Super Pershing: Why T26E4 didn't work.

A cool-looking tank, with a BFO cannon. What's not to like?
Well, obviously something, because the US Army chose not to equip itself with this tank. Reports from the Archives explain why.
Post-COVID-Travel-and-Scout Car Fund:
Patreon: / the_chieftain
Direct Paypal paypal.me/thechieftainshat
Subscribestar: www.subscribestar.com/the_chi...

[@colbeausabre8842]

Anyone who served in Germany in the Cold War Army will react to the length of the E4's gun tube with memories of trying to fit through the narrow streets of those "quaint" villages. There was a reason the squadron G5 was in a quarter-ton with a briefcase full of Deutschmarks at the end of the column. Other memories 1) Paying for dead farm animals - all of which were champion examples of their species - AND their descendants in perpetuity 2) Road marching down the autobahn at night, when some guy going Warp Factor Nine in a Beamer crests a hill behind you. The last thing he ever saw was an M60's tail lights 3) The smell of rain, diesel and GI coffee in the morning on the range at Graf. 4) During Autumn Forge, you establish you troop CP next to the gasthaus in one of those villages and some old gray haired guy walks up and says, "I was panzer mann in der Afrika Korps under Rommel" Sure, buddy. And he then pulls out of his wallet a faded picture of Rommel awarding him the Iron Cross First Class.. He doesn't pay for another beer for the rest of the night.

[@ret7army]

Ja, mien herr, aber ich habe nur in Berlin gedient und beobachtet, wie die US-Soldaten ihre M60-Panzer mit Babyöl polierten

[@DavidSmith-ss1cg]

The US made a few mistakes in the occupation of Germany after WW2, and the "Maneuver Damage" treaty was one. While on an FTX there, in the 1970s, we saw - in a German farmer's garage, a concrete roller(like landscapers use) with M-113 track links embedded in the roller. This would make realistic M-113 tracks in the dirt, and so a farmer could claim damages any time US forces were in the area. I had a friend who was a food inspector tell me that a German butcher was found to have a set of USDA meat inspector stamps. Then there's the flak towers that were never torn down. The US bent over backwards to get Germany to be their ally against the Soviet Union, mostly in a good way; they were allies. But many Germans could never forget the bombing(in WW2) and that the US was their enemy.

[@jthunders]

David Smith they don’t seem to like us too much these days. I’m over in Germany a lot. Ironically, France was more friendly last few times, something in da watah.

[@bocephussmith7858]

@@jthunders They’re very friendly up north towards Normandy. Know why Parisians are uppity, unfriendly douche nozzles? They are the equivalent on New Yorkers. No one else likes them in the whole rest of France, either.

[@PoolNoodleGundam]

@@DavidSmith-ss1cg tbh sounds like GI's being GI's and blaming locals for their own fuck ups, per the usual

[@milk3275]

How it reached Dessau? Easy! They just made the gun long enough to reach it before the rest of the tank

[@mpetersen6]

The gun was long enough to engage targets in western Germany from Fort Knox.

[@reecelongden3500]

Still not as long as the long 70 for the Panther in WoT

[@builder396]

@@reecelongden3500 Oh, you mean the REAAAAAAAALLY long one? That shit is ridiculous.

[@reecelongden3500]

@@builder396 The muzzle break occupies a different postcode to the rest of the tank xD

[@E0S1776]

Hahaha

[@jakobc.2558]

That bunny on his desk is actualy terrifying.

[@zafranorbian757]

This is no ordenary bunny.

[@Paciat]

Doh. It is a bunny: kzbin.info/www/bejne/jpTbfHyAicdmfsk

[@Mishn0]

@@zafranorbian757 That is the Rabbit of Caerbannog! "Death awaits you all - with nasty, big, pointy teeth!" Tim the Enchanter.

[@popuptarget7386]

Perhaps it would confuse it if we ran away some more?

[@The7humpwump]

It’s got a mean streak a mile wide

[@joeblow9657]

WW2 US soliders: *sees something vaguely armored* WW2 US Soldiers: Is this a Tiger or a King Tiger?

[@sadwingsraging3044]

Jag Tiger!

[@dcbanacek2]

*Some poor bastard tooling around in his kubelwagen while rounds are flying overhead* "Scheíße!!"

[@XerrolAvengerII]

I've been playing games with one of my friends who once spotted a tiger and was like "oh i thought it was a panzer iv", now we know why those men didn't survive.

[@kainhall]

@@XerrolAvengerII i played a LOT of red orchestra 1 back in the day (and its mod....darkest hour..... has 2 full 64 player servers right now 1:28 Montana time) anyway..... i have made this mistake.... . ive called a pz4 a tiger..... as it was at range, behind a bush..... and in fog. all i knew was it was shooting at me..... and i didnt want to walk 3km to get back into the fight. . and i called a tiger a PZ4 with the side and turret skirts..... all i saw was the turret over the ridge line. it REALLY looks similar . RO1 is the only game where i value my life in ARMA.... ill peak stuff i should not but.... in RO.... one burst of MG fire.... and i hit the dirt and will crawl 300 meters . but ya.... imagining my self as a REAL tanker.... the 75 and the 88 can kill me just the same (the 88 at a bit farther range..... ranges that were very rare to see)..... the 88 just makes death a bit less painful . as far as shooting the target.... hopefully i can shoot at it, back up behind a hill or cover.... and then "F-off" to a new location hopefully its late war..... and we have some planes.... or sluggers/jacksons..... or some 76mms....or arty.... if not ALL of them. . the Americans are not shy of using overkill..... we will arty and A-10 gun run at the same time..... as well as have a F-15E drop GBU's on your forehead.... if its worth doing.... its worth overdoing

[@MatthewDoye]

Ditto British Army, occasionally id'ed Panthers too.

