Author Topic: M3 Stonewall FSV  (Read 13592 times)

Offline tankmodeler

  • Wisely picking parts of the real universe 2 ignore
Re: M3 Stonewall FSV
« Reply #75 on: October 19, 2016, 12:53:16 AM »
For me the concept and quality of changes you made is focus of this build.
Tracks-wheels accurate or not, it all looks great to me. :)
Oh, I know and I'm just poking a bit of fun at Claymore, it's just that on that kit the crap wheels and tracks just jump out at me every time I see someone who has used them. For me ( and I acknowledge I may be a bit obsessed) they detract from any model that uses them. Especially the tracks, as they simply can not be a rational track design. The Tamiya M3/M5 Stuart tracks do the same thing to me.  :-\

Everyone has something that makes them cringe, this just happens to be (some of) mine. :)

Paul

Offline kerick

  • Responsible for all surrendered booty....Arrrr!!!!
Re: M3 Stonewall FSV
« Reply #76 on: October 19, 2016, 09:35:36 AM »
See through aircraft fuselages do it for me.

Offline Claymore

  • It's all done with smoke and mirrors!
  • Alt Hist AFV guy with a thing for Bradley turrets
Re: M3 Stonewall FSV
« Reply #77 on: November 05, 2016, 01:51:26 AM »
The M3 Jackson Multiple Gun Motor Carriage was introduced alongside the M3 Lee in order to provide close support to the Armoured Infantry Regiments of the US Army’s Armoured Divisions heading for North Africa.  Like the Lee and Grant before it, the Jackson was named after a great fighting General but, unlike its stable mates, the name didn’t stick much beyond its initial deployment.  In US Army service, the Jackson was universally better known as the ‘Stonewall’.  Whilst never supplied in great numbers to Great Britain, the British Army was also quick to adopt the name ‘Stonewall’ and at the same time dropped the mouthful that was ‘Multiple Gun Motor Carriage’ in preference for the more functional descriptor of ‘Fire Support Vehicle.’  It wasn’t long before the name M3 Stonewall Fire Support Vehicle became generally accepted across the Allied forces.

Whilst the commonality of the M3 hull would greatly ease maintenance and serviceability, the unusual gun arrangement brought with it its own unique problems.  With its crew of six (Commander, driver, 2 x gunners and 2 x loaders), the fighting compartment was a busy and cramped place.  With 2x 75mm guns to service and a potentially impressive rate of fire, ammunition storage was always going to be a problem and even with every spare corner packed there was never enough space.

It was also quickly realised that in the dry conditions found in North Africa the not inconsiderable dust cloud kicked up when both guns fired not only prevented effective sight of the fall of shot but also instantly gave away the firing position.  In practice, alternating firing of the guns proved to be more accurate and delivered a steadier rate of fire.  Although not intended as such, the Stonewall also proved to be a surprisingly good impromptu tank destroyer.

However, the Stonewall, like the Lee and Grant, was only ever meant to be a stopgap until a better vehicle was made available.  Indeed it was rather cruelly pointed out that the Stonewall had two of everything, two 75s, two gunners, two loaders and was too much trouble.  The 75mm HE round was just too small to provide the desired fire support and when the 105mm armed M7 Priest became available; it quickly replaced the Stonewall in the armoured formations.

Nevertheless, the Stonewall did not entirely disappear and provided useful service to the US Marine Corps and US Army fighting in the Pacific Theatre of Operations.  Although preferring the heavier 25pdr gun for its standard artillery fire support, the British Army saw potential in US Army’s anti-tank experiences and replaced the 75mm guns in most of their existing Stonewalls with 6pdrs in order to provide a more capable SPAT weapon system.  The resulting vehicle showed promise and had a degree of success in North Africa convincing the British Army to consider refining the Stonewall SPAT further by combining the gunners’ positions and sighting systems reducing the crew size to 5 and thus increasing the ammunition stowage.  However, in the end, the concept was never developed beyond the drawing board.

The model depicts the 3rd vehicle of F Company, 2nd Battalion, 13th Armoured Regiment of 1st Armoured Division in North Africa circa November 1942 and is made up from parts of a Tamiya M3 Lee Mk I, a Tamiya M3 Grant Mk I and the ubiquitous plastic card.







« Last Edit: November 09, 2016, 06:05:45 PM by Claymore »
Friendly fire isn't and suppressive fire rarely does!

