Hi all
This is the Hobby Boss kit, with individual T48 tracks from Dragon Models, a .50cal from Skybow/RB-Models and various extras from the spare box.
Please do comment.
Jacob

Good grief, man, how many models do you build every month?

Fantastic work and end result, love it!

Will you be building the gun for it to pull as well?

Ausgezeichnet! Needs an 8" howitzer to tow.

Overall, it looks very nice. The load is off though. You have it loaded with 105mm ammo in the tubes, and ammo crates (two tubes per crate). The M4 HST did not pull 105mm howitzers.




That wouldn't be correct either, The M4 HST pulled either the 90mm AAA gun, or the M1 155mm Howitzer.

The M115 8" was pulled by either an M35 Prime Mover or the Mack NO truck.

Is that mistyped? Thought the M4 HST towed either the 155mm gun (not howitzer), or the 8" howitzer, or the 90mm AA gun.
Like these 8" howitzers:

Well, I wasn't really planning for a gun, because I had the impression that this version was used for either the 90mm AA or the 3" gun, and neither is available in styrene.
Gino: Both the ammo crates and the tubes are supposed to be for the 76mm gun rounds. They are from Academy's supplies set, but I'm not very familiar with allied ammo, so you are probably right. Guess this is the top secret vehicle from the even more unknown 105mm battery
Thanks for watching
Jacob

your build looks great ,very nice work .and I think you should build a gun for it ,maybe a long tom ,

nice job looks great !

Hi Jacob,
Looks good. Gotta love that big side grill work!

I do have one issue. All those ammo boxes, and the tubes would have printed descriptions of the contents plastered all over them.
I just posted a forum entry on this general lack of stenciling on many fine models. See it here:
https://armorama.kitmaker.net/forums/258603&page=1

Like I said, it's superb and would be even more interesting pulling an 8" howitzer.

Not saying the M4 HST couldn't pull an 8" howitzer, but the MTO&E prescribed prime movers were as I listed above.

Well, that load used a different cargo bed than the one in the model. It would also raise the question of why it was carrying fixed ammunition for another weapon.

KL

While there is an appeal to some to always be the first to answer, it is better to wait, think, check, and be correct. Doubling down on being wrong is just bad.

The M4 18T HST was designed to pull the 3-inch and 90mm AA guns, the 155mm gun, the 8-inch howitzer, and the 240mm M1918 howitzer. I don't think the first or last weapons ever went overseas.

The M5 13T HST was used for 105mm howitzers, 4.5-inch guns, and 155mm howitzers.

The Mack NO was used to pull the 155mm gun and 8-inch howitzer.

The M35 prime mover (as well as the M33 and M34 prime movers) were created as expedients to haul the M1 8-inch gun and M1 240mm howitzers. The normal prime mover for these two weapons was the M6 38T HST.

MTO&E and M115 are postwar (~1960) labels. In WW II and Korea T/O&E and M1 were the correct designations.

So, for the M1 155mm gun and M1 8-inch howitzer, T/O&Es for truck-drawn units would list the Mack NO and for tractor-drawn units would list the M4.

KL

Super job!!!!!

Nice one, I like it a lot! How did you do the camo-net? I like it very much!

Marian: It's some of the old camouflage net from Verlinden, which has been soaked in white glue and water. When fully dry, I added a heavy dark wash and a bit of highlighting/dry brushing.
Hope that answers your question
Jacob

Jacob,

Lovin' your model. Really good work.

I also appreciate the MTO&E education it has generated. That is helpful to me.

Bravo36: thanks for the URL.

It has nothing to do with being the first to reply. That is the info I have. The issue is many different references have conflicting info. Sometime the discussion here clarifies what is often clouded by different sources.

This is EXACTLY why this place is so good. Gino provides some very detailed information based on his documented sources, and the vagaries of war come along with some photos and shake up what we thought we knew. Everyone should relax and enjoy the discussion.

