Reassembling the Last U.S. T28 Super Heavy Tank

[HUSKER2142]

Quote

 

On 28 October 2020, the U.S. Army Armor & Cavalry Collection went to work to reassemble the T28 Super Heavy Tank (also known as the Gun Motor Carriage T95) into its full 90-ton, four-tracked configuration. The T28 will now reside in the new Armor Heritage Training Support Facility of the U.S. Army Armor & Cavalry Collection, its first indoor home ever.

The T28 had been originally designed in World War II as an assault tank specifically made to take on the German defenses along the Siegfried Line. With that in mind, it was armed with the powerful T5E1 105mm main gun and had an impressive frontal armor of 12 inches (not counting the gun mantlet armor on top of that). Due to its weight, the T28 featured extra sets of tracks to properly distribute its mass. To allow the vehicle to be transportable by rail, boat, and truck, the outside tracks were detachable and could be towed behind the T28. Once near its objective, the T28 was capable to attaching its own tracks without external assistance within only a couple hours. 

Only two T28s were produced, and neither ever saw combat as the war ended before they were complete. Both served in important roles as test and evaluation platforms. One T28 was sent to the Yuma Proving Grounds to test new floatation bridges around 1947 but suffered a severe engine fire and was scrapped. The sole surviving T28 was eventually declared obsolete and sent to serve as a test weight for the Mobility Equipment Research and Development Center (MERDC) at Fort Belvoir, Virginia. Eventually the last T28 was considered no longer needed in testing and abandoned in a remote training area at Fort Belvoir before being rediscovered in 1976 in a time when interest in World War II armor was renewed. It was sent to Fort Knox to the Armor School Museum and moved with the Armor Collection when the Armor School was moved to Fort Benning, Ga, in 2010. 

This was the first time the outer track assemblies were attached to the vehicle since 2010, and the first time the installation process was conducted since the late 1970s. This was made possible by the supporting efforts of the Fort Benning Logistic Readiness Center and the U.S. Army Armor School Ground Mobility Division, which consists of Ordnance Corps Instructors that train tank mechanics on how to recover heavy armored fighting vehicles.

 

Somehow I became interested in armored vehicles, which did not go into production. I was a little terrified what monsters were building, how engineers could build them. And how many have not yet been embodied in metal .

Edited November 3, 2020 by HUSKER2142

[SimpleSimon]

The development process and early cancellation of vehicles like the T28 pretty directly reveals how military technology can evolve related to perceived threats instead of real ones, but rather interesting is why so much research continued on the vehicle for long after the war. The vehicle was authorized the same year US Army formations reached the much over-rated Siegfried Line and could plainly see what a joke it was. (Bulldozers could defeat major sections of the line...) The two vehicles were retained and used until 1947 though. 

Probably the US military was interested in studying the "operational realities" of trying to operate a 95 ton vehicle, of which theory could not entirely make clear. Trends for armored vehicle weights were still forecast upwards after the Second World War after all, so this was an important question. 

Edited November 6, 2020 by SimpleSimon

[Erwin]

We were chatting about the need for a "less-sophisticated than a modern MBT" heavily armored "bunker buster/building demolisher" for today's MOUT ops.  Maybe this is it!

Just replace the 105mm with 150mm or bigger.  Long range is not needed, so maybe a Sturmtiger-like 380mm mortar?

Edited November 6, 2020 by Erwin

[SimpleSimon]

The Stryker MGS happened because the Sheridan went away and took its gun with it. A gun that fulfilled the need to neutralize ATGM sites from *outside* of their effective range as well as provide the infantry with a rapid-response alternative to heavy mortars which still weren't quite precise enough. Quite a few ATGM types exist today that have fairly short range, and even the ones that do have long range have long flight times. So long that its reasonable enough for a crew to engage and destroy the launcher after a missile has already been fired. The Stryker MGS is often referred to as an Assault Gun and I guess in many ways it totally is a revival of the Sturmgeshutz but just like that vehicle it's finding itself in competition with Heavy Mortars and increasingly Smart Artillery that can fire rounds just as accurate from much further away. 

Finally, the damn thing just isn't protected well enough, although a lot of that emerged from the general criticism of the Stryker program some of which is unfair. But the US military just couldn't use the Stryker in cities and such. It was too prominent a target and isn't front-proof from the RPG-7 like the Abrams and Bradley are. Ironically after years of avoiding it the US military might end up seeking out a new Light Tank after all. 

And God a 150mm gun. You'll be collapsing weak houses a mile away from vibration alone lol. 

 

Edited November 6, 2020 by SimpleSimon