Help support TMP

"General They Should Name a Tank After (Round 1A)" Topic

13 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.

Return to the General They Should Name a Tank After (Round 1A) Poll

132 hits since 15 Apr 2018
©1994-2018 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Jim Selzer15 Apr 2018 1:10 a.m. PST

Dwight David Eisenhower does need no "stinkin tank" he's got an aircraft carrier named after him

Winston Smith Supporting Member of TMP15 Apr 2018 1:32 a.m. PST

Custer doesn't.
That's the only one that jumps out at me.
However, he's become a bit of a joke for obvious reasons.

Rommel was a "good German", so we graciously grant the Germans the right to name a tank for him.

Personal logo Flashman14 Supporting Member of TMP15 Apr 2018 3:32 a.m. PST

General Mills

Gunfreak Supporting Member of TMP15 Apr 2018 4:40 a.m. PST

You can't name a tank Eisenhower. Takes to long to say. Before you've finished saying that tanks name some Russian will have blown a hole in it

Major Mike15 Apr 2018 5:44 a.m. PST

General David Perkins, he lead the Thunder Run to Baghdad.

Frederick Supporting Member of TMP15 Apr 2018 7:18 a.m. PST

Interesting list

How does poor old Fitz John Porter make the list? Not a bad guy but not someone you name a tank after – same for Ambrose Burnside

I like General Grey

rmaker15 Apr 2018 9:52 a.m. PST

Custer DID have a tank named after him. The M-27 medium was to be the General Custer, but it was never standardized, since the heavy tank development, the M-26 Pershing went into production instead. And the M-27 would have had another, more tongue-in-check nickname. It had an electric transmission/final drive and the Ordnance Corps testers usually referred to it as the "General Electric".

Tommy2015 Apr 2018 11:27 a.m. PST

Poll is null and void. The correct answer, Buford, was not listed even though nominated twice.

robert piepenbrink Supporting Member of TMP15 Apr 2018 12:45 p.m. PST

You know, if we were being serious about this--successful US cavalry or armor officers--we'd have Light Horse Harry Lee and William Washington on the short list. Neither one will happen, of course.

Oh. Following up on the thread. I've heard before that our M-3 Mediums were Lees and the ones issued to the British were Grants. But I've also read Robinett's Armor Command, and he never refers to the M-3 mediums under his command as anything but Grants.

Tommy20, have patience. This is poll 1A. We may yet see Buford and Kearney.

Big Red Supporting Member of TMP16 Apr 2018 5:08 a.m. PST

The Dwight David Eisenhower would be the M2 Ike.

DeRuyter Supporting Member of TMP17 Apr 2018 10:30 a.m. PST

And Montgomery would be the "Monty"

Mithmee Supporting Member of TMP17 Apr 2018 12:06 p.m. PST

True but it wouldn't do anything until it had every other Monty in the right place and even then it still might not do anything.

Volleyfire18 Apr 2018 10:13 a.m. PST

The Monty tank would require a double so you could fool the enemy.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.