museum ordnance jan 95

8/18/2019 Museum Ordnance Jan 95

1/32


2/32

The

leader

in

defense, aerospace and transportation information.

Jane s products include Jane s Fighting Ships, Jane s All The World s

Aircraft and Jane s Defence

Weekly.

Jane s also offers its yearbooks,

directories, binders and magazines in electronic format.

, .

'

-

.

·

: .

:" ·-n

· -.

or a complete product list

or

a CD-ROM sample disc contact:

Jan

e's

INFORMATION GROUP

1340 Braddock Place, Suite 300

Alexandria, VA 22314-1651

Tel: (703) 683-3700 Fax: (703) 836-0029


3/32

Dr. 'Jack' Atwater

The

Curator's

ColulDD

I

have been asked

by several

people to

write a

column

on the

origin

and his

tory of the uniform worn by

military

and naval personnel. The use of

some

form of uniform dress for fighting men

on

land and sea

is

common to all civi

lized

nations.

Military necessity,

con

venience,

economic

necessity, and

sen

timent have all

played a part

in

its

development.

The Romans wore a

common uni

form.

This fact is

one

of

the

earliest

recorded instances of the wearing of

a

common

garb.

Likewise, the galley

slaves of

Rome,

the

"motive power"

of

that day,

were

all clothed in a costume

of

common

cut and

color bearing

the

number of

the

galley

in

which they

served.

As time

went

on,

leaders in

com

mand of land forces perceived the need

for some mark or badge to designate

the members of

their own

force

and

that

of the

enemy.

This resulted

in

distinctive

badges,

such as

plumes

of a

certain color, numbers, initials, a coat

of

arms or other

devices

which

were

worn

on the

helmet,

shoulder, or breast,

a

custom

which

still

prevails

today.

The General

given

the credit

for

the

"

uniforming" of

an

army, similar to

that

which

we know today,

is Gustavus

Adolphus. His

great

contribution

was

the wearing of a colored

sash and

the

introduction of a large, wide brimmed,

felt "slouch"

hat. t

survives to this day

in somewhat modified form. The tri

corn

hat, common

in the American

Revolution is

nothing

more than

Gustavus' hat

pinned

up in three

places

With a

rosette of the colors of the

gov

Continued on Page 24)

useum

Ordnanc

Feat

res

Grizzly Bear

By Jeffrey McKaughan

4

Sweden's Own!

§-Tank

By

lessandro Demaria

9

German Tank Flag Signals

By dam Geibel

'The One That

Got Away

" A British Export

Success

By

Peter Brown

12

Military Vehicle

Enthusiasts in

Russia

Photos by Sergey Kosenkow

16

1994 Editorial Index

18

Japanese

Ground Self-Defense Force Armored

Vehicles

By David R

Haugh

Photos by Masahiko Saito

19

Department§

Curator 's Column

3

Book Reviews

RAGGED WAR

The

Story of Unconventional

and

Counter-Revolutionary

Warfare

ROMMEL'S NORTH AFRICAN CAMPAIGN

SEPTEMBER

1940 -

NOVEMBER

1942

8

15

The Ordnance Museum Foundation

26

Miniature Ordnance:

Ckrman SdKfz 251/9 in 1/35: Two Variants

By Joe

P

Morgan

28

Classified Ads

31

Museum

Ordnance

Volume 5,

Number

1

January 1995

Jeffrey D McKaughan

Editor

Adam Geibel

Associate

Editor

Jan

uary

1995

Museum Ordnance

is published six-times per yea r by Darlington Productions, Inc., P.O. Box 5884, Darlington,

MD 21034. (410) 457-5400. All rights are reserved. Copyright 1995.

No

part of this publication may

be

copied or

reproduced without the expressed written permission of the publisher.

This publication serves the interests and needs of the U.S. Army Ordnance Musewn at Aberdeen Proving Ground,

Aberdeen, MD. A donation is made to the Museum for each copy

of

this magazine sold either by subscription

or

as a single

copy.

Subscriptions: One-year (six issues)

is

$17.00 (Maryland residents add 5% sales tax). All foreign subscriptions:

$20.00 surface, $30.00 airmail. Payment must

be in

U.S. funds. Make all checks or money orders payable to Museum

Ordnance.

Museum Ordnance

is not responsible for unsolicited manuscripts, artwork or photos sent to the office. Material

will

be

returned to the author only accompanied

by

a self-addressed stamped envelope. The opinions and views expressed

by the authors do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S. Army Ordnance Museum, the publisher or the editor

3


4/32

Building

on its tradition of non-tur

reted, limited-traverse assault guns,

the

Gennans designed a

wide

array of

variants,

llsingmostof

its

tank

chassis

for some form of

heavy

weapon carrier.

A favorite

gun

for some of

this purpose

was the sIG 150mm cannon, a variant

of the towed field piece.

The Brummbffi (Grizzly Bear) was

the

combination of the 150mm gun on

the PZKpfw V chassis (models F, G, H,

and J

were converted). Automotively,

the BrummbAr was very similar to the

standard

t nk chassis. Power was

provided

by

a Maybach HL 120 TRM

twelve-cylinder gasoline engine. At

3,OOOrpm,

the

engine produced 300

hp

and

gave a

possible road

speed of

about

25mph.

With

a full

tank

of

fuel. the

Brummbffi had a radius

of

about 124

(road) or

78 (cross-country)

miles.

The superstructure of

the

assault

gun was basically a box

configuration

over

the

fighting

compartment.

The

sIG 150mmgunwascentrally-mounted

in the front plate in a hemispheric

mantlet with a tube housing attached.

by effrey McKaughan

Not much oJthe zimmeritleJtin 1994

in

this

viewoJtheJrontplate

anddTivers superstructu

The

bore of

the sIG

150mmStu.H.

43

is a

flash hider.

This accounts for

58 long

and

its rifling

has 44

lands tapered look

at

the end of the barr

(right

hand

twist). The

gun

is twelve The

American

75mm

pack

howit

calibers long

with

six

and

one-half utilizes the

same

effect

but

is

not

inches

hollowed

out

at the end to

act

as pered externally.

...-;::.:rl'

The

berdeen

Bn.unmbar, photo taken

in

late 1946.

Capturea in

Italy, this mid production

version

still has

a

rather

complete

coatin

zimmerit. The side plate

has 24

vertical columns oj

zimmerit while the

angledJront plate appears

t have

eight. Note the

pattern

cha

on the zimmerit

behind the

running gear.

useum

Ordnan


5/32

To compensate for the weight ofthe

gun

(and mantiet)

forward of

the

trun

nions, a overly-large breechrlng was

utilized.

There

are two recoil cylinders

which

during

recoil at its highest eleva

tion

barelykeep

the breech off the floor.

Maximum

recoil was 22.5 (compared

to 48 on

the Infantry version

of the

sIG).

In temal stowage was for 38 rounds.

The

sIG

could

fire

at

targets

up t04,675

yards with

an

83 .8Ib. projectile. Muzzle

velocity was 790 ft/sec. Elevation was

between -8

and

+30 degrees with a

traverse

of

±20 degrees.

There were three series of

Brummbars

built,

each

being

easily

distinguishable from the others by look

ing at the driver s vision

blocks

and

the

surroundingarea. The

first

production

versions

can

be identified If the driver s

vision block is a sliding

shutter

type

(like

that used on

the Tiger I . The

second series

had

a smaIl boxed com

partment with a

periscope

on

top

for

driver's vision.

The

third is the series

had

a Similar box but

also

had

a ball

machlnegun mount

overhead near the

top of the fron t p late.

This

la s t version

also

had a re-arranged front plate as

sembly.

American

evaluation of the

Brummbar

found

t to be worthy of

study for

its mounting

of the main gun

in such a balanced

and

compact de

sign. Also of

note

for

incorporation

into

the study was

the

compact recoil

ar

rangement

and

its

applications

to

American artillery pieces.

lthough not

certain.

believe

the side skirt

supports should have

the

small angle

brace

angling down

and awayJrom

the vehicle not

towards

it

as the

two in theJoreground.

Looking

down nto the

slot Jor

the drivers

periscope.

5

anuary

995


6/32

/

/

.

