World War II Armor Training in Color l Photos

By Chuck Oldham (Editor) - April 2, 2021

M3 Stuart light tanks during training at Fort Knox, 1942. The light Stuarts typified pre-war American tanks, nimble and fast but lacking in armor and firepower. Confusingly, the Army Ordnance Department had two M3 tanks: the M3 light tank and the M3 medium tank. The British cleared up the confusion on their end by naming the tanks after American Civil War generals, such as J.E.B. Stuart, Ulysses S. Grant, Robert E. Lee, and William T. Sherman. Library of Congress photo

Putting on a brave face for the photographer, at least four different variants of two different tanks, some of them lacking armament, have been cobbled together for this shot. Behind the lead M4 Sherman is an M3 Lee, and behind it an M3A1 Lee with a cast hull, then the largest single piece casting in the world, but without its 75 mm gun. Farther behind is another Sherman, an M4A1, also with a cast hull. While cast hulls were superior to riveted ones, American production resources were just not up to the challenge of turning out extremely large numbers of cast hulls at the time. Library of Congress photo

An M3 Stuart barrels through a water obstacle during a training exercise at Fort Knox, Ky., in June, 1942. The Stuart served in the African, European, and Pacific theaters of World War II. Undergunned and already obsolescent by 1942, the Stuart was so mechanically sound by comparison with their own tanks that the British, who bought many, nicknamed it the "Honey." Library of Congress photo

M3 tanks in action, Fort Knox, Ky. The M3 was the U.S. Army's first medium tank, and was hurried into production after war broke out in Europe. It was a compromise, meant to be cheap and fast to manufacture, a clumsy hybrid with a 75 mm gun in a sponson and a 37 mm gun in the revolving turret. The M3 Lees shown were the preferred U.S. Army variant, easily distinguished from the Grant variants the British procured by their commander’s cupola at the top of the turret. The Grant’s turret featured a bustle at the rear for British radio equipment. Library of Congress photo

With war looming, there was not enough time to quickly develop a turret that could accommodate the Army’s M2 short-barreled 75 mm gun shown here, so it was mounted in a sponson on the right side of the hull. The gun was meant to fire high-explosive rounds, although it could also fire armor-piercing shot. The 37 mm in the turret was meant to be the primary anti-tank weapon, but it was already growing obsolescent by the time the M3 went into battle. Library of Congress photo

An M3 driver peers through his vision hatch. The M3 driver sat centrally, and high up at the front of the tank's hull. This gave him excellent vision ahead but also made him more vulnerable to enemy fire. The protective headgear of Army tank crewmen was adapted from the Rawlings football helmet. Library of Congress photo

While the British eagerly took all the M3s they could get to replace their tank losses, they were already looking forward to the M4. The M3’s 75 mm gun put the British on an arguably equal footing with the German tanks of 1942, but the Grant and Lee left much to be desired. Almost two feet taller than a German Pzkpfw IV, with limited traverse on the short-barreled 75 mm and an almost useless 37 mm in the turret, the M3 nevertheless helped turn the tide for the British in the Western desert. Library of Congress photo

Looking like a scene from Humphrey Bogart’s movie Sahara, an M3 tank crew pose with their personal weapons: M1917 .45-caliber revolvers and M1928 Thompson SMGs with drum magazines. The M3 Lee had no fewer than seven crewmembers: commander; 37 mm gunner; 37 mm loader; 75 mm gunner; 75 mm loader; driver; and radio operator. The Grant variant for the British dispensed with the radio operator as the radio equipment had been moved to the turret. Library of Congress photo

A front view of an M3 Lee. American tank crewmen nicknamed it "the iron cathedral" because of its great height, not a good quality on the battlefield. M3s didn't see much combat in American hands before being replaced by the M4 Sherman. It provided valuable training both to the Army and to industry, however, in how to build and operate the much larger, powerful, and more complex tanks the war demanded. Library of Congress photo

A very early production M4A1 Sherman crosses an obstacle at Fort Knox. The M4A1 featured a cast hull, and the earliest versions retained the two fixed .30-caliber machine guns in the front hull as well as the ball-mounted flexible .30-caliber. Library of Congress photo

At the time this photo was taken, the M4 Sherman was considered one of the best tanks in the world, receiving high praise from the British who were using them in North Africa. Unfortunately, the U.S. Army took this praise to heart and failed to make the improvements in gun and armor needed to match German developments. The result was a tank that was outgunned and underarmored when the invasion of France took place, and needed hasty modifications to try to catch up in the gun/armor race. Library of Congress photo

While these photos were presumably made to demonstrate American armored might six months after the nation’s entry into World War II, they present instead a pretty accurate picture of the real situation, with the United States still finding its way, production beginning to ramp up, but many, many lessons left to be learned. This series of photos depicts at least four different variants of two different tanks, some of them lacking armament, cobbled together for the photographer. M4 Sherman production had just begun in February 1942, and it was around the time these photos were taken that the U.S. 1st Armored Division had been stripped of its new M4A1 Shermans so that they could be urgently shipped to North Africa to cover British tank losses in the Western Desert.

The M3 Lee tanks in the photo represented the largest number of medium tanks in the U.S. Army, at the time, but they were essentially 1939 technology, developed as a stopgap that could be manufactured in large numbers very quickly. The M4 and M4A1 Shermans shown here initially made a good showing in battle, but instead of continuing development of ever more powerful guns and thicker armor, the Army concentrated on production, believing from the good reports from the Sherman’s initial battles against German tanks in North Africa that development could wait. As it turned out, it couldn’t, and while the Sherman was not the “death trap” some called it, especially after modifications, the failure to continuously refine and improve the design ultimately cost Allied lives. The most common tank in the Army at the time remained the M3 Stuart, a good design but already behind the times.

Originally published Sept, 6, 2017