looking at those data sheets and that photoJune 26 2014 at 3:32 PM
No score for this post
|Nelson (no login)|
Response to Re: T4 and M1 armored cars, etc.
Thanks for the URL for the T4/M1 Armored Car Index---I managed to miss it somehow. The data sheets David Haugh provides are quite interesting. Boy, I agree with your caveat that he "strongly implies" that the T4s got redesignated as M1s. Significantly, this same sentence appears in both the T4 and M1 data sheets: "....two T4 Armored Cars were completed and tested until 1934 when the design was type classified as the M1 Armored Car. After classification, an additional ten cars were completed." Only in the M1 data sheet, however, is there any mention of the War Department serial numbers: "A total of 12 M1s were completed with serial numbers running from USA W-60114 to W-60125." I still have my doubts, and wish that the serial number info had appeared as well in the T4 data sheet, just to confirm that the two T4s (or former T4s) were part of the same consecutive number sequence. And I'm not ruling out the 20 units that Hunnicutt claims (though as I pointed out previously, he may be reporting the number contracted for, rather than the number built before the cancellation of the contract). After all, there are several instances in both army and navy ordnance histories where weapons bear two or more discrete serial number sequences, separated by numbers that have been assigned to other weapons entirely. I would thus like corroboration that the two T4s (or former T4s) were part of that 12-number serial run, rather than a dozen purpose-built units, with the final total numbers IMO remaining ambiguous.
Again, I agree with your take on the photo of the long line of M1 armored cars. If you include the first vehicle whose hood is shown in the expanded version, there are ten M1 cars until you run into the ones having those "long gun-looking things", of which five can be seen. And you're right, the long hoods and bright headlamps are still there; moreover, the height of those distant vehicles does not seem to differ from that of the armored cars. You write, "...the U.S. Army had not yet developed turreted tanks with large guns." That depends on how you define "large guns" at that juncture in tank development, but I take your point. Both the M2 light and M2 medium tanks---having turrets armed with the M5 and M3 37mm main gun, respectively---should have been available while the M1 armored car was still seeing field evaluation in maneuvers, but their silhouettes were rather higher than the armored car's almost 7 feet (2.1 meters): M2 light 8 ft, 8 in (2.64 meters) and M2 medium 9 ft, 3 in (2.82 meters). But I too don't know what those long gun-looking things are. They're real, but I also think the reflected light is fooling with us. I'm unaware that any M1 armored cars were provided something with a little more oomph for experimental purposes (which would have required a redesign of the turret). Anyone have a clue?