calliope that have 1.9kg of explosive and a penetration

00:11:35of 24.4mm, and you could see that the old faithful rockets should perform a fair bit better. Aiming the

00:11:42rockets would require turning the entire turret as the launcher has no way of traversing horizontally,

00:11:47but elevation can be controlled, making aiming a bit easier. Overall I could see this being a premium

00:11:54or event tank at the M24s usual battle rating of 3.7, as the rockets, while interested in helping out on

00:12:00some occasions, are unlikely to make the tank much more lethal than the existing M24, but I would

00:12:06still like to see this rather unusual variant added in game. In real life only one tank was tested with

00:12:11these rockets for trials, and presumably wasn't considered successful enough to consider modifying

00:12:16any more. There was also another attempt to improve the machine gun firepower of the M24, this time by

00:12:22fitting the T122 twin machine gun mount in place of the usual commander's cupola. The T122 mount was

00:12:29fitted with two 50k browning machine guns, though 30k machine guns could also be fitted, doubling the

00:12:34available firepower from the machine guns to use against enemy aircraft or soft skin vehicles. While

00:12:40the ability to traverse 360 degrees is a massive improvement over the current roof mounted 50k machine

00:12:46gun, which has limited traverse and relies mainly on the turret turning to engage fast moving enemy

00:12:51aircraft. The mount itself has 12.7mm of armour, which isn't very good, and of course the size of the T122

00:12:58mount does make the tank a far more obvious target, which isn't great for a light tank that relies on

00:13:04not being spotted. I could see this being either a modification available for existing M24 tanks,

00:13:10or as a separate variant folded with it, and this would open up quite a few options when used in game,

00:13:16for example if a player is unsure on whether to spawn in an anti-air vehicle, they can use this

00:13:20variant and have the ability to take down enemy aircraft and enemy tanks, though of course it won't be

00:13:26suited to the former role as well as a dedicated anti-air vehicle, but regardless this would be

00:13:31a fun tank to have in game. In real life the T122 was mounted in July 1947 and tested until June 1948,

00:13:40and while it wasn't adopted, it was recommended to develop an improved machine gun mount with 360

00:13:45degree coverage, so it must have at least proved the concept was worth pursuing.

00:13:50So now that we've looked at the light tanks we can move on to looking at American medium tanks,

00:13:56and again I will start off by looking at some Marman Herrington designs with some rather interesting

00:14:01features, these being the CTMS ITB1 and the MTLS 1GI4, which long time viewers of the channel may

00:14:09remember from my episode on Dutch tanks, as the Netherlands were the ones who originally ordered

00:14:14them for use in the Dutch East Indies. However, these never made it to the Dutch East Indies due

00:14:20to the Japanese invasion, so the US took possession of these tanks, and decided to test them to see if

00:14:25they wanted to put them into service themselves. We'll start off by looking at the CTMS or Combat

00:14:32Tank medium series, of which 194 were built, and this tank is rather unusual in that it is primarily armed

00:14:39with a 37mm autocannon that was designed by the American Arms Corporation, though tests from the

00:14:45Aberdeen Proving Ground describe this as a semi-automatic gun. Unfortunately, I haven't found

00:14:51much information on this weapon, other than the fact it fired from 5 round clips, had a muzzle velocity

00:14:57of around 610m a second, and maybe could penetrate 25mm of hardened steel, though I'm unsure at what

00:15:04distance or angle this was referring to. That said, it should be a faster firing tank than most of its

00:15:10contemporaries, as well as being quick to reload as it uses 5 round clips, making this a rather deadly

00:15:16tank. It also had a coaxial 30 calibre Colt machine gun, while another 3 could be mounted at the front of

00:15:22the hull, giving some good defence against soft skin vehicles. The armour is again 12.7mm thick, so not

00:15:29particularly great, while the top speed for the 12 ton tank is now 25mph or 40km an hour. Still decent,

00:15:36but far worse than the CTL-3 tanks we looked at earlier, while a crew of 3 was carried, again making this

00:15:42tank rather vulnerable to crew losses. I could see this tank working at 1.0, having a rather interesting

00:15:48main armament and a decent speed, though it will be vulnerable if it gets into straight up fights with

00:15:54other tanks. In real life, 61 of the CTMS tanks would be sent to other nations, namely 3 Dutch forces

00:16:01in Dutch Guiana, as well as Ecuador, Cuba and Guatemala, with the remaining 133 staying in the

00:16:08United States, while testing was carried out at the Aberdeen Proving Grounds. These tests didn't go

00:16:14particularly well, as these tanks were not adopted by the US and the entire remaining stock of tanks were

00:16:20scrapped, though the one tested at Aberdeen was still around until at least 1946, before it too was

00:16:26presumably scrapped. This then brings us to the MTLS, of which 125 were built, which was also tested at

00:16:34the Aberdeen Proving Grounds. The Chieftain made a rather interesting video about this tank named

00:16:39The Worst Tank You Never Heard Of, which is a rather good indicator on how these tests went and of the

00:16:45tank's overall design, but of course most of the things that happened in the tests, like the inability

00:16:50to get the gun working properly, wouldn't occur in War Thunder, so we can still cover it and it could

00:16:55still be added. First of all, you might notice the MTLS is a rather rare example of a double-barrelled

00:17:01tank, with two 37mm AAC autocannons being fitted, essentially doubling the firepower of the tank,

00:17:09or alternatively allowing for one gun to be used against a target, and then switching to the other

00:17:14gun while the first is reloading, allowing for a constant stream of fire. The secondary armament is also

00:17:19pretty good, with a grand total of 7 30 cal Colt machine guns, one in a coaxial position, pintle

00:17:26mounts for two more at the rear of the turret, one in a ball mount on the right side of the turret,

00:17:31two mounted in fixed positions in the hull front, and the last in a ball mount at the hull front.

00:17:37Giving this tank a rather ridiculous amount of firepower against soft skin vehicles and enemy

00:17:42aircraft. Armour has also been improved, now maxing out at 38mm, so it's no longer at risk from

00:17:49machine gun fire and even protected against some small calibre tank guns, though the armour is riveted

00:17:55which would be an issue in real life. The crew has also now been increased, with four now being

00:18:00carried, making the tank less vulnerable to crew losses, while the top speed is 25mph or 40kmh, which

00:18:07isn't too bad for a 20 ton tank, though the suspension was based on the CTL tanks that weighed less than 10

00:18:13tons, which you have to imagine had a rather undesirable effect on the vehicle's manoeuvrability.

00:18:19I could see this tank working at 1.0, maybe 1.3, depending on how effective its main guns are,

00:18:25as it now has improved armour, a decent main armament and more crew, and while not the best tank in the

00:18:31world, it would do decently well in game, and it would be nice to see this rather unusual tank in War Thunder.

00:18:37In real life, the MTLS would be rejected after testing at Aberdeen Proving Ground, the reports saying that the tank

00:18:43was, quote, thoroughly unreliable, mechanically and structurally unsound, underpowered and equipped

00:18:49with unsatisfactory armament, and then goes on to say, quote, not a satisfactory combat vehicle for

00:18:54any branch of the armed forces, end quote. Bear in mind, this came at a time when the US now had

00:18:59Sherman's and M5 light tanks in service, which were infinitely more useful than the MTLS or CTMS.