-

pare

ro

wheel

rack on the

back

deck

The

radio an tenna

mounton

the

right re

ar o

the superstructure

6

useum Ordnance


7/32

The

Brummbar utilized a

basically

unmodi-

fred

chassis of the Pz Kpfw N, using new

Ausj.

a s, along

with

rebuiltE nd

F vehicles

l

\

_

I -

~

-

- - - ~

anuary 995


8/32

Museum

Ordnance s Bookshelf

Book Reviews

RAGGED

WAR

The Story of Unconventional and

Counter-Revolutionary Warfare

By Leroy

Thompson

192

pages,

64

photos

1994

Published by: Arms Armour

Distributed by: Sterling

Publishing

387 Park Ave, South

New York, Y

10016

24.95

Leroy Thompson has established a

reputation for writing excellent

works

dealing

with low-intensity

conflicts. An

earlier work of his, Dirty Wars. was

reviewed in the July' 1993 issue of

Musewn Ordnance

Laying a brief groundwork for the

pre-Twentieth

Century, the real focus

of the

book begins

just

afterWW

with

the works of Mao. While Mao was not

the

first

to put pen to paper

and

de

scribe

the precepts of unconventional

warfare.

he is credited with

doing

so in

a modern context.

Thompson

utilizes

these concepts

throughout

the

book.

illustrating

their validity today.

Thompson approaches this work

with a realistic format in that he de

scribes conflicts by

region

when

neces

sary (I.e. Africa,

Vietnam.

or the Middle

East)

but

also describes events by coun

try

(I.e .. Bri ttan-Kenya. Malaya.

Brunei.

Aden.

and

France-Vietnam. Algeria).

This

allows for

the

reader

to

follow a

consistent

trend without

thumbing

back pages

to

pick up a

story.

After covering the more well-known

conflicts. Thompson

moves to

a

broad

analysis ofvarious strategies and tac

tics that have

proven

successful-to

varying degrees. Of these two chap

ters. one

each looks at

the

conflict from

the side of the

insurgents and from the

view

of the

counter-insurgents.

The

similarities and differences

are

very

interesting.

Towards the

end

there is a "crystal

ball" chapter which trys to least sug

gest.

possible

problem areas and re

gions in

the

future. However. more

than pronosticating. Thompson estab

lishes criteria

that

helps establish where

and how insurgencies may

occur.

Finally. there

is

a

chapter

which

lists

63 countries

with

a

brief

descrip

tion of their

counter-insurgent

force.

While each country is only briefly cov

ered.

it is an insight

into

what

the

country has and the value i t does (or

doesn·t)

place on

detering

insurgen

cies.

In certain

areas

the book makes

assumptions thatyou have some knowl

edge or

background.

For instance. it

mentions

General Dozier's kidnapping.

wi

thout

telling

you anything else about

it.

This

is no t a big

issue

and

i anything

should

motivate you

to

do more

search i i t

is that important.

All in all this

book would be

quired reading for Counter-Insurge

101.

The book describes the conce

strategies. and

tactics used by

for

on

both

sides of

a confliCt.

With

placing his own

value ofright or

wro

Thompson

discusses the key eleme

in fighting

and countering

low-int

sity conflicts. The book does not de

each fire fight down

to

each fact.

enough information is provided

so

t

you can understand

the discussio

its proper

context.

An

index is

prOvided.

but

no

bibliography which

would have

b

useful for further reading and resea

since this topic

is

not covered in

many places.

ROMMEL S NORTH AFRICAN CAMPAIGN

September

1940 - November 1942

1

By Jack Greene and

Alessandro Massignani

Rommel's

272 pages. 50+photos.

18 maps

1994 ISBN 0-938289-34-9

Published

by Combined

Books. Inc.

Distributed by Stackpole Books. Inc.

5067 Ritter Road

Mechanicsburg.

PA 17055

22.95

717-796-0411

Reviewed by. Adam Geibel

Contrary to

popular history.

the

Afrika

Korps did not fight the

North

African

campaign Single-handedly

- German

involvement was initially

an

effort to

keep

the

Italian

Army from being over

whelmed after the disaster at Beda

Fomm.

While

Rommel's cult ofperson

ality turned a sideshow delaying action

into

a major theater for the Allies. the

Italian

Army

did notdisappear. Greene

and Massignanl illustrate Rommel's

interaction

with his

Italian

and Ger

man

superiors

and contemporaries.

as

well

as the

strong

and

weak

points of

both AxIs armies.

However. this Is not just

another

homily

to Rommel. Greene. author

of

Mare Nostrum: The

War In the Mediter

raneanand Massignani.

a

noted writer

on the

Italian

millitary.

detail

many of

the small engagements that are ig

nored or glossed

over in

previous texts

-most

of

them involving

Italian units.

In

addition

to

the chronological

North Africa

Campaign


9/32


10/32


11/32

GERMAN TANK SIGNAL

FLAGS

FLAG HELD

ERECT

FLAG WAVED IN AN

ARC

<

MEANS>

CONFORM

Yellow>

UNEAHEAD

D

EXTEND

< Blue

ARROW HI;AD

D

ed

ACTION

ENEMY TANKS

D

B

Yellow

<

over

TAKE POST

BROAD

Red

ARROWHEAD

Yellow

over

>

IGHT WHEEL LEFT WHEEL

Blue

B

B

Blue

< over

TURRET DOWN TANKS ABOUT

?ec

BlackC....,

UT OF ACTION

S.O.S.

n >

Yellow Field

LEADER

HERE

OWN TANKS

G

[

Black Ball on Red Field

by Adam Geibel

While

working

through

the

Ordnance

Museum s files, I found the following

notes

on

German Tank

Data

Signals

Code'. drawn

and

colored

by hand

.

Before the time when

radios

were fitted

to

all tanks,

a set

of

signal flags were

issued to each

tanks

and used to com

municate basic movements

or

tactical

concepts,

much like Nelson's pennants

at

Trafalgar

- but

with

far fewer mes-

sage

options.

As radios

became

more

commonplace

the use of flags dwindled, since they

required sticking an extremity outside

of the protective armor. Effective use of

flags also required

that someone

in the

other tanks crew was paying

attention.

To

be seen, the

tank commanderwould

have

to stand

high

in

his

cupola and

hold

the

flag

shaft

over

his head.

In

reality, probably only

his

arm poked

out of

the turret long enough to try and

catch anyone s eye.

The

notes

did

not

mention the

size of

the flags, nor the

length of

the flag

staffs.

Signal

flags are still issued and used

today,

but nowhere

near

as

frequently.

Readers are cautioned that since the

notes

that

this article was

based on

are

not an

original German document,

this

interpretation

may

be subject to cor

rections.

As such,

readers with addi-

tional information (on these

or other

nationalities

flags')are invited to con

tact

the editorial

offices of

this publica-

tion.

Tech Intell

During World War

II,

the United States

Army deployed

small teams of

ordnance

personnel

throughout

the European

and

Pacific theaters of

operation. The task of these teams was to report

on

each type of

enemy

ordnance

and equipment

as they

would

encounter it in the field.

Their reports and summaries were sometimes the first information

available on a vehicle,

gun,

tank,

or

other system. Each report was usuall y

accompanied by several photographs and a description of the subject.

These reports were

not

compiled in a rear area motor pool

but

right on the

front lines.

Darlington Productions has put together a selection of these reports in

Volume 1 of TECH

INTELL.

This soft-cover book is 132 pages long with

141 photographs

. Formatted with the look of the original reports, these

reports

have not

been altered

or edited and appear

as they

did

in 1944 /

45

.

Included

in Volume 1

ar

e reports on

the

Maultier

armored

half-

track, Tiger

II,

Panther disguised as an M-10, Sd.Kfz

251

with a flatbed

cargo deck, Bergepanther, Shlrmgeschutz disgui sed as U.s., Pz.Kfw IV

observation tank, German radio vehicle on a French half-track, Flak

towers on railway cars, P anther pillbox, "new" German full-tracked

carrier, Jagdtiger, Sd.Kfz

251

with PaK 40 75mm, Sd.Kfz

140/1,

Flakdrilling on U.s. M8

armored

car,

an RS

with PaK

D

75mm,

"German Automotive" material, Tiger

B

transport

trailer,

among

others.

Title

Qty

Each Total

Tech Intell Volume 1 13 .95

I Shipping

&

handling: I

SubTotal

$1.75 U.s., $3.50 foreign.

