Bridge Sign?
 

This image popped up on FB.

Some commentators believe the "38" to be the Bridge Sign, but it is on the side of this Canadian M4A2 (76)W HVSS. Did Canadians in the '60s put the bridge sign/gross weight on the side??

Wondering ....

Thanks

Mike

The format of the post war CFR number, along with the 70s style moustache on the fellow up top make me think the markings on this tank are historically incorrect. I can't say I have seen the bridge class in this location on the few cdn Sherman's I have worked with.

Thanks
 

Thanks Rob, I thought placing the bridge sign (if that's what it is) on the side defeated the whole purpose of the sign, which was supposed to be visible and readable from 50 yards distance or something like that distance, as the vehicle approached the bridge, ie the front-on view.


Mike

Bridge Sign
 

The first question I have is, what are is the provenance of the photograph? Is this a restored/repainted Sherman?

No idea
 

No idea Ed ... picked it up off FB Surviving Shermans group.

Mike

Downsview Airbase, Toronto, late 60's.
 

Mike, Dennis Cardy posted the photo. In the comments he wrote: "The photo was taken at Downsview Airbase, Toronto, late 60's. Shortly after it was released from DND stocks, and being acquired by a private museum. Those are the original markings it came with, which may give a clue as to its prior Service history."

To which Anthony Sewards replied: "there are so many questions in regards to this photo, markings are not standard Canadian markings. Standard markings for a Canadian issued Sherman , "should" have DND and a registration number 78-XXX which was done at Depot in Montreal upon arrival in the late 1940's, and if a Militia pool vehicle, that should be stenciled on the side as well. The person in the turret wearing a US Tanker Helmet, which is not Canadian issue post war. If the photo is of Canadian version is interesting, then the photo must be from the private collector , with new markings , and might be later than thought , only because they were not phased out until the early 1970's .Photo for reference of one of the Shermans that arrived at depot, with correct added markings upon arrival. Is there anymore information that can be given, does it still survive and possible location."

Source: https://www.facebook.com/groups/surv...1584430432012/

Thanks
 

Thanks Hanno - had not caught up with those replies until you posted them here.

Mike

Good to post the question on here, Mike. I don’t think the bridge classification sign is original, because of the location and the number (a 38 ton bridge classification did not exist in the 1960/70s).

There is the possibility that the markings, including the DND number being converted to a form of CFR number, was done by the militia. There has always been a bit of a disconnect between DND policy and militia units in these types of things. Officially the earlier DND numbers did not convert to the CAR/CFR formats...at least not in the 50s or early 60s.

I have seen bridge classes on the sides of vehicles, but not until the 90s and 2000 time period.

I kind of thought that was Dennis in the photo. I'm guessing this would have been Don Smith's tank which still resides in Southern Ontario.

A Little Analysis
 

It is unfortunate that there is no background information to this photograph so all we are left with is what has been captured in the image.

1. Bridge Classification Marking: I did a little digging through my sources and found that the manual Vehicle Markings Canada, 1947 lists several Sherman types including the "Sherman IV (up armd)" as 38. B-GL-303-008/SS-001 Staff Manuals, Volume 8, Marking of Field Force Vehicles and Guns, Change 1, 1981 lists the "Sherman Tank M4A2" as 36. So the '38' bridge classification found on the subject photograph is certainly within the parameters of the vehicle as prescribed by DND.

2. Location of Bridge Classification Marking: We don't have a complete frontal photograph of the vehicle in question, so there may well have been a bridge marking painted on the front. However, attached are three images from my archive taken in 1982 that show the bridge classification marking located on the right side of various vehicles. I did not take the time to dig deeper to see if I have anything from the 1970s, but the location of the marking does again appear to conform to DND practices at the time.

Attachment 141548

Attachment 141549

Attachment 141550

3. CFR Number: The CFR Number 45-78961 does conform to the CFR convention with 45 representing the vehicle year of manufacture and the five digits representing the number assigned to the specific vehicle on that year. These late war Shermans were originally destined for Russia and instead were purchased by Canada, which again supports 45 being used for the CFR number. Also 78-961 did represent a M4A2E8 Sherman that, according to the Arms and Armour site "https://canadianarmsandarmour.ca/", was in Sept 1962 assigned to the Central Command Pool and May 1965 was in the Central Ontario Pool, which may explain why this vehicle was photographed at Downsview as that was the location of 25 Supply Depot.

4. Turret Marking: The triangle turret marking, which indicated 'A Squadron' also conforms with the 1947 vehicle marking guidelines.

5. AFV Crew Helmet: The person in the turret is wearing what appears to be a U.S. M1938 AFV Helmet with U.S. Goggles. While the M1938 AFV Helmets do not appear to have been used by Canada in the post-war era (I don't see them listed in any of the supply catalogues I own), and if this photograph was taken at 25 Supply Depot in Downsview then there is the possibility that there may well have been a examples of this helmet type still languishing in stores that one was brought out for the photograph. Likewise the goggles are definitely U.S. manufacture and these were being used by Canada, the only thing I cannot tell from the photograph is if they were wartime or post-war manufacture.

Rob made a good point about DND policy and how it was interpreted which would certainly explain the markings. The contents/subject of this photograph just shows that knowing the context would certainly explain the anomalies in this image.