Even I first thought it was the T30, but after someone posted this drawing on a FB page, I took a 2nd look and recognized it as the T34. It's the only tank out of those three (T29, T30, T34) that has an extra armor plate on the back of the turret.
Looks a heck of a lot more like a Pershing than any T34 I've ever seen.
Pershing doesn't use 120mm gun...and the turret itself is too big for pershing. You probably mistaking for the russian T-34/76 or T-34/85.
American T-34 Heavy is a prototype tank derived from the T-29 Chassis and turret which instead of the T-29 105mm gun, uses 120mm gun. The other is known as T-30 which uses a whooping 155mm AT gun as its main armament.
Well, therein lies the issue. I wasn't aware we used anything other than the M- designation for our vehicles.
It still depresses me that people use WoT as a source. But, it's better than nothing.
Well, I don't think there is anything wrong when using WoT as a source for some tanks, at the very least not the T34, some of it is better than those from Achtung Panzer
(note: there is no hyphen between the "T" and the digit "34" That's how I distinguish between the standard service Soviet tank and the US's Test vehicle)
Well, therein lies the issue. I wasn't aware we used anything other than the M- designation for our vehicles.
It still depresses me that people use WoT as a source. But, it's better than nothing. [/quote]
Well, therein lies the issue. I wasn't aware we used anything other than the M- designation for our vehicles.
It still depresses me that people use WoT as a source. But, it's better than nothing.
WoT is actually a pretty good first source of tank knowledge since they do their research. If anyone wants more detailed information they can keep searching elsewhere too. Not that anyone should list WoT as a source in their bibliography...
