Pakwagen T-34 1943/76 (r)
Improvised Self Propelled Antitank vehicle

M.Julian Marles
Just another what-if project but based on a theoretically possible concept😉

John Van Kooten
Cool! That is most definitely an interesting concept 👍

Kind of like with that Stuart made by Ding Hao?

scalemates.com/kits/282102-d..bby-dh96001-m3a3-with-pak-40

M.Julian Marles
Wow! I knew about the 37mm "doorknocker" but not this...crazy!

John Van Kooten
Haha! Yeah, crazy, right?! 😄

So your concept really isn't that far fetched. That Stuart with PaK40 actually existed. And basically, in its design it is very much like the Marder II, which, as you know, is simply the Panzer II chassis with a PaK40. So yeah, I think a T-34 with PaK40 could very well have become a reality, had the Germans been able to capture enough of them.

M.Julian Marles
Since it's a "what if" do you think field applied zimmerit would be dumb?

John Van Kooten
With a "what if" anything is possible😉 but IMO, if we take from what we have here (T-34, captured vehicle) and what the Germans did with captured vehicles, I'd say zimmerit would not have happened.

The Germans didn't add zimmerit to any of their captured vehicles and they didn't do any field applications of zimmerit either, safe for some rare, early (experimental?) stage exceptions. I guess the reason would be that it would require stripping the vehicle completely of everything, including all paint & primer since you can't apply a zimmerit paste over a layer of paint for obvious reasons (it would simply fall off at some point...). In the field, that would require way too much time and there probably weren't even tools available to sandblast the vehicles to remove the paint & primer.
As for field application, yes, some vehicles were done in the field but again, those are rare exceptions and there is simply no proof of this being a common practice.

The German manufactured vehicles (Tigers, Panthers, StuGs, etc) that were already on active duty in the field which did receive zimmerit were actually recalled. They went back to the factory to get that done.

M.Julian Marles
yeah...I just always wanted to do zimm ona t 34 ha ha! 😭

M.Julian Marles
i will probbaly throw some side skirts on it ...and use the included front armour..maybe leave it in a primer colour...

John Van Kooten
Oh dear! Sorry about that! 😛 Hahaha! 😉

Nah, like I said, *anything* is possible with a "what if", especially if you want it 😄 I'd say go for it!! I don't think I have ever seen anyone do a T-34 Beute Fahrzeug with zimmerit before? So it would be seriously interesting to see that happen! 👍

M.Julian Marles
Yeh..but you are right..I want to keep it in the area of theoretically possible not sci fi so I will go for sideskirts and frontal armour with some added German goodies from old DML kits...have some extra tracks from different vehicles like panzer IV, T34, T60 etc.😉

John Van Kooten
In that case, then yeah, keep it "real" 😄

Very much looking forward to how you are going to cook this one up!! 👍

M.Julian Marles
Yah! Ordering some stuff from Amazon and Sprue Bros right now..then off tomorrow to the LHS to grab some treadplate!

John Van Kooten
Cool! The preparation stage is always a nice stage. For me anyway 🙂 Happy hunting! 👍

M.Julian Marles
😢

M.Julian Marles
I think I will start on the Pak while I wait for the mailman..and possibly make an improvised trailer from the carriage section. I will probably settle on a flat sided superstructure with a sloped front, with a spare Nashorn shield DML kindly included in some kit or other :/

John Van Kooten
Cool! 👍

I'm really interested in seeing how this project is going to develop!

M.Julian Marles
Just got the T 34 and some German weapons from the postie! :>

John Van Kooten
Great! 😄

So project "Panzerjäger 41(R) mit 7.5 cm PaK 40 auf Fahrgestell T-34 Ausf. A (Sd.Kfz. 666)" is a go 😛

And maybe on your next project you could go really crazy (just like the Germans did in those days) and build something like this:

[img1]

It's a Flak 36 on a T-34 chassis 😄 😄
Together with your PzJgr 41(R) 😉 it could make for a cool diorama 😄

Holger Kranich
Uh John, dont let Dragon see that pic or we will have it as a kit in a few month. 😛

H K
Old Photoshop. But perfect for Dragon- has T-34 and Flak 36, put all sprues in box, voila new kit 😛

Holger Kranich
And mark it as new tool! LOL😉

John Van Kooten
Hahaha! You caught me, indeed it's fake 😛

But yeah! Indeed, Holger, we'd better be careful not to let Dragon see this 😉 LOL
And like you said, HK, it has Dragon written all over it 😄
Oh dear... what have I done 😮 😄 😄

H K
Put it on a Tiger hull and we have an announcement from Dragon on Monday 😄

M.Julian Marles
Then they can do late version on the Tiger II ha ha!

