GHQ Models Forums

I suggest you keep in mind that cavalry units used M48s... 3 per platoon, plus a 4.2 mortar track, an infantry track, and 5 M114s, as well as 17 in the tank company.

Build yoursel an armored cavalry squadron circa 1964. It might be the start of a new path for your hobby. All OD, easy to paint, too.

For those of you doing '67 War, I'd chip in that Jordan was running M47s, as well.

Well, my next project will be a Jordanian armoured brigade. I've already got the M113 and other assorted vehicles

Did somebody say Jordanians?

The battle group - M48 squadron, M47 Squadron, Armoured Infantry Company, 25# Battery, ADA platoon, AT platoon and Command elements.



M48s A3s I think for PG...


M47s


Armoured Infantry


25# Battery

Oh, I LIKE this CavDog! Please, Sir, may I have some more?

Yes, A3s. Damn fine looking, they are! Good paint, too.

FOR TANK NERDS ONLY! YOU'VE BEEN WARNED!

Just to show you that, no matter how much work you have already done, you should keep working, in this case, keep reading.

Earlier, I told you that one discriminator between the M48/M48A1 and the M48A2 was the number of track support rollers, the early models having 5 and the A2 having only 3.

As it turns out, the Army, seeking to save a little money and weight, perhaps to extend the 165 mile range of the A2 (other improvements - diesel engine, turbochargers, bigger fuel tanks, had eliminated the need for the fuel drum kit) had asked that the support rollers be reduced to 3, but the Marines asked to keep the five. Thus, Army A2s had 3, while Marine A2s had 5.

The easiest way to tell the difference between the M48/M48A1 and the M48A2 remains the solid armor back deck and grill doors of the A2 versus the grilled back deck and solid rear plate of the earlier versions.

Now, if you REALLY MUST KNOW, whether your M48A5 was originally an A2 or an earlier model... the only discriminator MIGHT be the headlight group, oval for the early models, horseshoe for the A2.

I haven't talked about fender changes yet. Or Infantry phone boxes. OMG!

The GHQ M48 model has the correct oval headlight group, and their A2/A5 hulls have the correct horseshoe group, their A5s originally having been A2s, unless, of course, the headlight group was changed during rebuild.

Obviously, one's OCD gets worse with age, but it helps keep the forum going.

That's great detailed info PG! You are a treasure trove of tank knowledge!

Great looking vehicles Cav Dog! Keep the pics coming!

Jim, you are a crazy man. in 1/35 or even 1/48 I could see those things. In 1/285? I can't even be bothered with mounting the M2s on things. My M60's only have the cupola because they are easy.

It's an easy hobby, though. You remind me though, that I need to order another 1/35th scale M60. I'm going to order some 50cal trees, clip the M85 barrels off the cupolas of a company of my early M60s, glue on the M2s, and I will have one company in the battalion that has not yet received its M85s.

I really hope GHQ will make the M48A1 package for me, because I would rather have a battalion of A1s than the early 48s. I've ordered 20 M48s, but...

This is all why I've chosen to focus on US equipment. So many variations!

Cav Dog, your Jordanian forces look excellent. I like the mix of old British and more up to date(for that time) U.S.equipment including M-48s and the older M-47s in the mix.

Panzergator, I appreciate the nerdiness of this thread. I had a little basic understanding but have learned a lot more about this family of vehicles. I would like to see a whole new M-48A2 and the M-48A5 by GHQ at some point.

Pete

Thanks, Pete. I agree with you on new models for the A2 and A5. GHQ will have to figure out if the demand is there. They do an impressive job on these models. I shouldn't complain too much. As always, I encourage gamers to read more on their areas of interest. It brings more into the hobby.

If you war game the Middle East wars, M48 series, you need all the M48 models. "What if" games of the '50s and '60s would be interesting variations, and I haven't heard much about that, likely because info is hard to find. Certainly, hope pocket nuclear weapons and the Pentomic US Army concept make for new challenges.

In leafing through Squadron/Signal's M48 Patton in Action I found many examples of hulls with 5 road wheels and different headlight groups. Secondary identifying characteristics on the M48A5 are not predictable. In particular, the early production is inconsistent. They were, however, all diesel, so will have the solid armored deck, grill doors, and air cleaner boxes. Early ones will have the the enclosed cupola with the A3 vision ring, the majority will have the flat hatch a la Israeli practice, and you may find one or two with the cupola, but no a3 vision ring.

Thanks for the M-48 update, Panzergator! My hope is that if and when GHQ decides to add more M-48s to their line, I'm thinking the M-48A2 and M-48A5, they will choose the most common type if some variations exist. Both of these will require some new sculpting but I would buy some. Of course GHQ will have to determine the economic feasibility of these and anything else they do. I would rather they take the time and effort to do them right rather than "Halfass" it.

I remember when their new Panzer IV series which was designed to replace their older models came out. Pibber and I have discussed this a bit and we were disappointed with the new models. In this particular case, starting with the Panzer IVG which I was so looking forward to, the sculpting was very crisp and overall the suspension system was a work of art. For some reason, the drive sprocket was all wrong and had no teeth to boot. The proportions also seemed a bit off on the upper hull. I don't have a calipers but the dimensions seemed just a bit off. They also chose the end of production longer 75mm gun rather than the early and mid production long 75 which was used in the majority of the tanks.

The reason I mention this is that I am a GHQ fanboy so to speak. I much prefer getting their miniatures to those of other companies. I always look forward to seeing their new stuff but want them to take the time to do it right.

I may do a segment on their M4 Sherman series on the forum sometime. While not quite the expert that Mk1 is, I have learned a lot about this series of tanks and GHQ plans to do more. I hope to provide some insights as to what I would like to see from them regarding this series.

Pete

Pete,

If you haven't got it already, I strongly recommend R.P. Hunnicutt's book, "Sherman: A History of the American Medium Tank" surely thE definitive work on the subject, unless you want to repeat his research. I have spent a lot of time between its covers. It's usually available from Amazon. The hardbound book is usually pricey. The paperback is more reasonable. Give it a look. If you are interested in the M4 in all its varieties, this is the one.

On the opposite side, you might read Belton Cooper's "Deathtraps." Cooper was an ordnance officer during WWII, responsible for running the part of 3AD's recovery and repair operation. He has a bug up his behind about the Sherman.
It seemed to me the book sensationalized the fact that people die in combat. You have likely seen his commentary on TV. He was clearly traumatized by what he saw, with good reason. But he did not seem to comprehend where the Sherman fit into WWII. Recent books give the Sherman good credit. All tanks are a compromise of factors which must be worked out.

I'm looking forward to your article.

Jim

The most common type of A2 would be those with 3 return rollers, simply because the Army had more tanks than the Marines. As for the more common A5, I don't know about hulls (yet), but the most common would have the flat commander's hatch. We would need .50 cal trees as well as 7.62 mgs for the A5 hatches.

I would like to see the A2 and A5 redone, too. each with its correct hull. I have couple the M2 off five Magach 3s to make A5s.

A2s replaced M41s in scout platoons for tank and mech battalions as well as divisional and regimental cavalry platoons. Of course, they also equipped tank battalions. It was a significant tank in US forces if you can backward-break the Vietnam time barrier. It was also significant in foreign military sales, as you are aware. Along with examples in the Middle East, Pakistani M48s were engaged by Centurions in the Indo-Pak war. The M48s were badly handled, unfortunately, and did not look good.