Have a look at the track links on this, i counted four different types on it and not just the odd one either. There were different ones all over it. Interesting for us modellers.
Not an uncommon thing with museum and/or display pieces. They will often just piece together whatever they need to complete a track run. Or, in this particular case, they may have deliberately done it in order to show off the different types of track used…you never know!
Still, it’s a neat way to see all the different track types used on the StuG III family. You’ve got hollow horn (no ice cleat), hollow horn (with ice cleat), solid horn (no ice cleat), solid horn (ice cleat), and crimped horn (light weight and/or with ice cleat) (5 types) all on the same track run. Those designs span the full 1943-45 time period in terms of style/types of track used so it’s cool to see them all together in one place, no question about it. [;)]
So this wasn’t common in the field? I never thought of that. I imagine most modelers would be shot if they attempted this in a competition. The judges would undoubtedly deduct points.
Eric,
Not usually, no. Whenever there was an overlap in terms of new track types being introduced, you can see the odd case in the reference photos where you will see 2 types of track being used on the same vehicle but that’s about the extent of it. Typically you might see solid horns on the spare track runs and hollow horns on the actual main runs for example. Since German tracks used ungreased pins, their lifespan wasn’t that great and tracks were replaced on a routine basis by the field maintenance companies once the tracks wore out. This wouldn’t have been done on an individual link-by-link basis to produce the type of hybrid you see in Andy’s pics but instead would’ve resulted, typically, in the entire track run being replaced with the types they had on hand at the time.
Complicating things a bit is the fact that many of the different track designs continued to be produced and used simultaneously vs. a clean cut-over…so you can see vehicles in the same unit with different track types depending if you look hard enough in the reference photos. Generally speaking, the variations in the track types were meant to be improvements over the previous type/design so there were benefits to transitioning vs. sticking with the older types as well. For example, the introduction of the ice cleat face was clearly meant to improve traction under the conditions found on the Eastern Front but may not have been so beneficial for Italy…but if that was the design being used at the production facility, then that’s what the vehicle would receive. Later on in the field, the tracks might be replaced at the unit level to use a different type of that’s what the supply company had on hand and/or that’s what the unit preferred to use for their local conditions. By war’s end, emphasis was on lighter and faster production to save materials and time respectively so when a vehicle was produced would also likely dictate what “shoes” it left the factory with when shipped to the depots. [;)]
For something like what Andy’s pics to happen, someone would have to have deliberately replaced the different links with those types which is what leads me to believe it was done on purpose vs. being a “survivor relic” that just happened to be a mish-mash of all the different links.