_GOTOBOTTOM
Яusso-Soviэt Forum: Cold War Soviet Armor
For discussions related to cold war era Russo-Soviet armor.
Korean War T-34/85
long_tom
Visit this Community
Illinois, United States
Joined: March 18, 2006
KitMaker: 2,362 posts
Armorama: 2,005 posts
Posted: Sunday, July 12, 2015 - 01:08 AM UTC
I want to depict a knocked out North Korean T-34/85 tank, but most pictures I've seen depict burned-out hulks. I wanted to depict a relatively intact one which still is recognizable. Are there any photographs of, say, where only the turret got set on fire?
GeraldOwens
Visit this Community
Florida, United States
Joined: March 30, 2006
KitMaker: 3,736 posts
Armorama: 3,697 posts
Posted: Sunday, July 12, 2015 - 04:08 AM UTC

Quoted Text

I want to depict a knocked out North Korean T-34/85 tank, but most pictures I've seen depict burned-out hulks. I wanted to depict a relatively intact one which still is recognizable. Are there any photographs of, say, where only the turret got set on fire?


Well, if the vehicle burns at all, it burns. The ammo in a T-34 was stored in boxes on the hull floor, so that would cook the whole vehicle, and eventually involve the diesel fuel storage as well.

That said, not every tank burns. A tank holed through the turret will be unusable, with the gun wrecked (and the turret crew dead or grievously wounded). Pershing crews noted that the tanks were hard to set on fire, and at long range, they couldn't always tell that they had even hit the target (since the 90 mm shot would drill right through both sides), so they switched to 90 mm high explosive, which had enough power to lift the turret off the turret ring, disabling the tank (and the crew).

There are plenty of photos available online, including some great shots in the Life Magazine/Getty Images Archives.
srmalloy
Visit this Community
United States
Joined: April 15, 2012
KitMaker: 336 posts
Armorama: 298 posts
Posted: Thursday, July 16, 2015 - 12:17 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Well, if the vehicle burns at all, it burns. The ammo in a T-34 was stored in boxes on the hull floor, so that would cook the whole vehicle, and eventually involve the diesel fuel storage as well.

That said, not every tank burns. A tank holed through the turret will be unusable, with the gun wrecked (and the turret crew dead or grievously wounded).



Burned-out tanks were less often the result of combat than they are the result of a 'scorched earth' policy. A tank abandoned by its crew could be recovered, repaired, and put back into service. It was not uncommon for an abandoned tank, whether 'destroyed' or just incapacitated (i.e., a broken track), if there was sufficient ammunition, to be shot at from close range or to have some other destructive device used specifically to get the tank to burn, because a burned-out tank was unrecoverable.
HeavyArty
Visit this Community
Florida, United States
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,694 posts
Armorama: 13,742 posts
Posted: Thursday, July 16, 2015 - 05:05 PM UTC
There were plenty of abandoned intact T-34s during the Korean War. Here are a few:






I did a similar dio a while back with an abandoned T34/85 with a full interior.





So I say go for it.

210cav
Visit this Community
Virginia, United States
Joined: February 05, 2002
KitMaker: 6,149 posts
Armorama: 4,573 posts
Posted: Thursday, July 16, 2015 - 05:48 PM UTC
Gino-- nice work, I trust you won a prize for your model.
DJ
HeavyArty
Visit this Community
Florida, United States
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,694 posts
Armorama: 13,742 posts
Posted: Thursday, July 16, 2015 - 08:29 PM UTC
Thanks DJ. It did win that day.
18Bravo
Visit this Community
Colorado, United States
Joined: January 20, 2005
KitMaker: 7,219 posts
Armorama: 6,097 posts
Posted: Thursday, July 16, 2015 - 09:09 PM UTC
The great thing about these tanks is there are so many different ways you can damage them.




I'm currently working on 1/25 dio where the entire top plate is blown off of a T-34. You can also pop the frontal armor off, (or any other plates for that matter) to show a catastrophic interior explosion.
long_tom
Visit this Community
Illinois, United States
Joined: March 18, 2006
KitMaker: 2,362 posts
Armorama: 2,005 posts
Posted: Saturday, July 18, 2015 - 08:34 AM UTC
Thanks! I wanted to do a tank akin to the one in the third photograph, as it is mostly intact externally.