Shipping & handling

Darlington Productions Tax MD residents

add

5%)

P.O. Box

5884

Total

Darlington, MD

21034

(U.s. funds only)

January

1995

11


12/32

Sales were

fairly good.

in all

I

h

uncovered details of some

99

sold

tween

1930 and

1938 with variati

in

design

features and weaponry.

The

One

That

Got way

...

ritish

Export

uccess

addition,

the

same

chassis

was

olTe

Throughout

the 1920's

and 1930's,

many

designs for

armored

vehicles

were

produced. Some of

these

were in re

sponse to

official

army requirements,

some

were private

ventures, some

were

adopted, some sold, while many ap

peared

briefly and

then faded from

the

scene.

One of the more successfuldesigns

was the Vickers SlxTonTank. Vickers

Armstrong Ltd,

now

known as Vickers

Defence Systems. were

a well

estab

lished British armaments company,

indeed many of the vehicles

bought

by

the British

Army in

the inter-war pe

riod were designed and

built

by

them.

In addition to these, a number of

ve

hicles were designed

for

sales abroad.

The Six

Ton

Tank

was one of this

export series.

Earlier designs had in

cluded

what

Vickers termed

the Marks

A. B,

C. and D. A

and

B

were

not

built,

while one each of

the C

and

the

very

similar

D

were sold

to

Japan and

the

Irish

Republic. The new

Six

Ton design

became the Mark E,

designed

and avail

able

for

sale

from

1928.

Here. there is some discrepancy as

to designation. The Six Ton was pro

duced in two

variations,

one with

two

small turrets

mounting

machine guns.

and the other with a single large turret

carrying

a cannon and a coaxial mg.

There

were

known

respectively

as

Al

ternative

A for the

twin turreted and

Alternative

B for the

single turret. This

has confused some authors,

and

led

to

the erroneous names of

Models A

and

B or

Types A

and

B

being

used.

The

two variations shared

a

com

mon chassis and hull. Vickers'

own

contemporary

sales

literature

describes

the suspension

as being

of

a patented

type consisting of two sets of double

bogies on

each

side. These were pivoted

on

axles passing

through

the

hull.

and

fitted with leaf springs

supporting

two

sets of

two small.

rubber

covered

road

wheels

per

unit.

The

short pitch 10.25

wide

manganese

steel

track

was

also

covered

by

a Vickers patent.

Construction

of the

hull used

an

angle iron frame

with the bullet

proof

plates

riveted

to It.

Layout was conven

tional,

with engine

at

the

rear

sepa

rated from the fighting chamber by

a

bulkhead.

Drive

from the engine passed

by Peter rown

through

this

area

to the final drive unit

in the

nose

ofthe

vehicle.

This. accord

ing

the ad

men. balanced the

vehicle.

keeping the centrally

mounted

turret

as level as

possible

during cross coun

try movement. The driver

sat at

the

righ

t fron t ofthe fighting

com

partmen t,

with

good forward

vision and access

through large fiaps in front of him. with

a

toughened glass vision block

for

use

when closed down. He steered the tank

with

the

usual

two levers.

The remainder of

the

raised cen tre

fighting

area was

occupied by

the two

other crew

members.

In th e Alternative

A

version each man had his own turret

which rotated independently,

and while

theoretically

capable of

all-round

traverse each turre t got in its

neighbours'

way, allowing

at

best

240

degrees

rotation. Early

descriptions

of

this machine suggest

that fitting two

machine guns

per

turret was an option.

although photos and

later

accounts

show that only

one

was

ever

fitted.

Operating two

mgs

In a turret

with only

34 diameter

would have been

less

than

easy.

On the Alternative

B type.

the tur

ret had

a

larger

51

diameter ring

offset

to the left hand

side

ofthe hull.

mount

ing a 47mm

cannon in

what was termed

a duplex

mounting

with a

machine

gun.

Interestingly,

the

use

ofthe

main

gun

was stated

as being

for

dealing

with

hostile tanks, or other similar

targets,

requiring

an Armor Piercing or

High Explosive

shell

for

their

destruc

tion . So the tank was

envisaged

as an

anti-tank weapon

in its own

light.

s

the

tank

was

intended for sale

commerCially. Vickers allowed

much

leeway

In

the

final

specification

.

Armor

thickness varied from

5mm

in areas

not

greatly exposed

to

attack,

up to

13mmoreven

17mm

as

required.

Simi

larly.

the type of machine gun carrie

d

would

depend on the buyer's

own

re

qUirements. Vickers could supply t.:1eir

own Maxim derived one, fit the same or

similar type to that already

in

use in the

purchaser's inventory. or deliver

un

armed for fitting

weapons

as

requested

.

Oddly. all the

tanks were

olTered

with the same 80bhp four cylinder

Armstrong Siddeley

petrol

engine.

This

operated

through

a

gearbox

giving an

emergency

low

ratio

as well as

four

normal speeds

and reverse.

as a tractor for artillery pieces a

various civilian uses, and

also

a

mounting

for a

self

propelled 40m

anti aircraft gun for Siam (now Th

land). an

advanced

idea for

1933.

swell as

buying

vehicles.

both

Soviet

and Polish

governments

t

out

production licences. The

Sov

called their vehicles T-26.

and dev

oped

a

series of tanks using both t

and

single turrets.

The Polish A

also

bought

twin turret

types, althou

they later purchased additional

sin

turrets before first improving the

sign with

a

new engine

and

develop

their own

fP

series vehicles. B

designs saw action during

WW2.

Actual Six Ton tanks saw acti

with one actually changing hands

the Chaco War

between

Bolivia

Paraguay in 1933-34.

Ofuers w

used

in China and Finland.

Oddly,

tank itself was not adopted by Brit

although some gun tractors were p

chased.

Vickers

continually

reviewed

design. From 1936 only

the sin

turret version was

olTered for

sale w

a new design gun

of

40mm caliber a

available.

The

final

development

w

an

up-armored vehicle fitted

wit

larger Rolls-Royce

engine mounted

the

left hand

side of

the

hull and

turret

moved

to

the

right

,

behind

driver.

This Mark

F

was no t

,

it see

sold

. a s

its introdu

c

tion coincided w

the outbreak of the World War. Inde

some unsold

Six Tonners

which se

to have been of a hybrid type

wit

pattern hull and E type

power p

were

commandeered

by

the Bri

Go

vernmen

t

and

used for

training

fue X

Th e American Connection

s well

as actual sales. one

tank

w

leased to the US Government for tri

For

some

time.

I

have

been

seek

Information on

this

project,

my

searches h

ampered

by

my be i

ng on

wrong

side

of

the

Atlantic. One ite

was

paracularly

intereste

d

in was

report prepared on the ~ r i a l s

but

spite letters to various

organizatio

was unable to track down this do

ment.

At one stage

I

even advertise

useum

Ordnc nce,

and

although

I

not find the trials report I did gai

valuable ally

'In

country'

in

the

form

useu

Ord

nan

2


13/32

Adam Giebel.

Another

ally

was

closer

to

home,

as Phil

Dyer

had

also

been

seeking

data on the tank.

With help

from

these two

added to

my own

re

searches

over

a period of time, I was

able to

reconstruct the following

sce

nario.

In

March 193 '., the

Vickers factory

in

Chertsey reported

that

a machine

was

r

eady

to go

to the

USA. A

US War

Department

report

of 25

April

1931

stated that "in

order

to secure a

test of

a representative

modern

British mili

tary vehicle a contract had been nego

tiated with

Vickers-Armstrongs.

Ltd..

fora

thirty

da y test ofVickers-Armstrong

6-Ton

Tank".

This

tank

duly travelled

the

Atlantic

and was tested.

The

Balti

more

Sun

carried

a

photo of

the tank

taken on July 6 1931, stating that it

had been

"through

a

fortnight's severe

trials with complete success".

While

it

was

under

test,

a

series of photos

was

taken.

Copies

of some of these are at

the

Tank

Museum in Bovington.

En

gland,

and I asked

Adam

for any more

from the

series.

I was surprised and

pleased to actually

receive microfilm

copies from Phil

Dyer.

from which

I

was

able

to produce prints showing many

details of the

tank.

