Came across this pic on a different forum this morning. Just didn’t look right and I had never seen it before. Went through all my references trying to find it and no luck. Went back and looked again to see if I could find it without the twin 50’s to see if it was altered from another pic. Again no luck.
Did a google image search and tineye reverse image search and came up with it in WarThunder forums (of course) and on Reddit but not really anywhere else. Did find it colorized and labeled as an M48A1 in Vietnam (obviously not correct) on some page (Pinterest I think).
I know I have seen pics of nam M48 with umbrella and tarp covers for shade, but those were not this pic.
Still not sure this isn’t an AI or edited pic. It’s so unusual that it should have appeared somewhere else before now.
And thus is the problem with the internet….someone posts this pic, captions it “M48A1 in Vietnam”. Then it gets reposted and reposted and becomes canon, especially for those who don’t know any better.
I don’t know when AI started being used to generate highly believable fakes, but i remember seeing this several years ago. It’s always been in the back of my mind to use the Legend stowage set and the MiniArt(?) parasol, whichever set it came in, to do that tank.
That is a real photo because i have seen it and wanted to make that m48 and if you look at the bottom right hand side you can see “1971 M.J. Roche” which is the person that took that photo
I believe it’s real myself, but even things like that copyright can be faked with a simple Paint program.
I looked at other things as well:
The lighting and shadows on the parasol match those on the tank and soldiers — they appear to be the same direction, softness, and exposure level.
The film grain pattern is uniform across the entire frame, including the parasol fabric and fringe. If it were fiddled with later, the parasol would likely show mismatched grain or edge blur.
The contrast and tone are consistent, suggesting the parasol wasn’t added later on.
There are no sharp transitions, halos, or pixel boundary mismatches. (Anyone else remember Sean Connery in Rising Sun?)
And finally, there are photos of Australian Cents with a very similar setup. I don’t believe I’ve ever seen them called into question.
Never saw this while in RVN, but wouldn’t surprise me at all if it was authentic. Those umbrellas could be found in PX’s at really large secure base camps, (I remember an area at the hospital at Cam Ranh had a few), so very possible.
As many of us on here can testify to, just because there are no photos, doesn’t mean that it didn’t happen or wasn’t real. I saw a lot of things in my time that I get those looks when I try to explain to people that claim to know all about it. An open mind is better than a closed one. Wayne
Which is clearly wrong, because the tank in the photo is an M48A3. (Plus: there were no M48A1s in Vietnam in the first place, only both types of M48A3 and a few M48A2Cs.)
What are the visible distinguishing features to tell if it is an A1 or A3?
Not being present in the area is obviously a clue but what should I be
looking for in a photo from “anywhere” dated “anytime” showing an M48something?
Which is exactly what I was alluding to when I said you can’t believe everything on the interweb. Funny what some close minded people will extrapolate from that.
The M48 and M48A1 had mudguards with rounded ends, a flat engine deck with grilles in the top but no grills in the hull rear, a commander’s cupola with an external machine gun, and individual headlights under round headlight guards with internal bracing. They also have five return rollers. (The differences between the M48 and -A1 are relatively small, and I’m not going to explain them here )
The M48A2 introduced angled mudguards and a different engine deck, raised and with grilles only around the sides, plus large grilles in the hull rear. The commander’s cupola was now a small turret with an internal machine gun, the headlights were contained in a “block” on each side under a flattened guard with no internal braces. Also, it had three return rollers instead of five.
The early M48A3 (often called “Mod. A”) had mudguards, machine-gun turret and engine deck like the A2, but with a large air cleaner box on the mudguard on each side, between the front and rear stowage bins. However, it also had headlights like the M48 and -A1. It also reverted to five return rollers.
The late M48A3 (“Mod. B”) had slightly different mudguards, stil angular but with the front braces on top instead of on the front, and with large X-shapes stamped into the front and rear mudguard sections. It also had a large riser with vision blocks under the machine-gun turret, M48A2-type headlights and extra “ledges” around the grilles in the hull rear.
There are a lot more details, but these are the main ID features.
To tell an -A3 from an -A2, the best way is to just look at whether there are air cleaners on the mudguards:
Quiz time! Can you tell which of the above is which?
Clearly an A3 because it has air cleaners between the long stowage bin next to the turret and the short bin beside the engine deck. (You can also tell it’s a “Mod. B” by the “ledge” above the rear grilles and the square taillight guards.)
An A2, as it has three return rollers, and also a front and a rear stowage bin but there’s no big box between them.
This is an A3: again, it has air cleaners, and it’s a Mod. A because it has the early type of headlights and guards.
A well-known photo that people often assume to be an A3 Mod. B (see the headlights), but it’s an A2: you can see it has braces on the sloping part of the front mudguard, and combined with the headlights and the lack of vision blocks under the machine-gun turret, that means an A2. You can also just see it doesn’t have air cleaners, which would stick up above the stowage bin.
An A3 Mod. B: the air cleaners are clearly visible, as are the A2 type headlights, plus the machine-gun turret sits high up enough that there must be a vision riser ring under it.
Aircleaner, can’t see any return rollers, rear mudguard angled, front is missing → A3
No aircleaner, three rollers, angled mudguards front & rear → A2
I see 4 return rollers (i.e. more than three so 1 is not in the photo), aircleaner, front mudguard braces on the sloping part → A3 mod A
Headlights in a cluster, flattened brushguards, mudguard brace on the slope, no vision blocks under the machine gun turret, no chunky air cleaner → A2
The photo from the first post in this topic, already sorted as an A3. The air cleaner box needs a trained eye to identify, no mudguards at all. 5 return rollers so A1 or A3, commanders hatch/turret is hidden/removed/replaced by the dual MG contraption. The headlights are in a cluster with a flattened brushguard → A3. With some good intentions I might willing to admit to seeing a mudguard brace up on the horizontal part which is an A3 feature.
It would be easy for a casual observer to make a mistake.
As it happens, when I was a Chief Clerk at a Brigade HQ in the south of England, I came across a fairly largish umbrella in Brit Army DPM (Disruptive Pattern Material) ie camouflaged, in one of those sort of military-surplus shops that seemed to sell everything from Swedish Army parkas to camouflaged soap dishes; anyway, I bought it and took it with me on exercise - I couldn’t really envisage a way to utilise it in barracks without provoking no small scorn. On exercise however, it was a different matter. These were the days when Goretex still had to be invented, or at least, introduced into the British Army, and I thought it would be an excellent piece of kit when dodging German or Danish downpours. My Brigade Commander thought so too, and “asked” if he could use it when hosting a visiting General from the UK; it was, he opined, just the job for escorting the dignitary as he left his staff car en route to either our HQ complex, or, the evening dinner planned with the Danes or Germans (I can’t quite remember where we were at the time) should inclement weather occur - which it did. The Brigadier was a bit of a showman.
It must have worked a treat; I never saw it again.