T-28 Tank

[Von_Mannteufel]

I don't know if there ever was a post on this american beast but I found an interesting link and thought maybe there is anyone interested in reading about it.
http://www.missing-lynx.com/gallery/modern/dmt28.htm

[moses]

i had only seen one small photo of this thing before

it's nice to finally learn something about it

thanks

[Leibstandarte_reenactor]

I see it in real life even climbed on it,
its at the Patton Museum of cavalry and armor
dont know the museums web address right now but ill get it.

[Leibstandarte_reenactor]

here it is
http://www.generalpatton.org/index.cfm

[Caldric]

There were only 2 ever built, 1 was destroyed during test phase and the other was suppose to have been destroyed and sold for scrap but ended up being found in the 1960's or 1970's when they were looking for stuff for the museum.

They were mainly being built to destroy Japanese bunkers and pill boxes.

You will find a great deal more information if you search for T-95 heavy tank instead of T-28, T-95 is the final name.

http://www.naritafamily.com/Scalemodel/ ... age_01.htm


Patton:

[daveh]

The British built an AFV along similar lines to the american T28/ T95 namely the A39 Tortoise. Its design history is noted on

http://members.tripod.com/~chrisshillito/a39/a39txt.htm

with further pics on

http://www.armourinfocus.co.uk/a39/index.htm

[Paul Hanson]

The T-28 was renumbered T-95 GMC. It was not designed for the Japanese, it was designed to defeat the Siegfried Line. The problem was that it took too long to develop and was not needed in either theater.

The survivor was found at Fort Belvoir, VA. It was sitting in the woods totally forgotten where it had broken down a on test run in the late 40's and just left to rust. An officer from the post was out hiking and found it. No one even knew what it was when he reported it. The Knox curator had to ID it for them, after which they shipped it to the Museum.

PH

[Von_Mannteufel]

Just one question that bugs me, was this tank as reliable as the Maus? What german guns could penetrate it frontal plate? I haven't found on the site information about it's armour thickness, any of you guys know it? How big was it crew? Also I haven't seen any picture showing a MG on this tank, was there none?

[Leibstandarte_reenactor]

i dont know all i know is it is one BIG MOTHER of a tank. i do believe that there were provisons for a MG on the top of the tank.

[moses]

well if you take a look at the hull you can see it's not really a tank in the true sense

it's more like an assault gun or a tank destroyer

the maus was larger and it had a true 360-degree-traversing turret

according to one of those pages though, the T28/T95 had better armor


i wonder, though, which one got closer to actual production... the T28 or the maus?

[Aufklarung]

i wonder, though, which one got closer to actual production... the T28 or the maus?

AFAIK there were x2 Maus made and according to Caldrics post; there were x2 T28s. So you question is answered by the words: the same.

regards
A

[Paul Hanson]

To answer one of the earlier questions:

The gun mantlet was 11½" cast armor
The hull front was 12" cast armor
The sloping sides were 2½" rolled armor @ 57½°
The side skirts were 4" plate armor
The hull sides were 6" cast armor
The roof was 1½" rolled armor
The back plate was 2" rolled armor @ 9°
The floor was 1" rolled armor

The vehicle was designed on the premise of surviving a hit from an 88 at 1000m.

It weighed 188,000 lbs combat load, and that is a ring mount for the 50cal MG over the commander's cupola.

PH

[Von_Mannteufel]

thanks for the answers Mr. Hanson

[Paul Hanson]

I forgot to answer the rest of your question: it has a 4 man crew.



PH

[Redbaron1908]

I'm sure I am not the only one that has noticed this but I would just like to point out the resemblance.