Found this Sherman II on the IWM photo database



does it have a loader's hatch, or is there someone standing behind the turret to confuse us?

David

I tried enlarging the picture but it gets a bit fuzzy. At the chassis is a late production early M4A1 it could have a loaders hatch. That figure does stand up a bit tall though, so I am guessing he is standing on the engine deck.

It appears to me that he may be sitting on the turret roof with his legs in the loaders hatch. Right arm is leaning on something, maybe one half of the commanders split hatch?

hehe hard to say David
He would seem to be lined up perfect for the small loaders hatch, and looking at the relative head sizes of him and the commander, his looks even bigger, meaning he probably couldn't be further back... ie. the engine deck?
Brad

I'd say the loader is up in the turret. I am betting it is the M4A1 in the picture

Well, my take is still that he is standing on the engine deck, and to elaborate a little, he is leaning forward and appears to be holding a map. If he was in a loaders hatch he would be a bit more to the right (his left). His left arm looks like he is bracing himself on the anteanna.

Just my guess. If only the picture was a bit larger.

I'm sure that the shadow on the turret top right of screen is from the open loaders' hatch, but as to whether he is in the darn thing...?

Difficult to see. The late M4A1 75mm could have turret's with loader's hatch. I'm puzzled as to if it wouldn't be akward to stand on the engine deck and lean forward enough to lean on the open commander's hatch. I'm also thinking more of the lower torso and legs would be visible if he would be standing on the engine deck, as he would be standing on the raised cover immediatly behind the turret.

That might very well be true. I just ran a small check on my M4, as well as a random infantry, and if he's standing right behind the turret, much more of him would be visible. As of now, he seems to be "waist-up", while he would be more like "crotch-up" if he was standing...

It being an M4A1 is a given, what's in question is the turret type. Prior convention is that the early hull in the photo would have an early turret that did not have a loader's hatch. Hence the tries at determining whether the man is in a loader's hatch or standing behind the turret on the back deck and just looks like he may be in a loader's hatch.

Morning Guys,

This photo came up when I was discussion transmission types on British Mk IIs in NWE with David.

If it does turn out to be a loaders hatch then excellent, I will have finally found a home for the 75mm M4 Italeri turret I keep looking at and wondering what to do with.

Reading all the posts it would appear to be someone in the loaders hatch. The only other explanation is a dwarf or someone kneeling on the engine deck.

I'll await further developments.

Thanks guys.

Al

Well, I found a better copy of the picture in a Ground Power book on the Shermans. The tank does have a loaders hatch. The gunners head is sticking up in front of the commander from the nose up! This is why the loader looks bigger, the commander is all the way back in the hatch. The hull has all the late features including the cast in "added" armor. The gun muzzle is oddly shaped because it looks like there is a muzzle cover off a Cromwell, Churchill or 6pdr on the gun. Or, it could be an OP tank. There are numbers in a light color on the nose below the bow mg, but I can't make them out. The tracks are metal chevron, there is a round can on the right fender and a British style jerry can on the left. The picture is dated June 11, 1944 according to the book.

So, there you are David, Al, late M4A1 with a loaders hatch on the turret.

Chances are the turret is one of the low bustle versions though. It occured to me while conducting a little research that the turret bin common on British M4's in Normandy would have made it practically impossible for a man to stand, or kneel, behind the turret like that. Sometime it's the most obvious details we over look. Or is it just me!

Hi Randal,

Thanks very much for that. Very interesting indeed. Always something new with Shermans lol, lol.

Cheers

Al

Hi Randell,

Tank belomged to 4th Armd Bde - Unit not specified, possibly 3 CLY. Pic taken at Reviers on 11 June 44.

Al

Thanks Alan. 3 CLY seemed to have cornered the market on M4A1's, that's why I was curious.

Quite a few of the late LB turets with Loaders hatch appear to have served in Brit units in NWe. A few pics pop up know and again on M4A1 and M4 Composite hulls. As for the cornering of the M4A1 market, the Brits (like the US) tended to try to standardise type within units. 4AB was equipped with M4A1 with some M4 Composites. The Concord vol on Brit Tanks in NWE has some good pics of Brit M4A1 and Composite. Most of the composite tend to have the mid prod turret (LB) with no shell ejection port, no loaders hatch, Cast in Cheek armour.
CHeers
Al

Thanks for the info. While researching an M4A1 project I just noticed that many of the M4A1's seemed to be 3 CLY. Maybe they just had a prolific photographer! This was before the Concord books came out.

Hi Randall,

Both Royal Scots Grays and 444th Bn RTR also had M4A1s but as none of the unit markings are clear, most pics seem to be attributed to 3CLY based on time and location as much as anything else.

Cheers

Al

Thanks everyone

The point about the turret bin did occur to me while I was looking at another picture which is probably part of the same sequence. That one shows the roof of the turret nicely - enough to show the Sherman II in that pic doesn't have a loaders hatch.

Daivd

Here is a closer, but grainy view of the picture.