And BTW, Jacob my friend, it's a superb model.

I would like to see the sources you have:

That say the M4 HST was intended or authorized to pull the M1 155mm howitzer.

That say the the M35 Prime Mover was intended or authorized to pull the 8-inch howitzer.

I would also like to see:

The T/O&E that includes the M35 as the prime mover for the 8-inch howitzer.

The T/O&E that includes the M4 HST as the prime mover for the 155mm howitzer.

Look guys, this isn't a matter of "clarification" or "conflicting statements". It's purely an issue of statements that are factually incorrect that can be proven to be wrong by reading actual documentation. This also isn't situation of "possible". He's not talking about what might have happened, he's talking about what the official organizational documents said. He says they are the information he has. Great. Let's see them and put this to rest. Either those official documents support what he said or they don't; it's black and white.

KL

I guess someone pissed in your wheaties today Kurt.

I don't have links to them and I am not going to scan the documents I have seen, and probably can't find since my house is packed up right now anyways.

We'll just go with what you say and haven't backed up either if it makes you feel better.

In my opinion, the discussion is more important than who is right or wrong anyways.

Well now, I sense a fight coming on, which was not the intention of this thread at all.
I guess that all of us at one point, were sure to be right in some case, but then stand corrected by a more learned person. That doesn't make us fools, but, as Bill said, makes us wiser by sharing the informations.
It's not about who's right or wrong, it's about getting all the facts out in the open, and then it's up to each one to either learn more, or stick with whatever one like.
I very much hope, that I haven't stepped on any ones toes
Jacob

The standard deflecting response. It's not the person who is dead wrong who has a problem, ya see, it's the person who points it out. A normal person would let the crap stand. Only a bitter person or a weirdo would dare say it's wrong, is that it?




Ah, so in fact you did not check before you wrote your first post, you went from your memory of something you may or may not have read, at some point in the past. We all know memories are infallible, so I guess that settles it.




No it doesn't, because that's equivalent to what you did. How about we "go with" actual facts?

Let's look at the Catalogue of Standard Ordnance Items, Office of the Chief of Ordnance, Second Edition, 1944, Volume I. On page 73, it states what materiel can be used with the M4 HST. On page 74 there is the same information for the M5 HST, and on page 75 it's listed for the M6 HST. For the M4 and M5, the list is exactly as I wrote it, because this is where I got the information. The M6 listing includes one more item beyond what I listed, omitted because it was a developmental AA gun that was never standardized as listed. These pages also include the relevant Ordnance Committee Meeting Minutes, in case anyone would like to check further.

On page 70 the M33, M34, and M35 tractors are described: "These prime movers for 240-mm howitzer and 8-in. gun materiel were designed as expedients pending production in quantity of the 38 ton High Speed Tractor M6. They are Substitute Standard. REFERENCES--OCM 23183, 23571." That's sounds pretty definitive if you ask me, but I can probably dig up the OCMs if there still any doubts.

Now, I don't have originals of the T/O&Es, only secondary copies from artillery training manuals, but I can give you the numbers if you want to actually look them up and learn something.

6-37, 155mm howitzer battery

6-67, 8-inch howitzer battery




No, not when is purely an issue of facts. If we are talking about which kit is a better value, if a weathering technique is realistic, or how to fill seams and knockout pin marks, then lots of discussion is great. If the question is "What did the official government document say about X", there is nothing but right or wrong. If you want this site to have value as a reference source into the future, you want the factual information to be as good as possible. Saying that objective, provable facts and utter crap are equal in value is idiotic.

KL

I bow to your superior research ability and intellect, oh great one.

I remembered where I stashed this TM. Out of TM 9-2800 dated 1 September 1943.



Of interest is the ammunition stowage listing, and that the ground pressure ratings are only for the 90mm and the 155mm.

It seems the tractor was also expected to tow the 3 inch gun and 240mm howitzer.