M36 Tank Destroyer

[mwk522]

The M36 tank destroyer, formally 90 mm Gun Motor Carriage, M36, was an American tank destroyer used during World War II. American soldiers usually referred to them as TDs for 'tank destroyers'.[3] The M36 first served in combat in Europe in September 1944, and served until the end of the war; it also served during the Korean War, and in the armies of several other countries.

Type    Tank destroyer
Place of origin    United States
Service history
Wars    World War II, Korean War, First Indochina War, Indo-Pakistani War of 1965, Croatian War of Independence, Bosnian War
Specifications
Weight    29 tonnes (32.0 short tons; 28.5 long tons)
Length    7.46 metres (24 ft 6 in) (w/ gun)
5.97 metres (19 ft 7 in) (w/o gun)
Width    3.05 metres (10 ft 0 in)
Height    3.28 metres (10 ft 9 in)
Crew    5 (Commander, (3x) gun crew, driver)
Armor    9–108 millimetres (0.35–4.3 in)
Main
armament    90 mm M3 gun
47 rounds
Secondary
armament    .50 cal Browning M2HB machine gun
1,000 rounds
Engine    Ford GAA V-8 gasoline
450 hp (336 kW)
Power/weight    15.5 hp/t
Transmission    Synchromesh gearbox with 5 forward and 1 reverse ratio[1]
Suspension    Vertical Volute Spring Suspension (VVSS)
Fuel capacity    192 gallons[2]
Operational
range    240 km (150 mi) on roads
Speed    42 km/h (26 mph) (road)
With the advent of heavy German armor such as the Panther and Tiger, the standard U.S. tank destroyer, the 3in Gun Motor Carriage M10, was rapidly becoming obsolete, because its main armament, the 3in M7 gun, had difficulty engaging these new tanks past 500 metres. This was foreseen, however, and in September, 1942 American engineers had begun designing a new tank destroyer armed with the M3 90 mm gun. This was several months before any Western Allied unit encountered a Tiger in combat, as the British First Army in Tunisia was the first western Allied unit to encounter the Tiger I in the leadup to the Battle of the Kasserine Pass at the start of 1943, and well over a year before any US unit encountered a Panther in combat.

[Rich46yo]

The more TDs the better.  Im loving these new German TDs and would love to see the SU-100 and M36 added as well.

[33Vortex]

Ouch! Anything armored with a gasoline engine is just a mobile BBQ waiting to happen. Or like the Red Army called the M3 Lee, "A casket for 7 brothers". That's how successful the celebrated M3 Lee was on the ostfront.

[Ack-Ack]

Ouch! Anything armored with a gasoline engine is just a mobile BBQ waiting to happen. Or like the Red Army called the M3 Lee, "A casket for 7 brothers". That's how successful the celebrated M3 Lee was on the ostfront.

It's a myth that gasoline engine powered tanks burn more easily than diesel engine powered tanks.

ack-ack

[33Vortex]

Maybe it was just the M4s and M3s sent to the soviets, that really sucked, then.  

By the way this is from a soviet archive source and I don't consider that very much a myth even though the soviet / russian archives are notoriously unreliable.

[Arlo]

[SmokinLoon]

I have faith that HTC ignores these threads.      Adding the Jackson to AH's gv set makes about as much sense as adding the Pershing when there are so many other gv's that were far more prevalent and made a far greater contribution.

I also have faith enough in HTC that they are looking to plug the gaps in the plane set.  This has shown to be spot on with the past few updates.  The Oscar, the He111, the Yaks, and previously the P40's and Zekes. I was surprised at them releasing not 1 but 3 turret-less AFV's, but regardless I think it was a good move and it certainly changed the ground game a bit. 

I have faith that HTC is spending their resources on modeling a Soviet level bomber and another Soviet AFV.  Me thinks the SB-2, IL-4, or Tu-2 bomber (pick one) and Su-100 TD will be joining the ranks sooner than later.  Not to go too far off subject (aw heck, too late), but in terms of "what is next?", once the Soviets have their level bomber the next logical step is to fill out what is obviously missing in the Big Five's plane sets.  The Wellington and Beaufighter come to mind very quickly for the British, the Ki-45 "Nick" and Ki-100 for the Japanese, the Germans... ... ... not sure, the Soviets could use the Pe-2, and the US needs nuffin'.      

[Chalenge]

The only thing that makes sense, or should, is tanks/aircraft  that support additional interest to the game, provide for a growing user base, and satisfy inclusion requirements. From that you can easily see that the M36 is justifiable on all counts. I also want to emphasize that 1,400 of them were built during the war. The roof kit seen in Arlo's image was not used during the war.

It certainly makes more sense than any towed weapon that would provide nothing more than another manned gun role. The only problem I have with it is the relative ease with which it could be killed once it is discovered by mudhens.

[Ack-Ack]

Maybe it was just the M4s and M3s sent to the soviets, that really sucked, then.  

By the way this is from a soviet archive source and I don't consider that very much a myth even though the soviet / russian archives are notoriously unreliable.

Depends on what version of the M4s the Soviets received through Lend-Lease.  The Shermans could could have been the early M4s with the dry stowage which is what was responsible for the Sherman's reputation for going up in flames.

ack-ack

[33Vortex]

The Shermans could have been the early M4s with the dry stowage which is what was responsible for the Sherman's reputation for going up in flames.

Sounds likely, they were not liked by their Soviet crews.

[Butcher]

Sounds likely, they were not liked by their Soviet crews.

Really? The few books I have read especially with Soviet M4 crews they absolutely loved the Sherman to their own tanks (especially KV-1).

[33Vortex]

What books are those? Based on what research? I can not say what is more correct and after all I wasn't there but many propaganda numbers were played post-war from the Soviet side. Not much reliable info was given, at all, up until the archives became directly available to western researchers some years after the collapse. I'd wager only the last 15 years or so of books based on actual Soviet archive research hold to a degree of good accuracy when it comes to portraying the war in the east.

The Prochorovka myth was killed, to give a high-profile example.

[muzik]

I'd wager only the last 15 years or so of books based on actual Soviet archive research hold to a degree of good accuracy when it comes to portraying the war in the east.

   Did you just call the Soviet archives "accurate" and "honest"?   

I guess when you execute everyone who disagrees with the "State" then the remaining opinions are technically accurate. No one stepping up to dispute it and all.

[33Vortex]

 Did you just call the Soviet archives "accurate" and "honest"?  

I guess when you execute everyone who disagrees with the "State" then the remaining opinions are technically accurate. No one stepping up to dispute it and all.

No, but the researchers who have arduously sifted through the archives, or at least big portions of them, have found a somewhat different picture from the political propaganda that's dominated the Soviet view of the war ever since. The Soviet archives are especially valuable when comparing with the data garnered from German archives. However, the soviet front line reports remain notoriously inaccurate. To the point of embarrassment to STAVKA when dealing with the western allies who complained that some of the German divisions reported to be encircled in the Cherkassy/Korsun pocket were fighting them in the west.  

[muzik]

No, but the researchers who have arduously sifted through the archives, or at least big portions of them, have found a somewhat different picture

The researchers you are referring to are the ones writing the books you were just casting doubt on. They may or may not be reliable, but they are the ones most likely cross checking data on all sides because the document owners generally don't.

There is nothing accurate about Soviet archives. They consist of the same erroneous reports you just described as well as being written with the constant and real threat of execution if the reports were not what the party wanted to hear.