BGuthrie Photos: KY -- Fort Knox -- Patton Museum of Cavalry and Armor (main)

KY -- Fort Knox -- Patton Museum of Cavalry and Armor (main):

Bruce Guthrie Photos Home Page: [Click here] to go to Bruce Guthrie Photos home page.

Recognize anyone? If you recognize specific folks (or other stuff) and I haven't labeled them, please identify them for the world. Click the little pencil icon

underneath the file name (just above the picture). Spammers need not apply.

Slide Show: Want to see the pictures as a slide show? [Slideshow]

Copyrights: All pictures were taken by amateur photographer Bruce Guthrie (me!) who retains copyright on them. Free for non-commercial use with attribution. See the [Creative Commons] definition of what this means. "Photos (c) Bruce Guthrie" is fine for attribution. (Commercial use folks including AI scrapers can of course contact me.) Feel free to use in publications and pages with attribution but you don't have permission to sell the photos themselves. A free copy of any printed publication using any photographs is requested. Descriptive text, if any, is from a mixture of sources, quite frequently from signs at the location or from official web sites; copyrights, if any, are retained by their original owners.

Help? The Medium (Email) links are for screen viewing and emailing. You'll want bigger sizes for printing. [Click here for additional help]

Share: Facebook Twitter Digg
[1] PATTOM_081008_007.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[2] PATTOM_081008_010.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[3] PATTOM_081008_012.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[4] PATTOM_081008_017.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[5] PATTOM_081008_021.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[6] PATTOM_081008_029.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[7] PATTOM_081008_030.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[8] PATTOM_081008_040.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[9] PATTOM_081008_043.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[10] PATTOM_081008_047.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[11] PATTOM_081008_052.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[12] PATTOM_081008_058.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[13] PATTOM_081008_061.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[14] PATTOM_081008_064.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[15] PATTOM_081008_069.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[16] PATTOM_081008_076.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[17] PATTOM_081008_080.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[18] PATTOM_081008_085.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[19] PATTOM_081008_088.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[20] PATTOM_081008_092.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[21] PATTOM_081008_096.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[22] PATTOM_081008_099.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[23] PATTOM_081008_108.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[24] PATTOM_081008_112.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[25] PATTOM_081008_116.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[26] PATTOM_081008_124.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[27] PATTOM_081008_127.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[28] PATTOM_081008_131.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[29] PATTOM_081008_135.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[30] PATTOM_081008_140.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[31] PATTOM_081008_144.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[32] PATTOM_081008_149.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[33] PATTOM_081008_153.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[34] PATTOM_081008_161.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[35] PATTOM_081008_168.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[36] PATTOM_081008_172.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[37] PATTOM_081008_175.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[38] PATTOM_081008_179.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[39] PATTOM_081008_180.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[40] PATTOM_081008_184.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[41] PATTOM_081008_190.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[42] PATTOM_081008_194.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[43] PATTOM_081008_199.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[44] PATTOM_081008_202.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[45] PATTOM_081008_205.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[46] PATTOM_081008_207.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[47] PATTOM_081008_209.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[48] PATTOM_081008_212.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[49] PATTOM_081008_214.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[50] PATTOM_081008_217.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[51] PATTOM_081008_220.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[52] PATTOM_081008_222.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[53] PATTOM_081008_225.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[54] PATTOM_081008_228.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[55] PATTOM_081008_230.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[56] PATTOM_081008_233.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[57] PATTOM_081008_235.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[58] PATTOM_081008_238.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[59] PATTOM_081008_241.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[60] PATTOM_081008_244.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[61] PATTOM_081008_247.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[62] PATTOM_081008_251.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[63] PATTOM_081008_257.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[64] PATTOM_081008_260.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[65] PATTOM_081008_263.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[66] PATTOM_081008_266.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[67] PATTOM_081008_269.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[68] PATTOM_081008_272.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[69] PATTOM_081008_275.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[70] PATTOM_081008_278.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[71] PATTOM_081008_280.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[72] PATTOM_081008_282.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[73] PATTOM_081008_284.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[74] PATTOM_081008_289.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[75] PATTOM_081008_291.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[76] PATTOM_081008_294.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[77] PATTOM_081008_297.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[78] PATTOM_081008_300.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[79] PATTOM_081008_303.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[80] PATTOM_081008_306.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[81] PATTOM_081008_310.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[82] PATTOM_081008_313.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[83] PATTOM_081008_316.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[84] PATTOM_081008_318.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[85] PATTOM_081008_321.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[86] PATTOM_081008_324.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[87] PATTOM_081008_327.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[88] PATTOM_081008_330.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[89] PATTOM_081008_337.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[90] PATTOM_081008_340.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[91] PATTOM_081008_343.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[92] PATTOM_081008_345.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[93] PATTOM_081008_349.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[94] PATTOM_081008_352.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[95] PATTOM_081008_355.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[96] PATTOM_081008_358.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[97] PATTOM_081008_361.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[98] PATTOM_081008_364.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[99] PATTOM_081008_367.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[100] PATTOM_081008_370.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[101] PATTOM_081008_373.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[102] PATTOM_081008_381.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[103] PATTOM_081008_384.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[104] PATTOM_081008_389.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[105] PATTOM_081008_391.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[106] PATTOM_081008_398.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[107] PATTOM_081008_401.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[108] PATTOM_081008_404.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[109] PATTOM_081008_407.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[110] PATTOM_081008_414.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[111] PATTOM_081008_418.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[112] PATTOM_081008_426.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[113] PATTOM_081008_430.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[114] PATTOM_081008_434.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[115] PATTOM_081008_438.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[116] PATTOM_081008_441.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[117] PATTOM_081008_444.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[118] PATTOM_081008_447.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[119] PATTOM_081008_450.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[120] PATTOM_081008_454.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[121] PATTOM_081008_455.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[122] PATTOM_081008_458.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[123] PATTOM_081008_461.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[124] PATTOM_081008_464.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[125] PATTOM_081008_467.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[126] PATTOM_081008_470.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[127] PATTOM_081008_473.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[128] PATTOM_081008_477.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[129] PATTOM_081008_480.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[130] PATTOM_081008_483.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[131] PATTOM_081008_486.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[132] PATTOM_081008_489.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[133] PATTOM_081008_500.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[134] PATTOM_081008_503.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[135] PATTOM_081008_507.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[136] PATTOM_081008_511.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[137] PATTOM_081008_517.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[138] PATTOM_081008_522.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[139] PATTOM_081008_526.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[140] PATTOM_081008_533.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[141] PATTOM_081008_536.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[142] PATTOM_081008_542.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[143] PATTOM_081008_544.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[144] PATTOM_081008_551.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[145] PATTOM_081008_556.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[146] PATTOM_081008_562.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[147] PATTOM_081008_567.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[148] PATTOM_081008_571.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[149] PATTOM_081008_576.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[150] PATTOM_081008_581.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[151] PATTOM_081008_588.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[152] PATTOM_081008_604.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[153] PATTOM_081008_614.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[154] PATTOM_081008_616.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[155] PATTOM_081008_627.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[156] PATTOM_081008_632.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[157] PATTOM_081008_637.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[158] PATTOM_081008_642.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[159] PATTOM_081008_646.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[160] PATTOM_081008_650.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)
[161] PATTOM_081008_655.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[162] PATTOM_081008_657.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[163] PATTOM_081008_661.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)	[164] PATTOM_081008_668.JPG Medium (Email) (Bigger?)

Specific picture descriptions: Photos above with "i" icons next to the bracketed sequence numbers (e.g. "[1] ") are described as follows:
1. PATTOM_081008_012.JPG: WLA-42 Harley-Davidson Motorcycle Production of the Harley-Davidson Motorcycle WLA series of motorcycles was begun in 1939, in response to a request from the British Army. By 1940, the American Army began purchases of the WLA for use in reconnaissance and messenger services, as well as military police duties. The WLA-42 was a modification of the original WLA-39 design, adding changes required by the American Army. In all, over 88,000 WLA series motorcycles were made during the Second World War. The WLA-42 is powered by a 740cc V-type engine, which develops 23 horsepower, and is capable of speeds of over 60 mph. Heavier than many foreign motorcycles, the Harley-Davidson WLA weighs in at 535 pounds. Although very reliable, the WLA-42 saw only limited combat use with the US Army, being mostly replaced by the more useful Jeep.
