Welcome
Welcome to Military Power.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free, so please, join our community today!

T-28 Super Heavy Tank

Discussion on advances in Military equipment and weaponry over time.

T-28 Super Heavy Tank

Postby KnightTemplar on Mon Jul 30, 2007 4:45 pm

Image

The T28 "Superheavy Tank" is the heaviest armored vehicle ever produced by the United States ... about 95 tons. Designed late in WW-II as an assault vehicle to penetrate fixed German defense positions such as the Siegfried Line, the T28 carries the thickest armor ever fitted to an armored vehicle ... approx. 12" frontal and 8" side, some of it well sloped. This is more like Battleship armor than tank armor! The German's famed 88 mm would be nearly worthless against such a vehicle.

The T28's turretless design saved a LOT of weight, which allowed much heavier armor to be fitted. Since the vehicle was designed for frontal assault, a full rotating turret was not needed. The gun did have limited traverse in the hull, allowing some freedom of target choice without turning the whole vehicle. The gun itself was a very-high velocity 'long' 105mm. Compared with even the 90mm in the T26 Pershings, this was a powerful weapon; and was sufficient to 'crack' most any target the T28 might encounter.

To speed development, The T28 used as many 'off the shelf' parts as possible. The entire suspension consisted of slightly modified M4E8 components. Many of the hull fittings were 'Sherman', as was the Ford V-8 engine and matching transmission. A much lower final drive ratio was used, to move so heavy a vehicle. Top speed was about 10 mph. The unique paired tracks gave the vehicle a very acceptable ground pressure not much different than a Sherman. It weighs three times as much as an M4, but puts almost three times as much track surface on the ground.

A unique feature of the T28 were the detachable outboard track units. On each side of the main hull were attached massively armored supplementary sub-hulls, each with a fully functioning track. These could be removed from the main hull, clamped together to form a trailer, and towed behind the T28. This reduced the width to an acceptable value, allowing the vehicle to pass through city streets, be rail transported, and to fit in Landing craft. The outboard units would need to be reattached prior to combat. Two small moveable cranes are carried by the T28 to assist in mounting/detaching these side units. Supposedly, a well trained crew could do this relatively quickly.

One 'dumb' feature are the two very visible brake drums carried on the outside of the T28. These attach to the track-sprocket of the outboard track units when they are detached from the vehicle. This weird tracked trailer had NO regular brakes! To keep it from overrunning the towing vehicle, crew members, on FOOT, wrapped ropes around these drums, and pulled! This created a drag, slowing the trailer. It worked, but won't win any prizes for elegance! Oh, well, remember that this was only a prototype vehicle. If it had gone into production perhaps something better would have been used.

While large, the T28 is smaller than a German 'Maus'. The Maus was designed as a real 'Tank', with full rotating turret, and heavy armor all around. The price it paid for this was an astonishing weight of about 180 tons, with corresponding lack of mobility, transport problems, and overloaded drive components! The T28, on the other hand, was a special purpose vehicle, with much heavier armor (admittedly only on the front and sides), yet far less overall weight.

As an assault vehicle, the T28 was formidable. Low and squat, it presented very little target, and what did show was almost impenetrable. Only plunging artillery fire and anti-tank mines would much have bothered it. True, the T28 was SLOW, but this was not overly important for it's designed purpose. Alone, in open country, the T28 could be easily avoided or outflanked, but it was not envisioned to use in such a situation. Imagine, rather, a long row of T28's assaulting a fixed fortification, well backed by lesser armor, infantry, artillery, and air support. This was a vehicle to be used from a position of military superiority, to 'crack' tough spots in a defense perimeter.

Ultimately, it wasn't needed. The Germans abandoned the Siegfried line. Development of the vehicle continued into the Korean War years, then was terminated. Briefly, the vehicle was reclassified as a Gun Motor Carriage, T95, then back as a tank, type T28. Surviving records (at the time) indicated that both prototypes had been destroyed or scrapped. Obviously, this was wrong, as the Patton Museum's example clearly demonstrates.
User avatar
KnightTemplar
General of the Armies
General of the Armies
 
Posts: 1091
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 6:50 am
Location: Nashville, Tennessee, USA
How did you find out about Military Power?: Site Owner
Call Sign: Topher
Specialist: Aerospace

Postby CrazyCatman on Tue Jul 31, 2007 3:21 pm

That thing is huge, I remember going to the Patton Museum in Fort Knox, KY and seeing this thing. The tactic they were designed for would have been an impressive sight, and quite formidable I would have to say.
User avatar
CrazyCatman
2nd Lieutenant
2nd Lieutenant
 
Posts: 424
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2007 6:57 am
Location: Nashville, TN
Call Sign: Crazy Cat

Postby KnightTemplar on Tue Jul 31, 2007 4:09 pm

CrazyCatman wrote:That thing is huge, I remember going to the Patton Museum in Fort Knox, KY and seeing this thing.



I actually just got back from Fort Knox, and the Patton Museum. When I can I'll post the pictures of me in front of this monster.
User avatar
KnightTemplar
General of the Armies
General of the Armies
 
Posts: 1091
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 6:50 am
Location: Nashville, Tennessee, USA
How did you find out about Military Power?: Site Owner
Call Sign: Topher
Specialist: Aerospace

Re: T-28 Super Heavy Tank

Postby Maximus the Destroyer on Tue Apr 29, 2008 9:38 pm

KnightTemplar wrote:Imagine, rather, a long row of T28's assaulting a fixed fortification, well backed by lesser armor, infantry, artillery, and air support. This was a vehicle to be used from a position of military superiority, to 'crack' tough spots in a defense perimeter.


It may just be me, but seems like a rather limited use for such an expensive toy. Besides, if you had air support, wouldn't it be easier and more efficient to just bomb it into a powder?
User avatar
Maximus the Destroyer
1st Lieutenant
1st Lieutenant
 
Posts: 672
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 10:15 am

Postby CrazyCatman on Mon May 05, 2008 3:03 pm

That could be why they abandoned the project.
I detest life-insurance agents; they always argue that I shall some day die, which is not so.
User avatar
CrazyCatman
2nd Lieutenant
2nd Lieutenant
 
Posts: 424
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2007 6:57 am
Location: Nashville, TN
Call Sign: Crazy Cat

Postby Hobilar on Sun May 11, 2008 2:38 am

CrazyCatman wrote:That thing is huge, I remember going to the Patton Museum in Fort Knox, KY and seeing this thing. The tactic they were designed for would have been an impressive sight, and quite formidable I would have to say.


Only two were ever built. One was burnt out during trials and the second (presumably the one in the Patton Museum) was rediscovered during the 1970s rusting away in the corner of a proving ground.
User avatar
Hobilar
Sergeant Major
Sergeant Major
 
Posts: 350
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2008 4:17 am
Location: Lincoln, United Kingdom
How did you find out about Military Power?: Can't remember
Call Sign: Specs
Current Military Status: Former Army
Specialist: Gee that's a hard one....Adding to the Sergeants' Mess Bar profits maybe?

Postby General Forestry on Sun May 11, 2008 4:52 pm

Who cares about how expensive it would have been to manufacture the tank....I would have just enjoyed seeing it blow s**t up!
~GF

"War...it's fantastic!" ~ Hot Shots: Part Deux
User avatar
General Forestry
General of The Army
General of The Army
 
Posts: 629
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 9:16 pm
Location: Loysville, PA
How did you find out about Military Power?: KnightTemplar
Call Sign: Bowsaw
Current Military Status: Military Hobbiest
Specialist: Firearms, The Battle of Gettysburg

Postby Goliath on Tue May 13, 2008 9:57 pm

Forestry_manDCNR07 wrote:Who cares about how expensive it would have been to manufacture the tank....I would have just enjoyed seeing it blow s**t up!


Well, the government isn't one to spend unnecessarily :lol: :lol: Yeah, right.
User avatar
Goliath
Sergeant Major
Sergeant Major
 
Posts: 285
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 1:12 pm
Call Sign: Tiny

Postby CrazyCatman on Sat Jun 14, 2008 12:29 pm

Well, with a combination of cost, lack of speed, weight, ect, I'd say it would have just been a wast of money as it would probably never have seen battle.
I detest life-insurance agents; they always argue that I shall some day die, which is not so.
User avatar
CrazyCatman
2nd Lieutenant
2nd Lieutenant
 
Posts: 424
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2007 6:57 am
Location: Nashville, TN
Call Sign: Crazy Cat

Re: T-28 Super Heavy Tank

Postby AmericanPride on Sun Sep 21, 2008 5:49 pm

Whoa! I really like this. Of course I agree with CrazyCatman, it would be way too slow and only effective with proper set up and being concealed from the enemy.
You mess with me, and you mess with the whole trailer park!
User avatar
AmericanPride
Staff Sergeant
Staff Sergeant
 
Posts: 107
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2008 4:56 pm

Re: T-28 Super Heavy Tank

Postby Maximus the Destroyer on Mon Sep 22, 2008 12:35 pm

Actually, with what they had planned for it, it would have been ideal. By the time of it's use, the Allies would have owned the skies, shells from 88s would have bounced right off these things while it pummeled the fortifications into powder.
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -Thomas Jefferson

"A man-of-war is the best ambassador" -Oliver Cromwell
User avatar
Maximus the Destroyer
1st Lieutenant
1st Lieutenant
 
Posts: 672
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 10:15 am

Re: T-28 Super Heavy Tank

Postby General Forestry on Tue Sep 23, 2008 10:14 pm

I still agree with AP and CCM. The vehicle would be still too slow, and only effective on really one target before the enemy found their location, or were able to get in close with one guy and a small explosive to take out the tracks.
~GF

"War...it's fantastic!" ~ Hot Shots: Part Deux
User avatar
General Forestry
General of The Army
General of The Army
 
Posts: 629
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 9:16 pm
Location: Loysville, PA
How did you find out about Military Power?: KnightTemplar
Call Sign: Bowsaw
Current Military Status: Military Hobbiest
Specialist: Firearms, The Battle of Gettysburg

Re: T-28 Super Heavy Tank

Postby Maximus the Destroyer on Tue Sep 23, 2008 10:30 pm

One target was all it was designed for. However, they didn't have to attack said target after all so the project was scrapped.
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -Thomas Jefferson

"A man-of-war is the best ambassador" -Oliver Cromwell
User avatar
Maximus the Destroyer
1st Lieutenant
1st Lieutenant
 
Posts: 672
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 10:15 am

Re: T-28 Super Heavy Tank

Postby General Forestry on Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:44 am

Would it have been possible to have an effective tank like this during its time period, if it was lighter and a lot more versatile than this design? I mean could they have had the firepower of this tank in a smaller body?
~GF

"War...it's fantastic!" ~ Hot Shots: Part Deux
User avatar
General Forestry
General of The Army
General of The Army
 
Posts: 629
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 9:16 pm
Location: Loysville, PA
How did you find out about Military Power?: KnightTemplar
Call Sign: Bowsaw
Current Military Status: Military Hobbiest
Specialist: Firearms, The Battle of Gettysburg


Return to Equipment and Weaponry in History

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron