Mattias Posted November 12, 1999 Share Posted November 12, 1999 What exactly is the M4A3(75)W+ supposed to be? In my meagre collection of books covering the American tanks I can’t see any mention of any special M4A3(75)W model. Is it a tank with field fitted appliqué armour mayhap? In any case upper hull armour at 111/47 and lower at 146/15 goes quite some way to explain a lot of the bouncing 88 rounds spotted by seemingly surprised gunners. M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Beman Posted November 12, 1999 Share Posted November 12, 1999 If you've ever heard the Sherm referred to as Ronson or Zippo, their tendency to go BIGBOOM after any penetration was the reason. The ammo was stored in fairly exposed, thinly-armored bins; very vulnerable to being set off. The "W" referred to a change made in the Sherman's ammo storage: the rounds were encased in jackets of some sorta non-flammable liquid (glycol? water? Mountain Dew?) so that, should something hit the ammo, the liquid would pour out and drench the ammo, thus reducing the risk of fire cooking off the ammo. From what I've read, the change worked fairly well; however, I am of the opinion that it would have been better to increase armor protection to prevent penetration in the first place. Either that, or actually build the Sherman's successor in less than the 3.5 years (or thereabouts) it took to okay the Pershing for production. DjB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark L Posted November 12, 1999 Share Posted November 12, 1999 Wow! I didn't even notice that there were actually TWO different Sherman Models in Riesberg. The "+" model is apparently the one known as the "Jumbo", based on those armor values. I've seen it referred to as "M4A3E2(75)W". Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattias Posted November 12, 1999 Author Share Posted November 12, 1999 Thank you guys but no and no. I know what the W stands for and the wet stowage is found both the "+" and "standard" mods in the scenario. And no, this is not a Jumbo, the turret armour would be significantly thicker. So the question remains, what is the "+" tank supposed to be? M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted November 12, 1999 Share Posted November 12, 1999 I'd have to dig up an email from Steve about this to be 100% sure, but I think that the + indicates a field modification, e.g. additional welded armor plate on the front or something like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Oberst Posted November 12, 1999 Share Posted November 12, 1999 The W means that it it BTS's little Weasel, mounted with a gun, and a cardboard hull to make it look like a tank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest PeterNZ Posted November 13, 1999 Share Posted November 13, 1999 Moon is right, check the armor between the two different models, the + models have significantly more frontal armor. It's just the games way of saying "they've stuck **** on fron of the tank" i guess PeterNZ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted November 13, 1999 Share Posted November 13, 1999 This is why some folks have seen 88 rounds bounce off the front of a Sherman in Riesberg (I know I have, and it cost me the gun on the hill!). Thick armor, steep slope. But turn the sucker a little to expose a flank, and no problemo The "+" model is not a Jumbo BTW. That sucker is even better Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark L Posted November 13, 1999 Share Posted November 13, 1999 Oops. Sorry, my mistake. Gonna go dig out my sources again and look into it more... Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts