±Recent Visitors

Recent Visitors to Com-Central!

±User Info-big


Welcome Anonymous

Nickname
Password

Membership:
Latest: cgsimpson
New Today: 0
New Yesterday: 0
Overall: 6645

People Online:
Members: 0
Visitors: 269
Total: 269
Who Is Where:
 Visitors:
01: Home
02: Community Forums
03: Community Forums
04: Home
05: Home
06: Community Forums
07: Home
08: Home
09: Community Forums
10: Community Forums
11: Community Forums
12: Community Forums
13: Community Forums
14: CPGlang
15: Community Forums
16: Community Forums
17: Community Forums
18: Community Forums
19: Community Forums
20: Your Account
21: Community Forums
22: Community Forums
23: Community Forums
24: News
25: News
26: Community Forums
27: Community Forums
28: CPGlang
29: Community Forums
30: Community Forums
31: Community Forums
32: Home
33: Community Forums
34: Community Forums
35: Home
36: Your Account
37: Community Forums
38: Photo Gallery
39: CPGlang
40: Member Screenshots
41: Community Forums
42: Downloads
43: Community Forums
44: Community Forums
45: News Archive
46: Community Forums
47: Community Forums
48: Community Forums
49: Community Forums
50: Home
51: Home
52: Community Forums
53: Community Forums
54: Photo Gallery
55: Photo Gallery
56: Community Forums
57: Community Forums
58: Community Forums
59: Home
60: Community Forums
61: Community Forums
62: Photo Gallery
63: Community Forums
64: Home
65: CPGlang
66: Home
67: Community Forums
68: Home
69: CPGlang
70: Community Forums
71: Downloads
72: Downloads
73: Community Forums
74: Member Screenshots
75: Community Forums
76: Community Forums
77: Community Forums
78: Community Forums
79: Community Forums
80: Community Forums
81: Community Forums
82: Home
83: Community Forums
84: Member Screenshots
85: Community Forums
86: Community Forums
87: Community Forums
88: Statistics
89: Community Forums
90: Community Forums
91: CPGlang
92: CPGlang
93: Community Forums
94: CPGlang
95: Home
96: Photo Gallery
97: Community Forums
98: Home
99: Community Forums
100: Photo Gallery
101: Downloads
102: Community Forums
103: Community Forums
104: Community Forums
105: Photo Gallery
106: Community Forums
107: Community Forums
108: Community Forums
109: CPGlang
110: Home
111: Community Forums
112: Downloads
113: CPGlang
114: Community Forums
115: Community Forums
116: Home
117: Community Forums
118: Home
119: Home
120: Home
121: Member Screenshots
122: Community Forums
123: Community Forums
124: Home
125: Community Forums
126: Community Forums
127: Community Forums
128: Home
129: News
130: Community Forums
131: Community Forums
132: Photo Gallery
133: Community Forums
134: CPGlang
135: Community Forums
136: CPGlang
137: Statistics
138: Member Screenshots
139: Community Forums
140: Home
141: Photo Gallery
142: CPGlang
143: Community Forums
144: Community Forums
145: Home
146: Community Forums
147: Community Forums
148: Community Forums
149: Photo Gallery
150: Home
151: Community Forums
152: Statistics
153: Community Forums
154: Photo Gallery
155: Community Forums
156: Your Account
157: Community Forums
158: Community Forums
159: Community Forums
160: Community Forums
161: Home
162: Community Forums
163: Photo Gallery
164: Community Forums
165: Community Forums
166: Home
167: Community Forums
168: Photo Gallery
169: CPGlang
170: Home
171: Community Forums
172: Home
173: Home
174: Home
175: Community Forums
176: Downloads
177: Community Forums
178: Community Forums
179: Home
180: Community Forums
181: Community Forums
182: Photo Gallery
183: Community Forums
184: Member Screenshots
185: Home
186: Community Forums
187: Community Forums
188: Photo Gallery
189: Community Forums
190: Community Forums
191: Community Forums
192: Photo Gallery
193: Community Forums
194: Community Forums
195: Home
196: Community Forums
197: Home
198: CPGlang
199: Community Forums
200: Community Forums
201: Home
202: Community Forums
203: Downloads
204: Photo Gallery
205: Home
206: CPGlang
207: Community Forums
208: Photo Gallery
209: Community Forums
210: Member Screenshots
211: Community Forums
212: Photo Gallery
213: Home
214: Home
215: Member Screenshots
216: Community Forums
217: Photo Gallery
218: Community Forums
219: Photo Gallery
220: Community Forums
221: Community Forums
222: CPGlang
223: Home
224: Community Forums
225: Community Forums
226: CPGlang
227: Community Forums
228: Home
229: Community Forums
230: Photo Gallery
231: Tell a Friend
232: Home
233: Community Forums
234: Home
235: Community Forums
236: Community Forums
237: Community Forums
238: CPGlang
239: Community Forums
240: Community Forums
241: Home
242: Photo Gallery
243: Community Forums
244: Community Forums
245: Community Forums
246: Home
247: Community Forums
248: CPGlang
249: Community Forums
250: Community Forums
251: Home
252: Community Forums
253: Community Forums
254: Community Forums
255: Community Forums
256: Community Forums
257: Photo Gallery
258: Community Forums
259: Community Forums
260: Member Screenshots
261: Community Forums
262: Community Forums
263: Community Forums
264: Community Forums
265: Community Forums
266: Community Forums
267: Community Forums
268: News
269: Home

