LVT4 amphibious tanks

[madmickey]

Does the program handle the landing in hostile water of the amphibious tanks differently than they handle regular tanks? What is the difference especially if you are using an LSD or LST?

[gunnergoz]

I don't know the answer to that and I'm at work on my break now, so don't have the game to refer to, but you might want to launch the editor and examine the vehicles and tanks database. Is there any field denoting "amphibious" in the database for tanks? A checkbox or yes/no field? If so, then it may indeed matter in some way as the game would have some means to know if a tank was amphibious and that could be coded into the combat routines. On the other hand, if the game doesn't let you enter such data (say for a new hypothetical or post-war tank) then it probably just sees tanks as a platform with armor X and gun Y; and then it probably doesn't matter, the amphibous title would be just window dressing.

[kayjay]

An LVT is not an amphibious tank, it is a landing vehicle tracked, the ancestor of the modern AAV. see http://www.peleliu.net/USWeapons/LVT4.htm - LVT4 was first used at Saipan. They carry inf and supples.
Doctrinally they would be carried in LSDs and droped off to swim ashore. The tracks enabled them to climb over reefs as well.
Tanks (as in SHerman and Stuart) would be carried in LSTs which beach themselves and the tanks just drive off. With reefs this was a problem, as the tank couldnt get thru the lagoon.
HOw the game handles these tacitcal niceties is open to investigation. I have been trying different variants in Saipan landing to try to reduce lAP/AK loses to CD guns

Kevin

[Iron Duke]

Hi Kevin

There were two LVT 'Tanks'

1. LVT(A)-1 37mm M6 gun( Turret from a M5A1 Tank) and 3 x .30 cal machine guns

2. LVT(A)-4 75mm gun (Turret from a M8 Howitzer Motor Carriage)

used to support the marines during the landings

Production 1941-45
LVT(A)-1 = 510
LVT(A)-4 = 8,351

cheers

[gunnergoz]

I'd be surprised if the LVT(A)(4) production run was that high, over 8,000 units for the howitzer armed version. What source are you using? I would buy the figure if it included the cargo/personnel variants as well as the howitzer armed version. Hunnicutt, who wrote a series of extensive engineering design histories of US AFV's, corroborates your figures for the (A)(1) model but describes the 8,000 + quantity as being ALL LVT(4) unarmored variants. We know that the amphibian tractor battalions had, on average, 48 tractors apiece, so 8,000 armored ones would be enough for more than 160 battalions...which is more than the number of Sherman tank battalions fielded by the US army during the war. So that is not very likely.

Sorry, guess you pushed my "grog alert" button. [:)]

[kayjay]

He has total LVT4 production see http://afvdb.50megs.com/usa/lvt2.html
the LVT (A) desig is for armored in the sense of added plate armor
As far as I can tell there were 1890 LVT(A)4 produced of which a subset had the 75mm short howitzer. ANyway - Im about to go home and try another amph assault.

KEvin

[gunnergoz]

That sounds about right. My guess is that about a third would be the turreted versions and the rest simply applique-armored troop carriers used for the first assault waves. The follow up and logistics carriers would be unarmored and able to carry heavier loads without the plating.

[Iron Duke]

Hi
Your figures are correct, I looked at the wromg column of figures - not enough sleep[>:][:D]