2. PATTOM_081008_021.JPG: This is the actual model of the Bullion Depository as seen in the motion picture, "GOLDFINGER," a United Artists release. It was used by Goldfinger to brief his henchmen on the attack on the Depository. The model was presented to the Director of the Mint by the producers of the film, Harry Saltzman and Albert R. Broccoli. The Director in turn sent it to the Bullion Depository for donation to the Patton Museum.
3. PATTOM_081008_108.JPG: Assault Gun Mark III Model G This vehicle was recovered in 1994 from the bottom of a bog south of present day St. Petersburg Russia where it had broken through the ice in January of 1944. The vehicle had been participating in a local German counterattack against Soviet forces when it unknowingly crossed an open bog and bottomed out. Unable to recover the vehicle immediately, the crew took the radios, small arms and personal equipment. The area was overrun and the vehicle was never recovered. Soviet attempts to recover the vehicle after the war proved fruitless and no other attempts were made until the spring of 1994. It was recovered with a full ammunition load -- which was retained and, for safety, destroyed by the new Russian government. It was exchanged to the US Army in 1995.
4. PATTOM_081008_172.JPG: Major General Maurice Rose's helmet when he was killed in action on March 30 1945.
5. PATTOM_081008_184.JPG: These guys were loudly arguing about the numbers that were marked onto the various parts of the tank. I had thought the pieces were interchangeable but they weren't.
6. PATTOM_081008_205.JPG: Korean War: Onset of the Korean War: At the end of World War II, Korea divided into two nations: the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, north of the 38th parallel; and the Republic of Korea to the south. These two governments reflected the political leanings of their principal foreign backers. While the Soviet Union and China supported the government of North Korea, South Korea favored the western powers. The threat of war became a dominant characteristic of relations between North and South Korea. In June 1950, North Korea crossed the 38th parallel and invaded South Korea, seeking to overthrow the government by force. Moreover, the prior withdrawal of most US military forces made South Korea appear vulnerable.
7. PATTOM_081008_207.JPG: America Comes to South Korea's Defense: The invasion surprised American policymakers, but US military support was quickly committed to defending South Korea. President Truman believed that failure to respond would encourage further communist aggression in the region. The United Nations also endorsed support of South Korea and intervened. Under US leadership, military forces from 16 nations fought to sustain South Korea. In addition to the US, these nations included Britain, Australia, Belgium, Canada, Colombia, Ethiopia, France, Greece, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, the Philippines, Thailand, Turkey, and South Africa.
8. PATTOM_081008_209.JPG: America Unprepared for War: Few Troops, Fewer Tanks: On 30 June 1950, when General Douglas MacArthur received authorization to commit US troops, there were four under-strength American divisions available for deployment on occupation duty in Japan: the 7th, 24th, and 25th Infantry Divisions, as well as the 1st Cavalry Division. Normally, each division included one heavy tank battalion of M25 or M46 tanks, while each infantry regiment possessed one medium tank company of M4A3 Sherman tanks. Reconnaissance companies of M24 Chaffee light tanks rounded out the divisional armored force. At full strength, each division should have had about 150 tanks, but instead each had only one company of 17 light M24 Chaffee tanks. These 68 light tanks represented all the tanks available to blunt North Korea's armored spearhead. Worse, the M24 was designed for reconnaissance and security missions. It did not carry the armor or armament for the antitank role into which it was soon thrust.