[@thomaslemay8817]

The funny thing as a kid I recieved a small plastic toy with the long gun and I quickly discovered the grounding of the gun barrel problem. I think I was eight or nine at the time.

[@johnd2058]

...any relation to Curtis?

[@thomaslemay8817]

@@johnd2058 yes

[@johnd2058]

@@thomaslemay8817Well, I'm pleased to meet one of his kin. He was an honest man, professionally, I wish there were more like him. ...Also, I get to add to my list of controversial generals whose descendents I've met. There was a Westmoreland in my training company (F co., 2/58th, ITB).

[@milanmottl8983]

@@thomaslemay8817 General LeMay had one child, a daughter. So you either missing a real dong or you are lying.

[@thefuturist1867]

@@milanmottl8983 he could be a grandkid?

[@JNF590]

T32 heavy tank now can't wait.

[@jaspergood2091]

Bridges I think?

[@tugboatmedic]

It’s meh

[@ushiki2212]

@@tugboatmedic it's sexy, and that's all that matters

[@alexander1485]

And t29/t30

[@Orinslayer]

I mean, its just a pershing with armor from the e5 and the gun developed on the e4 production run. Nothing fancy really.

[@evanulven8249]

Ah, T32. If I remember right, the main reason it was never produced for service wasn't mechanical or reliability issues. It was how much of a cast-iron mother it would be to transport overseas given it's weight and dimensions. Adding further proof to the Chieftain's opinion that the clevis hitches and welded-on hook loops being the most important parts of the Sherman.

[@williammagoffin9324]

I find that interesting. The M103 was deployed to Europe and M103 was even bigger & heavier. The Marines also used M103 and sealift would be a critical consideration for them. So what happened in the 10 years between T32 and M103, was there some major change in sealift capability?

[@evanulven8249]

@@williammagoffin9324 In short, yes. Sea transport capability *vastly* improved in the directly postwar years. Attempting to build an entirely new logistics and support system with completely different specs for bigger and heavier equipment mid-war, while keeping it compatible with older equipment is doable, but something military planners would really like to avoid.

[@JainZar1]

@@williammagoffin9324 The LCM-8 was developed around the same timeframe as the M103 and the LCUs, already in service at that time, would be able to carry an M103.

[@mfree80286]

@@williammagoffin9324 Lack of a hostile country with submarine technology?

[@billwilson3609]

It wasn't produced because the Army didn't want the T32 nor the T26. They were happy to wait on Ordnance to finalize the design of the T25 when Congress forced Ordnance to design a heavy tank ASAP in 1943 due to the press getting the public alarmed over the Army's lack of a heavy tank and blamed Congress for failing to provide the funding to produce one. The 1944 elections were coming up and the Congressmen were worried about a repeat of 1942 where voters kicked out a lot of Democrats from office because the press said they weren't being aggressive enough to get the weapons needed to defeat Japan and Germany. Ordnance then turned the T25 into the T26, made a factory and lined up parts suppliers so it could go into production in September of 1944 before the November Elections. The factory was ready for assembly in September but no parts were available until after the elections due to delays in having new machinery made and contract obligations that had to be completed first by the suppliers. Seventeen were assembled in November and around 26 in December with the first 20 made promptly shipped over to Antwerp without trained crews and mechanics.

[@black__bread]

The soporific, unnecessary, pedantic detail in this is genuinely magical. It's like a big bowl of warm soup before bed. Thank you. This channel and army ration/MRE guy almost offset the whole social media is an industrialised means of spreading hate and misinformation thing.

[@NightWatch707]

Try LGR too if you are into computers. It's really good to slow things down a bit.

[@CMDRFandragon]

Now we need a video on T32.

[@Weisior]

And on M60

[@joeblow9657]

@@Weisior yes. Invest now!

[@ushiki2212]

Does he have a video on the M48? If not then that as well.

[@alexander1485]

And m103

[@CMDRFandragon]

@@alexander1485 I think he did one on the M103....or, well, someone did. One with Ken Estes

[@charlemagnemchaffie3385]

Those pictures of the P-47 firebombing the Pershing are unreal! Great find

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

Apparently at the time it was categorised as an F47, but same difference.

[@jeffknight9604]

While in the USAF, I was sent to Eglin AFB for an exercise, Iron Eagle. I was Security Police and we were charged with patrolling to bomb/gunnery ranges. During one of my shifts, we came across the vehicle depot for range targets. The range attached to it had about 25-30 T26 tanks (unknown variant) placed in a large square formation. Talking with one of the NCOs in charge of the range, they were there for the Air Force to do damage assessment on a 2000 lb bomb. They didn't do it while I was there, so I never found out what happened to those tanks. Did get a nice picture of me sitting in the commanders hatch of one though.

[@kalsten2236]

do you have a link for the picture?

[@jeffknight9604]

@@kalsten2236 sorry, I don't have a link.

[@kalsten2236]

@@jeffknight9604 understandable, Have a nice day

[@jeffknight9604]

@@kalsten2236 I was able to load it to The Chieftans facebook page

[@paulrward]

Hello All I just checked my drawings, and the turret for the T32 is indeed about 6 inches longer at the rear than the T26 E4 turret, at least internally. The added counter weight behind the T26 turret makes it longer on the outside, but this length isnt usable by the crew. Also, the T32 turret side walls are less sloped, more vertical, giving more internal volume to move stuff around inside the turret. Slight differences, but perhaps just enough to make things fit better. After all, just an inch or two on the waistband of your levis makes a big difference.... As for the T26 being underpowered, this was due to a failure of imagination by the U.S. Army. Henry Ford was making the GAA series V8s for M4 Shermans. This engine produced 450- 500 hp. and was a derivative of the V12 engine that Henry had prototyped for the British as an aircraft engine. Now, would it have been that big of a stretch for the Army to tell Ford to make a bunch of V12s, which produced about 700-750 hp. and lengthen the T26 a little bit to take the longer engine ? Add 250 ponies, ( 50% power increase ! ) and the M26 would have really had some get up and go.

