m26/m46 conversion
 

hi guys the next project in the planning stage is an m26/m46 arv
but the only reference on one are these photo's i've found
it needs to be based on the m26 chassis at least(due to getting a spare one:D)
not sure if it's going to be modelled on an actual variant or if a bit of artistic licence might come in a bit
so if anyone out there might be able to help it would be greatly appreciated;);)

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

You'll want to get your hands on the Osprey book and I think Schiffer book by Culver on the Pershing/Patton. Besides those, you're lucky to have the best source on those right here on this forum! No, not me! Pattoncommder! :D

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

cheers on the books swath, i was hoping bill might "inject" some of his knowledge;)[8D]

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

The M-46 on the lft looks like one of the Turkish Brigade's tanks during the Korean War. They are only ones I know that used those cages designed for anti grenades etc. I'lll have to do some looking in Dick Hunnnicuts book. The Engineer tank was only a prototype that never got into production. For a VTR we had the M-74 until the M-88 came out and an Engineer tank was never developed on the 46 or 47 chassis. I believe the gun used on that was the same as the M-45, a 105 Howitzer. Never saw one, so will research that also. If you're doing a M-46, the entire back deck has to be rebuilt. The 46-47 had a totally unique back deck based on the Continental V-12 engine and outside muffler system. I'm waiting for the conversion kits that are being designed now. Want to do a variation on the HL Pershing, do an m-45. Only 187 made and used only in korea.
Bill

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

thanks for the info bill as always you come up with the goods:D:D:D:D
i was looking for something which i could build a dozer blade on at the very least
as always the search will go on
your m45 does look good though and a nice conversion so may have to do that one if nothing else comes to light again many thanks for your help;):D:D:D

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

we did have dozer blades on some M-46's, but don't know about the Pershings. The weight of the M-26 was really too much for the Ford GAA and don't think it was up to ading a snowplow.[&o]

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

looking at the info available i might go for the m45 with a dozer blade :D
do you have any photos of the back deck as reference or lead me to any as from what i can make out on the pics of your tanks all that changed was the main gun.
just wondering how much work is involved in knocking up an m46

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

Bill (or anyone else who knows)

What percentage of Pershings in WWII had their side skirts removed???

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

don't know that one yhr but my personal choice is off

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

Yes I kind of like the look too, but just want to find out if they existed like this in the second world war.

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

I'm far from an authority on this, but most if not all pics I've seen of Pershings in Germany in WW2, have been ones with side skirts still attached. Personally, I prefer with, than without on the Pershing, but prefer the other way round with the Sherman!

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

I don't think they intentionally took them off. They were usually torn off or damaged so much by enemy fire and obstacles that the crews then removed what was left of them. I like them off too.

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

Don't really know on WW II, but since they only entered combat in ETO in April 45, they only had 5 months to put up with them...they are a royal "extreme discomfort in the posterior", and they just get in the way, road trash gets caught up in them and they get snagged on heavy bushes or shot up. Just have to look at the many photos and decide what unit you want to do. In Korea, some units took them off immediately, some removed the front and rear sections, and the Marines showed us the trick on folding up the center pieces to stow more MG ammo. None of our M-46s had them.

On that idea of fitting a dozer to an M-45...none of them had a dozer. Only 187 made and used only in korea as infantry support. Stilll, a neat tank and not a tough conversion.

Here's a view of the back deck of an M-46 and a view of the sprocket showing elevated position and addition of compensating idler wheel. Big diff between ther 26 and 46. 47 was identical to the 46.

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

many thanks bill
think i will go for the m45 and use artistic licence and stick a dozer blade on the front
i now it's not correct but hey thats the point of having a scale model if you can't do what you want with it
a bit like the hobart funnies
even the m46 conversion doesn't look to daunting apart from the re-location of the sprocket wheel and idler
but if i went that far might as well do an m60:D:D:D:D:D

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

Which M-60? I tested that pile of scheisse back in 1959-60 at (then) Camp Irwin, CA. I reported that there were only two good things about the tank...the gun and the fire control system, both of which were British. :eek:The rest of the tank was crap. [:'(]Everyone hated the "new"dielsel and the fact that some idiot decided that shocks were not needed, caused us to get really beat up travelling through the desert terrain.[:@] The A2 was an attempt to improve it, but it was still too big and slow of a mass for the firepower. [&o]

If you want to do a '46, I can get you some detailed, close shots of one we have here at Ft Jackson, and a lot is still in my memory banks. ;) But, it will take a LOT of work on the grill doors. May want to wait for the conversion kit...or get a 1;35 Trumpter model. put it on the copy machine and blow it up to scale :D :D :D :D .

My M-45 is pretty accurate and I could send you some photos. The mantlet has to be beefed up and closed in on the sides. The Coax is BELOW the 105, not in line as with the Pershing, [X(]a muffler has to be built on the rear and the gun travel lock is mounted on the blower motor housing and locks into a piece on the base of the mantlet. Swapping the 90 to 105 is no problem. [8D]

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

thanks for the offer bill would love to have you on side thinking on the m46
if you could help with the detail shots it would be very much appreciated:D:D:D;)
might just get away with the back deck as i see what you mean all those grills[&o][&o][:o][:o]
the exhaust doesn't look a big headache,Is it similar to the bulldog but with it starting in the centre and working out to the mufflers

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

I'll get some '46 back deck shots in the next couple days. Hre;'s some views of my M-45.

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

disregard photo #3 travel lock...it was wrong and I changed it and built a correct one that works by inserting a pin through it and an eye at the base of the mantlet. Pic shows the side of the beefed up mantlet. Here's a couple more showing the TC's cal 50 mount on the gunner's periscope shield. Same as m-46.

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

If you want an ARV, how about something different like this:

http://www.jedsite.info/tanks-papa/p...t12-intro.html

And here's what the M45's barrel really looks like:

http://www.jedsite.info/tanks-papa/p...m45-intro.html

The Sherman 105 barrel is way too big for this vehicle.

HTH


Jeff

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

Mr. Bill,

I would like to add that there is one attribute of the M-60 which you seem to have overlooked. If you are dismounted and on the way to picnic with our little brothers in beautiful Southeast Asia, The M-60 was a REALLY nice thing to have between you and those other guys with the AKs.

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

Hi
Is it possible that the canvas cover is making the 105 barrel appear shorter than it really is? The barrel on the M45 photo in the Vanguard book looks a lot longer (and more like the one on the Sherman).
Geoff

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

It's not so much the length but more the guage of the barrel and also the pics I have seen (the 'drawing' I used is a bad example) the end of the barrel is slightly tapered. I've never been a big fan of the stock Tamiya 105mm barrel. It's just too thick.

Not a personal attack, just an opinion. :D


Jeff

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

Ah well, you have the advantage of me there. The only photograph I have access too has a cover on the muzzle, so I can't see the taper. I will bow to your greater knowledge. :)
Geoff

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

hey bill can i add that is one nice m45 conversion you've got there hope my 46 is half as good[8D][8D][8D]
earlier you mentioned a conversion kit for the 46 do you by chance have a link or some photos?

Rob

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

I'm waiting eagerly for the conversion kit to M-46. I'll do two models. No photos. I intend to take some I the next day or so. We have an m-46 here at Ft Jackson...only one outside of Bovington I have seen. As soon as I get some photos. I'll post them.;)

Hey 123spat, We didn't have any M-60s in Nam. Latest we had there were M-48A3s.[>:] In my opnion, having worked with them a number of years, the M-60s were just as awkward and clumsy as the M-48s. I had 48, 48A1, A1 with dozer and 48A2, and for a short while was saddled with a T-97 flame tank. After spending so much time with very nimble 41s, 46's and 47s, the 48's were just slow, wallowing pigs. [:o] Going from 48.6 to 52 tons and from 23 inch to 28 inch tracks with the same engine was a bit too much. Last M-60A3 I drove could max out at 18 mph.[:'(] Driving an M-41 sportster will spoil you on speed and maneuverability, but have to admit, the M-60 would make a nice backstop.;) Now the M-1A1 is a totally different animal and has everything...with the corresponding price tag. [X(]

On the M-45, I'm not sure many even had a convas mantlet cover. None that I recall in Korea had covers, other that the partial mantlet side canvas as they had all been converted from older M-26s. But I have a photo of a post war training area that shows M-45's with a full mantlet cover like the M-46. Th M-45 mantlet was thicker with an added inch or two of armor, so the canvas would have to be custom made for that tank. My 105 howitzer was made from a Vietnam era radio antenna and is the correct length with a slight taper, but just may possubly be a slight fraction too thick.