9. PATTOM_081008_212.JPG: T-34/85 Tanks Spearhead the Invasion: Spearheading the North Korean invasion force of 80,000 men were the 140 tanks of the 105th Armored Brigade. Its four regiments used Soviet-built T-34/85 tanks. Heavily armored, mounting powerful 85mm guns, the T-34/85s were diesel powered and could travel 300 miles before refueling. This tank emerged from World War II with the reputation of being one of the best combat vehicles of the war. The North Koreans possessed nearly 280 of these tanks distributed among three armored brigades. The 105th Armored Brigade alone, however, represented 50 percent of this tank fleet. Facing this armored threat, the South Korean army lacked tanks and antitank weapons.
10. PATTOM_081008_214.JPG: The First American Tanks To Fight in Korea: On 4 July 1950, the first American tanks arrived in Pusan. The entire armored might of the 24th Infantry Division's 78th Heavy Tank Battalion initially consisted of A Company's fourteen M24 Chaffee light tanks. When the division left Japan, it possessed no heavy tanks due to a shortage of these vehicles and a desire to protect Japanese roads from damage. However, additional M24s soon followed A Company, throughout July, possessed the only American tanks in action. Unfortunately, these tanks proved to be in a poor state of repair. Between their first engagement on 10 July and 16 August, A Company lost all of its tanks, half due to enemy fire and half due to mechanical failures.
11. PATTOM_081008_217.JPG: Withdrawal to the Pusan Perimeter: The military situation faced the United Nations became desperate in July 1950. Lieutenant General Walton H. Walker, commander of the US 8th Army in Korea, selected Pusan for a final defensive line. The city remained the only major urban center still under UN control, and its port facilities made it vital for supply. US and South Korean troops fell back and regrouped around Pusan, established a defensive perimeter with newly arrived reinforcements. In addition to infantry units from the 5th Marines and the 25th and 2nd Infantry Divisions, the 89th Tank Battalion disembarked its M4 Sherman tanks on 31 July. The 5th Marines deployed a company of M26 Pershing medium tanks. Equipped with a 90mm gun and heavily armored, the Pershing proved more than a match for the T-34/85. On 1 August, LTG Walker issued the order for all troops to withdraw behind defensive positions on the east bank of the Naktong River. The perimeter formed a roughly rectangular area in the southeast corner of Korea. From north to south, the perimeter ran about 80 miles, and from east to west approximately 50 miles.
12. PATTOM_081008_220.JPG: Send More Tanks! To stop North Korea's armored thrust, American forces required the large-scale reinforcement of more powerful tanks. General MacArthur requested the full complement of tanks for each infantry division and an additional three medium tank battalions. To meet this demand, the Army dispatched the 6th, 70th, and 73rd Tank Battalions from the United States. The 70th and 73rd Tank Battalions were raised largely from school troops at Fort Knox and Fort Benning. Some of the tanks that equipped the 70th Tank Battalion were refurbished monument tanks only recently on display around Fort Knox.
13. PATTOM_081008_222.JPG: Infantry and Armor Reinforcements Arrive: The first three M26s to arrive in Korea were initially found in the Tokyo Ordnance Depot (a salvage yard) and rebuilt. The correct fan belts could not be found for the tank engines, which became prone to overheating. Thus constrained, the tanks were sent to Korea, where they constituted Task Force Fowler. However, within days of arriving in Pusan, this force was destroyed in combat, partially due to the tanks' inability to maneuver. Additional armor soon began to arrive. In late July, a medium tank company of the 8072 Provisional Tank Battalion (later renamed the 89th Tank Battalion) disembarked at Pusan. The 6th, 70th, and 73rd Tank Battalion arrived on 7 August. In mid-August, the 2nd Infantry Division arrived with its 72nd Tank Battalion. By month's end, the American tank force numbered 500 M4A3 Shermans, M26 Pershings, and newer M46 Pattons. They faced a North Korean armored force steadily eroded through combat. In September, American tanks outnumbered those of the North Koreans by five to one.