Staff Online:

No staff members are online!
T95 / T96 rehash
The AFV ASSOCIATION was formed in 1964 to support the thoughts and research of all those interested in Armored Fighting Vehicles and related topics, such as AFV drawings. The emphasis has always been on sharing information and communicating with other members of similar interests; e.g. German armor, Japanese AFVs, or whatever.
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Post new topic    Reply to topic    Printer Friendly Page     Forum Index ›  AFV News Discussion Board

View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Dontos
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 3436
Location: Vine Grove, KY
PostPosted: Mon Jan 05, 2009 3:14 am
Post subject: Re: T95 / T96 rehash

Neil

Try this one, I just amended from 2 documents:



My head is beginning to hurt. Wink

ah, but I do so love a challange....

Don
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger Photo Gallery
Neil_Baumgardner
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 3942
Location: Arlington, VA
PostPosted: Mon Jan 05, 2009 3:21 am
Post subject: Re: T95 / T96 rehash

You might want to add columns for current location and serial number (since we have at least 2).

To make sure I have this straight, are you suggesting that chassis 4, 7, 8 & 9 were given new RNs after conversion?

FWIW, I'd avoiding double-listing individual vehicles... Perhaps include an "original RN" and "new RN" (where applicable) columns?

Neil
Back to top
View user's profile
Joe_D
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 29, 2006
Posts: 2067
Location: Razorback Country
PostPosted: Mon Jan 05, 2009 3:28 am
Post subject: Re: T95 / T96 rehash

Don,

I always believed the T95 can be traced as the root to the modern FCS in the M1 if your really dig deep. Even OPTAR, the pre-curser to the laser range finder is linked in with it. Truth be said, most of what the M1 is, was developed long before the GM Chrysler showdown ever happened with the MBT70, M60A2, and T95 series. The decision to go with who made the tank was mostly political, since the Army would tell who ever got the contract what they really wanted once congress gave approval.

Joe D
Back to top
View user's profile Photo Gallery
Dontos
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 3436
Location: Vine Grove, KY
PostPosted: Mon Jan 05, 2009 3:28 am
Post subject: Re: T95 / T96 rehash

- Neil_Baumgardner
You might want to add columns for current location and serial number (since we have at least 2).

To make sure I have this straight, are you suggesting that chassis 4, 7, 8 & 9 were given new RNs after conversion?

FWIW, I'd avoiding double-listing individual vehicles... Perhaps include an "original RN" and "new RN" (where applicable) columns?

Neil


I'm working on some earlier dated material, which I'll add columns for each to keep the confusion to a minimum. All my notes, are from documents. Stuff seems to be bouncing around, but this will clear once I can organize it. (hopefully...!!)

Don
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger Photo Gallery
JG300-Ascout
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 05, 2005
Posts: 6257
Location: Cyberspace
PostPosted: Mon Jan 05, 2009 3:29 am
Post subject: Re: T95 / T96 rehash

- Dontos
- JG300-Ascout

To say nothing of the hulls, apparent from the front glacis.

