Friday, 10 April 2015

Extreme Makeover : Tank Edition



Historical Background
In 1939, the United States Army was equipped with 400 tanks, including 100 M2 Medium Tanks. The M2 was armed with a 37mm gun and seven .30-cal machineguns and protected with 32mm of armour. The success of the Blitzkrieg, spearheaded by the Panzer III and IV tanks came as a surprise, and led the US Army to order a new tank armed with a 75mm gun. That tank eventually turn out as the M4 Sherman. However, although the design was ready in mid-1940, the US industry was incapable of producing the required items such as a large enough fully-rotating turret (and the turret ring) capable of mounting a 75mm gun. An interim solution was found in the T5 medium tank design. The T5 was basically a scaled-up M2 design with a thicker armour. The new tank has a higher and wider hull to mount an offset75mm gun in a traversable sponson on the right side. A fully-traversable turret was placed on top of the hull, mounting a 37mm gun. The 75mm gun was intended to deal with hardened targets (including tanks) and infantry while the high-velocity 37mm gun was intended solely to deal with enemy tanks, A cupola armed with a .30-cal machinegun was placed on top of the turret, completing the 'battleship' looks of the tank. A further one to three .30-cal machineguns compeleted the armament fit. The hull mounted gun allowed the M3 (as it was officially designated) to be developed in the shortest possible time. This was further aided by using the tracks, roadwheels and most of the suspension system of the M2.

The interior of the M3 was roomy and protected by up to 51mm of armour. Power was provided by a Wright (Continental) R975 EC2 radial engine rated at 400hp allowing a speed of up to 16mph (off-road) and 26mph (road). The vertical volute suspension system include a self-contained return rollers, allowing easier maintenance in the field. The sponson gun was provided with 46 rounds, the 37mm gun with 178 rounds and up to 9,200 for the machine guns. Overall the M3 was tall, 10 ft high, earning it the nickname 'iron cathedral', and later, appropriately enough by the Germans as 'splendid targets'! The Russians meanwhile has a more poignant-sounding nickname - 'a grave for seven brothers'.

Back in Europe, the British Army found itself without many of its heavy equipment, abandoned after the evacuation from Dunkirk. The British armaments industry was unable to adequately supply the Army with enough armoured vehicles to defend the British Isles and the Empire and so the UK government had to turn to the US. Although not yet at war, the United States was willing to sell war materials to the UK, including armoured vehicles. The British had requested that the American factories build the Matilda and Crusader tank, but these were rejected. The M3 was offered to the British Purchasing Commission, but they were not entirely satisfied with the design, namely with the height, insufficient armour, sponson-mounted main gun, riveted hull and hull-mounted radio. However, since the production was ready to commence and lacking other alternatives, an initial order was placed for 1,250 M3s. The British however required some modifications:  a cast, rather than riveted turret  with a bustle at the back mounting the radio, a  thicker armour and a simple hatch replacing the cupola. The British-spec prototype was completed in March 1941 with production commencing July 1941. To make up their losses in North Africa and Greece, the British realized that they need to accept both types of M3s. When the British received the American tanks, confusion rose because of the 'M' designation of American vehicles as M3 was the designation for both a light tank and a medium tank. To avoid this, the American tanks were given American Civil War General names. The original M3 Medium Tank became General Lee (or just 'Lee') after General Robert E. Lee and the modified M3 as 'General Grant'/'Grant' after General Ulysses S. Grant. To help the UK (and later, other Allies) in securing the weapons from the US, the Lend-Lease Act was passed.

The Lee/Grant first saw action during the Battle of Gazala on 27 May 1942, where their presence surprised the Germans, who were unprepared for their 75mm gun. The Lee/Grant's primary armament allowed them to engage Afrika Korps tanks and anti-tank gun emplacements beyond the range of the KwK L/42 gun arming the Panzer III and Pak 38 50mm anti-tank guns. Despite the earlier misgivings, the Lee/Grant provided the British 8th Army with a sturdy, reliable and adequately protected and armed tank. The drawback of the Lee/Grant was its height, coupled with the low mounting of the 75mm gun, preventing them from fighting in the hull-down position. The use of riveted armour caused 'spalling' when impact of enemy shells caused the rivets to break off and caroming inside the tank with grievous results. Nevertheless, the lessons learnt were applied to the design and production of the M4 Sherman. The British Lee/Grant were joined by American M3s following Operation Torch in November 1942. The M3 Lee/Grant was used in North Africa until the end of the North African campaign in May 1943.

When the British received the Shermans, approximately 1,700 Lee/Grants, which were by now outclassed by 50mm L/60-armed Panzer III and 75mm L/43-armed Panzer IV, were transferred to South-East Asia. 800 were received by the Australians with the remainder used by the Indian Army. The Lee/Grants gave excellent account of themselves during the campaign, most notably during the Battle of Imphal. Japanese armour in the area, consisting mainly of Type 95 Ha-Gos and captured M3 Stuart light tanks found themselves totally outclassed by the M3. The Lee/Grant was used in this theatre until the end of hostilities, mainly supporting the infantry.