14. PATTOM_081008_225.JPG: Wearing Down the North Korean 105th Armored Brigade: The North Korean 105th Armored Brigade's T-34/85 tanks dominated the battlefield during the summer and early fall of 1950. They usually advanced boldly, knowing that the American and ROK troops could not stop them. They overran infantry positions, command posts, and artillery. However, continuous combat operations resulted in a steady rise in tank losses and maintenance work. American and South Korean soldiers mounted regular delaying actions and relied on close air support. The delivery of the new M20 3.5-inch rocket launcher, commonly called the 3.5-inch bazooka, finally provided the rifleman a means to destroy tanks. Meanwhile, the arrival of growing numbers of American tanks made possible more aggressive actions against North Korean armor. Nevertheless, the North Koreans planned a final offensive intended to eliminate the Pusan Perimeter. Between 31 August and 12 September, the North Koreans sought to breach UN lines, but after bitter fighting and heavy casualties, the offensive ended. As a result, much of North Korea's armor had been destroyed. Faced with more powerful American tanks and UN air attacks, the surviving North Korean vehicles were forced to move only at night and avoid prolonged encounters with American armor.
15. PATTOM_081008_228.JPG: Fire First, Hit First: Most of the principal tank-versus-tank engagements in the Korean War occurred between July and November 1950. By then, the North Korean armored force was largely destroyed and the Chinese possessed few vehicles. Analysis of these early tank actions revealed that American tanks performed three times more effectively than North Korean tanks. The North Koreans lost a full 25 percent of their total tank force to American tank gunnery. Air attack, handheld anti-tank rockets, and artillery were the next greatest tank killers. The study attributed these results to the tendencies of American tankers to fire first (about 60 percent of the time) and achieve a higher first-round hit probability (64 percent vs 38 percent). Interviews with captured North Korean tankers revealed that many of them had very little training.
16. PATTOM_081008_230.JPG: MSG Ernest Kouma: 72nd Tank Battalion Medal of Honor: MSG Kouma earned the medal of honor for his actions against the enemy in the vicinity of Angok, Korea. His unit was supporting infantry elements along the Naktong River. Near midnight on 31 August 1950, approximately 500 North Koreans crossed the river and attacked. The American position suffered heavy casualties and began to withdraw. Kouma's unit was directed to delay the North Koreans while a second defensive position was established. In the brutal nighttime melee, Kouma's tank became isolated and the only remaining obstacle to the enemy advance. He opted to defend his position against repeated assaults throughout the night. During one such engagement, his tank became surrounded. He climbed out of the turret and manned the exposed .50-caliber machine-gun. When ammunition ran low, he used his sidearm and threw grenades to keep enemy soldiers from reaching the tank. After nine hours, Kouma finally withdrew his tank. He fought his way through eight miles of enemy-held territory before reaching friendly lines. Although wounded, he attempted to resupply his tank and return to the fight. Personally credited with killing an estimated 250 soldiers, Kouma's stand permitted a new defensive line to be established, thereby stabilizing the front in his area.
17. PATTOM_081008_233.JPG: Not Ideal Tank Country: The Korean Peninsula: The Korean peninsula is predominantly rough mountainous country. Flatter terrain lies largely on the west coast, but it is subject to flooding between June and October. It is also highly cultivated and crisscrossed with irrigation ditches, canals, and dikes. All of these conditions hindered the employment of armored units. Therefore, tanks often maneuvered along roadways and dry riverbeds. Bridges, however, often proved too weak to support tank traffic. In these confining circumstances, North Korean and later Chinese forces relied extensively on mines to further channel or block American tank movements. Mines ultimately accounted for 34 percent of the tank losses in Korea.
18. PATTOM_081008_235.JPG: Armor Missions in Korea: The rugged nature of the Korean terrain ensured the primacy of the infantryman. No armored divisions deployed to Korea and there were no large-scale armored battles similar to those in World War II. However, tanks performed a number of critical missions. Frequently, they operated in companies or platoons to provide infantry support. Tanks spearheaded assaults, supported attacks with firepower, and helped to evacuate wounded soldiers. In the latter stages of the war, tanks served as mobile pill boxes amid infantry strong points on high ground facing Chinese forces. Tanks also served as auxiliary artillery by driving up the mountainous slopes to increase the elevation of their gun tubes for indirect fire.