[@blueboats7530]

The missing V12 GAA engine was probably less of a problem of imagination and more a consequence of the broad doctrine of not supporting any serious heavy tank direction until late in the war, at which point then for Ford to finalize development and re-tool or create a new factory to make a V12 would have been too disruptive. Keep in mind the T26E3 was treated as an evolution of medium tank class, and got to the combat theater in an impressive short development and production time which may not have been achieved if they used anything more advanced than the GAA V8.

[@paulrward]

@@blueboats7530 The problem with this version is, the V8 Ford GAA was simply a cut down version of the Ford V12 aircraft engine. All they did was cast a set of crankcases and cylinder blocks that were four cylinders long instead of six, make a shorter set of cranckshafts and camshafts, and make up a new distributor. This was why the GAA was so bulletproof - it was a 1000 hp aircraft engine that was only making 600 hp, The V12 version was already developed and proven ( It was BETTER than either the Merlin or the Allison ! ) so no further work needed to be done. All Ford would have had to do was use their existing plant that was making GAAs, and start casting V12 cases and blocks, and make longer forgings for the crankshafts and camshafts. That would have taken Henry's team about three weeks, and then the V12s would have come roaring out the back door of the factory. The problem with U.S. tank development after 1942 was, there were three factions in the Army. One wanted only to keep producing M4 Shermans, with few changes, the Second wanted only to improve the Sherman by up-gunning to a 90 mm gun and up-armoring it, and the Third wanted a whole new tank ( T-26 ). The three factions kept bickering until Eisenhower and Bradley screamed at Marshall loud enough to get him to settle the matter and the M-26 went into production . ( It also helped that by this time General McNair, who had opposed any technical improvements in U.S. tanks, had been ' accidently ' killed by Allied bombing during Operation Cobra, thus allowing the M-26 to go into production unimpeded. ) It's an ill wind.....

[@GARDENER42]

Or use non supercharged, Packard built Merlins. Could've called them Packard Asteroids or summink...

[@wildancrazy159]

@@paulrward sounds like "M&M Enterprises" at the direction of the CEO (Milo Minderbinder) made a deal to take out the said General Mc'Nair to remove that Tank Blocking mf-er. (It was just good business, after all everyone had a share in M&M and profits were up that quarter)

[@alganhar1]

@@GARDENER42 While the Meteor was derived from the Merlin it was not the same, very similar but there were differences. Engine rotation was the opposite direction, which meant modifying the camshaft lobes. Admittedly many of the changes made for easier construction, such as the removal of the supercharger and reduction gear. Other changes were made for reliability, the primary one being that the engine was de-rated somewhat so produced less horsepower than a Merlin. This however reduced wear and increased engine reliability. Not saying Packard Merlins could not have been modified in such a way, just pointing out that the Meteor was more than simply slapping a Merlin into a tank and calling it a new name. It was renamed because it had enough significant differences from the Merlin that it warranted a new name....

[@WestBestBound]

I live by cantigny and seen the super Pershing and I never realized what it was because i always thought the only one was scraped in Europe, so this is cool I actually seen the last one and have pictures

[@Hazwaste63]

Used to go to Cantigny as a kid (60's and early 70's). When did they get the Super Pershing? Maybe I saw it and didn't know it (I was a WW2 history nut as a kid).

[@WestBestBound]

Hazwaste63 I don’t know when they got it but it looks so similar to a regular Pershing with only the back turret block and longer gun it may have been there and just mistook it for a regular Pershing

[@alexander1485]

So upload them here using like imagebb

[@Beegrene]

My cub scout troupe used to go to Cantigny a lot where we would all climb around over all the tanks. Many years later I went there again to work a Wargaming event (Cantigny being about an hour's drive from Wargaming's Chicago office), which is where I met the Chieftain in person for the first time. He's a nice guy.

[@g2macs]

They must have had a bunch of very patient crew at Aberdeen, you can imagine the air turning blue as the loader tries to tackle moving huge heavy rounds in such a confined area.

[@Taranaki66]

Why do you want to take the T26 away from Cantigny? The tank park there is really cool - although it lacks a Sherman. In the summer there are concerts there amongst the tanks. Unfortunately not this year. So if Chieftain is ever around Chicago, I would be happy to take you there.

[@ScottKenny1978]

Turning the air blue? I'd be surprised if there was any paint left on the inside of the turret! 😆

[@mfree80286]

@@ScottKenny1978 Stripes of brass adorn the bare iron interior of the T26E4 turret, all from the loader's invectives and not scrapes from case rims....

[@gloccry2184]

I feel it will be something on the lines of 'Way too underpowered.' Edit: HP/T

[@kainhall]

as im a train nerd..... american freight trains have 2hp/t up to about 6hp/t on the "Z" trains (intermodual containers)

[@wyattroncin941]

@@kainhall yes but trains ride on hardened steel rail with a maximum slope of 2 percent, not driving up a 45 degree hill on mud encrusted tracks

[@justinkedgetor5949]

The regular m26 pershing was quite sluggish for a medium tank. It only had about 500HP engine and roughly 12-13 hp/ ton.

