Difference between revisions of "T20"
Colok76286 (talk | contribs) (→Modules: Added premium banner text + updated modules) |
(→Other considerations: Updates to outdated information due to BR and armor changes.) (Tag: Visual edit) |
||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
'''Armour type:''' | '''Armour type:''' | ||
| + | |||
* Cast homogeneous armour (Hull, Turret) | * Cast homogeneous armour (Hull, Turret) | ||
* Rolled homogeneous armour (Hull rear, Turret roof) | * Rolled homogeneous armour (Hull rear, Turret roof) | ||
| + | |||
{| class="wikitable" | {| class="wikitable" | ||
|- | |- | ||
| Line 33: | Line 35: | ||
|} | |} | ||
'''Notes:''' | '''Notes:''' | ||
| + | |||
* Suspension wheels and tracks are 20 mm thick. | * Suspension wheels and tracks are 20 mm thick. | ||
* The sides have boxes and sand skirts that give an additional 4 mm of armour | * The sides have boxes and sand skirts that give an additional 4 mm of armour | ||
| Line 184: | Line 187: | ||
|} | |} | ||
| − | == Usage in | + | == Usage in battle == |
<!--Describe the tactics of playing in the vehicle, the features of using vehicles in the team and advice on tactics. Refrain from creating a "guide" - do not impose a single point of view but instead give the reader food for thought. Describe the most dangerous enemies and give recommendations on fighting them. If necessary, note the specifics of the game in different modes (AB, RB, SB).--> | <!--Describe the tactics of playing in the vehicle, the features of using vehicles in the team and advice on tactics. Refrain from creating a "guide" - do not impose a single point of view but instead give the reader food for thought. Describe the most dangerous enemies and give recommendations on fighting them. If necessary, note the specifics of the game in different modes (AB, RB, SB).--> | ||
===Tactics=== | ===Tactics=== | ||
| Line 192: | Line 195: | ||
===Other considerations=== | ===Other considerations=== | ||
| − | + | Most medium tanks that the T20 will meet in battle can be penetrated through their front armor, though flanking will be more effective when facing more heavily-armored opponents in an uptier such as later Panther variants, the [[T-44]], and the [[Strv 81]], etc. | |
| − | + | Most heavy tanks and some case-mate tank destroyers such as the [[IS-2 (Family)|IS-2]], the [[Tiger II (Family)|Tiger II]], the [[Jagdpanther]] and the [[Jagdtiger]] will be almost impossible to defeat from the front due to their thick armour. Thus, it is necessary to flank such opponents in order to be able to easily destroy them from the side and rear. | |
Any tanks at the BR will, of course, be easy targets if the T20 catch them at their sides, which is very possible due to the greater mobility of the tank. A single hit from the 76 mm APCBC shell will devastate the interior and can lead to quick destruction or loss in combat efficiency. | Any tanks at the BR will, of course, be easy targets if the T20 catch them at their sides, which is very possible due to the greater mobility of the tank. A single hit from the 76 mm APCBC shell will devastate the interior and can lead to quick destruction or loss in combat efficiency. | ||
| − | + | Practically all enemies at the BR will be able to easily penetrate the front armor of the T20, with the exception of most SPAAs, so it is important to stay out-of-sight and avoid direct engagements whenever possible. | |
=== Modules === | === Modules === | ||
{| class="wikitable" | {| class="wikitable" | ||
| Line 241: | Line 244: | ||
<!--Summarise and briefly evaluate the vehicle in terms of its characteristics and combat effectiveness. Mark its pros and cons in a bulleted list. Try not to use more than 6 points for each of the characteristics. Avoid using categorical definitions such as "bad", "good" and the like - use substitutions with softer forms such as "inadequate" and "effective".--> | <!--Summarise and briefly evaluate the vehicle in terms of its characteristics and combat effectiveness. Mark its pros and cons in a bulleted list. Try not to use more than 6 points for each of the characteristics. Avoid using categorical definitions such as "bad", "good" and the like - use substitutions with softer forms such as "inadequate" and "effective".--> | ||
'''Pros:''' | '''Pros:''' | ||
| + | |||
* 76 mm gun, reloads fast, available ammunition is good for most foes | * 76 mm gun, reloads fast, available ammunition is good for most foes | ||
* Smaller profile, smaller target | * Smaller profile, smaller target | ||
| Line 252: | Line 256: | ||
'''Cons:''' | '''Cons:''' | ||
| + | |||
* Armour can still be easily penetrated | * Armour can still be easily penetrated | ||
* Small internal volume, one shot can easily knock out entire crew | * Small internal volume, one shot can easily knock out entire crew | ||
| Line 263: | Line 268: | ||