19. PATTOM_081008_260.JPG: Bowling Alley: In mid-August 1950, the North Korean 1st, 13th, and 15th Divisions, reinforced with 21 new T-34/85 tanks, attacked Taegu. There, the North Koreans encountered UN forced reinforced with a regimental combat team from the American 25th Infantry Division. This team included infantry, artillery, and a tank company equipped with M26 Pershing tanks, which proved instrumental in defeating the North Korean attack during a week of combat. The North Koreans resorted to a night assault, but American tank gunners destroyed much of the attacking force by firing at the muzzle flashes of the T-34/85s. Most of the North Korean attacked followed the course of a valley, swept by UN fire. Hence, the area was nicknamed the "bowling alley." According to the American 8th Army diary, "The rounds fired down the Alley hit the rocks and armor in the area and sounded almost like a bowling alley." The repulse of the North Korean attack helped set the stage for a major UN counteroffensive.
20. PATTOM_081008_263.JPG: Invasion of North Korea and Chinese Intervention: The stabilization of the Pusan perimeter and the steady arrival of reinforcements permitted UN forces to mount a large-scale counteroffensive. On 16 September 1950, General MacArthur led a successful American amphibious attack at Inchon, on South Korea's west coast. From Inchon, MacArthur's troops moved eastward to cut the North Korean supply lines. This advance was coordinated with an attack northward from the Pusan perimeter. The combined drives smashed the North Koreans and drove them back across the 38th parallel. The American-led UN offensive continued into North Korea, overrunning much of that country. However, Chinese Communist Forces began to enter North Korea in October. Unaware of this danger, UN columns continued to pursue surviving North Korean units to the Yalu River, anticipating the war's end by Christmas. The Chinese, however, mounted a major winter offensive that inflicted heavy casualties on UN forces, drove them back across the 38th parallel, and captured Seoul, South Korea's capital. Seoul was retaken, but the UN objectives for the rest of the war remained limited to blocking Chinese offensives along the 38th parallel.
21. PATTOM_081008_266.JPG: Tank-Infantry Coordination: During World War II, tank and infantry units encountered problems coordinating their efforts at the company and platoon levels. These difficulties were noted and corrective measures taken, including the incorporation of tanks within infantry divisions. However, in the opening phases of the Korean War, many of the same tactical coordination problems re-emerged. Consequently, the same lessons from World War II had to be relearned. Too often, tanks tended to lose contact with accompanying riflemen, or infantry withdrew, leaving tanks in unsupported exposed positions. The enemy exploited this lack of coordination. In November 1950, for example, the Chinese overran two battalions of the 9th Infantry Regiment and their supporting tanks. While the infantry deployed in high ground, the tanks remained road-bound. Thus separated, the Chinese defeated the armor and infantry separately. Tanks without infantry were particularly vulnerable at night to infiltrating Chinese soldiers, who attacked at close range with satchel charges, anti-tank rockets, and recoilless rifles.
22. PATTOM_081008_269.JPG: Combined Arms in the Mountains: Battle of Chipyong-ni: Gradually, tanks and infantry learned to work closely together in all operations. Combined arms action exploited the strengths of each and provided a versatile mix of capabilities. In February 1951, the 23rd Regimental Combat Team became involved in a defensive engagement with Chinese forces known as the Battle of Chipyong-ni. Surrounded, the infantry held the town against repeated human wave assaults, sustained by close air support during the day and air dropped supplies at night. Tanks of the 5th Cavalry Regiment attacked to relieve the besieged regimental combat team. They fought their way into the town and then launched a combined strike with the infantry to destroy the remaining Chinese. This battle marked a shift in initiative from the Chinese to the UN forces. The success demonstrated the effectiveness of armor, infantry, artillery, and aircraft working together to overcome an enemy in rugged mountainous terrain. General Matthew Ridgway declared the battle the most important combined arms action of the war. Tactical lessons learned there found application throughout the UN operations for the remainder of the conflict. Moreover, the victory ended fears that UN forces might be driven from the Korean peninsula.