Equallyvaluable

were

the captions

contained in

each negative. These tell

me

that the

tank

was

photographed

on

15and 22June as well as 6 July. which

would agree with the

two

week trial

period. A

further

report

via

Phil origi

nating from the Office of the Chief of

Ordnance

of23

November 1931 refers

to

the

trials,

and

tantaliSingly

men

tions OCM Items 7948 which seems to

be

the

trials

report

,

and

Item

8905

which is

a series

of remarks

and

con

cerning the report. I have a

copy ofthe

notes,

but not

the

report

The November document also re

fers to

00451.25/3852

of 11 August

1931

from the Chief

of Infantry 'enu

merating

the

desirable characteristics'

of the

tank,

and recommending that

two be procured for comparison with

the T5 Medium Tank, and

also

00451.25/3879 of9September recom

mending

that

five

be

purchased

to

use

in

a test

comparison

with a

platoon

of

1'3

Medium

Tanks.

However,

things

were

not ll good. To

quote the report

verbatim

"While the study

of

the test report

by

Aberdeen

Proving Ground of the

Vickers-Armstrongs Light

Tank

Mark

E and

the

requests

of the

Chief

of

Infantry

and

the Chief

of Cavalry

that a

number of

these tanks be

procured

at

January 995

once for tactical tests

at

Fort Benning

and

in the Mechanized

Cavalry Regi

ment respectively.

indicate

that this

tank is one of the best.

ifnot

the best,

track-laying tank (sic) now

known.

the

lack

of

available funds

at

this

time

or in

the near

future

makes it trupracticable

to purchase five tanks for engineering

studies

by the

Ordnance Department

and a tactical test by the

Infantry. The

sub-committee recommends

that

ne

gotiations

for

the

procurement of

VickerS-Armstrong Light

Tank

Mark E

be discontinued until

funds

become

available unless in the meantime an

other tank be found more

desirable."

So.

the

tank

was

thought good and

worthyoffurtherpurchaseandnodoubt

development.

but then as

before

and

after there were no

funds

available

for

the

project.

All was not lost.

The

tank

itself no doubt went back

to

the

U.K.

What happened to it there I cannot say.

I suspect it

may

well have been recon

ditioned

and sold to another customer.

but without knowing

its serial number

I

cannot say.

Back in the US, the suspension

principles were

used in

Tl

E4light tank,

rebuilt

as the

TIE6

light

tank

of 1932,

giving

it

an

appearance not unlike a

single

turret SixTon - indeed,

one of

the

1931

series

of photos

appeared

in the

"TIE6 (Vickers-Armstrong

Suspen

sion)" file

where Adam

Giebel located

it.

The same suspension featured on the

T2 light

tank

of

1934.

Tests showed

that

vertical

volute

suspension gave a

better ride. and this was used on US

light tanks

until 1944.

The twin turret concept also had

its day.

The T5 Combat Car and M2A1.

M2A2 and M2A3 Light Tanks

used

them from 1935 thru 1938. and the

'Mae Wests' were used to

train a

gen

eration of tankers. Thereafter a return

was made to single

turrets

.

Oddly. the part

played

by

the

Mark

Vickers Annstrong

light tank at AberdeeTL

The

U S UghtTank

T1E6 in

a

photo taken December

7.

1932.

3


14/32

E

in later

US tank

development

is little

recorded. Even

RP Hunnicutt's master

work

"Stuart

- A History of the Ameri

can Light a n k ~ hardly mentions the

trials although records

the

use of

the

suspension on

the

TI series vehicles,

However. I

am sure that somewhere

is

a

dusty

archive the original

document

still survives. Should

you

be the

one

to

find it.

pause

a while to recall this

article, and ifyou

can

sent me a

photo

copy of it Thank youl

Data -

typical

for

the series, taken various

reports

and

sales literature

Length

15'

Width T i l "

Height

6'1" (Alt

A) or

7'2" (Alt

B)

Engine Armstrong Siddeley 4-cylinder hori

zontal, air

cooled petrol. developing

80bhp

at

2,000 rpm

The Vickers·Armstrong

6·ton tank outside the

headquarters

oj

the 3rd

Corps

Area. Baltimore,

Maryland

on

uly

6,

1931

Fuel capacity

40

gallons,

giving a radiu

action

of

150-160 miles

or

seven

h

operations

Maximum road speed, maximum slop

degrees, ca n cross 8' trench and

2'6"

ver

obstacle

Weight

6

tons

17cwt

or 15,344lbs (Alt

tons 19cwt

or

15,5681bs

(Alt B)

Armor 5mm to 13mm (l7mrn as an

op

Armament two machine guns

with

6

rounds (less fitted

with

radio) (All

A)

One 47mm with

50

rounds and one

co-a

mg

with

4,000 rounds (Alt B)

Published

sources

Mechanised

Force

- British Tanks betw

the Wars by David Fletcher.

publishe

HMSO London 1991 covers all British

cial and commercial designs of the 19

and 1930's

Stuart

- A

History of the American

L

Tank Volume

1

by RP Hunnicutt,

publi

by Presidio Press

In

1992

details

US

tank development up

to

1945

The

Vickers

Tanks from

Landshlp

to C

lenger by C F

Foss

and

P McKenzie,

lished

Patrick

Stephens Ltd 1988

cove

Vickers

deSigns,

but has

little

to

say on

Six Ton Tank and much of that conf

with other sources

.

Thanks and

Acknowledgements

- In

al

betical order

Phil Dyer, for

sharing his

Ings on

the Mark

E

with me

David

Flet

of the

Tank

Museum.

Bovlngton for

with

finding

material

In

the museum

arch

and

also

for

his comments

Adam

Giebel for his efforts In

see

the Mark

E

report,

and for fOIWarding

ous related Items

In

all

cases,

I

hope

th

operation between us has been mutu

beneficial.

NOW/AU WE .\

~ A V E To

o

IS

MAKE

IT f l ~ E I

10,((0

U u 5 I

PER M I ~ U r E !

,.,.. t .M:hr ;11 U

N{AR

L NKLESS

Ammvm

riq /i_till..., r K OIOV'l

Alilfih#t A... v . .

I

.

i .,

C, 9

'

(lI

I}

853·0560

14

Museum

Ordna


15/32

Well hopefully you have ll noticed

thatMuseum

Ordnance

s a

bit

longer

this issue. I hope that i t will still meet

with everyone's

approval.

I

do not

foresee

the

publication

growing

any

larger

in

the

near

future, I

think that

32 pages will give

me

the space I need

(and

can

fill)

on

a

routine

basis, I will

try to avoid splitting articles

into

two

parts

from

now on.

However,

i f

I do

receive a good article

that

is too long

an d

would require dedicating too much

space to a single subject in one issue, I

may feel i t necessary

to

split an article.

As

many

niche magazines do from

time

to time, I take a small amount of

space and

remind

everyone

that

I

am

always

interested in receiving articles

on

armor

and

artillery

subjects

that

you find interesting.

Most

likely,

if you

like

the subject matter,

most

of

MO

readers

will as well.

I apprecIate all of

the comments

I

have received in

the past

(both good

and

not so good)

and

would

encourage

you to

let

me kpow what's on your

mind . On the back of your renewal

notice is

always

a good

place

(or a

phone

call).

According to a

recent

interview with

the

president of General Dynamics Land

Systems (GDLS) there are four differ-

ences

between MIA2s delivered

to the

US Army

and

those destined

for

the

Saudi forces.

They

are:

1)

a

Jaguar

radIo,

2) an external auxilIary power

unit (a 2 kW system by Tiernay Tur

bines mounted

in

the

left

rear turret

bustle),

3) an advanced

IVIS (a dIgital

InterVehicular Information System), 4

and 4)

a

mine clearing

capability,

Recently about 100 "obsolete" M-60s

were

dumped from barges off the coast

of Alabama

between June

and October

of

this

year. The

project.

codenamed

REEFEX94.

Citing the training benefits (?)

and

the

environmental advantages,

the

anua ry

1995

tanks will fonn

artlftcal reefs

that will

promote

marine development.

The

Environmental ProtectionAgency

(EPA)

set

the standards ofpreparation for the

tanks so

that

all

harmful materials and

products would be removed before the

dumping.

A

number

of

vehicles

from the Ab-

erdeen

Proving

Ground

(NOT

the mu

seum) are being prepared for dumping

off

Ocean

City, MD for

thIs

same

pur

pose,

Any scuba divers in the Gulf area

been

down to see them yet?

guestion: Which NATO country

is

the

only

one

targeted

by

ballistic missiles

since

1945?

Answer at the

end

of this

column.

Phil Dyer took

me to

task

for "highly

recommendIng"

a book entitled Steel

Wheeled Christie in the September 1994

issue. He included a

great

deal

of

material to

support

a contention

that

the

author

(Edward Christie)

did

not

present a fair, complete, and honest

(my words, not Mr. Dyer's) on the

sub

ject. This book was reviewed in ARMOR

magazine and AFV NEWS in January

1986,

with follow on letters In the July

issue of ARMOR

and

in the May

and

September issues of

AFV NEWS. Mr.

Dyer also provided a list of

errors and

a

comparison ofexcerptsfrom the Christie

book to previously published articles

on

the

same subject that appeared in

the

book

rather

"similar."

After reviewing the information

pro

vided

by

Mr.

Dyer

and

reviewing

the

articles in the mentioned magazines,

the "highly recommended" remark

is

not warranted. However, iftaken in the

context, with

(and only

with) the infor-

mation

provided by Mr. Dyer,

the book

would

silll

be

useful

in some

ways,

though not

as

a

balanced

document of

the life

and

work of

Christie.

The work

that Walter Christie did was important

to the

development of tanks in the

U.S.

and elsewhere

regardless

ofhis person

ality and the writing

skills, style,

and

ethics

of

his son.

Mr

. Dy

er

also noted

that

the

photo

on page 4,

upper right

is a Model 1931

NOT a Model 1931,

My thanks

to

Phil

Dyer

for his

com

ments

and I encourage others

that

ei-

ther take exception to , disagree

with,

or

have

coments

to

add to

articles,

please

send

them In.

They

will enl1ghten us all.

For those that might

be

interested, Vol-

ume 2 of Tech Intell is being worked on

and I hope

to

release

It

sometime In

February/March 1995, Those

that

have bought

Volume

One will receive a

pre-publication notice and offer in the

mail.

Many

thanks

to everyone

that

wrote

and

called with information

about the

Czech homebuilt armored car in

the

last

issue.

As they all noted, the vehicle

was built around the running

gear

of

the WWII Beobactungspanzer

RR

7

(Sd,Kfz

254).

The

original

vehIcle

was

designed by Sauer of

Austria and put

into limited

service

with the Germans

(most photographs show I t in North

Africa,

The

article

stated that i t

was

built from a discarded

British

armored

car, This information

came

from sev-

eral newspaper

articles written

about

the incident. Perhaps

they meant that

the steel body was built from the ar

mored

car? Or

who

knows-they

might

not

have known

what they were

talking

about

One

reader, who I still

hope

to

hear

from believes

that

this man (with some

sort

of

an

armored

vehicle)

was

killed

in

a shootout In California. He

was

going

to look through his files

and

if he could

find

anything,

would

send

it along to

MO.

The museum recently

gained

a new

U.S. MI09A3 self-propelled howitzer.

t

Is on display behind

the museum

building.

Peter Cooke

has sent

along a list of

photos that

are available through

him

from

the

New Zealand Archives. He

can

provide 6x8 ($NZ15)

or 8xlO

($NZ25)

plus a fee for

postage.

The

photos are

mainly

from WWII

with

a fair

number

from the Malayan Emergency

and

a few

Post-war

New

Zealand

vehicles. The

list he

sent has

several

hundred

photos

described

and

he says that this list

represents only about

half

of

those

available.

Peter

is

the publisher ofTank1V a

newsletter

on

AFV's, For

more

infor-

mation on his photo

service

contact

him

directly

at Box 9724,

Wellington,

New Zealand.

In

the

last issue we reported

that the

unarmored version of the

M26

Dragon

Wagon

tractor was

back

on

display

along the Mile

of

Tanks.

Due

to

its poor

condition,

it has

since been

relocated "behind the fence"

until It

can have some

work

done

on

It.

'PUBIS! UB!fBlI UB uo suollBIIBlSU! s n

lB

sdHsSIUI [llldAdS Pd.lij BAqn JIodJ.l.L

uo SP!B.l s n dlH .ldlJB '9961

uI

'Arell

15


16/32

Milit

ary

Vehicle

Enthusiasts in

Russia

Several

years

ago.

useum

Ordnance

ran a short article on the ISKATEL

club

is

Russia.

This adventerous group is

involved

in

a

number

of

projects.

but

their

favortte

is searching

and discov

ertng WWII relics.

When

we

first ran

an article on

them it was regarding

their

trip to the

Kurile Islands. This trtp.

taken

in

1991.

found

numerous Japanese

tanks

Type 95s) and field

guns and

emplace

ments.

They

remain today virtually as

they

were in the 1940s.

Recen tly. Serge Kosenkowsent sev

eral

photos of a projeclthat resulted

in

a

restored

artifact

and the

discovery of

several more.

As

the photos

will

show.

in

the

early 1990s they found

a T-20

in the

Smolensk

region that

was almost

com

pletely submerged in a bog. Through

their efforts. and

obviously with

some

help

from

friends

In

high places

a

helicopter for Instance), they reclaimed

the

T-20

and

have since

restored it. I

have used several

of

the photos to

illustrate

their work and also to show

the

T-20 since

there Is a kit for

Russia

on the T-20 due

out

soon in the US).

This

photo. taken in ay 1990. shows

what

ISKATEL started with. The T·20 w s a

completely

under withjust the top superstructure showing.

Part

of

th ISKATEL Club on

of

th ir w

After the discovery. the

group

began making

plans

to recovery th diminutive Soviet artil·

RIGHT: The plates in

th foreground are

anchored to

act as

a

basefor the

block

and

lery tractor.

They

retumed to th site

inJune.

1991

nd

began

th

task of

exr:avating th T·

tackle system that was used to pull the T 20

from

the mud.

20 the oldfashioned

way-by

hand

16

useum

Ordna


17/32

The

T-20

Komsomolets

beJore

and

aJter

With

some

air support,

the

T-20

was

lifted

out oj the

og

and sent

to

await restoration.

The two photos above

illustrate a German

The remains

oj

an upside

down nd

submerged

T-

34/76 300kmJrom

Moscow.

PaK

38 that has been

recovered. I m not

sure what

if

any work

has

been done

to

restore this artifact. Other

photos

show the

trails, a closeup

oj the breech mechanism

and a limber oj some sortJound at the site.

Serge tells

Museum Ordnance

th t he

would

be interested in

selling the

Gennan antitank

gun.

He did

not

indicate

a price

oj

what the

regulations

might be

on shipping.

anuary

1995

The Iskatel Club,

and

Serge

Kosenkow,

can be reached at P.O. Box 99-1, Smolensk

Region, Desnogorsk, 216532, Russia. They are

offering

tours and the opportunity to

join them on their

expeditions {Including

the

recovery

of the T-34J They seem

Interested In

tailoring a

tour

ofRussia s military history to your tastes. Th ey have also

indicated

that they are

offering

a photo service for about 6O/85e

per

photo. Contact

them for

more Infonnatlon.

17


18/32

994

E DITORIAL INDEX

FEATURES

1993 Editorial Index

Azhzarit (Israeli T-55-based APC)

Canadian

Universal

with a Punch

Czech-Built

Homemade

Armored

Car to

Freedom

Egypt

vs.

Libya, The Border

Conflict of July

1977

Future

Main Battle Tank

Future

U.S.

Tank Demonstrator

German B Bcm Pak 43/3 Ammunition

Ready

Rack

German Infra-Red Panther

Grab On To That MI0

(MI0

turret grabhandles)

Heavy Recon: The

Sd.Kfz.

243/3

Japanese Type 97

Flamethrower

Lineage

of

the

Challenger

Tank

Program

LSV: Desert

Storm

Uncovers New Solutions to Old Challenge

Marmon-Herrington Light

Tanks

Marmon-Herrington Tanks in Australia

Medium

T.3

Christie, The

Merkava:

Evolution

of a Battle Tank

Mighty

Beast:

Jagdtiger, The

M24 Chaffee Light Tank, The

MP44:

Forerunner

of

the

Modern Assault

Gun

Nahverteidigungswaffe

Practice

Pillbox

Self-Propelled Artillery: Soviet Style (SU -76)

Sherman

That

Never Was, The

South African

Olifant

(Part 1

South African Olifant (Part

2

Soviet

Tanks: Can·t Tell

the

Players Without a Scorecard

Tracking

the Independent

605.

Panzerj


19/32

Japanese

Ground Self-Defense

Force

Armored Vehicles

Type 61

Main

Battle Tank MB1) manuJactured by

Mitsubishi

Heavy Industries and entered

seroice with Japanese

GroundSelf DeJense

Force JGSDF) in 1962.

Approximately

400 are

still in seroice. Even though

it

is slowly being phased

ou t

oj seroice, some improvements are

still being made

tanks

have been equipped with

infrared

driving and

searchlights

and/or six

smoke

dischargers similar to those

on

the newer

Type

7

MBT. The size and weight oj the

Type 61 were dictated by the limits that wouldpermit being carried on

Japanese

railcars and

throu h narrow tunnels .

Background

.

With the defeat ofJapan in 1945, one of

the primary

Allied

war

aims was

that,

Japan is not to have an

Army, Navy,

Air Force, Secret Police organization or

ciVil aviation said General of the Army

Douglas MacArthur,

Supreme Com

mander

Allied

Powers

(SCAP). For five

years these orders were

carried out

with a

vengeance;

plants that were

earmarked

for reparations

to the

Allies

included

314 aircraft factories,

25

weap

ons

and air research centers, 119 steel

mills,

19

machine-tool manufacturing

plants,

18 shipyards, 6 synthetic

rub

be r

factories

and

131

military arsenals.

This determination to demilitarize

Japan, also extended to the civilian

sector, with Japan's post-war Consti

tution of 3 May 1947 (as

approved

by

Allied occupation authorities) rejecting

war

or

the

threat or use ofarmed

force

as

an instrument

of

national

policy.

Only three

years

later, the

desire

by

the U.

S. to limit

Japan's

production

of

military eqUipment

and

supplies

changed,

with the

beginning

of the

Korean

War.

Alarm

ofhaving to provide

security

for Japan, and fight a

war

on

the Korean

peninsula

led to the

en

couragement of the

Japanese govern

ment to provide some of their own

security. Not only

was

a militaryestab

lishment

requested

but

much of the

eqUipmentand factories slated

forrepa

rations were returned to their Japa

nese

owners .

In July 1950

the establishment

of

a Self-Defense Force (called the Na

tional Police Reserve) was

accomplished

along

with

the

increase of

Japanese

logistical

support

for the

Korean War at

an ever quickening pace. By

the begin

ning of

1951 almost three-quarters

of

Japanese

industry was directlyengaged

in what was known as defense

prod

uc

tion . To

help

kick-start

the

Japanese

Self-Defense

Force the

U.S. provided

nearly $900

million

in military aid in

the early 1950s. Along with encourag

ing the Japanese government to estab

lish

a National Police Reserve of75,OOO

men

(equipped with

light infantryweap

ons). on 8 September

1951

a formal

peace

treaty

was finally signed

with

Japan.

Seven months

later the

Na

tional

Police Reserve

was renamed the

National Safety Force

and

expanded to

100,000

men. In

1954 the organization

was renamed again

and

expanded

as

the

Self-

Defense

Agency

which

included

the Ground, Maritime

and

Air Self

Defense

Force.

In

May 1957

the

Japa

nese

government

adopted 'Basic

Policy

for National Defense' along with the

First Defense

Build

-

up

Plan. This plan

was

con

tinuallyexpandedand improved

until July 1979 when a new three year

planning

cycle was

put in

place.

Organization

Size ofthe Self-Defense Force is limited

to a percentage ofGross National Prod

uct 1%), which still allows for a good

size budget proVided the Japanese gov

ernment

doesn't

spend below the

maxi

mum allowed. Members of the Self

Defense Force are considered to be civil

servants like police officers, and enlist-I

By

David R. Haugh

Photos

by

Masahiko Saito

January

1995

Rear view oj

the

Type

61.

9


20/32

Type 74

MBT. Vehicle

shown

is an early Type

74

manuJactured

by

Mitsubishi

Hea

vy

Industries. The Type

74

uses a hydropneumatic suspension

which

can raise to a

maximum

oj65cm or

lower

to 20cm. In seroice wlthJGSDF

since

1973 (approximately. 800 in seroice).

Fire control

includes

a

laser

range j mder and integrated ballistic computer. Prototypes oj

th

Type

74 had

an

automaticloaderand aremotecontrol.50

caliberonthecommander s s tation.

Both were dropped Jrom the production models. In the late 1980 s the Japane

se

started

a

modernization

programJor

th Typ

e

74

including a

thennal sleeve

Jor

the maingun.

additional

armor on top andJront oJthe turret

and

the addition ojpassive night vision equipment.

ment

is voluntary. with more volun

misunderstanding of

goals

.

respon

s i

teers

than

vacancies. This semi-mili

bilities

and

capabilities.

as

in

the

Per

tary/

civil

servant role

has

lead

to

some sian Gulf

crisiS

in 1990;

when

the

confusion

outside

of Japan as to the international community wanted

Ja

role

and

performance of the Japanese

pan

to

contribute

more to the

resolu

military

establishment.

The primary

tion

ofthe crisis. Seeing as

70

percent

mission of

the

Self-Defense Force as

of

Japan

s imported oil came from the

seen by the Japanese governme n t is to region it was felt that a Japanese pres

repulse small

-scale foreign

attack

on ence was logical. A suggestion

to

pro

the

Japanese

homeland.

not act as a Vide Japanese

military personnel

as

projection of

Japanese

power

and po well as

money was

raised. but never

litical will. This

has

lead to some acted on before the end ofthe GulfWa r.

Type

60 Self-propelled Tank Destroyer manuJactured by Komatsu . Slightly over 200 vehicles

oj

this type

were completed

by 1979.

The two

J06mm recoilless rifles can be

elevated

hydraulically Jor a better angle

oj

j lre.

2

Type 74MBT.

A small contingent of Japanese

tary personnel were active in

Ca

dia with

the

UN mission during

but even this use raised

ques

among

the Japanese governmen

pe

ople . The UN

Cambodian

oper

was the

first

projection of

a Japa

military

presence overseas sinc

end of World War II. Japan Its

organized

into four Armyareas

: N

e

rn

Army

in

Hokkaido,

which

ha

larges t c

on

cen tration offorces be

t

was th e

most lik

ely area of

inv

(

Si

tu ated

op

po

site the Soviet Sak

Islan

d and th e Kurile

islands). N

Ea

st

ern Army in central Honshu

Toky

o.

Cen tral Army in Sou

Honshu

an

d on Shikoku

and

We

Army in Kyushu. As of 199

JGSDF had an authorized stren

1

80 ,

000

plus

40,000 :-eserves

Type

6 0

UAPC man uJactured by Mit

D

ev e

lopment beg an

in 1956

with t

p rototype s co

mpleted

in 1957 pro

s tarted 1959 . The Type U

60

was

Ja p

a.ru:se des igned armored vehicle

JuU service after

WWTI Annament: (1

caliber HMG and

(1)

7 62mm

LMG

i:x Jw

useum

Ordn


21/32

Type

74

105mm SP Howitzer manufactured by Komatsu/Japan Steel

Works

. Based on the

Type

73

PC chassis. Entered service in 1975. and was

to

replace

the U.S . supplied

M52

1

05mm

SPH.

Only

20

Type

74s

were

buUt.

the decision

being

made

to

concentrate

effort

on

the 155mm Type 75.

was only

manned

at approximately 85

percent.

The

Ground

forces consist of

12 infantry

divisions

lst. 2nd. 3rd.

4th. 5th.

6th.

8th. 9th.

lOth.

11 tho

12th. 13th - each with one

tank

battal

ion of four companies).

one

armored

division the

7th

stationed on

Hokkaido

with three

tank

battalions). two com

posite

brigades. one

airborne brigade.

one artillery

brigade and two

artillery

groups.

one

helicopter

brigade

with

24

squadrons).

five

engineer

brigades.

one

signal brigade. two

air

defense bri

gades.

an d

one training brigade. Present

eqUipment includes: Tanks;

Type

61,

Type

74

and Type 90 as well as a few

M24 light

tanks. Reconnaissance ve

hicles; Type 82 and Type 87 6x6

ar

mored

vehicles). APCs; Type

SU 60

and

Type 73 a Type 88 MICV is

under

development).

Anti-tank:

106mm

RR

in tracked and

wheeled

mounts. Artil

lery; MI0l l05mm. M2 155mm. and

M

115

203mm

howl

tzers

as

well

as

Type

Type 75 Multiple Rocket Launcher 130mm 30-round manufactured by Komatsu/Nissan.

