"M3/M5s question" Topic

I had this come up about a photo I have found. Is this a M3 or M5. And if it is a M3 how many were still being used in Europe. I had thought they had been replaced by the M5. Robert
link
US Seventh Army infantrymen climb on an M5 Stuart light tank, in preparation for an advance, circa November 1944.

Ugh! Facebook. You can't see the image unless you join up

Dammit!! Now I gotta rethink this LOL.
Robert

link
Does this one work??

Yes it works.
But I can't answer about the M3. :(

It's an M5, likely an M5A1. You can tell because it has hull hatches above the driver positions. You can also see the slope of the side armor below the driver position.

Edit: definitely an M5A1, you can tell by the turret hatches.

Also in terms of M3 usage, AFAIK the only ones still using those were some Commonwealth units. However, most stuarts in Europe were overwhelmingly M5A1s, some M3A3s, and a few M5s put back into service as M5A1 stocks became depleted.

Damon.

Thanks!!! Perhaps some info about if they had any in the Seventh Army in 1944. Robert

The M5A1 remained the primary US light tank until the end of the war, so Seventh Army would have had them.

Doesn't the M5 have a raised engine deck? Seems fairly clear that this one doesn't, so my guess would be it's an M3A3 like this one:

link

Good point on the sloping hull – I'd not picked up on that. It does look like a distinct line along the top edge of the hull though – the raised engine deck is normally quite noticeable. I am also confused now…

I'm with Ditto – the stowage has to be hiding the raised rear deck, as the hull sides definitely point to an M5A1 not an M3A3.

Wow, great puzzle. Went through my library and can't find an answer. I don't see the raised deck. Like many it looks like a straight line shot and no rise in the stowage either and it is at a point where the slope would begin. However I too can only see straight sides and the upper hull corners look like an M5. Too bad the front is obscured by stowage and the rest, might have been an easier identification.

the first tank id definitely not an m3a3, as for an m5 or m5a1 the engine deck is a raised for both and on this picture it is bit obscured by the stowage ect.
the main visible difference between m5 and m5a1 is the newer turret with bulge at rear, so it could be either m5 or m5a1 from the front.
it also has the bracket mounts for the side skirts as well making it more likely an m5a1

And just found the photo in the old Squadron/Signal publication on the Stuart and it reads: "infantry of the 114th Infantry Regiment board an M5A1 prior to their attack on Struth, November 1944. This M5A1 is fitted with metal cleat track instead of the usual rubber block track. The metal track added over half a ton to the vehicle's weight but gave better traction, especially on icy roads. Mud has been packed over the sandbags on the Stuart's glacis plate."

OK here is something to thing about:
you all need to understand one thing about WWII and US Tanks. They were never removed from use as long as they could still fight. They were only replaced with new models as they were put out of action and not repairable. older tanks that were not killed would have fought till the end of the war. Another thing sometimes older tanks were repaired using newer tank parts like turrets, newer tanks with older parts, what ever was in the repair yard.

so never assume a tank can't be an older model just because its after a date some book said it was replaced. That date was the date they started replacing them not the date the replacement was 100% done.

To add to the confusion a bit. Since it has a slight slope to the sides then it should be an M3A3. The hull hatches also look right for an M3A3 as they look to be a bit larger than what I would expect to see on a M5A1. The flat engine deck also indicates M3A3. The M3A3 and the M5A1 use the same turret and the same gun mantlet. The kicker is that the M3A3 (known as the Stuart V) is a foreign aid vehicle only and should not have been issued to US troops.

the tank has vertical side so cannot be an m3a3!

According to the reference book I'm using: World War II AFV Plans; American Armored Fighting Vehicles (George Bradford) page 59, the M3A3 does have sloped sides, the M5A1 has vertical sides (same book page 63).

The more I look at that picture though. I wonder if there is some kind of battle damage that is making the side look like its sloped. The side plate looks like its vertical at the front of the lead vehicle but then there is that odd spot under the tarp that makes it look like its sloped because part of the rear appears wider and squared off. I think the raised deck is hidden underneath the top, but its really hard to tell.

The sides are definitely not sloped – the photo's slightly angled, as you can see if you look at the angle of the front deck as it were.

I'm looking towards the back deck along the side almost where the soldier's hand is that is touching the tarp. That section of the side armor looks bent and it happens to be at the spot where I think there is a weld in the armor. If so its slab sided and is the M5A1 not an M3A3.

I think it is an M5A1 as well. The sides are not sloped. And the left foot of the solder bending over, touching the tarp, is blocking the engine deck.

Also, the solider standing to the rear is higher than the guy in front of him. Could be the photo – or he is standing on the engine deck.

As noted above, the M3A3 was primarily a Commonwealth vehicle, with maybe a handful going to the US.

Mike

Over on Missing Lynx Steve Zaloga chimed in and confirmed it is an M5A1. No better authority on the subject there is these days.

Damon.

Thanks all so far .Awesome Ditto!!! . Robert

M3A3:

M5A1:

Tim,

It's a viewport – missing the circular 'lid' that can be seen covering the driver's viewport on the opposite side.

I think the correct term would be pistol port. It's not a lid, but rather a plug held in place by a short length of chain.

cheers