23. PATTOM_081008_272.JPG: Holding the Line: By the spring of 1951, the front line had stabilized. For the remainder of the war, UN forces fought to keep Chinese and North Korean forces pinned along the 38th parallel. Offensives proved limited in scope, largely focused on making existing positions more secure. For the next two years, the war focused on blunting Chinese offensives and launching attacks on specific hilltops or ridgelines. In some ways, the fighting became reminiscent of the trench warfare of World War I. In these conditions, tanks generally fought as small units in a defensive posture. They buttressed infantry positions, provided a mobile reserve, and sometimes acted as reinforcing artillery. After prolonged negotiations, an armistice ended fighting on 27 July 1953. thanks to American and UN intervention, South Korea retained its sovereignty, but the 38th parallel became a fortified border and a strong American military presence remained in South Korea to deter aggression from North Korea. Today, American soldiers are still stationed in South Korea.
24. PATTOM_081008_275.JPG: Vietnam War: Background to the Vietnam War: The defeat of French military forces by Viet Minh soldiers at Dien Bein Phu in 1954 signaled the collapse of French colonial power in Southeast Asia. The French withdrew from the region and Vietnam split into two states. The Vietnamese Democratic Republic, or North Vietnam, embraced communism and received support from the Soviet Union and the Peoples Republic of China. Conversely, the Republic of Vietnam, or South Vietnam, sought to remain an independent, non-communist state. The United States supported South Vietnam to block the further spread of communism in Southeast Asia. However, the new South Vietnamese government proved unpopular, and its influence proved greatest in urban areas, rather than in the countryside where the bulk of South Vietnamese government proved unpopular, and its influence proved greatest in urban areas, rather than in the countryside where the bulk of South Vietnamese resided. North Vietnam sought to reunite Vietnam under its own influence. The National Front for the Liberation of Southern Vietnam formed to achieve this goal. A mix of communist and Vietnamese nationalist organizations, the National Liberation Front, began a guerrilla campaign to undermine the South Vietnamese government in 1957. The National Liberation front, also known as the Viet Cong, began to infiltrate soldiers into South Vietnam, resupplying them through Cambodia and Laos along a route that became the Ho Chi Minh Trail.
25. PATTOM_081008_278.JPG: American Military Support of South Vietnam: The United States supported South Vietnam with military equipment and advisers. The latter helped the South Vietnamese army resist the Viet Cong guerrillas. However, despite some successes, the year 1963 brought a string of defeats. A political crisis resulted, triggering an army coup that overthrew the existing government. The Viet Cong also escalated their activities. The United States responded b increasing the flow of military assistance and the number of advisers in South Vietnam. In August 1964, a minor skirmish occurred between US naval vessels and North Vietnamese torpedo boats in the Tonkin Gulf. This event became the justification for expanding the level of US involvement in South Vietnam. The US Senate passed the Tonkin Gulf Resolution, giving President Lyndon B Johnson broad powers to expand the conflict. In 1965, American military forces abandoned their advisory status and conventional combat units were sent to fight the Viet Cong. A large-scale troop build-up followed to ensure South Vietnam's continued independence. American soldiers were motivated by a belief that a communist victory in South Vietnam would lead to communist domination of all of Southeast Asia. This fear constituted the "domino theory" and propelled American involvement in the Vietnam War.
26. PATTOM_081008_280.JPG: North Vietnamese Strategy: Revolutionary War: The North Vietnamese adopted a strategy derived form Chinese communists and used successfully to achieve communist domination of China during the Chinese Civil War. This strategy was outlined by the Chinese communist leader Mao Tse-Tung. He emphasized the importance of securing popular support for guerrilla war intended to establish a communist state. To do so, he described a three-stage process. First, communist forces must organize themselves and consolidate their power base among the population. The second state witnessed the expansion of communist control. Finally, revolutionary forces undertook major military operations to destroy opposition on the battlefield. These three stages corresponded to the parallel escalation of military operations, which progressed from small-scale guerrilla operations to large-scale conventional battles. The Viet Minh successfully applied this model against the French, culminating in the latter's defeat at Dien Bien Phu. They also followed a similar strategy against the South Vietnamese and their American allies.