When the [[M4|M4 Sherman]] went into production in October 1941, it was considered one of the best Allied tanks of the time period. However, the observers in the North African Campaign noticed a trend in German tank development. Tanks like the [[Pz.III J|Panzer III]] were getting better frontal armour and a [[KwK 39 (50 mm)|longer 5 cm cannon]], and the same happened with the [[Pz.IV F1|Panzer IV]] when it received the [[KwK 40 (75 mm)|long 7.5 cm cannon]] as its main armament. These two tanks' improvements indicated that overtime, the Sherman itself may find itself on the shorter end of the stick, and thus plans for its successor started in Spring of 1942.<ref name="PershingHunnicutt">Hunnicutt, R.P. ''Pershing: A History of the Medium Tank T20 Series'' U.S.A.: Feist Publications, 1971</ref> | When the [[M4|M4 Sherman]] went into production in October 1941, it was considered one of the best Allied tanks of the time period. However, the observers in the North African Campaign noticed a trend in German tank development. Tanks like the [[Pz.III J|Panzer III]] were getting better frontal armour and a [[KwK 39 (50 mm)|longer 5 cm cannon]], and the same happened with the [[Pz.IV F1|Panzer IV]] when it received the [[KwK 40 (75 mm)|long 7.5 cm cannon]] as its main armament. These two tanks' improvements indicated that overtime, the Sherman itself may find itself on the shorter end of the stick, and thus plans for its successor started in Spring of 1942.<ref name="PershingHunnicutt">Hunnicutt, R.P. ''Pershing: A History of the Medium Tank T20 Series'' U.S.A.: Feist Publications, 1971</ref> | ||
| − | The new tank was to have superior aspects of firepower, mobility, and armour over the M4 Sherman and German counterparts, as well as the incorporation of lessons learned from the tank fighting against German forces. The new tank was one of the more technologically advanced American tanks by attempting to meet these requirements. The layout on the tank was similar as the Sherman's, with two in the front driving compartment and three in a turret. The surface area of the tank was reduced by utilizing a box design for the hull rather than sponsons, which led to equipment being stored outside the tank rather than inside it as in the M4. The tank's size was further reduced by having the transmission design be placed in the rear of the tank by the engine rather than in the front, leading to the removal of the power shaft needed to connect the front transmission on the M4 to its engine. This arrangement led to the tank having a much smaller profile than the M4. To further improve the tank, it was decided to give the tank a high-velocity [[M1 (76 mm)|76 mm gun]]. In May 1942, the first mock-up of the tank was produced, showing all its advantages over M4 Medium while keeping the same weight. Many of the observers present, including General Devers, liked the design and thus Ordnance Department continued forth with its development, designating the base vehicle as the '''T20'''.<ref name="PershingHunnicutt"/> | + | The new tank was to have superior aspects of firepower, mobility, and armour over the M4 Sherman and German counterparts, as well as the incorporation of lessons learned from the tank fighting against German forces. The new tank was one of the more technologically advanced American tanks by attempting to meet these requirements. The layout on the tank was similar as the Sherman's, with two in the front driving compartment and three in a turret. The surface area of the tank was reduced by utilizing a box design for the hull rather than sponsons, which led to equipment being stored outside the tank rather than inside it as in the M4. The tank's size was further reduced by having the transmission design be placed in the rear of the tank by the engine rather than in the front, leading to the removal of the power shaft needed to connect the front transmission on the M4 to its engine. This arrangement led to the tank having a much smaller profile than the M4. To further improve the tank, it was decided to give the tank a high-velocity [[M1 (76 mm)|76 mm gun]]. In May 1942, the first mock-up of the tank was produced, showing all its advantages over M4 Medium while keeping the same weight. Many of the observers present, including General Devers, liked the design and thus Ordnance Department continued forth with its development, designating the base vehicle as the '''T20'''.<ref name="PershingHunnicutt" /> |
===Testings=== | ===Testings=== | ||