Also, my intended diorama is to depict a T-34/85 with an M-16 halftrack driving alongside it, the title being "FORMER FRIENDS", referring to the vehicle types and not necessarily the actual vehicles. I assume that few if any North Korean tanks also served in WW2. And why an M-16? Because the American tanks that served in Korea had comparatively little service in WW2.
GeraldOwens
Visit this Community
Florida, United States
Joined: March 30, 2006
KitMaker: 3,736 posts
Armorama: 3,697 posts
Posted: Saturday, July 18, 2015 - 11:38 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Thanks! I wanted to do a tank akin to the one in the third photograph, as it is mostly intact externally.

Also, my intended diorama is to depict a T-34/85 with an M-16 halftrack driving alongside it, the title being "FORMER FRIENDS", referring to the vehicle types and not necessarily the actual vehicles. I assume that few if any North Korean tanks also served in WW2. And why an M-16? Because the American tanks that served in Korea had comparatively little service in WW2.



Well, the T-34-85 captured in Korea, which was displayed at the Patton Museum at Fort Knox for many years, was manufactured at Factory 183 in 1944, so presumably it served with Soviet forces.

As for US tanks, the M4A3E8 Sherman outnumbered the Pershings and Pattons in Korea, and it served in World War Two from November, 1944 to the end.

M16 halftracks served in Korea, but most I've seen were postwar M16B rebuilds, where towed M55 quad .50 mounts were installed in redundant M3A1 bodies. An extra riser ring was added so the guns could better clear the side armor, and wider "bat-wing" armor was added to the gun mount to provide extra protection for the gun crews (Eduard once offered this armor as a photo etch item, but I have no idea if it's still available).
long_tom
Visit this Community
Illinois, United States
Joined: March 18, 2006
KitMaker: 2,362 posts
Armorama: 2,005 posts
Posted: Sunday, July 19, 2015 - 08:17 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Well, the T-34-85 captured in Korea, which was displayed at the Patton Museum at Fort Knox for many years, was manufactured at Factory 183 in 1944, so presumably it served with Soviet forces.

As for US tanks, the M4A3E8 Sherman outnumbered the Pershings and Pattons in Korea, and it served in World War Two from November, 1944 to the end.

M16 halftracks served in Korea, but most I've seen were postwar M16B rebuilds, where towed M55 quad .50 mounts were installed in redundant M3A1 bodies. An extra riser ring was added so the guns could better clear the side armor, and wider "bat-wing" armor was added to the gun mount to provide extra protection for the gun crews (Eduard once offered this armor as a photo etch item, but I have no idea if it's still available).


Maybe I am wrong, but I thought Korean War Shermans were all substantially modified from their WW2 versions. That is why I opted for the M-16.
avenue
Visit this Community
Philippines
Joined: May 25, 2013
KitMaker: 544 posts
Armorama: 542 posts
Posted: Sunday, July 19, 2015 - 09:04 AM UTC
suggest you add some carbon black in the upper turrent.
GeraldOwens
Visit this Community
Florida, United States
Joined: March 30, 2006
KitMaker: 3,736 posts
Armorama: 3,697 posts
Posted: Monday, July 20, 2015 - 09:11 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text


Well, the T-34-85 captured in Korea, which was displayed at the Patton Museum at Fort Knox for many years, was manufactured at Factory 183 in 1944, so presumably it served with Soviet forces.

As for US tanks, the M4A3E8 Sherman outnumbered the Pershings and Pattons in Korea, and it served in World War Two from November, 1944 to the end.

M16 halftracks served in Korea, but most I've seen were postwar M16B rebuilds, where towed M55 quad .50 mounts were installed in redundant M3A1 bodies. An extra riser ring was added so the guns could better clear the side armor, and wider "bat-wing" armor was added to the gun mount to provide extra protection for the gun crews (Eduard once offered this armor as a photo etch item, but I have no idea if it's still available).


Maybe I am wrong, but I thought Korean War Shermans were all substantially modified from their WW2 versions. That is why I opted for the M-16.



Shermans in Korea received first aid kit boxes on the hull side and an infantry phone box on the tail plate. The single pin tracks were mostly supplanted by the double pin steel chevron pattern. They had the HVSS suspension seen on late WW2 vehicles. The commander's cupola was usually repositioned so the hatch opened directly rightward instead of obliquely to the right rear. In service, they often had large numbers of .30 calibre machine gun ammo boxes in improvised racks on the fenders. The tanks that had been specifically reconditioned in Tokyo in 1950 usually had racks for spare drive sprocket rings on the hull sides, though vehicles supplied from depots in the US did not. Oh, and the Olive Drab paint was semi-gloss instead of flat.
 _GOTOTOP