[@dse763]

@@justinkedgetor5949 It wasn't a medium but a heavy but for some reason, they later classify as a medium.

[@r.j.dunnill1465]

@@dse763 Tanks had gotten bigger.

[@George_M_]

Whenever you see a Tiger claimed killed in Western Europe, subtitle it as (Probably a Pz IV)

[@BorosWarmaster]

Or a STUG

[@alexander1485]

Or a panther

[@nighthawk8053]

@Patrick Ancona around only 1,350 Tiger 1 were made and only 480 Tiger 2 ,by wars end.

[@eyesofstatic9641]

@Patrick Ancona Where are you getting 1000 and 4000!?

[@simonnance]

@Patrick Ancona it's more complicated than that. Chieftain has a good video on why the Tiger was a good tank for its role, and also a number on why the Sherman was a excellent tank for what the US needed. A lot comes down to doctrine and logistics. The Germans designed a logistics train to support the needs of the Tiger and had a doctrinal use for it as a breakthrough tank. Once the logistics broke down and it was used outside its intended role it had difficulties. While the Sherman focussed on numbers on the ground, ease of transport to the European theatre, reliability and lighter supply chain reliance, and anti-personel focus for the main gun. It's not as simple as "if it were good, we'd have made our own". As I said, some very detailed Chieftain videos on this subject

[@Whiskey11Gaming]

EVERYONE knows that the reason the wings were added was so players in War Thunder could put oogly eyes on the wings and make it look like a giant mosquito.... SHEEEESH!

[@ceutermark8271]

lol

[@irish_thunder0185]

STOP

[@NashmanNash]

NOW i know what i have to do with my super pershing^^

[@JeanLucCaptain]

The Omnisiah looked upon the modifications made to the Super Pershing and determined TECH HERESY!!!!

[@johnolive3425]

Quick, get the Holy Hand Grenade. Gawd, this guys dry sense of humor is a breath of fresh air!

[@Scoop2992]

I like the rabbit with "Big Pointy Teeth".

[@ScottKenny1978]

Stuffed rabbit of Caerbannog (sp?). Where's my Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch?!?

[@ScottKenny1978]

@@TonysGemDesignswithGCS no switchblade.

[@Bart-Did-it]

Your gonna need the “Holy Hand grenade of Antioch” for that killer rabbit 🐇 Arthur .

[@joeblow9657]

The Chieftain got real sentimental at the end when talking about the T26E4 near Chicago :(....

[@tacomas9602]

there's something to be said about how Cooper's Super Pershing w/ added armor. it looks like such an angry machine ready to tackle Tiger 1s with ease

[@thomasbernecky2078]

I found this functional yet decorative. Tanks!

[@candleman2123]

In awesome form and excellent humour. I loved the energy in this one.

[@DecoratedSPLATTER]

as always very informative, and interesting. Your knowledge of tanks and armor in general, is just insane, you are such a classy man.

[@Riflelock]

I just love how his set is constantly shifting.

[@MrNigzy23]

Only recently really got into your videos... And I've spent the last couple of days solidly watching them. I have to say the way you look at things with an objective point of view, tempered with your intimate knowledge garnered from ... Well being intimate with these machines is absolutely brilliant. Kudos especially to the commitment you take upon yourself to get to the bottom of things, not relaxing until you've scoured every bit of source material, no matter the location, you can find before uploading/sharing etc... etc... It's truly awesome. I had always wanted to enlist in the army, especially as a tankie and get that coveted black beret of the RTR but alas I came from a navy family so was kind of shoehorned into that from an early age. So thank you for sharing your passion with us :D

[@CaptainPoofers]

OMG! I've seen that, I've been to that museum! X3 They also have on display, an Abrams with a 90mm gun! I know, not uncommon, but I still think it's cool.

[@russwoodward8251]

Yes it looked cool. Thanks for the research and excellent detail.

[@blakewinter1657]

Never mind the super Pershing, I see we have an even more dangerous beast on the field! That rabbit's dynamite!

[@Inpreesme]

Thank you

[@donaldwiller9238]

Grate job.

[@fafhrdkreig4739]

Love the vorpral bunny. Look at the bones!

[@Lukusprime]

This once again proves that up-gunning a tank, in general, should only be done if the tank was designed with up-gunning/modularity in mind, like the Panzer III or the Sherman. Sometimes adding a new turret works, like in the case of the T-34/85, other times the larger turret has to sacrifice armor and ends up being a questionable compromise, like was the case with one of the Swedish tanks (the name of which escapes me at this time). I suppose this was why Germany and the Soviet Union focused on casemated vehicles with limited traverse. It’s not at all as flexible as a tank, but it is a viable way of getting a more powerful gun out onto the battlefield using a chassis that otherwise wouldn’t be able to handle it.

[@Lukusprime]

@Håkan Bergvall thanks!

[@ditzydoo4378]

"Re-Jiggered the internal stowage"... o_0 Good sir your grasp of technical terms is a breath taking marvel to behold... >_< we are very amused... ^_^ The only thing that comes to mind with the Super Pershing: T26E4 is that some bright spark had a crystal ball and had a serious case of Maus envy..

[@woopimagpie]

Is "jiggered" an exclusively Irish term? Irish members of my family use that word in reference to the state which one finds oneself in when one has consumed a little too much Guinness. Or, as is the usage here, when one attempts to rectify a less than ideal situation but only succeed in making it even more less than ideal, if you follow.

[@ditzydoo4378]

@@woopimagpie not according to old Merrium Webster. (jiggered) an adjective is British in its origin, informal to mean: damaged; broken. "the lens is totally jiggered" synonyms: out of order · not working · not in working order · not functioning · broken -. or to mean totally exhausted.

