Home > Discussion Groups > Allied

Message posting guidelines:
1.

Full real names must be used at all times.

2.
A valid e-mail address must be provided. (This is not optional)
3.
Images must be posted at low resolution (72 dpi) and no larger than 760 pixels wide, and copyright/trade mark owners must be credited whenever reasonably possible.
4.

From 20 April, registration is compulsory if you wish to post messages on the Discussion Groups. For further information, please see the following message: http://www.network54.com/Forum/message?forumid=47208&messageid=1113823018
Please read our Community guidelines before posting.
By contributing to this discussion group, you indicate your agreement to the Terms and Conditions of Use.
Posts that violate the guidelines or Terms and conditions of Use of the Missing-lynx.com discussion groups will be erased, and repeated violation of this policy may result in termination of the violator's account.

Advertisement

 Return to Index  

M4 at Fort Benning

January 2 2012 at 12:16 PM		   (Login mmcalc)
Missing-Lynx members
from IP address 74.214.45.226


Response to Front hull pics of M4 at Ft. Benning, Georgia?
The tank used to have (it may still) a spurious RN painted on it: 3067668. This is a Lima M4A1 RN so that can't be the correct one. However, it also has another RN cut into the armor on the left side: RN 3033584-S.

[linked image]

This is in a range that is attributed to ALCO. It probably was built July 1943. It has characteristics of what is apparently a "late" ALCO production hull. These are a one piece glacis with a small bow gun casting and un-beveled side plate armor top edges. All of the late ALCO tanks were most likely produced with the late low bustle turret without the pistol port. This type has been observed in wartime photos with all three final drive assembly types, however this one was built before the one piece cut in. It also has its original idler wheels and does not have the travel lock installed. So judging from the pictures, it seems to have been brought back in pretty much original condition.

These can usually be distinguished in photos fairly easily by inspecting the bow gun casting area.

Mike Canaday


    
This message has been edited by mmcalc from IP address 74.214.45.226 on Jan 2, 2012 12:17 PM


 
 Respond to this message   


Terms and Conditions of Use Report abuse