| − | The T20 design went through many tests and variants as Ordnance try out various components and parts to see which would work best. One of the attempts was to try out different armaments as the 76 mm M1 was still new from the developmental stage, leading to the usage of guns like the [[M7 (76 mm)|3-inch gun]] on the ''"E2"'' variants from the [[M10 GMC|M10]] and a [[M3 (75 mm)|75 mm gun]] on the ''"E1"'' variants from the Sherman with an added autoloader. Transmission designs were tried as well, each with distinctive names. While the T20 designation stands for the tank with an automatic transmission, the ''T22'' had a gear box transmission from the Sherman and the ''T23'' had an electric drive derived from the [[M6A1|M6 heavy tank]]. Of all these designs, none of the "E2" variants were produced as the 76 mm M1 proved successful, and only one "E1" was built on the T22.<ref name="PershingHunnicutt"/> | + | The T20 design went through many tests and variants as Ordnance try out various components and parts to see which would work best. One of the attempts was to try out different armaments as the 76 mm M1 was still new from the developmental stage, leading to the usage of guns like the [[M7 (76 mm)|3-inch gun]] on the ''"E2"'' variants from the [[M10 GMC|M10]] and a [[M3 (75 mm)|75 mm gun]] on the ''"E1"'' variants from the Sherman with an added autoloader. Transmission designs were tried as well, each with distinctive names. While the T20 designation stands for the tank with an automatic transmission, the ''T22'' had a gear box transmission from the Sherman and the ''T23'' had an electric drive derived from the [[M6A1|M6 heavy tank]]. Of all these designs, none of the "E2" variants were produced as the 76 mm M1 proved successful, and only one "E1" was built on the T22.<ref name="PershingHunnicutt" /> |
| − | Another tried component was the suspension system on the T20 designs. The T20 and T22 produced in May and June 1943 respectively had an early variant of the horizontal-volute suspension system (HVSS), which would see itself on the [[M4A3 (76) W|M4 Sherman]] in the future (The first T23 would have the standard vertical-volute suspension system (VVSS) already used on the Sherman). Tests on the tanks progressed until Armored Force recommended the usage of a torsion bar suspension system on the tanks with wider tracks. This led to the ''T20E3'' tank, the second pilot model for the T20, to be produced in July 1943 with said torsion bar suspension, though it would not be the only T20 series tank that would have the specific suspension.<ref name="PershingHunnicutt"/> | + | Another tried component was the suspension system on the T20 designs. The T20 and T22 produced in May and June 1943 respectively had an early variant of the horizontal-volute suspension system (HVSS), which would see itself on the [[M4A3 (76) W|M4 Sherman]] in the future (The first T23 would have the standard vertical-volute suspension system (VVSS) already used on the Sherman). Tests on the tanks progressed until Armored Force recommended the usage of a torsion bar suspension system on the tanks with wider tracks. This led to the ''T20E3'' tank, the second pilot model for the T20, to be produced in July 1943 with said torsion bar suspension, though it would not be the only T20 series tank that would have the specific suspension.<ref name="PershingHunnicutt" /> |
| − | Testings with the tank in general went without much fanfare. The T20's transmission proved to be unreliable with oil leaks and overheating, but testings continued until February 1944 (T20E3 until December) when the T20 was dropped in favor of other promising designs. The T22 also encountered trouble in the transmission and engine after driving 900 miles, the continued problems also causing the T22 to be dropped in February 1944. The T22E1 design with the 75 mm auto-loading gun arrived for tests in November 1943, and though the auto-loader worked with a 20 round per minute fire rate, the insufficiency of the 75 mm gun and the questionable reliability of the auto-loader had it dropped in February 1944. Of the designs, the T23 is the one that proved promising enough for an order of 250 tanks to be placed in May 1943.<ref name="PershingHunnicutt"/> | + | Testings with the tank in general went without much fanfare. The T20's transmission proved to be unreliable with oil leaks and overheating, but testings continued until February 1944 (T20E3 until December) when the T20 was dropped in favor of other promising designs. The T22 also encountered trouble in the transmission and engine after driving 900 miles, the continued problems also causing the T22 to be dropped in February 1944. The T22E1 design with the 75 mm auto-loading gun arrived for tests in November 1943, and though the auto-loader worked with a 20 round per minute fire rate, the insufficiency of the 75 mm gun and the questionable reliability of the auto-loader had it dropped in February 1944. Of the designs, the T23 is the one that proved promising enough for an order of 250 tanks to be placed in May 1943.<ref name="PershingHunnicutt" /> |
===T23=== | ===T23=== | ||
| − | The T23 tank design with the rear electric transmission was rather popular in the testing grounds. A perk of the electric transmission is that the engine's performance can be varied without being in proportion with the speed of the tank, allowing for the prolonging of the engine life. Another thing the electric transmission provide is that it could be remote-controlled (though this feature was not tested for efficiency). Ten T23 prototypes arrived at Abderdeen Proving Grounds and Fort Knox for service tests around October 1943, and while the prototypes performed well compared to the other T20 series, it was deemed unsatisfactory for combat usage for its difficult maintenance attention. Another reason they refused the tank was logistics, as accepting a totally new tank without much parts commonality with their current M4 Sherman means for the retraining of tank and maintenance crew as well as obtaining a large inventory of spare parts to keep the tank in operational order. As such, the T23 was not approved for service by Armored Forces.<ref name="PershingHunnicutt"/> | + | The T23 tank design with the rear electric transmission was rather popular in the testing grounds. A perk of the electric transmission is that the engine's performance can be varied without being in proportion with the speed of the tank, allowing for the prolonging of the engine life. Another thing the electric transmission provide is that it could be remote-controlled (though this feature was not tested for efficiency). Ten T23 prototypes arrived at Abderdeen Proving Grounds and Fort Knox for service tests around October 1943, and while the prototypes performed well compared to the other T20 series, it was deemed unsatisfactory for combat usage for its difficult maintenance attention. Another reason they refused the tank was logistics, as accepting a totally new tank without much parts commonality with their current M4 Sherman means for the retraining of tank and maintenance crew as well as obtaining a large inventory of spare parts to keep the tank in operational order. As such, the T23 was not approved for service by Armored Forces.<ref name="PershingHunnicutt" /> |
| − | T23 still saw tests and in April 1943, a recommendation came in for the T23 to be used with a torsion bar suspension system, which was done and delivered in 29 August 1944 as the ''T23E3''. After being sent to Aberdeen Proving Ground for tests and then to Fort Knox for inspection by Armored Forces, they once again refused it due to a lack in interest to the complicated electric transmission. Another test attempt was on the ''T23E4'' variant which gave the T23 tank the same HVSS as on the Sherman, however objection by the U.S. Army engineers for its excessive width and lack of attention by armoured boards once again put the T23 on hold, and kept it that way until the end of the war.<ref name="PershingHunnicutt"/> | + | T23 still saw tests and in April 1943, a recommendation came in for the T23 to be used with a torsion bar suspension system, which was done and delivered in 29 August 1944 as the ''T23E3''. After being sent to Aberdeen Proving Ground for tests and then to Fort Knox for inspection by Armored Forces, they once again refused it due to a lack in interest to the complicated electric transmission. Another test attempt was on the ''T23E4'' variant which gave the T23 tank the same HVSS as on the Sherman, however objection by the U.S. Army engineers for its excessive width and lack of attention by armoured boards once again put the T23 on hold, and kept it that way until the end of the war.<ref name="PershingHunnicutt" /> |
===Successors=== | ===Successors=== | ||
With the initial rejection of the T23 by Armored Forces, it was clear that they were looking for something much more than a marginal upgrade over their existent and abundant M4 Shermans. By the time the T20 series were tested, the U.S. forces have discovered two new tanks on the battlefield, the [[Tiger H1|Tiger I]] and the [[Panther D|Panther]]. With these new benchmarks, the T20 would not be as big of an improvement over the M4 Sherman when coming up against these two specific tanks. However, not all was lost with the T20 series as Ordnance Department's tests on the tanks were incorporated into future tank designs. The T23's turret was first adapted onto the [[M4A1 (76) W|M4A1 Sherman]] to give the Sherman a 76 mm gun as the original Sherman turret with the 75 mm gun was too small for the 76 mm gun. The tested horizontal-volute suspension system on the T20s was also adapted onto the Sherman in the "E8" program, producing tanks like the [[M4A3 (76) W|M4A3E8]]. As these components, the T20's engineering feat carried on to help the American forces fight in Normandy and beyond. | With the initial rejection of the T23 by Armored Forces, it was clear that they were looking for something much more than a marginal upgrade over their existent and abundant M4 Shermans. By the time the T20 series were tested, the U.S. forces have discovered two new tanks on the battlefield, the [[Tiger H1|Tiger I]] and the [[Panther D|Panther]]. With these new benchmarks, the T20 would not be as big of an improvement over the M4 Sherman when coming up against these two specific tanks. However, not all was lost with the T20 series as Ordnance Department's tests on the tanks were incorporated into future tank designs. The T23's turret was first adapted onto the [[M4A1 (76) W|M4A1 Sherman]] to give the Sherman a 76 mm gun as the original Sherman turret with the 75 mm gun was too small for the 76 mm gun. The tested horizontal-volute suspension system on the T20s was also adapted onto the Sherman in the "E8" program, producing tanks like the [[M4A3 (76) W|M4A3E8]]. As these components, the T20's engineering feat carried on to help the American forces fight in Normandy and beyond. | ||