[@woopimagpie]

@@ditzydoo4378 Thanks! I guess "no longer in working order" would apply to the result of too much Guinness, lol. And if you "re-jiggered" something (as used in the video) then you'd be taking something that was already "jiggered" and making it worse. That would then be what us Australians would refer to as "cactus". LOL.

[@Bill22252]

@The_Chieftain I grew up one town over from where Cantigny is, spent many a happy hour there as a kid. The tanks outside are set up for static display and are painted very heavily. I believe they are all gutted internally. Cool museum nonetheless.

[@relluplewis7112]

It's been about 45-yrs. since I last was at 1st Inf Div museum at Cantigny, I now have an added reason to visit again! The only Super Pershing left! I'm fairly certain it wasn't there last time so that & catching up with other changes should make a full day of it.

[@Sturminfantrist]

The kill was not at Northeim, it was between the Weservalley and Northeim which is a big area of ca. 40- 50km i grew up there and its possible that the Kill was donein the Hills near Karlshafen on the east bank of the Weser Valley. No Kingtigers near the place at the time is also wrong, in the Citychronics of Uslar, they wrote that a bavarian Waffen SS unit with Tigers defend USLAR , a secound unit with Tiger II fought around Göttingen Harste, Nörthen Hardenberg and after retreating in the direction of the Harz Mountains the US troops intercepted the Tiger Unit near the Mackenröder Spitze.

[@thhseeking]

He *has* made Holy Grail references before, so it's possible he wanted to see how many people would pick up on it :P

[@herosstratos]

Further reading: LtC Ulrich Saft, Krieg in der Heimat - Das bittere Ende zwischen Weser und Elbe or: An Eclipse Without A Future www.amazon.de/Krieg-Heimat-bittere-zwischen-Weser/dp/3980178900 www.amazon.de/Eclipse-Without-Future-Ulrich-Saft/dp/1927332052

[@zoperxplex]

The Chieftain presents his own idea of the successor of the M1 in the form of that bunny.

[@stevepirie8130]

zoperxplex holy hand grenade soon sort it

[@admiraltiberius1989]

I like the super killer bunny front and center.

[@cirian75]

No noes, Sgt googly eyed Shillelagh is missing

[@demonprinces17]

Looks every thing shifted to the right, might be to the left

[@fabiogalletti528]

there is a suspicious shadow of a cavalry hat on a tube, there...

[@od1452]

A hot shell case in the lap must have been fun. Thanks for covering this topic. How about doing the T29,30 and 34?

[@georgebottarini1788]

Thanks informative vid

[@deeznoots6241]

Clearly it just needs to be even bigger

[@SmokedPeasant]

I hope we can get a similar video on the T29/T34 in the future. I wonder what the inside of the turret on them looks like.

[@duckrutt]

I haven't been to Cantigny in twenty years? From their website it looks like they've redesigned the whole place since then. Most of what I remember is from much earlier than that. Jumping off the tanks into the shredded tires they used as gravel.

[@Hybris51129]

Of all the US tanks there are two that I have always had a soft spot for the T95 GMC and the T30. The T95 is just a unique TD with the quad tracks that regardless of its practicality it looks cool. The T30 boils down to having that 155mm gun which just screams "I don't want see that target anymore."

[@JohnDoe-vm5rb]

"It throws new light onto the importance of power elevation" Funny as that is, I think it's actually probably more significant than 'damning with faint praise'. Tanks at this time are getting more heavily armed and armoured, so I reading between the lines I suspect it's also very much a "...this is going to be a very real issue for all our future tanks" as much as anything.

[@cookingonthecheapcheap6921]

Great video Chieftain. Just curious about something; what is your favorite model of Sherman?

[@hiltibrant1976]

Huh, never heard of the Super Pershing appearing in Dessau (if that's what you mentioned), but interesting, since that's my hometown :D

[@GAFBear]

@The_Chieftain Errm the shell on your left has gone walkies it was looking funny on your last Q&A, i think it's gone on holiday :) Add i can see it's shadow lurking of camera :)

[@Bird_Dog00]

Rumour has it, it was donated to a good cause the last wednesday when a door sales man showed up uninvited at the Moran residence...

[@codyayo6158]

We need a video on t29/30/34 chieftain!

[@Mana-Chann]

Please also do a review of T28/T95 super heavy tank and all its logistical problems and whatnots, and an if just an "if" scenario when the army decided to push that tank and use it as a post war tank and pre-cold war tank for Europe.

[@LOBricksAndSecrets]

For the ammunition going to the wrong unit part of the video, I at first heard 'TV' and not 'TD' Thank goodness for the ability to rewind

[@Luke11636]

Mark Felton Productions channel has a good video on the supposed combat actions of the super pershing. It also dispels the super pershing vs. King Tiger myth.

[@nonamesplease6288]

It's good that they killed this thing. Later in Korea, the regular M26 was a mechanical nightmare. The first ones sent to Korea were assigned to a provisional tank regiment, and every one of them was lost due to breakdowns. The Super Pershing wouldn't have faired any bettrr.

[@Predator20357]

And since the tanks they faced (unless I’m thinking wrong) were T-34s, you wouldn’t need such a heavy tank

[@jasonpeacock9735]

It’s vaguely humorous that M26 units were pulled from Korea, and replace buy Easy8 Sherman units

[@Predator20357]

Jason Peacock Yah, M26 was meant to be the replacements and got replaced instead due to how unreliable they were.

[@panther7584]

No, not good at all. It's one of a kind and should had been preserved for museum.

[@r.j.dunnill1465]

Where does this come from?

[@ASSman864]

T26E4 used to be one of my favorite tier 8 premiums for coin crinding but due to ir being so power crept it now needs a buff next update

[@whelmy]

Don't forget the M36 they slapped a T15 gun into for tests. Apparently a T25E1-6 as well.

[@cookingonthecheapcheap6921]

Every time I see that rabbit I think of a picture from the Falklands War. A trooper had a little snoopy toy attached to his weapon.

[@gabrielsistonamoca6963]

when the super pershing landed at Cherburg its gun was already in Berlin

[@christophercripps7639]

Bit of a problem for a tank - u can't load the gun at all angles of elevation it depression.

[@gings4ever]

Man it feels like Aberdeen probably went "bro are we EVEN GODDAMN SURE this will mechanically work?!" when they saw the test Pershing being fitted with the 90mm T15 barrel days after they exhaustively tested the crap out of it, never mind the very thought of a Super Pershing squad bum rushing Remagen village instead of regular T26E3's for maximum pants crapping facemelts. Did they actually mount that T15 on a Slugger tho?

[@colbeausabre8842]

1) That;s the reason the first test the gun and mounting by firing some proof rounds remotely 2) No they didn't. because there wasn't any such vehicle. the M36 was a Jackson. Per Zaloga, some M36's given to the Koreans were updated with roof armor and the M3A1 gun

[@ocorbitt]

On the general subject of the Pershing, I think it is interesting that the famous duel with the Panther in Cologne was won because the Pershing got off the first shot and at the side armor of the Panther at that. I suspect even a Sherman’s 75 would have no trouble penetrating the Panther at that range. Also, the Sherman that the Panther knocked out earlier on the other street didn’t burn. The effects of wet storage perhaps? Dramatic action nonetheless.

[@General_Cartman_Lee]

I recomment this website about the tank battle in Cologne: anicursor.com/colpicwar2.html (English) anicursor.com/colpicward2.html (German) According to this website the Sherman was hit through the mantlet and burning inside. However there's more that can burn when a shell gets inside a tank than the ammunition. There's also a 15 page site (only in Geman) that deals with the theory spread by one author that the tank duel is a fake and staged later for the camers: www.anicursor.com/battled2.html

[@kiloalphasierra]

The Panther’s side armor was vulnerable to 75mm fire from a Sherman well beyond regular battle ranges. The lack of the Sherman brewing up at Cologne had more to due with the improved construction of the wet storage ammo boxes and their location on the turret floor then the wet storage itself. After the war the army ordered the wet storage boxes drained when testing showed that there was little difference in the rate of fire between the wet storage boxes when filled with water or when left dry.

[@ocorbitt]

Whether the Sherman suffered fire damage or not, the video footage I have seen did not show it “brewing-up” which of course might be expected with its reputation as a “Ronson ” or “ Tommy Cooker.” Of course this is a sample of one, it was probably a late-war improved tank, and it may have lit up later off camera. Most of the smoke I remember seeing was from the stump of the unfortunate TC’s leg. Sad he didn’t survive; I think he would have a better chance today with TC3 etc.

[@General_Cartman_Lee]

@@ocorbitt The website I linked says the Sherman hit was an M4A1W76. So if this is correct it has the wet ammo stowage. However it was hit in the mantlet, there's no ammunition stowed that far up even on older Shermans. The problem of the early Shermans was the ammunition stowed in the sides above the tracks. But that is a common feature of many tanks, the Panther in Cologne for example caught fire after getting hit into the side by the Pershing. The bad reputation of the Sherman is a myth, the crew losses of Shermans destroyed were not higher than on other tanks.

[@opperbuil]

Follow up question on the M18 Hellcat and their successful failure: were they any better than 30+ ton tanks/TD's in logistical terms, using less shipping, fuel and/or maintenance? I also assume it's cheaper to build a 17 ton vehicle than a 33 tonner, as armor plate tends to be expensive.

[@itatane]

My grandfather served in a unit known as "Butler's Blue Battlin' Bastards" during World War II (395th Inf. Regt.) as they were constantly lent out to other units to plug gaps during the latter part of the war. (The training he got at Camp Blanding was supposedly based on Ranger Training, not because the Army wanted them to be elite, but because the need for manpower was so critical, they wanted replacements who could do anything needed.) He never talked about the war very much, but the RARE stories he told were either hilarious or horrifying. He would talk about how often guys would claim Tigers or Panthers were around, only for it to proved to be a towed anti-tank gun or a Panzer 4. Anyway, he said one of the few times he and his guys ever actually saw a "King Tiger" tank, it must have been driven by a conscript or been malfunctioning, because the driver stalled out the tank. While the thing was immobile, grandpa's commander called in a nearby TD and it put shells into the side of the German tank until "it went up like a barbecue." (I will not share the rest of his description, it was not pleasant. I was 8 when he told me that story.) Edit: And for anyone wanting to do research into what relatives did in World War II, the Archives in College Park are both a godsend and a bloody nightmare. (At least, I found them to be. Seriously, some unit records are just stacks of paper in a big box, un-indexed and un-conserved!)

[@jthunders]

Thanks for that advice on college park -I was trying to trace my dad. Also, Father in law was in the Kriegsmarine at first-and later the Heer in Frankreich when they had manpower shortages due to the sudden appearance of the allies in France. Don’t suppose you know how to trace Wehrmacht soldiers do you?

[@itatane]

@@jthunders Your best place to start is the Bundesarchiv. www.bundesarchiv.de/EN/Navigation/Use/Using-specific-types/Military-Records/military-records-en.html Best of luck in your search.

[@droppointbaker]

"It throws new light on the importance of powered elevation." lol... that dig.