M.Julian Marles
Well it's off to the spares drawers to look for all those Dragon panzer parts to Germanize my T 34!

M.Julian Marles
The last item is off my shopping list - Voyager treadplate for the floor of the fighting compartment! Now to design with some preliminary sketches and then break out the plastic stock!

John Van Kooten
Sounds good!! 😄 👍

M.Julian Marles
I value your opinion John...what do you think...a smaller fighting compartment that would follow the hull/turret or a larger one that extends over the hull sides? I am thinking the bigger one due to the size of the breech and extra ammo storage..😉

John Van Kooten
Thanks Julian. I appreciate that! 👍 😄

You are right, there are two possibilities.

This is what I personally think:

1. Superstructure extending over the sides
The T-34 has a fairly small diameter at the top of the hull. So space might indeed be an issue and could be a good reason to build an overlapping superstructure. A good example of the need (or possibly simply the lack of sufficient technical insight...) for an overlapping superstructure is of course the "7,5cm PaK40(SF) auf Geschutzwagen 39(f) Marder I". The Germans did this mostly on captured chassis that were basically too small to carry the proposed gun.
However, ammo storage would preferably be in the back of the superstructure or utilizing the already present storage racks inside the hull. Ammo is preferably not stored on the sides of a lightly armored compartment. Since the side armor of the superstructure on vehicles like this will be relatively thin, an incoming shell would be devastating if it were to hit the stored ammo. So, if they could avoid it, they would store ammo somewhere more safe. And there is plenty of space to extend the superstructure towards the back, for (extra) ammo storage / stowage.

Also, an overlapping superstructure on the T-34 would negate the deflective properties of the hull, basically trapping incoming shells on the underside of the superstructure (see image 1 below). I'd say the sloped armor would be one of the main reasons for utilizing the T-34 as a tank hunter?

So with that in mind (ammo storage in hull / in the back of the compartment + armor deflective properties), I think the method below would most likely be the preferred solution.

2. Superstructure in line with hull sides
This being a Panzerjäger, I think the Germans would probably try to retain the deflecting properties of the sloped armor as much as possible. If you build a superstructure that overlaps the sides, incoming shells that are deflected from the armor of the top of the hull will be trapped below the lower side of the compartment (again, see image 1 below), turning the Panzerjäger into a death trap. For the same reason (shells getting trapped by deflecting off of vehicle's armor) the Germans modified the armored mantlet of the Panther gun on the Ausf. G, for instance, or built pretty much all Panzerjäger after the first War years with armor in line with the lower hull.
It would be better to build the superstructure in line with the armor of the hull, extending & preserving its deflective properties. If more room is required, the superstructure should extend towards the back, not the sides. See image 2.

Seeing how the PaK40 was also built into Sd.Kfz.251's I don't think the breech size should be a problem.

Image 1 : Overlapping superstructure - shell deflection

[img1]

Image 2 : in line superstructure - shell deflection (theoretically!)

[img1]

M.Julian Marles
Nice diagram! I agree with the deflection issue!

John Van Kooten
I made a couple of quick 3D drawings in 3DS Max 🙂 I thought it was easier to show than trying to explain in words what I meant 😄

M.Julian Marles
I don't understand your fancy science talk! Ha ha!😉 yeh definitely will go with sloped armour and maybe a hatch in the floor to access internal ammo! 🙂

John Van Kooten
LOL! 😉 😛

So sloped armor it is. Cool! 👍 Very much looking forward to how you are going to tackle it all 🙂

Rui S
Hey, I was following this one?

M.Julian Marles
I think so hee hee

M.Julian Marles
You were following the album attached to the project I think, Rui