another sherman marking question

Next time, I think I'll do more research on the subject I'm modeling before I start.

Cool!  Bouganville had all sorts of oddball stuff-- Marines driving around in M6 37mm Gun Motor Carriages too

Here ya go, an M4 on Bouganville

I could be wrong but I don't think any M4s were fielded in the PTO.  You see some Army M4A1s and plenty of M4A2s and M4A3s --- but I don't ever recall seeing any M4s beyond the composite hulled ones in the PTO.

It is an M4 that can be made from early to mid prodcution using the optional parts. Although to make a true early production M4 you need an earlier style mantlet, with or without the co-ax MG armored shield. The bolted transmission cover was replaced by the cast one later during production, as were the open spoked road wheels replaced by the solid stamped type. Armored plates over ammo bins were first added as field mods and later in procuction on dry ammo stowage tanks. Early build tanks did not have them. The best way to determine what to put on is to find a pic of a particular tank you want to model.

If I may ask, what model(s) do this kit actually represent?  I know there are a lot of optional parts, like the cast single piece vs. riveted 3 piece transmission cover, and the pressed vs. spoked wheels, but the instructions don't give any descriptions of what options go with what models.

You will want a M4A2 or M4A3 for a 1945 USMC Sherman. Those were the chosen variant by that point in the war for the Marine Corps. By that point in the war many Marine Shermans were pattern Camo painted and had no stars visible. Great stuff to see the variety there for the modeler. The M4 for PTO would be more likely seen in Army tank battalions.

my kit is the Tamiya M4 Sherman Early Production, and I'm trying to represent a generic PTO USMC Sherman circa spring 1945.

The M4A3 in the photo was rebuilt for MDAP export during the early 1950's.  The turret is the earlier dry-stowage, low bustle type, hence the applique armor on it.  It has also been upgunned with a 76mm and given the designation M4A3E4.  During the rebuild process, whatever 75mm turrets that were available were used, regardless of whether or not they were original to that hull type.  The Danish Army received similar ones as well.

This M4A3 had cheak armor, but it may have been done post war as this photo was taken in 1995 in the late Yugoslavia during the Balkins War

I found this picture researching "Sgt Oddball's Sherman"

Look around for a copy of Sherman In Action by Squadron-Signal.  The Squadron Shop might still carry it although I heard it could be out of print.  Great photo reference.

Most were factory applied or kits supplied to field units (these were about 1943 timeframe).  Only the EARLIEST upgrades would show any variation and this woudl be slight as mens' lives depended on this.  If you're doing the Tamiya M4A3 kit, know that Tamiya screwed up.  The tank never had applique armor.

What kit are you building?

ok, work is progressing on my Sherman, and I have another question, were the applique armor plates added in the factory, or were they a field modification that would vary from one tank to the next?

Spamicus

I just did a PTO US Army Sherman from a photo and all the stars were painted over by some fella that couldn't paint for you know what. So I put the decals on and then put a sloppy coat of dark green over them and chipped it a little to let a few scrapes of white show through. In the ETO the air recognition star on top of the turret was normally left in plain view; being attacked by a Typhoon or a Jug carrying rockets was a bad thing.

I just did a PTO US Army Sherman from a photo and all the stars were painted over by some fella that couldn't paint for you know what. So I put the decals on and then put a sloppy coat of dark green over them and chipped it a little to let a few scrapes of white show through. In the ETO the air recognition star on top of the turret was normally left in plain view; being attacked by a Typhoon or a Jug carrying rockets was a bad thing.

Also,there is no need to be neat about it.The focus was on covering up the star.

Different methods were used.Some were painted over,blacked out or covered with mud.Use your imagination.With over 50,000 Shermans produced,ya can't go wrong.

From what I read, the hull markings were actually of particular concern as they pointed to the ready ammo racks. Later, this was where the racks were converted to the "wet" method. Unit policies allowed this practice or not. I seem to remember that Patton was against this practice. Some tankers then used mud to obscure the markings.

Mike T.