(Semi OT) Wet Stowage?

The term alwys made me think first of sort of bin where the presumably waterproofed ammo was stored in a liquid. I always figured that can't be it, though, for obvious reasons.

I was looking through my squadron Sherman Tank in Action book the other day, and found the explanation, which I'll try to summarize:

Apparently, many Shermans were lost due to ammunition fires after the armor was penetrated. Hot fragments were piercing the casing of the ammo, starting the fire/explosion.

Later Shermans had "wet stowage". Apparently this was a double walled tank, filled with a water/glycol mix that surrounded the (dry) ammo. The idea was that any hot fragments that hit the stowed ammo would have to have passed through the stoargae tank walls, releasing the water and stopping the ammo fire before it could get started.

I gather it worked pretty well, but was partly negated by the practice of tank crews to load up with as much extra ammo as they could cram into the turret. Wet stowage wouldn't help if you had a bunch of "extra" rounds carried loose inside the tank....

HTH,

-Bill

O.K. As a guy old enough to have ridden in a Sherman tank, here's the dope. This is the story as given to me by Sergeant Fitz, D Co., 5th Battalion, 66th Armd. Cav., USAR while climbing through an old Sherman we used as a gate guardian and parade toy at our armory. Some of the early U.S. tanks in the Second World War period would "brew up" rather readily when hit and the ammo would quickly explode. Someone got the bright idea of stowing the ammo in containers filled with water. I believe the shells were coated with lacquer to prevent water leaking in. The water filled ammo cases didn't totally prevent the ammo from exploding but it slowed the process to give the crews time to bail out. Fitz was a veteran of Okinawa with the Marines and Korea with the U.S.Army, I suspect he knew his Sherman's like few others.

Bill Shuey

It was still bad, I think 3 sec from time of hit, to fire through the complete crew compartment.........

I remember listining to a german tank gunner (Mk IV) talk about the Shermans, and he couldnt believe that the greatist country on earth would make a tank that was soo unsurvivable when hit on the battelfield. He felt very sorry for the Sherman crews.... (Mk IV's brewed up right quick too, but not as fast as a Sherman he said)

They didnt call them Ronsons for nothing.......

"Only a Gentleman can insult me, and a true Gentleman never will..."

"RC Boater" wrote

Correct. It was also used on M24 Chaffees.

Actually, it didn't work all that well. The modification involved a) adding the liquid stowage, b) adding armored protectors for the racks, and c) deleting the loose rounds clipped into the turret basket. "Battle experience failed to prove that the wet ammunition stowage is of any significant value in reducing the ammunition fire hazard." (OCM 32697, 7 February 1949.) The real benefit was from b) and c), leading to the draining of the tanks in 1949.

KL

Guaranteed to light!

Or the lend lease ones for the Russians "The coffin for seven comrades!"

Hope this helps, Peter

Who were the extra two guy's ?????

"Only a Gentleman can insult me, and a true Gentleman never will..."

The Political Officer and the local Commissar's brother-in-law?

-- John ___ __[xxx]__ (o - ) --------o00o--(_)--o00o-------

The history of things that didn't happen has never been written - Henry Kissinger

"Azzz1588" wrote

That was in reference to the M3 medium.

KL

My father served on an escort carrier in WWII. They were essentially built on unarmored merchant hulls, unlike the larger fleet carriers. They were labelled CVE's, which escort carrier veterans claimed stood for "Combustible, Vulnerable, and Expendable."

How about the LST's? "Large, Slow Target"

Bill Shuey