The Kit
Academy released a new-tool 1/35 M3 Lee in 2006 and was followed by the Grant in 2008. While they feature vast improvements over the ancient Tamiya kit, both of them suffer from 'too-tall' bogies. The Grant was more regrettable as the bogies were corrected in the M7 Priest kit released in-between the Lee and Grant in 2007. Apart from the bogies, comments on the internet include issues with the turret, being too high and of the wrong shape (others digress about the shape, however). Anyway in 2009, Academy re-released the Grant kit as 'M3 Grant El Alamein 1942'. The re-release finally corrected the bogies although other issues remain. The kit comes in 486 parts and two one-piece vinyl tracks. As with the original release, the tracks are still the T51 type rather than the more usual WE210. The plastic spare track links however were of the WE210 type...hmmmm. As with the original release the kit featured a fairly complete interior details. Three gun barrels were provided for the main gun. Academy also included the complete figure set from Miniart's British Tank Crew set. While a nice addition, they weren't really suitable for North Africa as the set depicted them in European theatre-style uniforms (they however would be very useful for other British AFVs in my collection). Markings are the same with the original release - T24334/Atlanta II, Royal Army (sic), North Africa 1943 and Fosios II, 'Royal Army', 8th Army, El Alamein 1942.  

Construction
The bogies were assembled first. They have simpler construction than some other companies (plus the real thing is also a bit simpler than the M4 bogies). Just a little cement was deposited on the contact points of the suspension arms to allow free movement of the wheel. The completed VVSS suspension and the sprocket wheel was then set aside. Academy included some interior details, including part of the transmission but since I'm going to close all the hull hatches, I decided not to add them. The hull floor was then cemented to the lower hull shell and was followed by the rear panel and the transmission cover. Academy has you add Parts G7 and G8 to the transmission cover but I found that the fit is better if the parts are glued to the hull instead. The internal bulkhead was inserted although I didn't add the ammunition included. The addition of the front fenders finished the construction of the lower hull.

The upper hull consists of a single upper panel and separate walls. Although fit is excellent, care has to be taken to ensure that the separate hull panels align correctly. I cemented parts F6 and F7 and checked the alignment by dry-fitting it over the lower hull. The bulkhead installed earlier helped in aligning the upper hull panels. Once I was satisfied, the rest of the panels were cemented together, The hull machine guns were painted first and then inserted into place. the main gun was then assembled, even though I didn't paint the parts inside the hull. Academy provided three barrels : short, long and long with counterweight. However Academy did not mention which barrel to use for the tanks depicted in the kit. I used the short barrel just because I like it, ha! The completed gun assembly was placed in position and the upper hull was then cemented to the lower half. The stowage boxes were then assembled and cemented onto their places.

Moving on to the turret, I believe the Academy Grant is one of the few tank/AFV kits which include a turret basket. Although not comprehensive, it does include a whole bunch of 37-mm rounds. The turret basket was assembled but I decided not to paint it, and neither did I add all the ammo parts. The gun was assembled and placed into the front plate. Some online build reviews mentioned that the gun sits too low (or was it too high?) and suggests that the gun assembly from Tamiya's Grant, which despite its age, is more accurate. While I do have that old kit (now serving as a weathering technique test-bed), I couldn't find any difference between the two. Anyway, the kit parts was used, cemented onto its place and it was off for painting.

Painting and Decaling
The colour options for the kit only depict the Grant in the theatre where it was well-known: North Africa. The basic colour recommended by Academy was Sandy Brown (or Gunze H66). The article written by Mark Starmer stated however that British tanks in North Africa were painted Light Stone. Using the mixture given by him (7 parts XF-2 Flat White + 2 parts XF-59 Desert Yellow + 2 parts XF-3 Flat Yellow) the model was painted so. To make it less boring, I decided to finish the model as 'Fosios II'. The camouflage colour was Khaki Green as per the instructions but I painted it XF-62 Olive Drab (it didn't look like OD as I was using the 'wrong' batch of Tamiya XF-62). The tracks were painted the usual red brown/flat black mix. Afterwards it was time for the decals. As usual I was quite apprehensive about Academy decals but this time only the decals for the tank's nickname misbehave by silvering, and not even Mr Mark Softer can rectify that. The model was then given the usual wash.

Before weathering the model further, I added some stores. A pair of folded canvas from Tamiya Aliied Vehicle Accesories Set was hanged on the right-side hangers while two 4-gallon flimsies from Bronco were placed on the rear deck. I also robbed the tow cable from Tamiya's Grant and placed it on the engine deck. The model was then subjected to an overall application of Mig Productions pigments; thicker on the lower hull and thinner elsewhere. For figures, I chose two from the Masterbox 'Commonwealth AFV Crew' set: a sitting figure set inside the turret hatch and a leaning and eating figure which I put next to the turret.

Conclusion
After a wait of more than 30 years, modelers finally have a successor to the ancient and mainly inaccurate Tamiya Grant. The Academy Grant however received rather vicious reviews on the internet, with many so-called experts bashing the kit of a number of inaccuracies. Cooler heads however prevailed and pointed out that the worst features of the kit were the too-tall bogies and some contour issues on the turret. Academy however listened and released this revamped version (and throw in the Miniart figure set for good measure). The Academy kit is a nice kit anyway and can be build by anyone. My true grouse with this kit are the less-used T51 tracks and the too-small selection of markings and the lack of information about the markings provided.

1 comment:

Kevin Sharma said...

Nice blog you havee