Re: [EXT] Re: [RealSTMFC] Late 40's to mid 50's military rail movements

Daniel A. Mitchell

The stated weight for an armored vehicle in most references is the “empty” weight. And they do mean empty. An in service vehicle will have fuel, oil, ammunition, crew weaponry, spare parts, tarps, and crew personal items, tents, sleeping bags/bedrolls, food, etc., plus the crew itself. That will easily add 10K-plus pounds. The crew was also very good at acquiring “things” in the field. Most such vehicles were literally covered in "stuff”. This also often included “in the field” crew-applied add-on “armor”. ANYTHING that even MIGHT provide extra protection … sandbags, wooden planks, scrap iron, old track-links, concrete, etc.) … add another 10K-20K pounds. And, yes, it overloaded the suspension and transmission leading to breakdowns. It came down to “do you want to be stranded or dead”.

A vehicle being shipped will normally NOT have all the add-ons, and will have the ammunition and fuel removed, but may be accompanied by spare parts, etc. … so, take the stated weights as a lower limit, and probably add at least 5K pounds (2.5 tons) for a vehicle shipped on a rail car.

Dan MiItchell
Sometimes crewman on a WWII M-18 Hellcat tank-destroyer
(I wish somebody would make a decent HO model of an M-18, the two on Shapeways are poor).

On Oct 18, 2021, at 11:48 PM, spsalso via <Edwardsutorik@...> wrote:


The capacity of the car in the photo reads 140000 pounds.  Can you crowd that up to 158000 pounds?

The T43 was reported to weigh 60 tons in the New York Times, back in the day.  It was also reported to weigh 50 tons.  In the New York Times.

Wikipedia says an M103 weighs 65 tons.

Military things generally weighing a bit more than hoped, I will lean towards the T43 being a heavy tank.

Anyway, it clearly arrived at its destination.


Edward Sutorik

Join to automatically receive all group messages.