Offline LemonJello

  • MARPAT Master
  • Moderator
  • Member number 100...WooHoo!!!
Re: M3 Stonewall FSV
« Reply #78 on: November 05, 2016, 02:39:16 AM »
Awesome! Has just the right wear & tear too!

Offline Claymore

  • It's all done with smoke and mirrors!
  • Alt Hist AFV guy with a thing for Bradley turrets
Re: M3 Stonewall FSV
« Reply #79 on: November 05, 2016, 03:20:15 AM »
Thanks, much appreciated.  :)
Friendly fire isn't and suppressive fire rarely does!

Offline Jeffry Fontaine

  • Unaffiliated Independent Subversive...and the last person to go for a trip on a Mexicana dH Comet 4
  • Global Moderator
  • His stash is able to be seen from space...
Re: M3 Stonewall FSV
« Reply #80 on: November 05, 2016, 05:15:31 AM »
Excellent story to back up your model.  Especially like the part where the 6pdr was adopted for the UK/Commonwealth version.  ;)
"Every day we hear about new studies 'revealing' what should have been obvious to sentient beings for generations; 'Research shows wolverines don't like to be teased" -- Jonah Goldberg

Offline Claymore

  • It's all done with smoke and mirrors!
  • Alt Hist AFV guy with a thing for Bradley turrets
Re: M3 Stonewall FSV
« Reply #81 on: November 05, 2016, 05:38:03 AM »
Why thank you. I wonder where those 6pdrs came from...  ;)
Friendly fire isn't and suppressive fire rarely does!

Offline buzzbomb

  • Low Concentration Span, oft wanders betwixt projects
  • Accurate Scale representations of fictional stuff
    • Club and my stuff site
Re: M3 Stonewall FSV
« Reply #82 on: November 05, 2016, 05:16:09 PM »
Just works.

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: M3 Stonewall FSV
« Reply #83 on: November 05, 2016, 06:12:32 PM »
Nice!

Love the back story too.

Offline Claymore

  • It's all done with smoke and mirrors!
  • Alt Hist AFV guy with a thing for Bradley turrets
Re: M3 Stonewall FSV
« Reply #84 on: November 05, 2016, 10:35:34 PM »
Just works.

Nice!

Love the back story too.

Much appreciated, thanks guys.  :)
Friendly fire isn't and suppressive fire rarely does!

Offline Camthalion

  • The man has done a pink tank...need we say more?!
Re: M3 Stonewall FSV
« Reply #85 on: November 07, 2016, 04:05:42 PM »
very cool

Offline finsrin

  • The Dr Frankenstein of the modelling world...when not hiding from SBA
  • Finds part glues it on, finds part glues it on....
Re: M3 Stonewall FSV
« Reply #86 on: November 07, 2016, 04:37:40 PM »
So thatz the story, most interesting.  I'd completely missed it.
Top notch styrene surgery combined with just right weathering. :)
and,,, now you have two 37mm turrets for something(s) else.

Online GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: M3 Stonewall FSV
« Reply #87 on: November 07, 2016, 04:50:01 PM »
I don't suppose you would have a 1/35 Commander's Cupola left over that you don't want - see circled part in pic below.  I am after one of these for another project.
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline Claymore

  • It's all done with smoke and mirrors!
  • Alt Hist AFV guy with a thing for Bradley turrets
Re: M3 Stonewall FSV
« Reply #88 on: November 07, 2016, 09:12:01 PM »
I don't suppose you would have a 1/35 Commander's Cupola left over that you don't want - see circled part in pic below.  I am after one of these for another project.

Indeed I do.  As finsrin points out, I have the entire M3 Lee turret available.  Drop me a PM with a suitable address and I'll get it in the post.  :)
Friendly fire isn't and suppressive fire rarely does!

Offline tankmodeler

  • Wisely picking parts of the real universe 2 ignore
Re: M3 Stonewall FSV
« Reply #89 on: November 07, 2016, 10:48:00 PM »
Very cool. Like it a bunch.

In the terminology of the time it probably wouldn't have been the M3 (although there certainly were a LOT of M3s floating about at the time) and it technically would have been called a multiple gun motor carriage not a fire support vehicle, so it's more likely that it would have been the M1 MGMC in US service and the Stonewall Mk I in Brit service. The Yanks never really adopted the naming thing until later in the war.

But that's just me being unnecessarily pedantic.

As I'm wont to be... :)

Paul