Why is the gun tube so short with bore evacuators placed proportionately? Was there to be a demo variant?


The turret has the XM81, 152mm gun system. I believe it is the development 'chain' to the M60A2 turret system.

T95 (test rig) in the LST is THAT configuration. Trying to dig up stuff on it.

Don


I thought as much, but didn't see it on the "chart". Thought I recognized it. Wink

Doesn't the one from the LST building have an M60A1E2/A2 turret on it, though? Just an extension of the program?

_________________
"All facts go to clearly prove that Shades is a thrice-cursed traitor & mentally deranged person steeped in inveterate enmity toward mankind"
Back to top
View user's profile Photo Gallery
Dontos
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 3436
Location: Vine Grove, KY
PostPosted: Mon Jan 05, 2009 3:37 am
Post subject: Re: T95 / T96 rehash

Here is another flow chart (if you can read the 'chicken scratch')



Don
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger Photo Gallery
Dontos
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 3436
Location: Vine Grove, KY
PostPosted: Mon Jan 05, 2009 5:02 am
Post subject: Re: T95 / T96 rehash

Neil

I'm looking at a Sept 1957 note of future chassis deliveries for the project. It includes additional 'NEW' chassis #s:

# 10 Nov 1957
# 11 Dec 1957
# 12 Jan 1958

its quoting 'Pre-Production Pilots of M48A2/T95' (gotta dig this one up & hope it'll be able to give some indepth info.)

Why do I do this to myself...?? (You could have warned me.... Wink

Don
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger Photo Gallery
Neil_Baumgardner
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 3942
Location: Arlington, VA
PostPosted: Mon Jan 05, 2009 5:09 am
Post subject: Re: T95 / T96 rehash

Ummm... How many times have I mentioned before that the T95 series seems very hard to discern? Wink

Thanks though!

Again, keep an eye for any reference to serial numbers... I'm not convinced they're the same thing as chassis numbers...

Neil
Back to top
View user's profile
Dontos
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 3436
Location: Vine Grove, KY
PostPosted: Mon Jan 05, 2009 5:34 am
Post subject: Re: T95 / T96 rehash

- Neil_Baumgardner
Ummm... How many times have I mentioned before that the T95 series seems very hard to discern? Wink

Thanks though!

Again, keep an eye for any reference to serial numbers... I'm not convinced they're the same thing as chassis numbers...

Neil


I think that Chassis # is the SN for these prototypes. BUT,....the confusion partially stems from annotations of turret #'s. I'm seeing such references, and initially mistook it for chassis #'s. The fact that the chassis #'s don't seem to match any sequential order for the RN's is confusing though. (luckily the chassis #'s are welded on the hull, not just stamped on the tow eyelets)

So far chassis #'s are matching up with RN's, even thru some of the upgrade rebuilds, but there are some serious 'gray' areas.

I'm on the uphill climb on a learning curve. (just wish it wouldn't 'zig-zag' sooo much...!!)

Time for bed,....I have a headache.

Don
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger Photo Gallery
Neil_Baumgardner
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 3942
Location: Arlington, VA
PostPosted: Mon Jan 05, 2009 6:07 am
Post subject: Re: T95 / T96 rehash

Don,
Big problem with chassis #s vs serial #s. Take the Knox LST T95. From what I remember there's photo evidence (I'll need to recheck the JMO article) that its 9B1051 Chassis #6 - but it has SN 8 under the front hull.

We've already been down the chassis # vs serial # path on these before and decided there wasnt an obvious correlation... Unfortunately...

Neil
Back to top
View user's profile
bsmart
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 2523
Location: Central Maryland
PostPosted: Mon Jan 05, 2009 2:50 pm
Post subject: Re: T95 / T96 rehash

Actually from my pictures of the Weirton T95 it appears that the serial number is cast into the hull. Now whether we are calling that the Chassis number or the Serial number is open for discussion (and whether it is the vehicle serial number or the Hull casting serial number) but the number under the front of the hull is labeled SER NO

Maybe we need to step back and confirm what information we have on each known vehicle and the source for the information. I have a fear that some of the information that we believe has been cross checked is subject to circular references.