| − | The T20 still left a basis for future designs as in the production time of the T23, the preexisting request for 250 was altered for 50 of them to be modified. 40 of them to be upgraded with a [[M3 (90 mm)|90 mm gun]] and 10 more with the same gun upgrade, but with an armour upgrade as well. These programs would be called the ''[[T25|T25]]'' and ''T26''; the latter eventually becoming the approved American tank ''[[M26|M26 Pershing]]''.<ref name="PershingHunnicutt"/> | + | The T20 still left a basis for future designs as in the production time of the T23, the preexisting request for 250 was altered for 50 of them to be modified. 40 of them to be upgraded with a [[M3 (90 mm)|90 mm gun]] and 10 more with the same gun upgrade, but with an armour upgrade as well. These programs would be called the ''[[T25|T25]]'' and ''T26''; the latter eventually becoming the approved American tank ''[[M26|M26 Pershing]]''.<ref name="PershingHunnicutt" /> |
== Media == | == Media == | ||
| Line 288: | Line 293: | ||
== See also == | == See also == | ||
''Links to the articles on the War Thunder Wiki that you think will be useful for the reader, for example:'' | ''Links to the articles on the War Thunder Wiki that you think will be useful for the reader, for example:'' | ||
| + | |||
* ''reference to the series of the vehicles;'' | * ''reference to the series of the vehicles;'' | ||
* ''links to approximate analogues of other nations and research trees.'' | * ''links to approximate analogues of other nations and research trees.'' | ||
| Line 293: | Line 299: | ||
== External links == | == External links == | ||
''Paste links to sources and external resources, such as:'' | ''Paste links to sources and external resources, such as:'' | ||
| + | |||
* ''topic on the official game forum;'' | * ''topic on the official game forum;'' | ||
* ''encyclopedia page on the tank;'' | * ''encyclopedia page on the tank;'' | ||
| Line 299: | Line 306: | ||
{{USA medium tanks}} | {{USA medium tanks}} | ||
{{USA premium ground vehicles}} | {{USA premium ground vehicles}} | ||
| + | <references /> | ||
Revision as of 02:22, 13 June 2020
Contents
Description
The Medium Tank T20 is a premium rank IV American medium tank
with a battle rating of 6.3 (AB/RB/SB). It was introduced in Update 1.63 "Desert Hunters". Intended as a replacement for the M4 Sherman tank, it features a rear transmission that gives it a much lower profile than the Sherman series, as well as the 76 mm gun for additional anti-tank firepower.
The T20 is a more mobile and smaller vehicle platform than the Sherman series. A vehicle with a similar play style to the T20 would be the T25, not surprising considering the T25 is an upgrade of the T20 prototype models.
General info
Survivability and armour
The armour is similar to a late M4 Sherman model with a sloped 63.5 mm, as such enemies that can take out the M4 (76) models will also be able to penetrate the T20 straight through the front hull unless compound angling.
Armour type:
- Cast homogeneous armour (Hull, Turret)
- Rolled homogeneous armour (Hull rear, Turret roof)
| Armour | Front (Slope angle) | Sides | Rear | Roof |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hull | 63.5 mm (47°) Front glacis 63.5 mm (52°) Lower glacis |
50.8 mm Front 38.1 mm Rear |
38.1 mm (11-54°) | 19 mm |
| Turret | 88.9 mm (2-55°) Turret front 88 + 88.9 mm (1-23°) Gun mantlet |
63.5 mm (0-58°) | 63.5 mm (3-69°) | 25.4 mm |
| Armour | Sides | Roof | ||
| Cupola | 51 mm | 25.4 mm |
Notes:
- Suspension wheels and tracks are 20 mm thick.
- The sides have boxes and sand skirts that give an additional 4 mm of armour
- Belly armour is 12.7 mm thick.
Mobility
| Game Mode | Max Speed (km/h) | Weight (tons) | Engine power (horsepower) | Power-to-weight ratio (hp/ton) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Forward | Reverse | Stock | Upgraded | Stock | Upgraded | ||
| Arcade | 63 | 21 | 29.8 | 775 | 954 | 26.01 | 32.01 |
| Realistic | 56 | 19 | 442 | 500 | 14.83 | 16.78 | |
The T20's greatest strength lays in its mobility. The forward and reverse speeds are nearly the same due to the transmission, so retreating from cover after exposing itself to fire is easy and quick.
Armaments
Main armament
Armed with the 76 mm M1 gun, the T20's armament can do sterling performances against vehicles of its caliber, so while the T20 itself is easy to take out, it can destroy the enemy the same if it can get the first penetrating shot off first. The front placement of the turret also allows the T20 to expose the minimum amount of its body when it comes out to fire.
