Template talk:WWII tanks

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Military history (Rated Template-Class)
MILHIST This template is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Temp Templates and modules do not require a rating on the quality assessment scale.

M26 pershing - heavy or medium during ww2[edit]

To avoid a backwards and forwards on reclassification of the Pershing I've highlighted an apparent contradiction in the M26 pershing talk page. Can we resolve the main article and then reflect the most appropriate on here. For the time being I've left the M26 in Heavy as that seems to agree with the article for the ww2 period, but a bit more digging in the article indicates there may be more to it. Lkchild (talk) 20:09, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

It's my understanding that it was a medium in WWII, the US didn't have a policy for heavy tanks, that's why the M6 heavy tank was shelved. For a brief period after the war the tank was classified as a heavy, but only because it had a 90mm gun, not because of weight or armor. Pennsy22 (talk) 04:39, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
I'm not up on US vehicles, so apologies if I'm missing something (I'm more into the British and Commonwealth vehicles). As a starting point, while Chamberlain and Ellis isnt perfect, it's one of the better references I've come across (British and American tanks of world war 2: The complete illustrated history of British, American and Commonwealth tanks, 1939 - 1945). It states the change under the development programme from medium to heavy occurred pre-production with T26E1 in June 1944. Production of T26E3 starts November 1944. Shipped to Europe Jan/Feb 1945 along with a full production order. Standardised as heavy tank M26 General Pershing in March 1945. Thus it looks (to me, from this source) like the tank was built and fielded under the heavy designation during ww2. Have you got any other sources that might offer an alternative viewpoint? Lkchild (talk) 23:06, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
I'm getting ready to leave on a 7 day cruise, I'll look for an answer when I get home. On a funny note I was looking through a tank book I have at home yesterday and in the section on the Pershing, it list it as the M26 Pershing Gravy Tank and is accompanied with a picture of a Pershing at the Aberdeen Proving Grounds, in front of the tank is a sign that says Medium M26 Pershing Tank. Pennsy22 (talk) 20:06, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
After reading two books on the M26, I've found that though it was designed to be a Medium tank to replace the Medium tank M4, they were redesignated Heavy Tank T26E3 prior to being shipped to Europe with the M26 retaining the Heavy tank designation until March 1946, when tanks in design were heavier than the M26. Can I add a note or something to the template to reflect this change, ie-Reclassified Medium Tank March 1946, or something to that extent? I was certainly confused about this because some books and references call it a Medium, but a few will call it a Heavy, as I stated above, even the US Army called it a Medium when it was on display at Aberdeen. Pennsy22 (talk) 09:43, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
Nice one :) you can add a note using the "ref" tag the sane as citing reference - more here help:footnotes. I'm not sure how that works with templates though, I'd assume it's only visible here. Lkchild (talk) 13:51, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Scope of template[edit]

Given the large number of different tank serving in War and the equally large number of experimental and prototype designs - should this template be focused on tanks that saw actual service (even if in limited numbers) when the nations' militaries? And is there a cut-off between tanks that were produced during the period before 1939 and didn't see service during the war and those that were used during WWII? GraemeLeggett (talk) 11:22, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Certainly there is an overlap of Interwar tanks and World War II tanks. But the ones that should be included from Interwar to World War II are the ones that continued in production during the war years (and were used). As for your other thought, there could be a separate template for experimental and prototype designs. Kierzek (talk) 13:42, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
As it stands, none of the tanks in the "Super-heavy" category fought in the war, only a couple were built, and the rest were on paper only. "Assault" tank is a made-up category, two of them were prototypes and one is already listed under "Medium". And the rest aren't complete. In my revision I tried to include only tanks that saw service, even if only for training. So I'm confused with what you want to include and exclude. Maybe we can just retitle it to "Some World War II tanks", or "Only the World War II tanks that I want to list". I added the notes for clarity. My edit didn't violate any rules. Pennsy22 (talk) 03:46, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
There has to be an element of subjectivity, noteworthiness, and consensus on this one. For example, the Covenanter tank was never accepted into operational use, but was a very important step in the development of Crusader tank and Cromwell tank etc. Similarly the assault tanks saw a large amount of development for operational reasons, but ultimately weren't needed when the Churchill tank continued to suffice (note this is not a made up category - it was a joint British/US classification of tank aimed at piercing German heavily emplaced defences for the war in Europe). That said if we included every single project we'd be so far overloaded that the template would be usable. Lkchild (talk) 16:27, 12 August 2017 (UTC)