I've always found it annoying that the army has two different tracking numbers for each vehicle (RN and SN) and isn't consistent in how it marks and with how much permanancy that marking has. Why the RN isn't recorded permanently on each vehicle Evil or Very Mad Evil or Very Mad is beyond me. It is almost like they want the system to be confusing so that individual vehicles can't be tracked.

_________________
Bob Smart (bsmart@xecu.net)
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
Joe_D
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 29, 2006
Posts: 2067
Location: Razorback Country
PostPosted: Mon Jan 05, 2009 5:23 pm
Post subject: Re: T95 / T96 rehash

Hey everyone,

Food for thought,

1, Those cast SER-NO does not mean serial number, but series number by the outfit who cast the steel. Case in point is the recently posted Ash Flat AR M47 and the use of it for the SN.

2, The Army assigns Registration Numbers only, and depending on what year the tank was made determines what system it used. A big old mess is what it is with M60's since they stayed in production so long.

3, Serial Numbers are assigned by the manufacturer. In my opinion the best way to track a tank. Since it transcends branches of the Military (Army and Marines) and Countries, and BTW, are hull generated, even though turrets data plates usually match the hull.

As far as the T95 goes, I went over the example at Fort McCoy when up there and could not find any stamping for a SN anywhere, if there was one it has long since been painted over or wore off where ever it is. The cast mark on the hull is SER-12, and the M48 turret is SER-29. Manufacturer is American Steel Foundries, East Chicago Indiana Works. If you could locate a -10 or -20 of the T95 maybe it shows the external SN or RN location in the Stowage and Sign Guide section. Most manuals back then did.

Joe D
Back to top
View user's profile Photo Gallery
Neil_Baumgardner
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 3942
Location: Arlington, VA
PostPosted: Mon Jan 05, 2009 5:28 pm
Post subject: Re: T95 / T96 rehash

Joe D,
Good points, many thanks. Because the T95s are SOO different, and it was the only "serial number" we could find, I thought that perhaps these cast numbers were indeed the actual SNs.

Don, do you have access to these -10 or -20s?

Neil
Back to top
View user's profile
bsmart
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 2523
Location: Central Maryland
PostPosted: Mon Jan 05, 2009 6:27 pm
Post subject: Re: T95 / T96 rehash

Thanks Joe

but about the RNs I know on M60s we often find them stamped on the bow near the headlight but in general on most vehicles I think they are just painted/decaled on and disappear when the vehicle gets repainted

And some vehicles don't seem to have any permanent external marking. I can see that on a test vehicle like the T95 but on M114s or M48s.

I guess I'm used to aircraft where each one was known by a 'tail number' which was created when the aircraft was ordered and followed it in all records and marked in expected places on the airplane.

Would there be -10s or -20s on T series vehicles or would those only be produced when a vehicle was standardised as an M series?

_________________
Bob Smart (bsmart@xecu.net)
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
Joe_D
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 29, 2006
Posts: 2067
Location: Razorback Country
PostPosted: Mon Jan 05, 2009 7:34 pm
Post subject: Re: T95 / T96 rehash

Bob,

Another good example of not having an external SN stamping are the M42 "Dusters", unless you count the plates found welded on the rear.

The PV M1's are also not stamped with any external numbers IIRC. Leads to much confusion there too.

There should be some TM's for the T95 series and they should be written just like the standard ones for the Tanks of that period. Just like there were TM's for the M60A1E1/A1E2 and MBT-70/XM803, the former eventually being type classified M60A2. I would imagine some archive should have them, either Knox or Aberdeen. Manufacturers generally destroy/dump stuff like that if the system isn't purchased, and besides, since the development is usually taxpayer funded it tends to be turned over to the military and belongs to Uncle Sam.

Don, better get your "Indiana Jones" hat on and start researching the "Catacombs" of Fort Knox Wink .

Joe D
Back to top
View user's profile Photo Gallery
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    Reply to topic    Printer Friendly Page    Forum Index ›  AFV News Discussion Board
Page 2 of 3
All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next



Jump to:  


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum