AHC: StuG Sherman

[phx1138]

Edit: thinking about it, as it was, the 90mm gun was capable of killing even Jagdtigers, even if it couldn't reliably penetrate the glacis plate at range. IMO while there might be a case for the Jagdsherman in general use with the US, the casemate Grant/Lee would probably be a lend-lease only thing, and the sort of thing the Free whatevers would get, while major powers got real front-line kit instead. I'll probably use the idea for my Latin Pact project, if I ever get around to that as well.

Why not just slightly change the M3 spec? The Brits accepted the sponson mount; why not move it lower & into the hull front? If U.S. Army doesn't want it (& U.S. makers won't build it except for them), what about Canadian production in place of the 6pdr Ram tank, which wasn't much more than a badge-engineered M3 Medium anyhow? (Yes, I know, anything to have more Canadian production.) Build it in Montreal, get the Quebecois involved in the war effort.

with the excellent 3,7'' AA gun

An excellent choice, & IMO better than waiting for the 17pdr...

Also, Claymore, let me add my voice to the praise for those models. Wow! Beautiful indeed.

 

[NothingNow]

Why not just slightly change the M3 spec? The Brits accepted the sponson mount; why not move it lower & into the hull front? If U.S. Army doesn't want it (& U.S. makers won't build it except for them), what about Canadian production in place of the 6pdr Ram tank, which wasn't much more than a badge-engineered M3 Medium anyhow? (Yes, I know, anything to have more Canadian production.) Build it in Montreal, get the Quebecois involved in the war effort.

Because the whole initial idea was to work from existing toolings and if possible, enable it to be a simple conversion instead of a new build design. Besides, the Canadians had the Grizzly and could build useful things, like more Shermans and M36s. This is we build a kit, find a lee with only a couple of holes in it, give both to the Free Grand Fenwickers, and let them do the rest in a shack somewhere.

 

[trekchu]

If there was to be an M3Stug it would have to be done in the design phase. Hell, even fitting a different gun to the standard Lee might do the trick.

 

[Claymore]

<Snip>

Also, Claymore, let me add my voice to the praise for those models. Wow! Beautiful indeed.

Thank you

 

[machine3589]

Depicted is the 1st vehicle of the 2 platoon, 2nd Company, 2nd Battalion, Tank Destroyer Command attached to the Golani Brigade.

That`s just awesome.

 

[Claymore]

It's taken a little time, but here is 17 pdr armed M7 Priest. The model depicts "Caldera" the 5th vehicle of C battery, 57th (East Surrey) Anti-Tank Regt of 7th Armoured Division (1944).

 

[Life In Black]

Awesome Claymore!

 

[Bozo]

A Portugese Version

This is a portugese modification showing a sherman with a 88mm. It wouldnt have been available in quantity, but this could be improved.

From School of Artillery at Vendas Novas

 

[Claymore]

This is a portugese modification showing a sherman with a 88mm. It wouldnt have been available in quantity, but this could be improved.

From School of Artillery at Vendas Novas

I think what we have here is an ex-WW2 Sexton mounting a 25pdr (87.6mm). This was actually a highly successful SPG built in Canada for both the British and Canadian forces and was based on the Ram tank chassis. A total of 2150 Sextons were built by the Montreal Locomotice Works.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexton_(artillery)

 

[AdA]

And a number were supplied to Portugal, along with a lot of WW2 hardware, from Valentines to Shermans. You'll find a few of them on display outside Portuguese units. The ones that have a most interesting history are the Stuarts, that were very succeful in COIN posing Africa.

 

[BigWillyG]

As promised....

The Israelis on the other hand have a considerable track record of adapting any and all available AFVs to their own unique needs.

Just suppose that in the early 60s as the Centurion is entering front line service a number of Sherman hulls are made available for conversion into dedicated tank destroyers. Knowing that they face potential enemies on many fronts and that their armoured force cannot concentrate on more than one at a time, a plan is developed to increase the AT firepower of the Infantry formations who will have to conduct holding actions until relieved by the hard pressed armoured divisions. Enter the 90mm armed "StuG" Sherman; although not many were ever produced, they were a firm favourite of the infantry in the early phase of the 6-Day War.

Depicted is the 1st vehicle of the 2 platoon, 2nd Company, 2nd Battalion, Tank Destroyer Command attached to the Golani Brigade.

That might have taken less to do than what the Israelis actually had to do to shoehorn French 105mm guns into a Sherman turret to make the Super-Shermans IOTL. The Israelis could also make these using 20pdrs and 90mm guns left over when they start converting older Centurians and the M48s to use the L7 105mm. The Germans developed the Jagdpanzer Kanone that way IOTL.

 

[OneUp]

I think Princess Leia would say something like, "Aren't you a little tall for a StUG?"

On a more serious note, I thought one of the major advantages of the STUG design was the low height gave it a smaller profile that helped make it harder to hit. The Sherman chassis was kind of tall and that just makes it...kind of easy to hit compared to other "STUG" type designs. Don't it?

 

[Claymore]

That might have taken less to do than what the Israelis actually had to do to shoehorn French 105mm guns into a Sherman turret to make the Super-Shermans IOTL. The Israelis could also make these using 20pdrs and 90mm guns left over when they start converting older Centurians and the M48s to use the L7 105mm. The Germans developed the Jagdpanzer Kanone that way IOTL.

Indeed that it pretty much where I was coming from.

I think Princess Leia would say something like, "Aren't you a little tall for a StUG?"

On a more serious note, I thought one of the major advantages of the STUG design was the low height gave it a smaller profile that helped make it harder to hit. The Sherman chassis was kind of tall and that just makes it...kind of easy to hit compared to other "STUG" type designs. Don't it?