| 76 mm M1 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capacity | Vertical guidance |
Horizontal guidance | |||
| 75 | -10°/+25° | ±180° | |||
| Turret rotation speed (°/s) | |||||
| Mode | Stock | Upgraded | Prior + Full crew | Prior + Expert qualif. | Prior + Ace qualif. |
| Arcade | 14.28 | 19.80 | 24.0 | 26.60 | 28.24 |
| Realistic | 14.28 | 16.80 | 20.4 | 22.60 | 24.00 |
| Reloading rate (seconds) | |||||
| Stock | Prior + Full crew | Prior + Expert qualif. | Prior + Ace qualif. | ||
| 7.67 | 6.78 | 6.25 | 5.90 | ||
Ammunition
| Penetration statistics | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ammunition | Type of warhead |
Penetration in mm @ 90° | |||||
| 10m | 100m | 500m | 1000m | 1500m | 2000m | ||
| M62 Shell | APCBC | 148 | 146 | 133 | 119 | 106 | 95 |
| M42A1 Shell | HE | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 |
| M79 Shot | AP | 134 | 132 | 121 | 109 | 99 | 89 |
| Shell details | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ammunition | Velocity in m/s |
Projectile Mass in kg |
Fuse delay
in m: |
Fuse sensitivity
in mm: |
Explosive Mass in g (TNT equivalent): |
Normalization At 30° from horizontal: |
Ricochet: | ||
| 0% | 50% | 100% | |||||||
| M62 Shell | 792 | 7.0 | 1.2 | 20 | 63.7 | +4° | 48° | 63° | 71° |
| M42A1 Shell | 800 | 5.8 | 0.1 | 0.5 | 390 | +0° | 79° | 80° | 81° |
| M79 Shot | 792 | 6.8 | N/A | N/A | N/A | -1° | 47° | 60° | 65° |
Ammo racks
| Full ammo |
1st rack empty |
2nd rack empty |
3rd rack empty |
4th rack empty |
5th rack empty |
6th rack empty |
Visual discrepancy |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 75 | 57 (+18) | 47 (+28) | 33 (+42) | 19 (+56) | 9 (+66) | 1 (+74) | Yes |
Turret empty: 47 (+28)
Machine guns
| 12.7 mm M2HB | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pintle mount | ||||||
| Capacity (Belt capacity) | Fire rate (shots/minute) |
Vertical guidance |
Horizontal guidance | |||
| 1,000 (200) | 576 | -10°/+50° | ±120° | |||
| 7.62 mm M1919A4 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coaxial mount | ||||||
| Capacity (Belt capacity) | Fire rate (shots/minute) |
Vertical guidance |
Horizontal guidance | |||
| 5,000 (250) | 500 | N/A | N/A | |||
Usage in battle
Tactics
Offense: The T20 in an offensive mode should be done by exploiting its mobility with the terrain. Thus, the T20 would be great in areas with lots of cover. Unless in a close-range engagement or in an emergency, it is not recommended to fire the T20's cannon while on the move just like any other tank as it affects accuracy. Thus, the T20 should move forwards, make contact with an enemy, fire if possible then move to cover if the enemy was not taken out with the first shot. The T20 should not go alone due to the vulnerability of its armour, so make sure allies are accompanied with the T20 for additional firepower and protection, most preferably a heavy tank.
Defense: The T20 in a defensive mode should be played similarly like the M18 Hellcat due to its mobility and firepower. However, a benefit over the M18 is the increased armour, so more risk could be taken with exposing the tank to the enemy to get a good shot placement. Allow the enemy to run their tank into the T20's line of sight, don't try to move and expose the tank otherwise the attacking enemy tank would be aware of the T20's position and also may shoot first, disabling critical components if not destroying the T20 outright. Due to the positioning of the internal components, an enemy tank attacking the rear would actually minimize the damage to the crew compartment as the shell must pass through both the transmission and the engine. If the turret ring and crew remain untouched (unlikely, but a possibility), the player could traverse the turret to the enemy at the rear and attack it, though the attack on the engine may also create a fire, so the FPE modification is necessary for this unorthodox method.
Other considerations
Most medium tanks that the T20 will meet in battle can be penetrated through their front armor, though flanking will be more effective when facing more heavily-armored opponents in an uptier such as later Panther variants, the T-44, and the Strv 81, etc.
Most heavy tanks and some case-mate tank destroyers such as the IS-2, the Tiger II, the Jagdpanther and the Jagdtiger will be almost impossible to defeat from the front due to their thick armour. Thus, it is necessary to flank such opponents in order to be able to easily destroy them from the side and rear.
Any tanks at the BR will, of course, be easy targets if the T20 catch them at their sides, which is very possible due to the greater mobility of the tank. A single hit from the 76 mm APCBC shell will devastate the interior and can lead to quick destruction or loss in combat efficiency.
Practically all enemies at the BR will be able to easily penetrate the front armor of the T20, with the exception of most SPAAs, so it is important to stay out-of-sight and avoid direct engagements whenever possible.
Modules
| Tier | Mobility | Protection | Firepower | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I | Tracks | Parts | Horizontal Drive | ||
| II | Suspension | Brake System | FPE | Adjustment of Fire | M79 shot |
| III | Filters | Crew Replenishment | Elevation Mechanism | ||
| IV | Transmission | Engine | Artillery Support | ||
| This is a premium vehicle: all modifications are unlocked on purchase | |||||
Pros and cons
Pros:
- 76 mm gun, reloads fast, available ammunition is good for most foes
- Smaller profile, smaller target
- Fast turret traverse rate
- Good gun elevation/depression combo
- Very mobile and fast in forward and reverse
- Sloped 63.5 mm front hull armour is resistant to most glancing shot, and can frequently ricochet when angled
- Side armour thicker than M4 Sherman (50 mm > 38 mm)
- Rear transmission and engine may help absorb rear shots to protect crew
- RP and SL boost from premium status, great for leveling through Rank III and IV vehicles
Cons:
- Armour can still be easily penetrated
- Small internal volume, one shot can easily knock out entire crew
- Machine gun port on front is a weak point
- Front ammo rack between driver & co-driver doesn't empty until no ammo is left
History
Development
When the M4 Sherman went into production in October 1941, it was considered one of the best Allied tanks of the time period. However, the observers in the North African Campaign noticed a trend in German tank development. Tanks like the Panzer III were getting better frontal armour and a longer 5 cm cannon, and the same happened with the Panzer IV when it received the long 7.5 cm cannon as its main armament. These two tanks' improvements indicated that overtime, the Sherman itself may find itself on the shorter end of the stick, and thus plans for its successor started in Spring of 1942.[1]
The new tank was to have superior aspects of firepower, mobility, and armour over the M4 Sherman and German counterparts, as well as the incorporation of lessons learned from the tank fighting against German forces. The new tank was one of the more technologically advanced American tanks by attempting to meet these requirements. The layout on the tank was similar as the Sherman's, with two in the front driving compartment and three in a turret. The surface area of the tank was reduced by utilizing a box design for the hull rather than sponsons, which led to equipment being stored outside the tank rather than inside it as in the M4. The tank's size was further reduced by having the transmission design be placed in the rear of the tank by the engine rather than in the front, leading to the removal of the power shaft needed to connect the front transmission on the M4 to its engine. This arrangement led to the tank having a much smaller profile than the M4. To further improve the tank, it was decided to give the tank a high-velocity 76 mm gun. In May 1942, the first mock-up of the tank was produced, showing all its advantages over M4 Medium while keeping the same weight. Many of the observers present, including General Devers, liked the design and thus Ordnance Department continued forth with its development, designating the base vehicle as the T20.[1]
Testings
The T20 design went through many tests and variants as Ordnance try out various components and parts to see which would work best. One of the attempts was to try out different armaments as the 76 mm M1 was still new from the developmental stage, leading to the usage of guns like the 3-inch gun on the "E2" variants from the M10 and a 75 mm gun on the "E1" variants from the Sherman with an added autoloader. Transmission designs were tried as well, each with distinctive names. While the T20 designation stands for the tank with an automatic transmission, the T22 had a gear box transmission from the Sherman and the T23 had an electric drive derived from the M6 heavy tank. Of all these designs, none of the "E2" variants were produced as the 76 mm M1 proved successful, and only one "E1" was built on the T22.[1]
Another tried component was the suspension system on the T20 designs. The T20 and T22 produced in May and June 1943 respectively had an early variant of the horizontal-volute suspension system (HVSS), which would see itself on the M4 Sherman in the future (The first T23 would have the standard vertical-volute suspension system (VVSS) already used on the Sherman). Tests on the tanks progressed until Armored Force recommended the usage of a torsion bar suspension system on the tanks with wider tracks. This led to the T20E3 tank, the second pilot model for the T20, to be produced in July 1943 with said torsion bar suspension, though it would not be the only T20 series tank that would have the specific suspension.[1]
Testings with the tank in general went without much fanfare. The T20's transmission proved to be unreliable with oil leaks and overheating, but testings continued until February 1944 (T20E3 until December) when the T20 was dropped in favor of other promising designs. The T22 also encountered trouble in the transmission and engine after driving 900 miles, the continued problems also causing the T22 to be dropped in February 1944. The T22E1 design with the 75 mm auto-loading gun arrived for tests in November 1943, and though the auto-loader worked with a 20 round per minute fire rate, the insufficiency of the 75 mm gun and the questionable reliability of the auto-loader had it dropped in February 1944. Of the designs, the T23 is the one that proved promising enough for an order of 250 tanks to be placed in May 1943.[1]
T23
The T23 tank design with the rear electric transmission was rather popular in the testing grounds. A perk of the electric transmission is that the engine's performance can be varied without being in proportion with the speed of the tank, allowing for the prolonging of the engine life. Another thing the electric transmission provide is that it could be remote-controlled (though this feature was not tested for efficiency). Ten T23 prototypes arrived at Abderdeen Proving Grounds and Fort Knox for service tests around October 1943, and while the prototypes performed well compared to the other T20 series, it was deemed unsatisfactory for combat usage for its difficult maintenance attention. Another reason they refused the tank was logistics, as accepting a totally new tank without much parts commonality with their current M4 Sherman means for the retraining of tank and maintenance crew as well as obtaining a large inventory of spare parts to keep the tank in operational order. As such, the T23 was not approved for service by Armored Forces.[1]
T23 still saw tests and in April 1943, a recommendation came in for the T23 to be used with a torsion bar suspension system, which was done and delivered in 29 August 1944 as the T23E3. After being sent to Aberdeen Proving Ground for tests and then to Fort Knox for inspection by Armored Forces, they once again refused it due to a lack in interest to the complicated electric transmission. Another test attempt was on the T23E4 variant which gave the T23 tank the same HVSS as on the Sherman, however objection by the U.S. Army engineers for its excessive width and lack of attention by armoured boards once again put the T23 on hold, and kept it that way until the end of the war.[1]
Successors
With the initial rejection of the T23 by Armored Forces, it was clear that they were looking for something much more than a marginal upgrade over their existent and abundant M4 Shermans. By the time the T20 series were tested, the U.S. forces have discovered two new tanks on the battlefield, the Tiger I and the Panther. With these new benchmarks, the T20 would not be as big of an improvement over the M4 Sherman when coming up against these two specific tanks. However, not all was lost with the T20 series as Ordnance Department's tests on the tanks were incorporated into future tank designs. The T23's turret was first adapted onto the M4A1 Sherman to give the Sherman a 76 mm gun as the original Sherman turret with the 75 mm gun was too small for the 76 mm gun. The tested horizontal-volute suspension system on the T20s was also adapted onto the Sherman in the "E8" program, producing tanks like the M4A3E8. As these components, the T20's engineering feat carried on to help the American forces fight in Normandy and beyond.
The T20 still left a basis for future designs as in the production time of the T23, the preexisting request for 250 was altered for 50 of them to be modified. 40 of them to be upgraded with a 90 mm gun and 10 more with the same gun upgrade, but with an armour upgrade as well. These programs would be called the T25 and T26; the latter eventually becoming the approved American tank M26 Pershing.[1]
Media
See also
Links to the articles on the War Thunder Wiki that you think will be useful for the reader, for example:
- reference to the series of the vehicles;
- links to approximate analogues of other nations and research trees.
External links
Paste links to sources and external resources, such as:
- topic on the official game forum;
- encyclopedia page on the tank;
- other literature.
| USA medium tanks | |
|---|---|
| M2 | M2 |
| M3 | M3 Lee · ▃Grant I |
| M4 | M4 · Calliope · M4A1 · M4A1 (76) W · M4A2 · M4A2 (76) W · M4A3 (105) · M4A3 (76) W · M4/T26 |
| M26 Pershing | T20 · T25 · M26 · M26 T99 · M26E1 |
| M46/47/48 Patton | M46 · M46 "Tiger" · M47 · M48A1 · T54E1 · T54E2 |
| M60 | M60 · M60A1 (AOS) · M60A1 RISE (P) · M60A2 · M60A3 TTS · M728 CEV · 120S |
| MBT-70 | MBT-70 · XM803 |
| M1 Abrams | XM1 (Chrysler) · XM1 (GM) |
| M1 Abrams · M1 KVT · IPM1 | |
| M1A1 · M1A1 HC · M1A1 Click-Bait | |
| M1A2 Abrams · M1A2 SEP · M1A2 SEP V2 | |
| Other | T95E1 |
| Australia | M1A1 AIM |
| Canada | M4A5 |
| Israel | ▃Magach 3 (ERA) · ▃Merkava Mk.1 · ▃Merkava Mk.2B · ▃Merkava Mk.3D |
| Turkey | M60 AMBT |
| USA premium ground vehicles | |
|---|---|
| Light tanks | LVT(A)(4) · M2A4 (1st Arm.Div.) · M3A1 (USMC) · ▃Stuart VI (5th CAD) · M8 LAC · M8A1 GMC |
| M18 "Black Cat" · Super Hellcat · T18E2 · M551(76) · T114 · M1128 Wolfpack | |
| Medium tanks | ▃Grant I · M4A5 · Calliope · T20 · M26 T99 · M26E1 · M46 "Tiger" · T54E1 · T54E2 · ▃Magach 3 (ERA) · M728 CEV |
| XM1 (GM) · XM1 (Chrysler) · M1 KVT · M1A1 Click-Bait | |
| Heavy tanks | T14 · Cobra King · M6A2E1 · T29 · T30 |
| Tank destroyers | T28 · T55E1 |
