Hey lads. Have a query regarding tactical numbers on Shermans. Can
different tank battalions from the same Division carry the same tactical sign? Have viewed photos of a M4 from 6 AD 68th, carrying "77" in white on the hull side, and a M4A3 6 AD 15th, with "77" quite similar ...
Another question. Want to build one of these versions, the M4, (photo is bottom of p.44 Zalogas "The Sherman at war" #7036) Would anyone know (as the photo shows the front and angle of LEFT side) what the right side has in the way of markings? I'm guessing the "77" is painted on both sides, along with mebbe a wolfs head on the yellow blue red armoured division triangle set on a white square? Help!! :-)
Hosted by Darren Baker
Tactical numbers on Shermans...?
HONEYCUT
Victoria, Australia
Joined: May 07, 2003
KitMaker: 4,002 posts
Armorama: 2,947 posts
Joined: May 07, 2003
KitMaker: 4,002 posts
Armorama: 2,947 posts
Posted: Friday, March 04, 2005 - 10:49 AM UTC
War_Machine
Washington, United States
Joined: February 11, 2003
KitMaker: 702 posts
Armorama: 385 posts
Joined: February 11, 2003
KitMaker: 702 posts
Armorama: 385 posts
Posted: Friday, March 04, 2005 - 04:04 PM UTC
From looking through Zaloga's "US Tank Battles In Germany 1944-45," it would appear that the style of numbers and methods for identification were essentially the same in all three armored battalions of the 6th Armored.
The main differences were in the other ID markings carried by the vehicles of each AB. The 15th AB used a gray wolf's head superimposed on an armored division triangular tri-color patch; the 68th used a boxing turtle wearing a leather pilot's helmet (which, btw, was designed by an animator who worked for Disney); and the 69th had black panthers inside the white stars which usually were not painted over on tanks in that particular AB.
I can't vouch for the absolute accuracy of all of this, but it seems as though Zaloga's research says it's pretty much true. If that's so, then it's good enough for me (at least until I find a newer reference that contradicts all this).
The main differences were in the other ID markings carried by the vehicles of each AB. The 15th AB used a gray wolf's head superimposed on an armored division triangular tri-color patch; the 68th used a boxing turtle wearing a leather pilot's helmet (which, btw, was designed by an animator who worked for Disney); and the 69th had black panthers inside the white stars which usually were not painted over on tanks in that particular AB.
I can't vouch for the absolute accuracy of all of this, but it seems as though Zaloga's research says it's pretty much true. If that's so, then it's good enough for me (at least until I find a newer reference that contradicts all this).
Posted: Saturday, March 05, 2005 - 03:14 AM UTC
Quoted Text
it would appear that the style of numbers and methods for identification were essentially the same in all three armored battalions of the 6th Armored.
Generally this is true for any of the Allied armoured formations. In fact, Commonwealth Brigades used a system that allowed you to determine which vehicle you were seeing within the Brigade but any two brigades operating side by side would have the same tac signs repeated in the other Brigade. Thinking about this, I would say the American system was similar, I'm just not familiar with the US markings to know if every armored regiment followed the practice. Almost all Commonwealth regiments & brigades used the Brit system.
The aim is to allow you to ID which tank you are looking at, but not to provide any really identifying marks to the enemy. The enemy knowing that they are looking at the 3rd tank of the 2nd company of the junior regiment of the brigade was OK. Them knowing they were looking at a tank of the Lord Strathcona's Horse, was not. The later allowed you to ID the formations you were fighting and draw a lot of intelligence from that. A common tac sign system meant that you had to be really close to ID the units from the formation sign on the fender or from the vehicle code on the front bumber of US vehicles.
Paul
HONEYCUT
Victoria, Australia
Joined: May 07, 2003
KitMaker: 4,002 posts
Armorama: 2,947 posts
Joined: May 07, 2003
KitMaker: 4,002 posts
Armorama: 2,947 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 05, 2005 - 10:09 PM UTC
Ed, Paul, thanks for your help! This helps me plenty! Ed, I have the Zaloga book you referenced from, but can't locate it at the moment.
Paul, everything you wrote made complete sense to me and I'd be surprised if the Us system didn't follow suit...
Paul, everything you wrote made complete sense to me and I'd be surprised if the Us system didn't follow suit...