I agree that if you were going to design a modern StuG from scratch you would not use the Sherman as a role model. However, 'necessity is the mother of invention' as they say and the Israelis have an impressive track record of innovation. As I have hinted at, this was a stop-gap measure that utilised a limited number of available Sherman hulls to produce a reasonably effective tank destroyer. It was not perfect - it was never meant to be - but it was good enough. Whilst taller than some StuG designs it is still shorter than the original Sherman.

 

[OneUp]

*Snip*

Well I guess, I think you'd really need to revise US armored doctrine otherwise these new StUG Shermans are going to be infantry supporting bunkers that can get demolished by the car-lot by flanking panzer 3's

 

[BigWillyG]

Someone on the 1946 WWIII thread made me think of this. Could you have the Soviets make Stug Shermans during an early WWIII to make use of old Lend Lease tanks? The Lend Lease tanks would be getting obsolete by the late '40s or early '50s and some like the Sherman's would be a major recognition problem in their original form. Turning them into assault guns like the WWII Su-76I developed from the Panzer III chassis would provide a use and help replace the less capable Su-76 Sukas.

 

[Claymore]

Well I guess, I think you'd really need to revise US armored doctrine otherwise these new StUG Shermans are going to be infantry supporting bunkers that can get demolished by the car-lot by flanking panzer 3's

US Armoured doctrine? Panzer 3s? My StuG Sherman design is an Israeli vehicle designed to fight a defensive battlen until such time as IDF heavy armoured units can concentrate and take the offensive (circa 6-day war). It was just a concept and a bit of fun to design and build. If you don't like the idea then fine, franky it does not bother me one way or the other.

Edit: The StuG Sherman comes out at 2.45m in height - only 20cm taller than the StuG IV and the same height as the SU-152/ISU-152 a highly successful Soviet assault gun/tank destroyer.

Someone on the 1946 WWIII thread made me think of this. Could you have the Soviets make Stug Shermans during an early WWIII to make use of old Lend Lease tanks? The Lend Lease tanks would be getting obsolete by the late '40s or early '50s and some like the Sherman's would be a major recognition problem in their original form. Turning them into assault guns like the WWII Su-76I developed from the Panzer III chassis would provide a use and help replace the less capable Su-76 Sukas.

That's an interesting twist and one Hairog might be interested in for his TL.

 

[AdA]

The excelent french AH site la france continue has a design for a RAM based "Stug" that shows what a Sherman Stug would look like

 

[OneUp]

US Armoured doctrine? Panzer 3s? My StuG Sherman design is an Israeli vehicle designed to fight a defensive battlen until such time as IDF heavy armoured units can concentrate and take the offensive (circa 6-day war). It was just a concept and a bit of fun to design and build. If you don't like the idea then fine, franky it does not bother me one way or the other.

Edit: The StuG Sherman comes out at 2.45m in height - only 20cm taller than the StuG IV and the same height as the SU-152/ISU-152 a highly successful Soviet assault gun/tank destroyer.



That's an interesting twist and one Hairog might be interested in for his TL.

oop sorry. I really thought the IDF stug Sherman was an OTL thing. Also I wasn't reading carefully enough, didn't realize that the Stug sherman's had to be in WW2

 

[Life In Black]

oop sorry. I really thought the IDF stug Sherman was an OTL thing. Also I wasn't reading carefully enough, didn't realize that the Stug sherman's had to be in WW2

I relaxed that requirement. And yeah, Claymore's background history for the vehicles is pretty damn convincing.

 

[bsmart]

Are you looking for a StuG or a JagdPanzer?

Maybe I'm missing something but the Original question was looking for a StuG version of a Sherman. The Stug was meant to be an infantry support vehicle. Most folks here are postulating an antitank vehicle which would be a JagdPanzer (JgPz).

Yes I know that StuGs were used as antitank vehicles but that was more of a "It has a gun and it's available'. If we are looking at the Infantry support role the question becomes what features are desired? Everyone seems to be concentrating on low profile. While that is very important for an defensive antitank vehicle (The role the StuG morphed into) I believe it is less important in an infantry support vehicle. Because of the design of the Sherman (A central driveshaft from the radial engine bisected the crew compartment at a relatively high level.) it would be difficult to create as low slung a vehicle as the StuG.

If it is desired to have a vehicle with a forward firing gun I'm not sure if you could do much better than the design of the M3 Lee/Grant. The off center mounted gun allows a good range of elevation without the drivetrain interfering. If you are willing to accept a lessor range of elevation (affecting range, flexibility of use on slopes, etc) than a slightly shorter fighting compartment could be accepted. The 75mm M3 gun in the Lee/Grant is also probably the most flexible infantry support gun of the era. It had the widest range of ammunition (everything designed, tested and used with the 'French 75' that has been in use since before WWI could be used) of any weapon of the era. based on later use in the M4 I suspect that a 105mm Howitzer could be fitted in the same gun position (but then you would have a StuH not a StuG )

I have seen a few versions of the M7 Priest and the Sexton vehicles suggested. I believe that with the gun located above the drivetrain the height of the enclosed fighting compartment would be the same (or higher) than a standard turreted Sherman

However I believe that would not be the BEST infantry support vehicle that could be developed on that chassis. I believe the plain Sherman was an excellent infantry support vehicle (It was after all designed for that role) The M4A3E2 with it's additional armor (especially if equipped with 'wet storage') would be better. After all it fas the flexibility of having a rotating turret allowing the armament to be pointed in a direction other than along the line of travel. I suspect that if desired there could be a 105mm Howitzer version of the M4A3E2 developed

I wouldn't mind discussing a potential antitank vehicle based on a Sherman chassis but that would be a different article.