[@LTSarcasm]

I am curious if you have access to any reports on the spiritual successor, the M26E1 with the 90mm Gun T54. Hunnicutt clams that those went much, much smoother in testing and that the T54 gun was essentially killed off as a result of budget measures.

[@LURKTec]

Hey, could you please elaborate on the mantlet "ears"? I've seen some arguments that it was either boiler plate or armored steel. But no sources.

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

Cooper states that they were boiler plate.

[@LURKTec]

@@TheChieftainsHatch Thanks, that clears it up.

[@ScottKenny1978]

All the stories I heard was that they were cut from Panther glacis plates, but if they were just for counterweight basic boiler plates would be easier to cut out.

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

Cooper explicitly distinguishes between panther plate for the front of the mantlet, and boiler plate for everything else. His memory may be faulty, but it's better information than anything else.

[@ScottKenny1978]

@@TheChieftainsHatch that makes sense for the mantlet. Kinda surprised that they didn't also use Panther glacis for the extra bow armor.

[@romeovictor954]

This is the best tank for tilting heat spammers in WOT.

[@MasterMalrubius]

LOL wut?

[@sherlocksinha2435]

And scaring German players in war thunder

[@Pimpdaddy_payne]

Sherlock Sinha, this tank does not scare me, I scare them

[@sherlocksinha2435]

But if u get downtiered it's pretty good and medium to long range assuming that a nashorn or even worse a sturer Emil is shooting at you

[@OCofthe3]

The t32 might have had the 3rd variant of the T15 gun. That last variant used a resigned shell case that was wider and shorter and was one piece. This might have allowed the use of a standard m26 turret size.

[@AngryMarine-il6ej]

After reviewing the video and the comments he mentioned the powertrain as to whether or not it was resolved. According to what I researched the powertrain issue was not resolved until The Korean War. They were still using the same powertrain and transmission that was being used on the M-4 Sherman towards the end of the war in Europe. So the early M-26s had a powerplant designed to move a 30ton Sherman was being installed on Pershings that were 10 tons heavier. Part of the problem in getting it developed was Army politics delayed a big part in it. General McNair who was Chief of AGF, an artillery officer, was in favor of keeping only 76mm armed tanks and was opposed to developing tanks with a 90mm gun and did his best to delay it. The only thing that kept development going was General Devers who was in charge of Armored Forces went to Marshall who overruled him. When they did correct the transmission problem it was a whole new tank. The M-26s that were rushed to Korea were using the same powertrain which caused issues when travelling in hilly terrain. The M26E2s which were being developed had a redesigned turret and improved engine, where it was reclassified as the M-46. All the remaining M-26 Pershings that were in Korea were upgraded to M-46s. But since the M-26/M-46 could overmatch the T-34/85, very few tank on tank actions happened after 1951. So Shermans were the prime tank then.

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

Different issue. I was referring to the changes in the power train between T26E1 and T26E3 (the production version of M26). It turned out that T26E3's system wasn't ideal either, but it was certainly better than T26E1's, and the vehicle which went to Germany was originally an E1.

[@AngryMarine-il6ej]

@@TheChieftainsHatch Correct me if I'm wrong but are you're referring to, the switch from a 'torqmatic transmission' to an 'electrical transmission'? Granted you're the duty expert on this. From what available sources I could find the transmission was still being used with the same M4A3 engine they installed on the T26 series which points to them using an engine not suited to the increase in weight.

[@Jakeedaman21]

I grew up climbing on that tank, and hanging upside down from its barrel, and didn’t even know it’s rarity!

[@jacobosburne2565]

I have this strange love spot for T32 for some reason and I don't know why.

[@armandorodrigues144]

I can't remember right now from where I read/heard tha the Super Pershing was designated as T26E4 on the documents from the orders to send it to Europe

[@ralphvincentfcamacho8637]

MY FAVORITE TANK OF ALL TIME !!!!

[@rogueleader7506]

Ive seen the t26e4 and got on top of it too.

[@jimmertrzcinski1144]

Great Video, I’m sure that Super P took out that King Tiger,,,, history is always written by the victor,,, lol Watch “Greatest Tank Battles” one of the episodes has the Super P and the alleged encounters

[@MerrimanDevonshire]

Nice backhanded shout out to the 1st Division Museum at Cantiguy, Illinois

[@WildBillCox13]

The High Herman? Well, someone was high. Upgrading the engine might've been the way to go with Pershing. M48 wants to know your location.

[@lharless105]

In my opinion I like war thunder a lot more, but I love this channel

[@1czv13]

What do you think about the new Serbian tank M-84 AS-1, i think it is a big step from an M-84 to that tank, all thought Serbia did not gave any updates on it.

[@czechnolike]

Maybe you should do a video on American superiority in artillery and the supply system across western Europe?

[@apiece_]

If you haven’t already (relatively new to your channel) could you go over the stuff on your shelf?

[@robertdendooven7258]

Any info about the M26E1 version that had a 90 MM T54 gun and a shorter and fatter propellant charge? I think I saw that 25 examples of the tank were produced after June 1945? Is there any info in the archives that the improvements made to the M46 for the use of a Cross-Drive transmission and a V-12 engine were ever considered for the T26 during its design or early prototype stages? I have seen that both of the above were used in the prototype T29 tank, so I was wondering if Ordinance had ever had the spark of inspiration to add these two improvements to the production M26s before the Fall of 1945? Thanks!

[@mpetersen6]

The US actually had two potential V-12 engine designs they could potentially have used for armored vehicles. These were the Curtiss D-12 and Conqueror aircraft engines. The problem here is in all likelihood Curtiss or the Air Corps had scrapped all the tooling. Ford most likely have been strapped to produce the V-12 version of the G series of engines. Of course the G series started out as the Ford V-1650 designed as a competitor to the Merlin.