As soon as I get some M-46 photos, I'll post them:D

Bill

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

Bill, that M45 mantlet was 8 inches thick. I read they did it to help balance the gun in the turret.

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

Here's the M-46 pic. May have to send them 4 at a time. Note this has been modified in removing the 2d and 4th return roller and the pistol port has been welded over....why???? Note also that this has the original sand/dust shields and you can plainly see how the center sections fold up.

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

OK, they all took...something blinked with the computer so hope it didn't kill this post....will send it anyhow and see....if closer pics are needed, i can take. When the Museum is settled....ther are moving back in next week after renovation....I would like to get the key, traverse the turret to the side, sweep the leaves off and shoot the back deck complete.

Bill

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

just noticed the compensating idler is missing from the right side. [X(]Strange...Also the spare tracks are mounted backwards...the chevrons should be facing the tank....with the center guides on this side, the crew would have to dismantle the tracks and move the center guides to the other direction[:@]....this was probably done for show. [:'(]

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

WOW bill many many thanks for those photo's
did notice the right side comp idler missing thought it was my eye's LOL
the back deck does look like it's gonna be a fun job thought of doing it in thin brass sheet for ease of the louvres.
The exhaust and rear plate look relatively straight forward[X(][X(]
the only real dramatic change being the change in drive and the positioning (to make em work with the stock boxes)

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

forgot I have a Trumpeter 1;35 scale M-46....here's the back deck. Detail is very good,
Bill

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

Great pics Bill! When you get a chance could you find out which company made that particular tank? Chrysler or Fisher? I think the shape of the blower housings are different between the manufacturers even taking into account the 400cfm and 1000cfm blower sizes.

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

[quote]ORIGINAL: pattoncommander

I'm waiting eagerly for the conversion kit to M-46. I'll do two models. No photos. I intend to take some I the next day or so. We have an m-46 here at Ft Jackson...only one outside of Bovington I have seen. As soon as I get some photos. I'll post them.;)

Hey 123spat, We didn't have any M-60s in Nam. Latest we had there were M-48A3s.[>:] In my opnion, having worked with them a number of years, the M-60s were just as awkward and clumsy as the M-48s. I had 48, 48A1, A1 with dozer and 48A2, and for a short while was saddled with a T-97 flame tank. After spending so much time with very nimble 41s, 46's and 47s, the 48's were just slow, wallowing pigs. [:o] Going from 48.6 to 52 tons and from 23 inch to 28 inch tracks with the same engine was a bit too much. Last M-60A3 I drove could max out at 18 mph.[:'(] Driving an M-41 sportster will spoil you on speed and maneuverability, but have to admit, the M-60 would make a nice backstop.;) Now the M-1A1 is a totally different animal and has everything...with the corresponding price tag. [X(]

On the M-45, I'm not sure many even had a convas mantlet cover. None that I recall in Korea had covers, other that the partial mantlet side canvas as they had all been converted from older M-26s. But I have a photo of a post war training area that shows M-45's with a full mantlet cover like the M-46. Th M-45 mantlet was thicker with an added inch or two of armor, so the canvas would have to be custom made for that tank. My 105 howitzer was made from a Vietnam era radio antenna and is the correct length with a slight taper, but just may possubly be a slight fraction too thick.

As soon as I get some M-46 photos, I'll post them:D

Bill

[/quot M 60 CEV was in SE ASIA and maybe the bridge layer

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

Hi clickster, where did you get the info on the M-60 CEV in Nam? I did some in depth research for my museum last year and was informed very flatly that there were no M-60 series tanks sent to Vietnam and the that latest model 48 tanks were the 48A3 with 90mm and dielsels. If they did have stuff there, I'd like to to know where and when. Just the size and weight of the 60 would be enought justifiication not to send to a swamp/jungle area. Plus as that time, it was the latest in our inventory and no a good idea to let them out of the box too soon.

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

Was the CEV built on the 48 chassis?

Here's a quote I found on the net:

Name: George Vincent Robbins
Email: gvrobbins at prodigy dot net
Hometown: El Paso, TX
Date: April 03, 2006 - 08:46 PM (pacific)

Hello from El Paso

I served in Vietnam for 31/2 years, from May 67 to Dec. 67, I served in 511 Pannel bridge Company at Ahn Khe, we were attached to the 18th Engineerd Bde. In Dec. 67 I was sent to Chu Lai to form the new Amercial Div. After about a month of running in circles I was assigned to E Company 26th Engineers, I stayed with them until Apr 68, I went home just a couple of weeks after Tet 68. In Mar. of 69 I went back to Vietnam and I was assigned to the same company E company 26th Engineers, I was assigned at LZ Fat City. In May-Jun. 69 right after the sapper attack were we lost half of our vehicles, I last a rank and was transfered to A Company at LZ Baldy, main duty was to clear road of mines from Baldy to Ross,did that until Aug. 69 when sappers over ran LZ Hawk Hill, the platoon I was assigned was sent to LZ Hawk Hill to reinforce the bunkers and give them some support until they sent in the 1/46 Inf. I stayed on Hawk Hill until around Nov. 69 when I was assigned to the CEV crew (007). A company's crew was assigned back on LZ Fat City, then all the CEV crews were sent to E company for control and movied to Chu Lai. I stayed on the CEV until Oct. 69 were I went home. I returned back to Vietnam in Feb. 71 in Chu Lai, they were going to send me back to the 26th engineers (this whould have been the 3rd time), I went to personel and was assigned to C troop 1/1 Cav were I stayed until Jan 72, by this time I was all Vietnamed out and I went home. If you think you served in those areas at the same time give me a call or email.
Take care Brothers
George

[link=http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:6PBuKDJrrI0J:http://www.vwam.com/guestbook/index....cd=4&gl=us]CEV in Vietnam[/link]

Also, didn't a CEV take out a T-54 or T-55?

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

[link=http://www.army.mil/CMH/documents/vietnam/vni/249.htm]More CEV[/link]

e. The Combat Engineer Vehicle (CEV), Company A, 65th Engineer Battalion successfully used several innovative techniques during Operation Cliff Dweller IV.

(1) The CEV devised a plan to afford more protection for US infantry elements providing security for the southernmost blocking position. When arriving at this position on 8 January the vehicle commander used the CEV blade to build a berm 3-4 feet high between the tanks to protect the infantrymen. This not only gave the infantryman a berm in front of him but also a depression behind the berm for further protection. On 11 January the CEV leveled the berm, filling in all holes after the blocking force had completed its mission and were returning to their respective bases of operation.

(2) In order to bring more destructive fires against the enemy with its 165mm demolition projector, the CEV commander took down the locations of caves during the daylight hours and fired at them at night using a range card system. Three secondary explosions were achieved by using this method. Further damage assessment to enemy personnel or equipment was undeterminable because of the destructive power of the 165mm demolition projector. It was the only weapon available during the operation capable of destroying caves of the granite type found on Nui Ba Den.

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

Is it possible that it was missed in your search because it was listed as M728 rather than M60 CEV? According to the Squadron/signal M60 book the M728 saw 'limited' service in Vietnam. I can't find any references in my books to an M48 CEV variant (flamethrowers, AVLB etc variants, just no CEV). Just a thought.
Geoff

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

Just did some looking around, and Globalsecurity.com has a big history on the CEV and they state that the M-728 CEV did see service in Vietnam. I have never seen a CEV on a 48 chassis and have never seen any version of it on any tank, so must conclude, from my experience anyway, that the M-728 was the first tank spefically designed for the engineer mission on a modified m-60 chassis. None of my reference material covering the CEV indicates that it was used in VN, but it appears is was. First one I ever saw was with the 14th ACR in Fulda, Germany, when we got our M-60A1s issued in 1961. I think I counted 4 of them.

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

GWW I checked the sites you posted and sent an email to the webmaster. On the M-45, he indicates no M-45's on inventory after 1954, but when we switch to Pentomic in Aug 1956, 31st Regt 7th Inf Div had a platoon of M-45s for Inf Spt tanks, for which they were designed. He has the papers and books, but I was there and test drove one. Nice pic of the M-45 and it does substantiate the mantlet cover, which I don't recall seeing. It's really great when a number of people on the site take an interest....we wind up with all sorts of links and info that normally would be overlooked. Thanks
Bill

RE: m26/m46 arv help needed
 

Hi mate
Thanks, but I'm not the one deserving the plaudits. If you mean the links back on the first page of this thread, I was just quoting the what the other Jeff (Panth. F) posted, which included the links. I agree with what you say though. I've been alerted to some really good sources in the brief time I've been on here.
Regards
Geoff