00:19:06That said, some MTLS tanks would be sent to Dutch Guiana in South America,

00:19:12but a lack of troops meant not all of the tanks could be operated, so in 1946 they were sent to

00:19:18storage, and when taken out of storage just a year late in 1947, were found in such a bad state that

00:19:24only some could be reactivated, and most would break down or be scrapped over the next 10 years,

00:19:29never seeing any combat service. So, the Moran Herrington medium tanks were a complete and utter

00:19:36failure, at least in US service, but the US Army had access to far better designs that were used in

00:19:42large numbers, like the M3 Lee and M4 Sherman, and both of these tanks have variants that need adding.

00:19:49Starting with the M3 medium, but also known by the British designations of M3 Lee and M3 Grant,

00:19:56we only have one variant in game, that being the initial production M3 medium with riveted armor,

00:20:03but there are quite a few variants that still need adding, starting with the M3 A1 with the main

00:20:08difference being that this uses cast as opposed to riveted armor, giving it a smoother appearance,

00:20:14while the left side of the hull is noticeably different compared to the riveted model.

00:20:18This could potentially be an upgrade or a downgrade, as the more sloped armor might

00:20:22potentially deflect more shots than the armor of the original M3, but in game cast armor has a

00:20:28negative modifier, so for the regular M3s, the thickest armor plate of 50.8mm is riveted RHA

00:20:36armor plate, which gives a 1.0 multiplier, meaning it gives the full 50.8mm of protection,

00:20:42while the M3 A1's cast armor has a 0.94 multiplier, meaning that the same cast armor thickness only

00:20:49provides 47.7mm of protection, not a huge difference but it is there nonetheless. It should also be

00:20:56noted that 28 M3 A1's were fitted with diesel engines, which gave better performance compared

00:21:02to the usual petrol engines and could also be added if needed. With the rest of the stats remaining the

00:21:07same, I could see the M3 A1 being added at 2.7, probably folded with the M3 Lee, with its place in game

00:21:15really depending on how much difference the cast armor makes, while potentially the diesel engine

00:21:20variant could also be added, which would make up for any difference in the armor, and it would be

00:21:24nice for this unusual looking M3 variant to be added in game. In real life only 300 M3 A1s were made,

00:21:31out of 6258, so it was a relatively uncommon variant, and in the subsequent M3 A2 it was decided

00:21:39to revert to the more angular hull, though this time welding was used for the armor, which in real life

00:21:44is better than riveted armor, but in game doesn't really have any effect, so it wouldn't add much

00:21:49if added in game, and in real life only 12 M3 A2s were built, so this seems to have been more of a

00:21:54test bed for welded armor more than anything else. Presumably the M3 A2's welded armor was considered

00:22:00fairly successful however, as it was used again in the M3 A3, but the far bigger difference in this

00:22:06tank was the use of a GM 6046 diesel engine, with previous M3s mostly using petrol engines, and this new

00:22:13diesel engine as well as reducing the risk of fire was also a bit more powerful, giving an improved

00:22:19top speed of 30mph or 48kmh, compared to the initial M3s 24mph or 39kmh, making the M3 A3 a more mobile

00:22:29tank and a better choice for getting around the battlefield, and again this could be folded with

00:22:33the regular M3 medium tank, or perhaps just after it on the tech tree. We then come to the M3 A4,

00:22:40again another unusual looking M3 variant, with the hull being stretched to incorporate a new

00:22:46Chrysler A57 multibank engine, which is essentially 5 6-cylinder L-head car engines, and this turned

00:22:53out to be pretty powerful, producing 470hp, bearing in mind the original engine only did 400hp, and a

00:23:01lot more torque was also produced, compared to the previous engines, about 1060ft vs 890 for the previous M3s,

00:23:10again making this a rather powerful tank indeed mobility wise, though the top speed seems to have

00:23:15remained 24mph or 39kmh. Again this could be folded with the M3 or added as its own separate vehicle,

00:23:23being a bit more capable at getting across obstacles and difficult terrain, and again it would give us

00:23:28another unusual looking M3 medium tank for those playing the US tech tree. Ultimately only 109 of the

00:23:35M3 A4 would be built, with these remaining in the US for training purposes, though the Chrysler A57

00:23:42multibank engine would go on to be used on the M4 A4 Sherman, which would be built in larger numbers.

00:23:48Lastly for the M3 medium variants, we have the M3 A5, which is essentially just the M3 A3 but with a

00:23:55riveted instead of welded hull, and again I could see this being folded with the M3, or added as a premium or

00:24:01offense tank, as in game it would have virtually no difference to the M3 A3, as the disadvantages of

00:24:06riveted armour are not really replicated in game. So as we can see there are still quite a few M3

00:24:13medium variants that need add in, but these often weren't made in large numbers, which makes sense

00:24:18as the tank was intended more as a stop gap until the next tank would be ready, which of course would

00:24:23be the M4 Sherman, a tank that was produced in great numbers and gives us a bewildering number

00:24:28of different variants and experimental models to look at. However, we will start off by looking at

00:24:34its initial prototype form, designated the medium tank T6, which began development in February 1941,

00:24:41once design work was finished on the M3 medium, with a wooden mockup being produced later in the year.

00:24:48Interestingly this mockup seems to have been used to test some ideas, for example at one point they

00:24:52tested a larger turret with a 75mm gun and coaxial 37mm gun, more reminiscent to the M3 medium tank,

00:25:00though obviously this idea was dropped. However when looking at the pilot model of the T6 that was

00:25:05completed on 2nd September 1941, we do see that some other features from the M3 were kept,

00:25:11for example the commander's cupola was fitted with a machine gun, and two 30 cam machine guns are fixed

00:25:17in place on the frontal hull, alongside the usual ball mount and coaxial machine gun as found on

00:25:22regular Shermans. It also retains the shorter M2 length 31 75mm gun, instead of the M3 length 40 75mm

00:25:32gun as fitted to the regular Sherman, with the M2 having a reduced penetration of 87mm at 500m and a

00:25:40muscle velocity of 588m a second, versus 93mm at 500m for the M3 and a muscle velocity of 618m a second,

00:25:50making the M2 a marginally worse performing gun. You can also see other minor additions that would

00:25:55later be changed on the production Shermans, such as the antenna being mounted on the hull front,

00:26:01which could be hit and entangled with the main gun, and these grab handles fitted on the side of the

00:26:06tank. Beyond this it was still to have 5 crew, a top speed of 24mph of 38kmh, and a maximum armour

00:26:14thickness of 76mm, which in the initial pilot model was cast armour, but a second prototype was built

00:26:21shortly after with rolled homogenous armour plate, though there aren't any photos of this prototype.