[@robertdendooven7258]

@@mpetersen6 I am well aware of the Ford GAC engine and its history. How much different would it have to scale up the V-8 production line? As a automotive engineer, it would not have been that difficult given enough notice/time to scale back up to a V-12 engine. What is the real question is whether or not anyone in Ordinance thought that during the design stages, the T26 with its increased weight, would have benefited with a bigger engine which what my question to the Chieftain was. Or would the change in engine delayed the production of T26E3s later than actual start time of Nov. 1944?

[@mpetersen6]

@@robertdendooven7258 Having worked in the Tool Room of an automotive engine facility for 30+ years I also have a very good idea of just what is entailed in producing automotive powerplants. My point about the Curtiss power plants is they had basic designs that where relatively well developed. Production of them probably would not have entailed that much specialized custom built machinery. The components most likely to require specially built machinery would IMO most likely be the equipment needed for the camshaft and crankshaft grinding. I'm not sure if Landis built pin grinders or multi wheel large enough beyond those made for custom orders. The other large components could most likely be manufactured on normal machinery found in larger machine shops. G&L boring mills, DeVlieg jig mills or there equivilants. These V-12s would not be needed for M-4s. Another possible powerplant option would have been the Packard V-12 used in PT boats.

[@ScottKenny1978]

@@mpetersen6 I think that the Packard 2500s would have been a good call, though they would have needed to be detuned to run on automotive gasoline instead of the avgas the PT boats ran on.

[@marktwain2053]

It's not completely out of reason to suggest that there may have been a King Tiger at Dessau. At the time things were in such a mess in the German Army that they may not have known with any certainty where anything was. Did the Super Pershing kill a King Tiger at Dessau? No idea, and anyone who did know wasn't saying, and is long dead. But, it could have. It's a question that can never be answered!

[@damnedjuggernaut1051]

Could we have a video on the t110 series?

[@oisnowy5368]

Now, let's hope for the sequal T26E5. :P

[@Dodey2257]

I love your videos but I saw that shillelagh you had disappeared what happened to it ?

[@chrissheffield5468]

You have to respect an officer with this level of thoughtful analysis. However, what really puts this cat over the top is the plush Killer Rabbit of Caerbannog on his desk and Sheehan's A Bright Shining Lie on the book shelf.

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

In fairness, I'm mainly just taking the information from the test report. The Bunny, however, is not from the test report.

[@oo7killer1]

Can you do a T-29/30/34 video for why those tanks 'failed'?

[@axelrajr]

kinda looks to me like the T32, while the turret is strongly reminiscent of the T-26, the back of it is different, like it was designed that way instead of having a bunch added on. perhaps its simply a case of it actually using a turret that big instead of a T26 turret modified to accept and handle the larger gun. things like a bit more room for teh gun laying equipment, room aft of the gun for loading, room to get those casings out of the hull stowage, perhaps ready racks for casings along with shells. that room could in turn allow more reasonable access to the hull stowage areas. i think you have shown a couple of other tanks where just a couple of inches to something like the turret ring, where it seems so minuscule, makes all the difference.

[@phil20_20]

The gun was great. It's very reassuring to know they were trying.

[@TheChris046]

The bunny scares me.

[@ScottKenny1978]

It should! That's the killer Rabbit of Caerbannog!

[@jeffhousen8968]

such a sweet bunny...it's not bun-bun, so all is well

[@abntemplar82]

Question i have for you Chieftain is this, was the t15e2 or later model used on the early Patton variants or did they maintain the same M3 underpowered gun? i say underpowered because now as the Pershing was supposed to take on the JS 3. Now as for the comments, i spent some time in Germany both back in the 80s and early 21st century prior to my retirement. i was stationed in Bad Tolz, no i was not a tanker. in fact all i ever did when it comes to tanks, was learn to point them in the right direction to find and destroy the enemy or how to destroy them. the A10 being the easiest and most effective way. that said, reading some of these comments brought back a lot of good memories. Having been stationed at Bad Tolz once or twice, and popping in for a training. i got to meet a great bunch of folks, some exhibited caution at having an American in their home but nothing to bad. being a history geek, this would cause me to make friends with the grand father and or father, and piss of said girlfriend at the time. well worth it though.

[@420choochy]

@chieftan sorry to ask another question,but after watching. Drachfinal video concerning munitions for naval guns and necking the shells higher to diminish size and weight but still maintain same effectiveness for kinetic energy or possibly increasing it,why has this not been done for army style guns used in various purposes ? I figure this would increase ammo storage capabilities as well as diminish loader weight handling concerns that are becoming more and more problematic the higher the caliber the gun is . Or has this already been done and not nearly as noticeable as it is with navy caliber guns ?

[@matthiuskoenig3378]

The Italian oto 60mm hvs is a necked down oto 76mm. And it was designed for light land vehicles. So they atleast sometimes neck down their shells off the top of my head. And the new 50 mm chain gun developedfor the us army is also just a necked up 30mm (the one in the Apache) off the top of my head. Would be interested to see how often this is down though.

[@ScottKenny1978]

@@matthiuskoenig3378 the new army 50mm is the 35mm NATO AA cartridge necked up to 50mm. Same overall length and base diameter as the 35x228mm, but a much better HE round. And the APDS round is obscene, supposed to punch more than 140mm at 1km.

[@eclipseno15]

WHAT A CUTE BUNNY!!!!

[@donaldparlettjr3295]

You need a "Holy Handgrenade" next to that "Killer Rabbit"

[@kyle857]

I'm prepared to use this video as a reference in internet arguments.