Bruceov Posted January 4, 2003 Share Posted January 4, 2003 The game has the M10 TD with a 76 mm gun. Didn't it have the same 75mm gun as the M4. The M18 then had the 76mm. Otherwise what was the point of the M18 TD except less armor than the M10 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green Hornet Posted January 4, 2003 Share Posted January 4, 2003 I don't think so. I'm pretty sure that the 76mm gun on the M10 is accurate and it never had a 75mm gun. The M10 shared the same basic chasis as the M4 Sherman, so it was sort of "converted" to a Tank Destoyer. The M18 Hellcat was designed to be a TD from the beginning using a unique, smaller chasis (giving it more agility and acceleration) and more powerful gun. The book I have states that the M10 gun was a 76.2mm M7 gun and that the M18's gun was a more powerful 76.2mm M4A1 gun. I'm not going to pretend that I know the difference between these guns and, hopefully, someone more knowlegable will be along shortly to shed some more light. [ January 03, 2003, 09:26 PM: Message edited by: Green Hornet ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maj. Battaglia Posted January 4, 2003 Share Posted January 4, 2003 The Standard Ordnance Items Catalogue from 1944 provides the following information: 3-inch gun motor carriage M-10: 3-inch gun M7, APC 2600 fps, 30 mph level 76mm gun motor carriage M-18: 76mm gun M1A1/M1A2 APC 2600 fps, 50 mph level Armor penetration at 1000 yards is the same, according to this source. So why did the US Army use both? The M-10 was a way to get the 3-inch gun (I think originally an AA gun) onto an existing chassis to meet the German armor threat. It appeared before the M-18. The M-18 had a much higher speed (thanks to a better suspension and 26,000 fewer pounds) and so better met the doctrine of the TD forces. The guns were not the same (at least in designation) but both used the M62 APC ammo. I am not sure what the differences were between the two, aside from a muzzle brake on the M18's 76mm. They did have different optics. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruceov Posted January 4, 2003 Author Share Posted January 4, 2003 thanks 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanzfeld Posted January 5, 2003 Share Posted January 5, 2003 test 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silvio Manuel Posted January 6, 2003 Share Posted January 6, 2003 In CM the M18 has a "fast" turret and very high movement speed, while the M10 like the Tiger has the "very slow" turret and good but not amazing speed. M10 is also resistant to 20mm to the front, while the Hellcat has to worry about it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shosties Posted January 6, 2003 Share Posted January 6, 2003 The 3-inch on the M10 was very heavy, which I believe is the reason for the slow turret traverse. You owe me a turn, Silvio! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonC Posted January 6, 2003 Share Posted January 6, 2003 Actually the slow turret on the M10 due to the counterweight at the back of the turret, as well as the gun. As an ad hoc design, they needed to balance the weight of the barrel to allow the turret to turn smoothly (center of mass over the pivot point). The turret wasn't really designed for the gun, so weight winds up in two places. The M18 was designed on the "battlecruiser" notion that "speed is armor" - which did not prove to be true in practice, needless to say, but did provide some benefits. The M18 is incredibly fast, and proved quite successful as a pure tank killler in practice. When pressed into an attacking role as a tank substitute, obviously it left something to be desired. The main drawback in is that the armor is so thin it is vunerable to every cheap towed gun in the German arsenal. So it can wind up rapidly getting to the key location where it dies instantly lol. AFVs aren't really the problem, because you can usually locate them and move, but guns stay hidden until they kill you. On defense inside your own lines, they can be quite effective, exploiting slow German traverse, lack of turrets on SP guns, etc. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Yeide Posted January 10, 2003 Share Posted January 10, 2003 Actually actually, the slow traverse on the M10 was due to its manual traverse mechanism. The M18 had a powered traverse system that was so fast that gunners had to make the final tweaks using the manual backup. (The M36, which also had a honker counterweight but also a powered traverse system, should have a faster turret rotation speed than the M10.) The M18's speed was due mainly to the fact that its armor was almost notional--the M8 Greyhound had better protection up front! The Army concluded after the war that the M18's speed had proved essentially irrelevant on the battlefield. Of course, that was the ultimate conclusion (weird, in its way) about tank destroyers, too, and the last TD battalion was gone by November 1946. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.