Jump to content

Super Pershing


Recommended Posts

mav1,

This should help. For details on the add-on armor applied once the Super Pershing was in theater, see Belton Cooper's DEATH TRAPS. Believe he was directly involved in the armor add-ons.

http://www.3ad.com/history/news/super.pershing.1.htm

Here's what they looked like. As you can see, they were extensive.

http://www.hsgalleries.com/gallery04/m26e3jw_1.htm

Here's master modeler and armor expert Steve Zaloga's Super Pershing, showing the add-on armor pieces from several angles.

http://www.missing-lynx.com/gallery/usa/superpershing_szaloga.html

Here's his book, which covers the Super Pershing and is searchable.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1841762024/ref=pd_sl_aw_alx-jeb-9-1_book_13569641_1/103-5743728-5876644?n=283155

Here's a book on Pershings and more which covers the Super Pershing.

http://www.missing-lynx.com/reviews/usa/afvisual018_jprigent.html

Earlier, expensive book here

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0208020063/103-5743728-5876644?v=glance&n=283155

Regards,

John Kettler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the info John Kettler. If they put the super pershing in cmbo, they could of put the centurion in. The British needed something better than what they have.

Why didn't the americans build super pershings rather than the ordinary pershing after the war?

[ August 07, 2006, 09:12 AM: Message edited by: mav1 ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by John Kettler:

mav1,

You're welcome! The Super Pershing was included, I believe, because it saw combat, whereas the Centurion did not. The most advanced British tank in CMBO is the Comet.

Regards,

John Kettler

Well, the centurion missed ww2 by a few days, they could of squeezed it in. smile.gif

So why did the americans not build the super pershing instead of the pershing after the war?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

mav1,

The answer you seek is probably in one of the books I cited. If not, it is almost certainly in the definitive Pershing study by Hunnicutt. There were only three Super Pershings built, of which only one

bore the many tons of add-on field expedient armor.

These were basically experiments rushed into service to help desperate tankers. The extreme barrel overhang alone made them not generally practical.

Regards,

John Kettler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TufenHuden,

From what I can tell, that debate rages on. I haven't played with whatever is in CMBB myself, though. Just tried to go to Battlefield.ru to see what might be new on the topic, but the site wouldn't open. No idea why. According to this, though, if the IS-3 did see combat, it was in Manchuria in the form of a single regiment during August Storm against the Japanese.

http://www.answers.com/topic/iosif-stalin-tank

This one says no European use but mentions no Manchuria employment either.

http://www.onwar.com/tanks/ussr/data/is3.htm

Regards,

John Kettler

[ August 17, 2006, 09:43 PM: Message edited by: John Kettler ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...