The

Type

75

entered

service

1975. engine. suspension and

tracks are the same

as

the

Type

73 APe.

approximately

75

vehicles

were

produced.

January

99

Type

75 155mm Self-propelled. Howitzer

manufactured

by Mitsubishi Heavy Indus

tries. NilwnSeikoJyo an d Japan Iron Works.

Development

started

in 1969 two prototypes

completed in

1971-72.

Entered service in

1978. replacing

the

U.S.

supplied

M44 155mm

SPH.

approximately 200 vehicles are in

ser

vice. Outwardly

theType

75

looks very much

like

the U.S.

M

109AL

74 I05mm. Type 75 155mm and MIlO

203mm SP Howitzers.

Rocket

launch

ers; Type 67

MLRS on a

6x6 Nissan

truck chassis)

and

Type

75 130mm

MLRS tracked).

Anti-aircraft;

35mm.

37mm. 40mm

and

75mm guns and

Hawk.

Type

81

and

Stinger misslles.

Other vehicles; Type 67

Armored

Ve

hicle Launched Bridge

based on

the

Type 61 MBT chassis). Type

67

Ar

mored

Engineer

Vehicle.

Type

70 Ar

mored Recovery Vehicle and Type

78

Armored

Recovery Vehicle

based on

Type

74

chassis)

as well

as various

specialized wheeled

and tracked engi-

Type 82

Command and

Communications

Vehicle manLifactured by Komatsu Seisaku-

Jyo and

Mitsubishi

Heavy

Industries.

A 6x6

wheeled armored vehicle. developmentofthe

Type

82 began in 1974

to

a JGSDF require

ment of 250 vehicles. For

ease

of

mainte·

nance and logistics. the Type 82

is eighty

percent

compatible

with

the

Type 87

Recon

naissance and Patrol Vehicle. It is

armed

with

1) M2.50

caliber HMG;

1)

7.62mm

LMG

21


22/32

Type 8 command

and

communications

vehicle.

neer

and

support

vehicles.

Design Rationw

When the

JGSDF was

fonned

i

vehicles

and annorwere supple

U.S.

mostly from

left

over

and

re

tioned

World

War

stocks. T

Sherman

and

M24

Chaffee

m

the bulk

of

the armor,

with v

half-tracks,

1/4-ton

Jeeps

an

ton

and

2 1

/2-ton trucks

filling

force.

Small

arms for

the mo

were

U.S.

weapons.

The drawb

this eqUipmentwas

that

it

was in

cases too large for

the average

nese

to

use

with

comfort and t

size

ofthe vehicles made them

d

to

use

in Japan,

as

well as

defensive

tactics

that

were being

oped.

As

an example, Japanes

cars and tunnels were

too

sma

narrow

to fit

most of the Am

suppled

vehicles.

In response

to the

requirem

a

tailored

force

with

equipment

their

tactics,

a

design progra

started In the late

1950s. One

tage the

Japanese designers

sti

is

that they don t have to consi

possibility of exporting their a

vehicles

so designs

can

centero

best

suits

Self-Defense

Force r

ments and

Japanese

industria

bility.

Equipment N

otes

Being a

small

militaryorganizat

JGSDF

has

been

very frugal

wi

vehicles

and

systems.

Vehicle

were originally to

be replaced

instead been supplemented by

designs. Several Japanese

vehic

are

still in

service

after 30 plus

ABOVE and RIGHT Type 87 Reconnais-

sance

and

Patrol Vehicle manufactured

by

Komatsu

Seisaku Jyo

and

Mitsubishi

Heavy

Industries. Another 6x6 wheeled

amwred

vehicle

the

Type

87 has an all steel

hull and

turret

The

driver

sits on

the vehicle

right,

with the radio operator

to

his

left.

A vehicle

commander and gunner are carried in the

turret Annament l) 25mm cannon; 1)

coaxial 7.62mm LMG.

22

Museum Ord


23/32

Type

78 Armored Recovery Vehicle ARV)

manufactured

by MitsubishL Based

on the

Type

74

MB T

chassis the

prototype

Type

78

ARV was completed in 1974 and

standard-

ized in 1978

Armament

(1) M2 S0

caliber

HMG.

David Haugh

is

the

editor

Annored

Car

a bi-nwnth ly newsletter dedicated

to

the study wheeled military vehicles

throughout history. For nwre inJorma-

tion write to: Armored

Car

556 N. Third

Street

Woodburn

OR 97071.

References

Japanese Ground

Self Defense

Force

Armored

Vehicles

Aoki,

Tsutomu,

Japan's

Defence Indus

tl)',

Military

Technology,

Vol 9

7, Monch

Pub. Grp.,

Bonn,

Germany, 1986.

Bonsignore, Editor,

Dr. Ezio,

The

Mili-

tary Balance

1985/86,

Military

Technol-

ogy, Vol 9 13, Monch Pub.

Grp.,

Bonn,

Germany, 1986.

Bishop,

Chris

and Ian Drul)', Encyclope

dia

of World Military

Weapons,

Aero-

space

Pub.,

Ltd .,

London,

G.B.,

1988.

Chant,

Christopher,

Land Forces

of

the

World, Crescent Books, New York, NY

1990.

Doi,

Hiroshi,

Likelihood

of

a

Resurgence

of

Japanese Militarism, Military Technol-

ogy, Vol 9 7, Monch Pub. Grp., Bonn,

Germany, 1986.

Dupuy, Col. T.N., The Almanac of World

Military Power,

Stackpole Books,

Harris

burg, PA 1970.

Foss

, Christopher F., Jane

's

AFV Recog-

nition Handbook, Jane 's

Publishing

Co.,

Ltd.,

London,

G.B.,

1987

.

Foss, Christopher

F., Jane's Armour

and

Artillery

1981-82,Jane'sPublishing,

Lon-

don,

G.B., 1982.

Foss, Christopher F., Jane's Armoured

Personnel Carriers, Jane's

Pub.,

Co., Lon-

don, G.B.

1985.

Foss, Christopher F., Jane's Light Tanks

and Armoured Cars, Jane's Pub. Inc.,

New York, NY 1984.

Foss, Christopher

and

Terry J. Gander,

Jane's

Military Vehicles and Logistics

1991-92, Jane's Information Group,

Coulson,

G.B.,

1991.

Foss,

Christopher

F.,

Jane's

Pocket Book

ofModemTanks

and Armoured

Fighting

Vehicles, Collier Books, New York, NY

1974.

Foss, Christopher

F.,

Jane's Pocket Book

ofModem

Tanks and Armoured

Fighting

Vehicles, Revised Edition, Jane's

Pub

lishing Co

., Ltd. , London. G.B.,

1981.

Foss, Christopher

F

.• Jane 's World

Armoured

Fighting

Vehicles, St Martin's

Press,

Inc., New York. NY. 1976.

Koku-Fan, World Tank

Annual

'71,

Bunrin-Do

Co., Ltd., Tokyo,

Japan,

1971.

Miller, David,

Modem

Tanks Fighting

Vehicles, Smithmark Pub., Inc., New

York, NY 1992.

Messenger,

Charles,

Tanks Other

Armoured Vehicles, Frederick Warne

Ltd.,

London.

G.B.,

1984.

Pretty, RT.

and

D.H.R

Archer, Jane's

Weapon

Systems 1972-73,

McGraw

Hill

Book

Co . New York, NY 1972.

Summers Jr., Col. HMJY G., The Reluc-

tant

Samurat

Defense

Diplomacy

Vol

9 2, Defense Diplomacy Inc., Mclean,

VA

1991.

Von Senger

und

Etterlin,

F.M.,

Taschenbuch der

Panzer 1969,

J.F.

Lehmanns

,

Munchen,

Germany,

1969.

Westhorp.

Chris, The

World's Armies,

Milital)' Press, New York. NY. 1991.

January

1995

3


24/32

output as 1 48, 1 72 or 1 76 on request. The subject matter is

random, with

an

emphasis

on

vehicles that have never been properly

covered to date. Each shows a minimum of 4 views, others 5 or 6.

Drawings are computer generated at 600dpi for extreme detail.

Presently available drawings

GERMAN POLISH CANADIAN

G

Neubaufahrzeug

G2

Pz

Kpfw

I Ausf F

VK 1801)

G3 Jagdtiger

(SdKfz

186)

G4

SPzSpWg (SdKfz

231)

G5 SPzSpWg (SdKfz 233) (75mm)

G6 SdKfz 252 (munitions carrier)

G7

SdKfz

253

(

ob

servation

post)

GB Pak 40 auf

RSO

(sf)

G9

Jagdpanther

(SdKfz 173)

ITALIAN

Semovente

da 90/53

,

SPG

BRITISH

B1 Stuart I (early

Honey)

B2 Indian Pattern

Carrier Mk.lIA

P C7P Arty Tra

ctor

P2 7TP

Light Tank

FRENCH

F Char Renault

D 1

F2

Char Renault

D 2

AMERICAN

A1

T-28 (T95)

superhvy

A2

M12 155mm GMC

JAPANESE

J1

Ho·Ro

SPG

J2 Ho-Ni

I SPG

J3 Ho-Ni

II SPG

J4 Ho-Ni

III

TO

C Skink

AA

Ta

nk

C2 Lynx

C&R

Carrier

C3 Leopard

Cl

C4 Ram II (late)

C5 Ram Kangaroo

C6 Ram

Badger

C7

Ram

II

O/P

CB

Otter

N ar

C9 C-15 AfTruck

C10

Grizz

ly I

(WW2)

Suggestions for

future scale

drawings in

this

series are welcomed.

NeubaulahrzeU\J lK rI

Available at $2.00 each, with a minimum order of 5 items to merit postage and handling costs.

Single items will be sold at $3.00 each, plus

1

.00 postage.

Order from: GEORGE R. BRADFORD, R.R.32, CAMBRIDGE, ONTARIO, CANADA N3H 4R7.

/

SCALE DRAWINGS 5

BY GEORGE R. BRADFORD

This is

an

attempt to carry on where Bellona Military Prints left off, but

with 1 35 scale plans. For those working

in

other scales I can easily

useum Ordn

Curator s Column

ContinuedJrom Page 3

ernment of the date (a cockade) result

ing in

a "cocked"

hat. The

Vietnam

"boonie" hat is nothing more

than

the

original Swedish

hat

in

a more modern

form.

The wide brimmed

hat was not

suitable

to

wear

at

sea as

it

carried

too

much sail

in

a gale." Naval officers

fastened

t up against the

crown

on

both sides

and

crushed the

crown

to

gether in

a "fore

and

aft" Hne.

In this

form

the

erstwhile

slouch

hat still

appears in some navies around the

world as a dress cover.

Cords of

various

colors

were worn

around

the

base of

the

crown of

the

slouch hat.

and

fo r ornamentation

these cords

had

tasseis at the ends .

while

the

color of hat cord indicated the

regiment. corps. or service of the

wearer

.

The

uniforms

of

the

US Army

and

MarL71e Corps have resulted from an

2.doption of the styles

of

the older na

tions

with such mod1flcations

as

w

ere

[rom

time to time dictated

by local

conditions

or national sentiment. Dur

ing our RevolutionaryWar. we adopted

a

very

French style

uniform.

This was

only natural as

we had

an alliance

with

France . Afte:r

the war

some changes

are made to make the

troops more

comfortable

.

The uniform remains very

French through 1870

.

In

that year. the

Prussians

beat the French

in

the

Franco-Prussian War

and

the United

States adopts the German style of un i

form.

The Marines still retain.

in their

dress unif

orm.

a relic of the

past. The

Marine

"

Dr

ess

Blue"

uniform

has

a

close-fitting standing

collar

which

is

a

holdover from the days when soldiers

and

sailors wore

a "stock."

The original

idea

of

the stock was to make the

soldier

or

sailor

hold their

head

upright

and stand stiffly erect.

I t

dates from

"The Age

of Reason when soldiers

and

sailors were drilled with mathematical

precision

i

nto

every

motion they

per

formed. Marines retained a leather

stock long afterihe

navy

abandoned it

giving s ~ o t he expression

leatherneck. "

Mili

tary

ecessity

has

oft

en dic

tated

the color

of

the clotiling worn by

troops

in th e field. C

onfederate o o p s

wore

"butter nu t" b

ecause of

a

lac

:. of

gray dye. Going fu r ther back in A:neri

can history we find the Royal American

Regimer.t adopting Green over Red

be

cause of the necessity

to

fight

Indi

a

ns

in

a

bushwhacking

form

of

warfare

rather

than in the

more

formalize

and

column.

Today

the US

Army and

M

Corps wear a

battle

dress

un

The first

such instance

of

such

form

was

the adoption of the

"k

color for

British tro

o

ps

in

India.

is an East Indian world

meaning

colored" and replaced the

tradi

red

uniforms

ofthe British.

By

th

World War,

most

cou

ntries

had

ad

a subdued color for their "field

fo

rm

,

and v e had replaced

the

man

patt

ern

'Nith a

British pa

uniform

.

The uniforms of both office

enlis ted men in the US Navy

ra ther closely

in

style, color,

an

mo s

e

H

om in

the Britis

b Royal

Some of

the

in t

e

resting

traditions

la tter sen -ice may

-x seen even

nav

al

service .

For instance. the

neckerchi

ef wo

rn alike Britis

Am

erican sa il

ors w

as made blac

Tr

af

alg

ar

as

an

emblem

of

mou

fo r the Grea t Lord Nelson, anci the

wh ite s trip

es

around the collar w

pl

aced

to co

mmem

or8.te Nelso::t's

g

re

a t victorie s ; Co

penhagen

, th

and Trafalgar.

Com e and visit us at the Ord

Muse

um

24

http:///reader/full/commemor8.tehttp:///reader/full/commemor8.tehttp:///reader/full/commemor8.tehttp:///reader/full/commemor8.tehttp:///reader/full/commemor8.tehttp:///reader/full/commemor8.tehttp:///reader/full/commemor8.tehttp:///reader/full/commemor8.te


25/32

MUSEUM ORDNANCE

Museum

Ordnance

Specials

Museum Ordnance announces a series ofpublications using the 24-page magazine fonnat. Each

publication in the series will feature either a particular vehicle, a series of vehicles, or a conflict!

engagement.

Museum Ordnance Special

#1

Museum Ordnance Special #2

M88Al Armored

Recovery

Iron

Coffins:

Italian

Medium

Vehicle Tanks

- M13

and M14

An

indepth photo study of the U.S.

More than

60

photos, illustrations. and

Army's primary ARV. More than

80

drawings depict these

WWII

tanks.

BACK

ISSU S

Miss

an

issue?

Get

them

while

you can.

September

1991

May 1993

November 1991

July

1993

January 1992

Sept.

1993 SO

March 1992

November 199 3

May

1992

January 1994

July 1992

March 1994

September 1992

~

1994 SO

November

1992 Jttl 1994 SO

January 1993

Sef't. 1994 SO

March

1993 November 1994

50- indicates this issue is sold out

- - indicates that there are

10

or

less

copies remaining

$3.00

each U.S.

(25¢ postage.

Maryland

residents

add

5%

sales

.

tax). foreign $4 .25. U.S. funds

only.

Museum Ordnance. POB 5884.

Darlington. MD 21034

photos and line drawings detail the

exterior and interior

of

this vehicle.

r

useum Ordnance Special

#3

M26 Pershing

(Available

Dec. IS)

NE

\..

The interior and exterior of this U.S. tank is

detailed with more than

60

photos and line

drawings detail the exterior and interior

of

this vehicle.

r

useum Ordnance Special #4

German Elefant (Available Ja n . 1

\..

This study includes text by Tom Jentz, 20+

unpublished interior photos of the APG

PORTRAYAL

PRESS

Elefant, and

40+

additional photos

i

Large 48 page catalog - $3

or free with

an

order

P.O.

Box

1190

$7.95 each

II

Andover.

NJ

07821

Postage:

u.s : $1.00 for the

f1rst

, +4S¢ for each after.

Phone

(201) 579-5781

._

"

Foreign: $2.00 for first, +4S¢ for each after. (surface)

Recommended

phone

time

$3.00 for first. 4S¢ for each after. (airmail)

Darlington Productions

9amEST

P.O. Box 5884

u.s. funds only.

BOOKS

MANUALS

Maryland residents add S%

tax.

D ~ r l i n g t o n MD

POSTERS

LUBE CHARTS

21034

First

museum ordnance jan 95

Documents