Fury
- Thread starter joe n
- Start date
I recently saw a props tank which they made up for filming this
No doubt it saved running wear and tear on the real tank (which appears to be an 'Easy Eight' with the horizontal volute suspension which only appeared in the last months of the war) unnecessarily. The chassis and running gear appear to be a British FV432 APC. It will look alright if the camera keeps above running gear level.
No doubt it saved running wear and tear on the real tank (which appears to be an 'Easy Eight' with the horizontal volute suspension which only appeared in the last months of the war) unnecessarily. The chassis and running gear appear to be a British FV432 APC. It will look alright if the camera keeps above running gear level.
By no means it is a FV432. The sprocket drive and the road wheels are not having the shape used by the British on this vehicle. Even by looking in my books (they are a bit out dated now) I can't identify it. It should be obvious with the road wheels grouped in pairs.
Martin
Martin
Not a FV432 but the chassis of a Alvis Stormer CVR(T), I would lean toward a flat backed Stormer being reworked for the role of carrying the sherman hull/turret
Here is the actual tank used in the movie which was supposed to be set/taking place within Germany April 1945 so Brad/Wardaddy could very well have had a E8 issued as he is killing Germans in Germany.
^Kind of strange seeing (cops) Gendermerie Nationale walking about with no body armour on, but they do carry.
^ And well kitted out to look the part.
Here is the actual tank used in the movie which was supposed to be set/taking place within Germany April 1945 so Brad/Wardaddy could very well have had a E8 issued as he is killing Germans in Germany.
^Kind of strange seeing (cops) Gendermerie Nationale walking about with no body armour on, but they do carry.
^ And well kitted out to look the part.
Last edited:
Coyote Ugly
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
maple_leaf_eh
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Good photos for the archives. Using a reliable chassis for a movie shoot makes perfect sense, when you consider how much Brad Pitt's contract must have been.
A Sherman for all its 1940's engineering is not especially complicated. The lower hull is a 3-sided box with a set of flat steel plates over the tracks, fronted with the really recognizable final drives. A skilled metal worker with torches, grinders and welders can fabricate almost everything. The upper hull has more distinctive angles and flats. The turret is a big casting, which is something few companies are doing.
The engine compartment and driveshaft are out of sight, so historic accuracy is unimportant for exterior shots.
A Sherman for all its 1940's engineering is not especially complicated. The lower hull is a 3-sided box with a set of flat steel plates over the tracks, fronted with the really recognizable final drives. A skilled metal worker with torches, grinders and welders can fabricate almost everything. The upper hull has more distinctive angles and flats. The turret is a big casting, which is something few companies are doing.
The engine compartment and driveshaft are out of sight, so historic accuracy is unimportant for exterior shots.
Historical accuracy seems not to be important at all in the entertainment industry, but whatever is the current fashion (or is cheaper) IS important. Thus we have the spectacle of a German First World War army making an attack, equipped with Number 4 rifles ("The Blue Max").
Look at "Enemy at the Gates" for an example; they spent more $$$ on doing the Stuka attack at the beginning of the film by CGI than Junkers would have charged them to build a real, honest, full-size Stuka, complete with dive brakes and sirens.
I am TIRED of seeing Tigers and Panthers in movies, all with DEAD-TRACK (rear drive sprocket) chassis on the things. Both (as all German-designed tanks in that war) were LIVE-TRACK designs (forward drive sprocket) for one reason: a live-track chassis can CLIMB HILLS much better than the dead-track type. This was proven again in Korea, when the obsolete Shermans were used to push the more (cheaper) modern tanks up the hills, even though they used the same master weapons and the same co-axes. In the end they gave up on this foolishness and just used the 'obsolete' Shermans to do the job.
And an M-48 does NOT look like a Tiger II, either. "Battle of the Bulge" was one of the greatest disappointments I ever endured on the big screen. The only tank which can double, more or less successfully, for ANY Tiger is the Comet, which, despite its smaller size, can be used as a fairly-decent double for a Tiger I ("Night of the Generals").
Why not just use the right tank for the job? And if you can't find one, BUILD a PROPER double: no more second-hand Russian APC chassis with fake Tiger upperworks.
In the immortal word of Charlie Brown, "Arrrrrrrrgh!!!".
Look at "Enemy at the Gates" for an example; they spent more $$$ on doing the Stuka attack at the beginning of the film by CGI than Junkers would have charged them to build a real, honest, full-size Stuka, complete with dive brakes and sirens.
I am TIRED of seeing Tigers and Panthers in movies, all with DEAD-TRACK (rear drive sprocket) chassis on the things. Both (as all German-designed tanks in that war) were LIVE-TRACK designs (forward drive sprocket) for one reason: a live-track chassis can CLIMB HILLS much better than the dead-track type. This was proven again in Korea, when the obsolete Shermans were used to push the more (cheaper) modern tanks up the hills, even though they used the same master weapons and the same co-axes. In the end they gave up on this foolishness and just used the 'obsolete' Shermans to do the job.
And an M-48 does NOT look like a Tiger II, either. "Battle of the Bulge" was one of the greatest disappointments I ever endured on the big screen. The only tank which can double, more or less successfully, for ANY Tiger is the Comet, which, despite its smaller size, can be used as a fairly-decent double for a Tiger I ("Night of the Generals").
Why not just use the right tank for the job? And if you can't find one, BUILD a PROPER double: no more second-hand Russian APC chassis with fake Tiger upperworks.
In the immortal word of Charlie Brown, "Arrrrrrrrgh!!!".
If I may gently correct what is a "live" Vs "dead" track. Simply put the live track when removed from a vehicle will tend to want to curl and roll up on its own. This is because the pins running through the shoe are set in cast rubber (such as the Diehl track fitted to the old M113 or Leopard). a "dead" track will, once laid out on the ground will just lay there and do nothing, tracks like the Soviet T series are generally dead, the German Panther and Tiger are dead tracks and even the little kettenkrad and Sd.Kfz family of halftracks, all dead. The dead track shoes are castings and do not have rubber bushings. Even the Canadian Dry Pin track was cast (but I am not a Sherman guy so others can throw in on that). Dead/live track has nothing to do with how tight the track is or if it has return rollers or not or the placement of tthe drive sprocket. Hill climbing and balance, if your engine is in the back and the steering differential is at front being driven by a prop shaft then you would have a more balanced distribution of weight and a improvement in climbability. That said as long as you have good "gription" on a hill side and the BHP to push the tank up a hillside one should be good to go.
As for making decent "prop tanks" for movie work, those crafty Russian have done that (by the way its for sale) http://englishrussia.com/2012/02/15/how-to-make-a-tank-in-your-garage/
[youtube]Wlv6iuLT6-s[/youtube]
Last edited:
fat tony
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
It's too bad there will never be a pull out all the stops movie about Cdn cavalry units in WWII. To the victors go the spoils. We can only see Churchills, Comets, Valentines, etc. on ranges (wrecks), finally being pulled out of bogs which preserved them (eh-ph was in the right range) or in select few museums scattered about the globe.
Hope your summer is going well Smellie and I will torch a steak for you.
Hope your summer is going well Smellie and I will torch a steak for you.
Last edited:
The Sherman was a basic and automotively reliable tank which would still make a good training vehicle. We used the M4A2E8 with the twin GM diesel engines up to about 1970. I learned to drive one back in 1965 at the Armoured Corps School in Camp Borden where we had both the conventional gun tanks and the de-turreted ones which were used as APCs before the M113A1s came into use. There were a couple of white painted Shermans which were used as target vehicles for the ENTAC and SS11 ATGs with dummy warheads.
In recent yrs I've seen a couple of Sherman chassis being used as platforms for mobile rock drills on highway construction here in BC. One had the later suspension and the other used the original style suspension.
The Sherman was still soldiering on for the Israelis in the 1973 Yom Kippur war where they were armed with a modern high velocity 105mm gun and gave a good account of themselves against Syrian T55s and T62s proving that superior crew training and tactical handling can make a difference. A number of these tanks were later sited around various kibbutz's and used as static pillboxes to beef up perimeter defences. We used to have a length of Sherman track in our camp on the Golan Heights which we fixed in a circle to surround an ornamental flower bed, kind of like beating a sword into a ploughshare.
In recent yrs I've seen a couple of Sherman chassis being used as platforms for mobile rock drills on highway construction here in BC. One had the later suspension and the other used the original style suspension.
The Sherman was still soldiering on for the Israelis in the 1973 Yom Kippur war where they were armed with a modern high velocity 105mm gun and gave a good account of themselves against Syrian T55s and T62s proving that superior crew training and tactical handling can make a difference. A number of these tanks were later sited around various kibbutz's and used as static pillboxes to beef up perimeter defences. We used to have a length of Sherman track in our camp on the Golan Heights which we fixed in a circle to surround an ornamental flower bed, kind of like beating a sword into a ploughshare.
