 John the OFM   | 09 Feb 2011 6:24 p.m. PST |
I will not ask why it was done. That seems kind of obvious, hainna?
Instead, I will ask why the logs were put where they were. Was the armor plate particularly weak there, or was what was behind it particularly vital? I just put 6 Old Glory T34s together, and put the logs where the Squadron Shop "T34 in Action!" booklet showed them. I have no clue why they go in that particular place, however. Clue in the clueless, please.  Sooner or later, I have to get to my Finnish Sturmi (StuGIII), and they have log armor too. |
| Jemima Fawr | 09 Feb 2011 6:31 p.m. PST |
I thought the logs were to give infantry something to hang on to? |
| The Gray Ghost | 09 Feb 2011 6:33 p.m. PST |
The real question is what type of logs were used. |
| 21eRegt | 09 Feb 2011 6:44 p.m. PST |
I wouldn't want to be riding on, or anywhere near a tank with logs on it that took a hit. Splinters flying everywhere! |
| Wargamer Blue | 09 Feb 2011 6:57 p.m. PST |
Used for firewood so the English can break for a cuppa tea. |
| WarpSpeed | 09 Feb 2011 7:12 p.m. PST |
Good points kyote and 21 regt,i add the danger of the molotov cocktail incendiary to such hastily armoured vehicles.I remember Revel had a 1/32 sherman out in the early 80s,clad in sandbags ,lumber and various bits of scrap metal .Photos of Italian M13/40s show similar "upgrades" in the desert war.Other than unditching logs and bed springs i have never seen Soviet vehicles similarly garbed. |
| Garand | 09 Feb 2011 7:19 p.m. PST |
IIRC on the T-34 the logs were, like on modern Soviet tanks, used to help unditch the tank if it gets bogged down. Damon. |
| rvandusen | 09 Feb 2011 7:26 p.m. PST |
I concur with Damon and Ditto that the logs were hasty unditching beams. I recall seeing improvised wooden plank armor on a Stug-maybe Finnish? And this was on the very weak flanks. |
| Etranger | 09 Feb 2011 8:30 p.m. PST |
Tim – log armour seems to have been mostly a feature on Finnish StuGs, & rare on other Finnish AFVs. picture picture |
aecurtis  | 09 Feb 2011 9:12 p.m. PST |
So far, some have it: improvised armor on Finnish StuGs to defeat shaped-charge weapons (Panzerfausts, Panzerschrecks) and Hafthohlladungen (magnetic panzer knackers), as KB suggests. Allen |
| John the OFM | 09 Feb 2011 9:19 p.m. PST |
>smiling sheepishly<
Oh… I thought they were improvised armor on the T34… When you ASSUME… |
| Martin Rapier | 10 Feb 2011 3:23 a.m. PST |
As Allen says, they would work against magnetic or shaped charge weapons (and presumably sticky bombs as well), but against APCBC doing 3000 fps….. |
| kabrank | 10 Feb 2011 3:53 a.m. PST |
Possibly with APCBC may lead to cap damage reducing penetration as the damaged cap does not conform to the armour slope as intended. |
| Marc33594 | 10 Feb 2011 5:50 a.m. PST |
US forces in the Pacific used logs and wooden planking to counter magnetic and shaped charges. Here are a few shots showing the use of planking on Marine tanks in the pacific
link My understanding is like the rest here that on Soviet equipment it was for unditching, not for armor protection. |
| zoneofcontrol | 10 Feb 2011 10:23 a.m. PST |
John the OFM said:
">smiling sheepishly<
Oh… I thought they were improvised armor on the T34… When you ASSUME…" Technically you are also correct! The log "armor" protected the tank from the attacking mud. LOL |
| number4 | 10 Feb 2011 12:31 p.m. PST |
If it's on a command tank, it could be the captain's log…..
:) I'll get my coat |
| (Stolen Name) | 10 Feb 2011 1:33 p.m. PST |
|
| Rod Robertson | 10 Feb 2011 2:05 p.m. PST |
|
| Nikator | 10 Feb 2011 5:43 p.m. PST |
Actually, the concept of log armor.goes 'way back to the Sumerian Timber Chariot, all evidence of which was, sadly, used as toothpicks by Saddam Hussein in his bunker. The concept was next utilized as a mobile food source for the Iriquois Beaver-Drawn War Wagon, terror of the 1730's Indian wars.
An interesting sidelight is the wooden Battlebot sketched by Da Vinci, complete with optional strap-on armor plate made from teak. Wooden armor, forsooth. |