00:26:27In theory we could get the cast and welded armour versions, with one being as an event vehicle,

00:26:32and the other hopefully being added as a regular vehicle, perhaps between the M3 Lee and M4 Sherman at

00:26:393.0, and it would be nice to have this initial prototype added to the game to showcase how

00:26:44American tank design changed from the M3 to the M4 Sherman. In real life the welded and cast armour

00:26:51versions would be adopted as the M4 and M4A1 respectively, while the T6 prototype would stick

00:26:58around until at least 1947, last seen being used to attest additional armour for the differential housing,

00:27:05though it seems likely it was scrapped some time after this. So the Sherman would of course go on

00:27:10to be adopted with multiple variants, with most of these being included in War Thunder, if not

00:27:16necessarily in the American tech tree. So the M4, M4A1, M4A2 and M4A3 are all in game and in the

00:27:23American tech tree, while the M4A4 is in game but not in the American tech tree, which kind of makes sense

00:27:30as the Americans didn't really use this variant themselves, mostly giving it over to other nations.

00:27:35But it's odd that France and China get it while Britain doesn't, as Britain received 7167 of the

00:27:437499 produced, or just over 95%, while France and China used it in far lower numbers. So when it comes

00:27:52to major Sherman variants that leaves just the M4A5 and M4A6, except the M4A5 is just the designation for

00:28:00the Canadian ram tank, so really we just have the M4A6 to look at for major variants. And this is

00:28:06actually a composite Sherman, with the front of the hole being cast, and joined to an enlarged

00:28:12welded hole from the M4A4, which was needed to incorporate the new RD1820 air-cooled engine,

00:28:20which could run on a variety of fuels from diesel to lower octane petrol, and produces 450 horsepower,

00:28:26which gives it a top speed of 30mph at 48kmh, which would make this the fastest Sherman variant

00:28:33in game, just beating out the M4A2's 29.2mph. Unfortunately, only the 75mm gun is available

00:28:41for this tank, which is a bit of a shame, but this would make a good tank at 4.0, either folded with

00:28:47the other 75mm Shermans, or as an event tank, giving us a slightly faster Sherman tank, and would

00:28:54allow us to experience the last major Sherman variant that's still to be added in War Thunder.

00:28:59Despite the better performance and fuel economy from the new engine, only 75 M4A6s would be produced,

00:29:06with the M4A3 and its fold engine being the preferred tank for US Army service.

00:29:12So that is all of the major variants of the Sherman, but of course there are a whole bunch of sub-variants

00:29:17that still need adding. For example the M4105, which is the initial M4 Sherman but with a 105mm

00:29:24howitzer, which could be folded with the M4A3 105, and of course the initial version of the M4A3,

00:29:31which was armed with the 75mm gun in either dry or wet storage variants, and could also be fitted with

00:29:37the BVS suspension, and this would round out the 75mm armed Shermans. Of course outside of the regular

00:29:45variants and sub-variants, there were also a lot of attempts at up-gunning or generally improving

00:29:50the Sherman tank. Which leads us to the M4A1 76M1, which was an attempt to fit the new T1 76mm gun into

00:29:59the turret of the 75mm armed M4A1. Now this new 76mm gun was based on the M7 3-inch gun from

00:30:07the M10, and this was intended to have the same performance, while being lighter yet having a

00:30:13longer barrel of 57 calibres or 4.34 metres in length. Now things get a bit interesting here

00:30:19because the gun was installed in an M4A1, but had to be cut down to 4 metres due to the barrel drooping,

00:30:26though it still retained the same performance as the M7 3-inch gun. However the initial longer barrel

00:30:32version could still be included in War Thunder, as the barrel drooping is unlikely to be represented

00:30:37in game, meaning the longer barrel might give a slightly better performance against enemy armour,

00:30:43giving us a rather powerful version of the Sherman. While the version with the cut down barrel could

00:30:47also be added, with both versions having longer reload times due to the guns not leaving much

00:30:52space in the turret. So the shorter barrel version could be added at 4.7-5.0, while the longer

00:30:58barrel version could be added at 5.0, and it could be used in a more tank destroyer like role.

00:31:04In real life 12 of these tanks would be built and 1000 ordered due to seeming to be a successful

00:31:09design, but these plans were overturned when the armoured force turned out to be less enthusiastic

00:31:14about the design, citing the lack of space in the turret due to the size of the new guns, meaning tankers

00:31:20would have to wait for the larger T-23 turret to be developed and fitted to the Sherman before they

00:31:25could get the more powerful gun. Oddly enough there would be renewed attempts at fitting the 76mm gun

00:31:31into 75mm turrets after the war, mainly by various allied armies, but also by the United States itself,

00:31:38mainly with an eye on keeping the more up to date Shermans and components for themselves,

00:31:43while still supplying friendly nations with decent tanks, leading to the M4A1E6 and M4A3E4. The M4A1E6

00:31:52would be given the 76mm gun in the original 75mm armed turret, with these sometimes fitted with

00:31:59muzzle brakes, and these tanks would often receive an upgraded VVS suspension from the M4A1E9, which

00:32:06might help mobility a little bit. Meanwhile the M4A3E4 had a similar upgrade, but without the improved

00:32:12suspension or muzzle brake, though they were still modified to receive the muzzle brakes if needed,

00:32:18helping to visually identify this variant over the E6. Meanwhile the radio was also relocated to

00:32:24free up room in the turret, which might help with the reload rate. I could see these tanks being added

00:32:30as event tanks or in the US tech tree at 5.0 to 5.3, depending on the variant, and while not the

00:32:36greatest tank in the world, it would be nice to see these upgraded Shermans in game. In real life these

00:32:42weren't really used by the US Army, but were instead sent to friendly nations, or nations that the US

00:32:48wanted to build ties with, like Denmark, India, Pakistan, Portugal and Yugoslavia, helping these

00:32:54nations to build up their tank forces in the immediate aftermath of the war. Of course, as it

00:32:59turns out, once a larger turret was installed, it became far easier to install the 76mm gun on the

00:33:05Sherman tank. But even with this boost in firepower, American tank crews still often found themselves

00:33:11unable to take out more heavily armoured German tanks like the Panther or Tiger, which led to calls for

00:33:17yet a more powerful weapon. A weapon that could be at least as powerful as the British 17-pounder,

00:33:23which of course by now had been mounted in British Sherman tanks, becoming the Firefly.

00:33:28The 90mm gun was being developed by this point, but something needed to be done in the short term.

00:33:34At first this was a request from General Omar Bradley for Fireflies to be provided until better

00:33:40guns could be delivered, but between equipping its own forces and allied forces, Britain didn't have

00:33:46any to spare. With Britain unable to supply tanks, it was simply decided that American tanks would be

00:33:51converted by Britain instead, which after much delay began in March 1945, with the new tanks being known

00:33:58in American service as the Sherman 17-pounder, with M4s and M4A3s being used for the conversion work.

00:34:06Weirdly enough, only the Shermans with the original turrets for the 75mm gun were converted,

00:34:12as although larger, the T23 turret needed extensive modifications to fit the 17-pounder.

00:34:18Ultimately, 100 tanks would be converted, and roughly 80 or so tanks would be delivered,

00:34:23with most of these being M4A3s, though overall numbers converted do differ from source to source.

00:34:30In-game, 17-pounder armed Shermans would be an interesting addition to the US tech tree,

00:34:34as the 17-pounder had a better penetration compared to the 76mm gun, with its APCBC shell being capable

00:34:42of penetrating 172mm of armour at 500m versus 131mm for the M62 shell for the 76mm gun, though of course

00:34:52British shells are solid shot, while the M62 has an explosive filler, causing much more damage after

00:34:59penetration. That said, the Sherman 17-pounders could work in-game at 4.7 like the British Fireflies,

00:35:06bridging the gap between the M4A2 and M4A176W, and it would be cool for American players to have a

00:35:13chance of using these unique tanks. In real life, on the 8th of April 1945, after the first 80 or so

00:35:20converted tanks were received by the US, the order for conversions were cancelled. As the M26 Persian,

00:35:26with its 19mm gun, was now entering service, and the remaining 20 or so tanks were given to Britain.

00:35:33As for the tanks received by the US Army, it's possible that they might have been used on the

00:35:38Italian front, where it's known that some fireflies were used by American forces, though in this case

00:35:43it seems they were taken from local British troops, so they might not actually have been sent here from

00:35:48US Army stocks, and ultimately it seems like the Sherman 17-pounders were either scrapped or

00:35:53reconverted back to their original states, or given the T-23 turret and 76mm gun,

00:35:59thus ending the tale of these little known tanks. Before we leave the Sherman however,

00:36:04there were also many variants where the tank itself was unchanged, but additional weaponry was installed,

00:36:10usually rocket launchers, which were fitted atop the tank, the most famous of these being the T-34

00:36:16Kaliopi with its 60 114mm M8 rockets. However, there were other rocket launchers tested on the M4

00:36:24Sherman, such as the T-40 slash M17 Wisbang, which is capable of firing 20 7.2-inch rockets,

00:36:32up to 200m at an elevation of minus 2 to plus 25 degrees. Now you might be wondering how is this any

00:36:38different to the Kaliopi, surely they play fairly similarly, where the Kaliopi's rockets, despite

00:36:44weighing 17.2kg, have a payload of just 1.95kg of explosives, giving a maximum penetration of 24.4mm.

00:36:54The Wisbang's rockets on the other hand are the T-37 demolition rocket, which was derived from the

00:36:59naval mousetrap anti-submarine rocket, so naturally these rockets were much larger, at 27.6kg, and carried

00:37:0814.5kg of plastic explosive. So to put that in context, the KV-2's HE shell has 5.82kg of

00:37:17explosive, or less than half that of the Wisbang, while the German Brumbar's 150mm HE shells only

00:37:24have 8.6kg of explosives. In fact, there seem to be very few vehicles with comparable shells or rockets,

00:37:31with some of these being the Sturmtiger or Russian RBT-5, the latter of whose rockets have 130kg

00:37:38of explosive, but it only carries 2 of them versus 24 the Wisbang. Of course with such large rockets

00:37:44there are some downsides, for example the launcher makes for a rather obvious target, though it is

00:37:49fitted with 12.7mm of armour, so shell splinters and light machine guns won't set off the rockets,

00:37:56and the range of the rockets themselves is only 200m or so, while their velocity is just under 50m a

00:38:02second, making these inaccurate for long range shooting, but in close range engagements they

00:38:07would be absolutely lethal, with all of the rockets being capable of being fired in just under 10

00:38:12seconds, if stuck in a dire situation. Of course I can't say exactly what the penetration of these

00:38:17rockets would be, but I would suspect it would be in the 50 plus millimetres range, making these rather

00:38:24effective against enemy tanks. As for its place in War Thunder, I would think a battle rating of 4.7 or

00:38:30higher would be a good place for the Wisbang, as you still have all the other excellent

00:38:34characteristics of the Sherman, plus the 75mm gun, but now with devastating rockets that would

00:38:40quickly turn the tide in close range engagements, and it would be nice for this deadly cousin of the

00:38:45Calliope to be included in War Thunder. In real life, while the Wisbang was intended to be used in

00:38:51the Normandy invasion, it ultimately was not ready in time and had very limited use in Europe.

00:38:57The marines would also test the Wisbang with an eye on using it in the Pacific,

00:39:01but this ultimately didn't pan out. So that is most of the Sherman variants that need adding to

00:39:07War Thunder, but there are of course other medium tanks that were being developed during WW2,

00:39:13some as potential successors and some that sort of accidentally came into the medium tank scene,

00:39:19and some of these were just prototypes, and others were built in very large numbers and were even

00:39:23accepted into service, which allows them to be added into War Thunder. For these alternative medium

00:39:30tank designs, we will start off by looking at the M7 medium tank. Now the M7 medium was originally

00:39:36proposed in January 1941, not as a medium tank, but as the T7 light tank, and two pilot models were

00:39:44ordered. The T7 with a welded hull, and the T7 E1 with a riveted hull, and a proposed weight of 14 tons.

00:39:52By July 1941, a wooden mock up was ready, and more pilot models were ordered, these being the T7 E2,

00:39:59E3 and E4, while the weight had now been increased to 16 tons. The T7 would be finished in January 1942,

00:40:07with a welded hull and cast turret, and a Continental W670 radial engine, while the T7 E1 would only get

00:40:15its hull assembled, as riveted armour was by now clearly inferior to cast or welded armour. The T7 E2

00:40:22would be finished with a cast upper hull and turret, and was fitted with a high power Wright Whirlwind

00:40:28R975 EC2 engine, and was also given a more powerful gun, as instead of the 37mm gun as planned in the previous

00:40:36tanks, it was to be armed with the British 57mm 6-pounder Mk3, which can penetrate 101mm of armour

00:40:45at 500m with its APC-BC shell, versus 73mm for the 37mm gun. So this is quite a good improvement,

00:40:54but all these changes meant that the tank now weighed in at 26 tons, so it could hardly count

00:40:59as a light tank by this point. However, despite the good performance of the tank and its gun,

00:41:04Armoured Force rejected the use of the 6-pounder, preferring instead the American 75mm gun,

00:41:11which only penetrates 93mm at 500m with the M61 shell, but that shell has an explosive filler

00:41:17and superior HE shell to compensate. The 75mm gun would subsequently be installed in the T7 E2,

00:41:24which would now be designated the T7 E5. So looking at the T7 E5, it has the 75mm gun,

00:41:31and three 7.62mm Browning machine guns, these being placed in the bale, coaxial and roof position,

00:41:38giving good all round fire, though it is surprising that a Browning 50 cal wasn't fitted on the roof,

00:41:44but this could be a holdover from its intended light tank role. Meanwhile, the Armour Max is out

00:41:49at 38mm for the hull and 64mm for the turret, and while this is decently sloped, it is worse than tanks

00:41:56like the Sherman, which wasn't a problem when it was filling the light tank role, but by the time it

00:42:01reached 26 tons, it was now more of a medium tank, though it does have a faster top speed than the

00:42:07Sherman at 30mph or 48kmh, and has a crew of 5. As for the other pilot models, the T7 E3 would have

00:42:16a welded hull and turret, and would be fitted with an automatic transmission and twin Hercules diesel

00:42:21engines, while the T7 E4 would also be fully welded, and have two hydromatic transmissions and twin

00:42:28Cadillac engines. As you can see, when it comes to adding the M7 medium tank to War Thunder, we have

00:42:33quite a few options, as we have the various pilot models with their different armaments, armour and

00:42:39engines that could all be added, probably as event tanks, while the production version of the M7 could

00:42:44be added to the regular tech tree, probably at 3.0 between the M3 Lee and M4A1, bridging the gap between

00:42:52these two iconic tanks, and giving American players a faster medium tank than usual, and it would be

00:42:58nice for this often forgotten American medium tank to get some recognition in game. In real life the T7 E5

00:43:04was accepted into service, but as the weight was now 26 tons, or even 28 to 29 tons when fully loaded,

00:43:11only a tonne or two less than the Sherman, it would be standardised as the M7 medium tank,

00:43:17and was now set for production. Indeed, an entirely new tank plant was constructed in Bettendorf,

00:43:23Iowa, where the M7 was to be put into production by the International Harvester Corporation,

00:43:29and as you can see in the pictures, this was a very large factory, with quite a few M7 tanks in various

00:43:35stages of construction, showing just how seriously efforts were being made for getting this tank ready

00:43:40for mass service. Of course you might be wondering why so much effort was being put into a tank,

00:43:45that on the face of it was at best equivalent to the Sherman, which was already in mass production,

00:43:50and in many ways was actively worse, all while bringing virtually nothing new to the table,

00:43:56while also complicating logistics and adding a need to retrain existing cruiser mechanics to operate the

00:44:02new tanks. Well as it turns out, Armoured Force also quickly realised the M7 just wasn't good enough,

00:44:08compared to the Sherman, and they preferred to stick to that tank. So on the 20th of January 1944,

00:44:14with only 13 tanks being produced in total, but with far more under construction, the M7 medium would

00:44:20be declared obsolete, meaning the US Army would have to stick with the M5 light tank until the introduction

00:44:26of the M24 Chaffee, and a new medium tank would have to wait until near the end of the war.

00:44:31So the M7 medium tank was overall a failure, being too big for a light tank, but not being better than

00:44:39the Sherman as a medium tank, but given its originally intended role as a light tank it was never supposed

00:44:44to replace the Sherman. However once the Sherman was in full scout production, some efforts were put

00:44:50into developing various prototypes, these being the T20, T22 and T23, as well as various subvariants of

00:44:57these tanks, and this was in order to test various new components and design features that hadn't been

00:45:02available when designing the Sherman, but also with an idea that one of these could potentially become

00:45:07a successor to the Sherman. So most of these tanks are quite similar to each other, at least with regards

00:45:12to the hull, differing mainly in engines, transmission and occasionally the armament. So a bit like the

00:45:19Cavalier Centaur and Cromwell that we looked at in my episode looking at British WW2 tanks.

00:45:25So we'll start off by looking at the Fisher built T20, or more specifically the T20E3, as the T20 itself

00:45:33is already in game, while the T20E1, which was to be fitted with a 75mm gun with an autoloader,

00:45:39doesn't seem to have been completed, and the T20E2, which was intended to be fitted with a torsion bar

00:45:46suspension and 3 inch gun, in case the development of the M1 76mm gun was delayed, was also cancelled,

00:45:52as the 76mm gun wasn't delayed. At this point however the torsion bar suspension system was

00:45:58incorporated into the T20E3, which was armed with the 76mm gun, and is otherwise mostly identical to

00:46:05the initial T20, with the new suspension being superior to the VVS suspension as used on Sherman

00:46:12tanks, but it still had a high ground pressure due to the tracks being the same width as those on the

00:46:17Sherman. So as it was built and tested, we could get the T20E3 with its new suspension, probably at

00:46:236.0, which honestly I think the T20 could also be reduced to, as while its suspension is better than

00:46:29the Sherman, so is the T20's HVS suspension, while the other stats are more or less the same, but

00:46:35either way, giving American players an extra tank to choose from can only be a good thing and it would

00:46:40be nice for this testbed to have some success in War Thunder. In real life the T20 and T20E3 would

00:46:47not be chosen for further development due to various automotive issues, particularly around the torquematic

00:46:54transmission, which was derived from a transmission designed for lighter tanks, but the experience

00:46:59gained from using the torsion bar suspension system probably came in handy when designing the

00:47:05M24 Chaffee and M26 Pershing, as both these tanks used this suspension. So we can now move on to the

00:47:13second prototype series, the T22, which as mentioned was basically the same as the T20, at least with

00:47:20regards to the hull, but was built by Chrysler, and due to issues with the torquematic transmission,

00:47:26this reverted to the transmission from the M4 Sherman, which was at least available in great

00:47:31numbers and was proving to be reliable, though these factors wouldn't make much difference in game.

00:47:37However, when the T22 suffered a complete engine failure in testing, it would be rebuilt and

00:47:43re-designated as the T22E1, and in this new guise it was fitted with the auto-loading

00:47:4975mm gun that had been intended for the T20E1. So you might be wondering, how much of a difference

00:47:56does an auto-loader on a WW2 tank make? Well, first of all, this new auto-loader allowed for

00:48:02the removal of the loader, which does technically make the tank more vulnerable to being destroyed

00:48:07via crew losses, but they have now been replaced by an auto-loader fed from two 32 round magazines,

00:48:13one with AP shells and one with HE shells, though in game it's likely we could change this up,

00:48:18and this gun was capable of firing 20 rounds a minute, or a round every 3 seconds,

00:48:25making this a ridiculously powerful weapon if only through sheer weight of fire. I mean,

00:48:30if you encounter a superior tank, you could easily destroy their barrel and then detract them

00:48:36before they have time to even realise what's happening. Aside from the loss of the loader,

00:48:40the new 75mm gun and new transmission, the rest of the stats should be broadly the same as the T20,

00:48:47and I could see the T22E1 being a good defence or premium tank, and to be honest it's going to have

00:48:52to be 5.3 at the very lowest I think, as this weapon, while lacking in punch in the higher tiers,

00:48:58will be one of the fastest firing weapons at tier 3, giving this a unique edge over most enemies,

00:49:04while the loss of a crew member will make this tank slightly more vulnerable in battle,

00:49:09though its armour and decent speed should do it in good stead in battle. Again, like with the T20,

00:49:14there were various mechanical problems with the new design, with the T22 having its engine completely

00:49:20fail, and the T22E1's new autoloader, while giving a good performance when it worked, proved to be

00:49:27very unreliable, and the 75mm gun was itself becoming obsolete, leading to the project's

00:49:33cancellation. However, there was one last concurrent design, the T23, again built by Chrysler and based

00:49:41of the T22, though this time using a general electric, electric transmission, something that

00:49:48is usually associated with German tank designs, allowing for the same top speed in forward and

00:49:53reverse, and two pilots were ordered with 76mm guns, and these were actually finished before the T20 and

00:50:00T22, with the first pilot model fitted with a welded turret, and the second with a cast turret.

00:50:06During testing, the T23 proved to be the best of these prototype tanks, with the second pilot tank

00:50:12beating the M4A3 and M7 medium tanks in uphill climbs, while the first managed to travel more

00:50:18than 2000 miles with no major issues. Pleased with these results, 250 T23s would be ordered,

00:50:25with these to be fitted with a cast turret combining the best features from both the welded and cast turret

00:50:30versions, and the upper frontal plate was increased to 76mm thick, but it retained the VVS suspension

00:50:38from the Sherman, and had a top speed of 35mph or 56kmh with a 5 man crew. I think this would make a

00:50:46good 6.3 tank in War Thunder, as it has thicker hull armour than the T20, while its electric drive will

00:50:53make it far more effective at escaping ambushes and peeking round corners to take snapshots, and being

00:50:59built in large numbers means it would be a perfect fit in the regular tech tree between the M4A3W and

00:51:05M4T26, giving players a chance to play this rather lesser known tank. In real life, despite some early

00:51:13promise and being built in decent numbers, the T23 was never standardised, so it never got an M number

00:51:19or became the M23, and unfortunately despite the early promise, it failed to live up to expectations,

00:51:25as the additional weight from the up armouring, the use of the VVS suspension and the electric drive

00:51:31meant that when it was given over to the army for testing in more strenuous conditions than those

00:51:36of General Electric, a whole bunch of issues started cropping up, ranging from cooling issues and high

00:51:42ground pressure to issues with the electric drive itself, especially the fact it required more

00:51:47maintenance to keep it running. Not mention having to retrain mechanics to deal with it, while other minor

00:51:52factors also caused issues with it being used as a combat tank, while the inability to fit a 90mm gun

00:51:59severely limited any future development on the tank. Thus, the T23 tanks that were built were kept in

00:52:05the United States for training and testing purposes, never being sent to the European or Pacific theatres,

00:52:11somewhat similar to the British Covenanter tank, though at least this tank sort of worked and wasn't built

00:52:16during a time when tanks were desperately needed overseas. However, all was not lost as the T23

00:52:23did sea surface overseas in a sense, as the cast turret that was designed for the T23 would end

00:52:29up being adapted for the Sherman tank, which allowed the Sherman to be upgunned with the 76mm gun, giving

00:52:35the Sherman a fighting chance against newer tanks and allowing it to fight until the end of World War 2,

00:52:41while the later T25 would use a redesigned T23 hull. It should also be mentioned that more variants of

00:52:49the T23 would be produced for testing, such as the T23E3 with a torsion bar suspension, which reduced

00:52:56ground pressure compared to the usual T23 and was actually recommended for standardisation as the M27,

00:53:03but this never went ahead. There were also plans to build the T23E4 with HVS suspension,

00:53:11but this design was cancelled, though some regular T23s would be converted to the new suspension,

00:53:17but these were relegated to test tanks. So overall, it might seem like these tanks were all a failure,

00:53:24but they did allow for the development of the better turret for the Sherman tank,

00:53:28while the experience gained with torsion bar suspension systems would no doubt have been invaluable,

00:53:33especially since this would be the suspension of choice for most future American tanks.

00:53:37And if viewed merely as test beds, I would say these tanks did their job extremely well,

00:53:42though maybe a few less T23s could have been built as 250 seems a bit excessive for

00:53:47testing and training. Development would continue with the T25 and T26, the former of which is already

00:53:54in game, and the latter of which I will cover in the heavy tank section. But there was a T25E1,

00:54:01which differs from the T25 in that it has a torsion bar suspension system and a more conventional

00:54:08transmission, while weighing around 3 tons less. I think the T25E1 could work on the regular tech tree,

00:54:15as only two T25s were built, while 40 T25E1s were built, and no doubt there were differences in some

00:54:22of these 40 pilot models, potentially giving us even more variants to add, and I think this could work

00:54:27at 6.0 to 6.3, either on its own or folded with the regular T25, and this would give us access to

00:54:34yet another late war American medium tank that was built in decently large numbers.

00:54:40So I think that just about wraps it up for the medium tanks, meaning we can move on to heavy tanks,

00:54:46and to be honest there aren't a huge amount of American heavy tanks from WW2 that need adding,

00:54:51but there are a few, including at least one design that I think will be quite interesting.

00:54:56But we'll start off first with the M6 heavy tank. Now of course we do have many variants of the M6

00:55:01heavy tank in game, for example the T1E1, M6A1 and M6A2E1, but we don't have the T1E2 which was

00:55:09standardised as the M6 heavy tank, with 8 being built compared to 20 for the T1E1 and 12 for the M6A1.

00:55:17In many ways this is very similar to the M6A1, but has an entirely cast hull, making this look more like

00:55:22the T1E1, which might provide some additional protection from sloping, but this might be

00:55:28cancelled out by the fact that cast armour provides less protection in game. Interestingly it also

00:55:33seems like the T1E2, before it was standardised, was fitted with a different turret, that didn't

00:55:39have a roof mounted machine gun, but instead had a high elevation machine gun mounted at the rear of

00:55:44the turret, which I can't see being much use in game. While a more prominent commander's cupola was

00:55:49also provided, which might make for an easier target in game, and a machine gun was provided

00:55:54for the driver to use. Obviously all of these would be changed in the production version as the M6,

00:56:00and for the rest of the stats it seems to be broadly the same as the M6A1. I could see the

00:56:05initial prototype and production version being fitted in War Thunder at 5.0, the prototype as an

00:56:11event vehicle and the M6 being folded with the M6A1, with the prototype T1E2 giving us a slightly

00:56:17different design, with a differently designed turret and different machine gun positions.

00:56:21While the M6 would play pretty similarly to the M6A1, with slightly different protection,

00:56:26but it would be nice to see the actual initial M6 Heavy Tank added in game to go alongside its

00:56:31subvariants. Of course the M6 Heavy Tank program, while technically successful, never saw mass production

00:56:39or any tanks deployed in a combat theatre. With the M4 Sherman seeming to be adequate enough,

00:56:45and it wouldn't be until January 1945 that the first of the new M26 Pershing Heavy Tanks would

00:56:51be deployed to Europe. Of course the M26 Pershing technically started off as a medium tank,

00:56:57and was really only classed as a heavy tank from 1945 to 1947, and the M26 in game is also classed as

00:57:05a medium tank, but I'm covering it in this section because it was technically a heavy tank during the

00:57:09war, and as mentioned we do have the M26 in game, but it is a rather unique variant of this tank,

00:57:16the T26E2 or M45. Now the first big thing you might notice about this tank is the shorter barrel,

00:57:23and that's because it's now armed with a vertically stabilised M4 105mm howitzer, the same one as used on

00:57:31the M4 A3 105 in game, and it is able to fire smoke, HE shells with a maximum penetration of 26.8mm,

00:57:39and a HE shell with 130mm penetration. However, it should be noted that there are

00:57:45post-war shells that could be fired from the M4 howitzer that haven't been added to the game yet,

00:57:50for example the M3 27 HEP or High Explosive plastic, aka a HES shell, which has a penetration of 127mm,

00:58:00so much the same as other American 105mm HES shells. There was also the T131 E31 heat shell,

00:58:08though I believe this shell was considered more experimental as it was considered too inaccurate

00:58:13for field artillery in testing, but in firing tests against the 177mm armour plate,

00:58:203 out of 5 shells penetrated, but then in another test against 7 inch plates set at 60 degrees,

00:58:2712 out of 17 shells completely penetrated, with the remaining 5 penetrating an average of 267mm,

00:58:35so similar to the 90mm Cockerill Mk3 on 6.7 to 7.0 vehicles, so if these shells are introduced,

00:58:43this of course makes this vehicle far more deadly. However, the new weapon is much lighter than the

00:58:4990mm gun, which you might think is a good thing, but meant that some rebalancing of the turret needed

00:58:54to be done, which as it turns out meant a palmer in the turret. With the mantlet now increased from

00:59:01114mm to 203mm, the turret faced from 101mm to 127mm, and the turret sides from 76mm to 127mm, which

00:59:16increases the tank's weight by 292kg, but leaves it massively more protected, especially from the front

00:59:23and sides of the turret. The top speed seems to be broadly the same at 30mph or 48km an hour,

00:59:30and the usual crew of 5 is carried. Honestly, trying to find a place for this tank might be a

00:59:35little bit difficult, and is heavily dependent on whether it gets access to the post war shells or

00:59:40not. If it only gets access to the shells that are already in game, I think it would have to start with

00:59:45the heat shell unlocked stock, and this would make it rather hard to balance, and I couldn't see it

00:59:50being added at any lower than 6.0, and I could even see some arguments against adding it just because

00:59:56the not particularly great penetration from the heat shell and the massive amount of armour would

01:00:02make it very hard to balance. However, if it gets access to the post war hair shell, and even perhaps

01:00:08the heat shell, we suddenly have a few more options with regards to balancing, allowing it to be placed at

01:00:14a higher battle rating, where its improved armour isn't going to be such a massive hindrance to

01:00:19enemies. But either way, I'd still like to see this rather interesting tank added to War Thunder in

01:00:24some form or fashion. Ultimately, the T26E2 wouldn't be ready for production until July 1945,

01:00:32two months after the end of the war in Europe, and it had initially been wanted in large numbers,

01:00:38as just before D-Day it had been hoped to halt production of 75mm and 76mm

01:00:44armed tanks, and instead build 75% of new tanks with a 105mm howitzer, and the remaining 25%

01:00:51with 90mm guns. But by January 1945, this ratio had reversed. Thus, with the end of the war and a

01:00:58lessened demand for howitzer tanks, only 185 would be built as the heavy tank T26E2, not receiving its

01:01:06M number until May 1946, when it became the medium tank M45. Despite missing the war in Europe, it did

01:01:14see surface in the Korean War, but after that it seems they were all scrapped or destroyed and so

01:01:19no M45s are around today. There was also the T26, which was essentially the M26 Persian but fitted with

01:01:27an electric drive, and despite weighing a little over a ton more than the regular M26, in testing

01:01:33it had superior mobility compared to the M26. But as in previous cases with the electric drive,

01:01:39it suffered with regards to reliability and maintenance, and thus wasn't given any further

01:01:44development. But it could be a good tank to have in game, probably at 6.7, maybe 7.0 depending on how

01:01:51much better the mobility is. So having looked at light, medium and heavy tanks, we have nearly

01:01:57finished with the regular tanks of the US armed forces. But there are of course amphibious and

01:02:03flamethrower tanks which we can take a quick look at. And when it comes to amphibious tanks, America is

01:02:09in quite a good place. As while tanks like the DD Sherman with their flotation screens are somewhat

01:02:14unsuitable to be added due to their inability to fire when on them water, most American designs used

01:02:21flotation devices that didn't prohibit firing on water. Though not all of them, for example the

01:02:26M3E4 based on the M3 Stewart, used a similar flotation device to the DD Sherman's. This is also

01:02:33a fairly relevant topic as we just received the T-86 amphibious tank as an event vehicle. This

01:02:39essentially being the M18 but adapted for amphibious operations, being a massive vehicle retaining its

01:02:4476mm gun with a vertical stabiliser and very fast 45mph top speed, but in turn being a massive target

01:02:53with armour that is virtually useless. Of course the T-86 is now technically in game, and the T-86E1

01:03:00only differs in being slightly heavier and using propellers to propel itself through the water,

01:03:06unlike the T-86 which uses tracks. But there is also the very similar T-87, which had a shorter

01:03:12hull and was armed with a 105mm howitzer, which along with its thin armour and slower speed,

01:03:18means it could be added at a lower battle rating, perhaps 3.3 or higher, giving us a good counterpart

01:03:24to the T-86 in the lower ranks. There would be more vehicles that were designed from the outset

01:03:30with an amphibious role in mind, for example the LVT-A4 which was fitted with a 75mm howitzer

01:03:36from the M8 Scott, given a penetration of 10mm with its HE shells or 89mm with its heat shell,

01:03:43and I could see this working at 1.3 between the LVT-A1 and M22 Locust, giving us a choice on whether

01:03:50to use the 37mm gun or 75mm howitzer in amphibious operations. It also appears that the turret of the

01:03:57M24 Chaffee was tested on the LVT-A1, though modifications needed to be carried out that weren't

01:04:03finished when the project was cancelled at the end of the war, but it could be added at 3.3 between

01:04:08the M22 and M6A1, filling in a gap in the middle, lying at rank 2, and giving us an amphibious vehicle

01:04:16that we could use for tier 2. Then there were regular tanks that could be equipped with flotation

01:04:21devices to enable them to perform amphibious operations. For example the M24 Chaffee used flotation

01:04:27devices that while heavy and unwieldy on land, give it a top speed of 5.2mph on water and allow

01:04:34the tank to fire in a 310 degree angle, only unable to fire directly rearward due to fording

01:04:40stacks on the rear deck. As mentioned the flotation devices are heavy, increasing the total weight of

01:04:46the tank from 18.3t to 24.7t, no doubt heavily affecting its top speed and acceleration, but this

01:04:53would give us an amphibious tank with some pretty effective weapons, and could be represented in

01:04:58game as a modification for the M24 if needed, or as a separate variant. Of course these weren't just

01:05:05available to the light tanks, and there were flotation devices available for the Sherman, these

01:05:10being the T6 or M19 flotation device, and these actually have some advantages over the rather

01:05:16more famous Sherman DD tanks, as these do allow the Sherman to engage enemies while crossing over

01:05:23the water. And while they would be cumbersome once you hit land, these flotation devices could be added

01:05:29rather quickly and easily, either as modifications or as entirely new vehicles in the American tech

01:05:34tree, and they would give American players access to a rather useful, less famous cousin of the

01:05:40Sherman DD tanks, that could be used alongside their regular Shermans, and bringing light to this

01:05:46lesser known variant of the Sherman tank. There was also the T7 flotation device for the M18,

01:05:52which again I know is technically a tank destroyer but it feels better to cover it here with the other

01:05:56amphibious tanks, and interestingly when tested with the T7 flotation device, the M18 was fitted with an

01:06:03elevation gyro stabilizer for the main gun, allowing for more accurate shooting on the move, much like the

01:06:09T86. Again the T7 does prevent firing directly backwards, and has a lower top speed on water

01:06:15of 4.24 mph, but again it gives us another effective amphibious tank to use in game,

01:06:21again either as a separate vehicle or as a modification to the MAT. The T88 GMC, essentially

01:06:28the M18 with a 105mm howitzer, would also be tested with the T7 flotation device, giving us yet another

01:06:35amphibious vehicle that could be added, though I suspect that a T88 might be added without amphibious

01:06:40capabilities, at least at first. So with the amphibious tanks out of the way, we now come to

01:06:47the last tanks we will be looking at, which are the flamethrower tanks, which are often very hard to

01:06:52add in game due to the fact that they often replace the main armament, which would make them borderline

01:06:57useless. However, there were a number of American designs and modifications that added a flamethrower,

01:07:03while retaining the usual main armament. For example in the Pacific, the M3 Stuart often had

01:07:09flamethrowers placed in the bound machine gun position, and in at least one case had the flamethrower

01:07:14attached to the bound machine gun itself, allowing for both weapons to be retained, and giving us a

01:07:19fast moving flamethrower tank for the lower tiers. There was also the E9-9 mechanised flamethrower,

01:07:26which had a fuel trailer being towed at the rear of an M5A1, allowing for more fuel for the flamethrower to be

01:07:32carried. But this remained a one-off prototype due to a rather unfortunate accident destroying the

01:07:37prototype, and all four crew members being lost as a result. And I could see Gaijin being somewhat

01:07:42wary of touching this tank as a result of how it was lost. There would also be flamethrower tanks

01:07:47based on the Sherman, again with many replacing the bound machine gun with flamethrowers, and adding

01:07:52these variants would be a quick and expedient way of getting effective flamethrower tanks into the

01:07:57American tech tree. But there were more flamethrower tanks that were a bit more specialised. One of

01:08:02these is the Sherman Crocodile, which as the name suggests is similar to the Churchill Crocodile in

01:08:07that a trailer containing fuel is towed behind the tank. This came about from a conference in May 1943,

01:08:14where it was actually concluded that Britain was ahead of the Americans in flamethrower development,

01:08:19and thus these Shermans were actually converted for American use by Britain. And while the initial

01:08:23prototype was an M4A2, the other three converted were M4A4s, a variant of the Sherman that wasn't

01:08:30really used much by American forces, making this a rather rare case of its use by US forces.

01:08:35As for the tank itself, the flamethrower is mounted on the right corner of the hole,

01:08:40allowing the bound machine gun to be retained, while the fuel is provided by an armoured trailer

01:08:45towed behind the tank. This would make for an excellent flamethrower tank for the US tech tree,

01:08:50probably at 3.7, giving us a rather unique American flamethrower tank, and giving Gaijin a reason to

01:08:56add the M4A4 into the American tech tree. In real life, while it had been hoped to use these during

01:09:02the Normandy invasion, they weren't delivered in time, being kept in the UK until November 1944,

01:09:08only seeing action once during the attack on Ulrich in Germany on 24th February 1945,

01:09:15where they proved to be rather successful. Lastly, when it comes to flamethrower tanks,

01:09:20we have the T-33, which started development in May 1945 by taking the whole of the heavily

01:09:26armoured M4A3E2 with HVS suspension, and combining it with a new turret that had the M675mm gun from

01:09:34the M24, a coaxial machine gun, an E20-20 flamethrower mounted to the right of the main gun,

01:09:41and an E21R4 flamethrower by the Commander 2 Plus. With all of these weapons having separate elevation,

01:09:48and unfortunately making the turret very cramps, which could be represented by a longer reload

01:09:53rate for the 75mm gun. The 75mm gun is a little less effective as its elevation is now minus 10

01:10:00to plus 13 compared to the plus 25 for the original turret, while the E20-20 flamethrower's elevation is

01:10:07minus 15 to plus 45, with a range of 137 metres and enough fuel for 56 seconds of firing. Meanwhile,

01:10:15the E21 flamethrower has a limited traverse of 240 degrees, elevation of minus 20 to plus 20,

01:10:22and a range of just 73 metres, but a much longer firing duration of about 4 minutes. The crew is also

01:10:29reduced from 5 to 4 as the power machine gun position has been eliminated, and plated over to

01:10:34make room for more fuel tanks, making the tanks slightly more vulnerable to crew losses and

01:10:39enemy fire in general on account of the extra fuel tanks. All in all, this looks like it would be a

01:10:44very successful flamethrower tank for the US tech tree, retaining an effective main armament and giving

01:10:50us two good flamethrower weapons, which would also confuse enemies, as one of the usual ways of disabling a

01:10:56down-tiered Jumbo Sherman is to either fire at the machine gun port, which is going to be missing in

01:11:02this case, or disabling the barrel. Except there are now two barrels, so you're going to have to

01:11:07choose which one to shoot, and then even if you do disable both of the barrels in the turret, you

01:11:12still have that flamethrower on the roof, which can be used to obscure the enemy's view and possibly

01:11:17even cause some minor damage or take them out entirely if they're in an open-topped vehicle.

01:11:22Ultimately, this would probably work at 5.7, maybe 5.3 depending on the armour of the new turret,

01:11:28and it would be very nice for this unusual and effective flamethrower tank to be available in

01:11:32War Thunder. In real life, development would be protracted, and only three were produced,

01:11:38with the first pilot not being delivered until September 1947, more than two years after

01:11:43development had started, while the second and third pilot, the latter of which was the most advanced

01:11:48of all of them, wasn't delivered until January 1948, long after the end of the war. With testing of

01:11:55the tanks taking place until July 1950, and ultimately they were not accepted for service,

01:12:01though two were converted into turretless T-68 flamethrower vehicles in 1953, but again after

01:12:07testing were still not accepted for service in this role either. So that brings us to the end of this

01:12:13episode looking at American World War 2 tanks. I'd be interested to hear your views on these tanks,

01:12:18and any other ones you would like me to cover, as there are no doubt many more tanks and variants

01:12:22that I have yet to cover. I will of course cover tank destroyers, armoured cars and anti-air vehicles

01:12:27in a separate video, with the Soviets probably being the next nation I cover, though that is

01:12:31subject to change depending on time and real life events as I've just been very busy lately.

01:12:36So anyway, I hope you've enjoyed this video, hopefully you're enjoying the series and will

01:12:40join me for the next episode, I've been Toreno and I'll see you next time.

Category

Transcript

Recommended