Ram Tank

Discussion in 'Weapons, Technology & Equipment' started by von Poop, Jan 13, 2008.

  1. von Poop

    von Poop Adaministrator Admin

    On the Ram tank, I wondered is there any. truth in a once heard urban legend that the sherman was knock off of the Ram, as it's prototype came off the line in early july 1941 and was on the aberdeen proving grounds a by july 18th 41 a full 2 months ahead of the Sherman. Many have pointed out the American assistance in tooling the Montreal Locomotive works to build them. As well as the dissatisaftion with the M3 Grant. I cant imagine the that the US designers werent fully aware of the Canadian design based on the MOD requirements for the new battle tank in 1941.
    That doesn't really hold water for me.
    To look at it more widely you have to consider Ram, M3 & M4 really quite strongly as sister vehicles in the 'US Medium' family.
    Ram was based on the Drivetrain of the Septic M3 Medium, and M4 also evolved from the M3 - so you can't really call one a knock-off of either, more divergent evolutionary aspects of the same tree with good open-ness between developers.

    Seems the US actually financed 1114 of the 1941 Rams produced, so the co-operation and awareness of what the Canucks were working on was definitely no secret. But that sort of co-operation (and even more direct cribbing of ideas) has produced a few tank designs over the years which have similarities, but aren't necessarily copies.
     
  2. gpo son

    gpo son Senior Member

    It was this paper '"Not competent to produce tanks" The Ram and Tank Production in Canada 1939-1945.' From the Wilfred Laurier collection that led me to the comment, remembered it from years ago. The author Graham Broad suggests Frank Worthington [the father of Canadian armour] believed that the M4 was based largely on the Ram. http://www.wlu.ca/lcmsds/cmh/back%20issues/CMH/volume%2011/issue%201/Broad%20-%20Not%20competent%20to%20produce%20tanks%20The%20Ram%20and%20Tank%20Production%20in%20Canada,%201939-45.pdf
    On another note Interesting how the US got the Canadians to build tanks [for the british army] then sold them under lend-lease at no doubt additional profit.
    Matt
     
  3. TTH

    TTH Senior Member

    If my memory of Chamberlain and Ellis is accurate, then the M4 and Ram were examples of parallel but similar development from the M3.

    Re the M3 being 'septic,' that is coming it too strong. It was a badly flawed design, of course, but it was a stopgap and recognized as such from the first. Despite its weaknesses it played an important role in the Western Desert in 1942, and later did good work in Burma.

    As to whether or not the Ram could have been used by 8th Army at Gazala, just when did the Mark II start coming off the production line in numbers? Could a large number have gotten all the way to Egypt in time, together with spares etc? The Mk I with the 2 pdr wouldn't have been much of an improvement on the tanks 8th Army already had. Bear in mind too that the Grant could fire a really good HE shell, something neither the Ram nor any other 8th Army tank could do. Still, if I had been an 8th Army commander I would really like to have had an armored regiment with a mixture of Mk II Rams firing 6 pdr AP and Grants firing 75mm HE.
     
  4. Za Rodinu

    Za Rodinu Hot air manufacturer

    TTH, that the term 'septic' was not applied to the M3 itself, rather it appears to be equivalent to 'Damned Yanks', 'Bloody Colonials' or Americans at large. Mind you, I did not coin the term, certain other British members of this fine forum will be able and willing to corroborate ;)
     
  5. Ramiles

    Ramiles Researching 9th Lancers, 24th L and SRY

    ecalpald and TTH like this.

Share This Page