HOME | DD

joshshapiro — No Rest for The Wicked

#battle #koreanwar #tank #vehicle #warfare #wwii #vehicledesign #worldoftanks #warthunder #worldoftanksfanart #war_thunder
Published: 2015-05-25 09:01:09 +0000 UTC; Views: 6498; Favourites: 130; Downloads: 1
Redirect to original
Description Alt timeline, Korea '51. An M24 "Mack" climbs a ridge toward a fortified enemy position.  Its light weight and small size makes it especially suitable for navigating washed out mountain passes.

M24 MacArthur design schematics: joshshapiro.deviantart.com/art…

History:
In mid 1943, General Motors Corp received a contract to produce a modern and more versatile light tank to be used in conjunction with highly-mobile gun carriages and the heavier T20 prototypes (and later M26 Pershings) as a cross-country light/medium tank. With extensive knowledge on light tank design with the Stuart, it became the platform by which the M24 was built upon. After several prototypes, the modifications to the Stuart design were so extensive, it was decided it would be renamed to prevent confusion with Stuart versioning and so adopted the internal name "Jimmy". It was not until after General Douglas MacArthur was killed in action during the liberation of the Philippines in 1944 that it was officially given its manufacturing name of M24 MacArthur. Although fielded in few numbers before the war's end, the MacArthur proved to have superior combat effectiveness compared with the Sherman due to its high speed, smaller profile and 76mm M1A1 gun. It would later prove its worth in the Korean War, where it would traverse snow and mud filled roads that troubled heavier tanks and successfully engage PRC tanks and armored vehicles. While outmatched in direct combat against Russian-supplied enemy T-34-85s due to its light armor, its high-velocity gun, high maneuverability, and light weight made it an effective rough terrain pack fighter, especially when grouped with M18 and M20 bazooka equipped platoons.

Specifications:
Primary Gun: 76mm M1A2
Secondary weapons: 2x Browning .30-06 cal. One mounted on top of turret and a second in the ball turret.
Ammunition:
-76mm, 45 rounds
-.30-06, 5250 rounds
Engine and chassis: Modified Stuart VI chassis with 370hp Continental R-975-C4 9-cyl radial engine on a torsion bar suspension.
Hull shape: Elongated rhombus design allows for larger fuel and ammunition storage at the cost of a higher profile.
Armor: 42mm/20mm/10mm hull, 50mm/30mm/15mm turret, relying on its sloped armor and spall liner for crew protection. Lacking heavy armor, its speed, small size and punch gun were its greatest assets.
Top Speed: 74 km/h (46 mph, maximum road)
Dimensions:
-Length: 17' 2.4" (5.24 m)
-Width: 8' 6" (2.59 m)
-Height: 8' 9" (2.67 m)
-Weight: 44,500 lbs (20,185 Kg)

---------
-Maya + Renderman, Photoshop
Related content
Comments: 12

1898Krag [2019-09-28 19:27:13 +0000 UTC]

Could have named it after Gen. Buckner, the US commanding general killed on Okinawa. Also per the M5, the rear trailing wheel was about twice the size of the road wheels. Considering that you have five other road wheels per side I'd use an elevated idler wheel  which would allow reverse over rough ground. It seems rather tall but based on the M5 with front drive sprockets means there is a full length drive shaft. Combined with torsion bars  it has to be tall. Otherwise it has a nice look. I can see this being used by the post war Japanese SDF.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

RO-95 [2019-07-21 04:31:09 +0000 UTC]

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

1898Krag In reply to RO-95 [2019-09-28 19:14:25 +0000 UTC]

The US did have some late war/postwar AFV designs with trailing road wheel rather than idlers. M-5 Stuart. But an elevated idler is better for reverse. This AFV has 5 other sets of road-wheels per side so it would be better off with an elevated idler.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

TaeyunJung [2019-05-24 04:38:06 +0000 UTC]

What's that black smoke? Exhaust from that tank? Or is that damaged?

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

ST4RSK1MM3R [2017-04-03 03:29:34 +0000 UTC]

Looks like a Sherman and a Panther had kids.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

R3dfir3X In reply to ST4RSK1MM3R [2017-04-17 07:15:38 +0000 UTC]

Seems good tho the fast and reliable and mobility and has a better kick then the m4

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Joseph-Romay [2015-09-05 21:50:10 +0000 UTC]

Well done!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

theschell [2015-06-03 21:34:34 +0000 UTC]

Nicely done!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Lil-Mz [2015-06-03 20:09:19 +0000 UTC]

This is fantastic. What software do you render with?

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

thormemeson [2015-05-28 16:02:22 +0000 UTC]

bad to the ass

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

purpledragon104 [2015-05-26 09:03:37 +0000 UTC]

Not a bad vehicle.

I'd stick to the Other M24 (Chaffe) though for the lower profile.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

joshshapiro In reply to purpledragon104 [2015-05-26 09:23:52 +0000 UTC]

It's a bit of a trade off between size and firepower.  While it's a bigger target, it can bite harder with a much superior gun.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0