Jump to content


HMH M51

Camo

  • Please log in to reply
23 replies to this topic

C-O-R-S-A-i-R_ #21 Posted 19 February 2020 - 09:56 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 38518 battles
  • 4,093
  • [SALT-]
  • Member since:
    12-04-2015

View PostAlbapfalzd3, on 12 February 2020 - 02:22 PM, said:

 

I was under the impression that the Rev is just totally made up and was not even a prototype. Do you have a link to some documentation please. BTW, I think that the HMH M51 even with the short barrel and WAY to big Muzzle Brake is still one of the best looking tanks in the game.

 

Roy

The Revalorise was real, it was just one tank that was used to test the feasability of the huge French 105 on a sherman chassis.

 

here is another wrinkle and a tank we don’t have in the game.  Check the link below it’ll blow your mind.  After WW2 Argentina had South America’s largest military after acquiring several hundred Fireflies from the UK.  When tensions rose between Chile and Argentina in the mid 1970s Chile responded by purchasing 119 M51 Shermans from Israel.  Now outclassed Argentina sought help from France in the form of buying a license to basically produce their own version of the M51.

 

the crazy thing about it is that the Argentinians used the original round 75mm turrets that the Fireflies already came with and they put the huge gun in those.  It’s absolutely nuts but they made it work.  They made a whole fleet (like 200) of these erzatz M51 to compete with the Chileans.  They still even had the original Firefly gun mantlet  and rear turret extension, but the gun is way thicker and even longer and it has the charateristic french double baffle muzzle brake like we see on the Bat chat.

 

for all intent and purposes these tanks are basically M51 revalorise with the old VVSS but look even more archaic because of using the old 75mm round turrets.  Two different poweplants were used both french made fiat designs and both were diesels.  Check out the link

 

https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/coldwar-argentina-sherman-repotenciado/


  

I am a farmable asset,  please don’t call me a potato


C-O-R-S-A-i-R_ #22 Posted 19 February 2020 - 10:18 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 38518 battles
  • 4,093
  • [SALT-]
  • Member since:
    12-04-2015

In regards to the revalorise, I found this link on the internet just from a simple google search.

 

now there are two black and white images of VVSS M4A1 with a long 105, I can’t vouch for the image at the top of the page it may or may not be legitimate.  

 

BUT, if you scroll all the way down on the article there is an exerpt that was taken from R.P. Hunnicutt’s Sherman tank bible, the excerpt shows two tanks, on the left is the production M51 and on the right is the Rev, thing is that image of the Rev must’ve been super early in testing and development because it still has the original 105mm full length and with a smaller MB, later the rev had the gun shortened and a larger MB was installed.  They cut the barrel down 1.5 meters so like 4 1/2 feet.   

 

The revalorise was the test bed, it went thru several modifications before they felt that the turret was balanced and the gun performed properly in such a small space.  The second turret modification saw them lengthen the rear bustle more and by shortening the gun and adding the larger MB they got the recoil shorter so it worked in the tank.

 

I happen to own a copy of the Hunnicutt book and the excerpt seen on that blog is on page 509, it’s the second page in a section titled “Israeli Service” at the end of the book.  Unfortunately his book published some 5-6 years before the Argentinian Shermans were made into 105mm gun tanks.  Otherwise I’m certain Hunnicutt would’ve included them as well.

 

here’s the link to that blog

http://ritastatusreport.blogspot.com/2015/09/the-m4a1-revalorise-and-names-of.html


  

I am a farmable asset,  please don’t call me a potato


SlagInGristle #23 Posted 20 February 2020 - 08:06 AM

    Major

  • Players
  • 38517 battles
  • 3,771
  • [6SIC6]
  • Member since:
    02-13-2014

View PostCORSAIR_CRAZY, on 11 February 2020 - 11:34 PM, said:

The only thing that needs to be done to the M51 has nothing to do with paint.

 

the computer model itself needs to be cleaned up,

 

the mantlet has incorrect shape in profile it looked more like a triangle than a half circle,

 

the gun is too short, which is hilarious because WG likes putting ridiculously long guns on things that didn’t even exist, and this one existed with a ridiculously long gun and they made it about 4 feet shorter than it should be,

 

also the muzzle brake is more than twice as big as it should be which gives it the feel of those Christmas toy tanks with the plungers on the end of the gun

 

but the biggest glaring issue with the tank is the hideous rubber track, the Israelis couldn’t use the rubber in the desert for a couple of reasons, it didn’t have enough traction in sand and it got so hot in the desert that it bonded to gravel roads and sand which destroyed roads and clumped up the track pads with debri.  The tracks already exist in the game on the TT M4A3E8 so it’s just a matter of cut and paste.

 

I have a theory as to why WG used the black rubber tracks, the outdoor tank museum at Latrum has all the M51s with metal tracks painted black, perhaps to protect them from rust?  IDK but all the images clearly show metal track links not rubber.

 

the other thing that the M51 need is a small buff to it’s gun handling (quicker aim time) and it had tons of gun depression so t needs another couple of degrees to take advantage of the only armor it has which is on the mantlet.

 

 

Rubber track is a upgrade and indicates the suspension is upgraded to newer equipment- perhaps this was done. 


:bush:

C-O-R-S-A-i-R_ #24 Posted 20 February 2020 - 01:18 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 38518 battles
  • 4,093
  • [SALT-]
  • Member since:
    12-04-2015

View PostSlagInGristle, on 20 February 2020 - 08:06 AM, said:

Rubber track is a upgrade and indicates the suspension is upgraded to newer equipment- perhaps this was done. 

Maybe you should read all the posts?  T84 rubber track was not a performance upgrade it was just a different type of track.

 

T84 rubber track was produced sometime after WW2 and there are images showing it was used in Korea but the IDF didn’t use it.  T84 lacked the welded plate that holds the track skeleton together on sherman track, it was just rubber all the way thru from the chevrons thru to the rubber backing.  So being all rubber made T84 have a limited tread life, it needed to be replaced a lot more quickly than all steel track did.  From a military logistics point of view a track that wears out quickly is not an upgrade.

 

T84 was invented for peacetime because it was kinder on road surfaces when tanks had to roll thru towns or bases during exercises.  But on hot asphalt in the middle east it tended to bond to the asphalt lifting chunks of materiel off paved roads so it was never used by the IDF.

 

look at vintage photos of IDF shermans, 99.99% of them show Shermans with some variant of metal track whether the tank had VVSS (narrow track) or HVSS (wide track)


  

I am a farmable asset,  please don’t call me a potato






Also tagged with Camo

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users