27. PATTOM_081008_282.JPG: Early Absence of Armor: General William Westmoreland assumed command over the growing American presence in Vietnam. Analyzing the type of military force required to combat the Viet Cong, he initially opted not to consider armored units. This decision was based on three considerations: (1) The terrain of Vietnam was considered unsuitable to armor operations, despite the use of armor throughout the Pacific Theater in World War II. (2) Limitations on the number of troops to be deployed led Westmoreland to favor infantry formations, since they required less logistics support and provided a better ration of combat-to-support personnel. (3) Armored units heightened the visibility of the American presence at a time when the US Army did not want to be seen as taking over the conduct of the war. Initially, Army units deployed in Vietnam without their tank units. Marine Corps forces, however, arrived overseas with their organic tank units.
28. PATTOM_081008_284.JPG: US Armor Makes an Impression: In spite of their small numbers, the few armored units that did arrive in Vietnam soon demonstrated their effectiveness. In November 1965, M113s from the 1st Infantry Division's cavalry squadron repulsed a series of guerrilla attacks near the village of Ap Bau Bang. The squadron received fire from mortars, recoilless rifles, and automatic weapons, yet still inflicted substantial losses on the Viet Cong attackers. The squadron lost five vehicles, but had few casualties. This action served to illustrate the potential effectiveness of mounted units and it gained the attention of senior leaders.
29. PATTOM_081008_289.JPG: The Value of Armor Reconsidered: Send More Tanks! The early successes of American armor, together with the experiences of South Vietnamese mounted units, encouraged a re-evaluation of the decision to minimize deployments of armored forces. The Armor Center dispatched a team to South Vietnam to conduct a formal terrain analysis. The team found that, contrary to earlier beliefs, much of the country could be traversed by tracked vehicles throughout the year. These results encouraged an expanded armored presence. When the 25th Infantry Division deployed to Vietnam, it did so with its tanks and armored vehicles. In March 1966, the 1st Battalion, 69th Armor, 25th Infantry Division, became the first Army tank battalion to arrive in Vietnam.
30. PATTOM_081008_291.JPG: 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment is Sent to Vietnam: In March 1966, the 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment was alerted for movement to Vietnam. In preparation, the regiment modified its M113 personnel carriers by adding more machine guns and gun shields. The resultant armored cavalry assault vehicle (ACAV) reflected lessons learned from the South Vietnamese army and American forces already in Vietnam. The Blackhorse Regiment arrived in Vietnam during September 1966 and employed tanks, ACAVs, artillery, and helicopters to hunt Viet Cong guerrillas. Its area of operations included the provinces around Saigon, extending to the Cambodian border. The regiment's mobility permitted it considerable operational flexibility. During the 1968 Tet Offensive, for example, it moved 100 kilometers in 8 hours to reach Saigon, where it then fought through the streets to destroy infiltration Viet Cong. In July 1968, Colonel George S. Patton, the son of the great World War II general, assumed command. He routinely operated the regiment off-road in search of enemy concentrations. The 11th ACR conducted a series of search-and-destroy missions that cut Viet Cong supply routes between Saigon and the Cambodian border.
31. PATTOM_081008_294.JPG: Types of Armor Employed in Vietnam: The principal combat vehicles used by American mounted forces in Vietnam included the M48A3 Patton tank, the M551 Armored Reconnaissance Airborne Assault Vehicle (Sheridan), and the M113 in varied configurations. The M48A3 equipped the tank companies and cavalry squadrons. The M113 equipped the mechanized infantry and cavalry. In 1969, the M551 began to replace the M113 and M48A3 in select units. The Viet Cong possessed no armor. The North Vietnamese possessed many vehicles supplied by the Soviet Union. However, this armor played little role in the war until American forces began withdrawing. North Vietnamese armor then spearheaded conventional attacks into the South and directly contributed to the final collapse of South Vietnam. Prior to these operations, North Vietnamese armor was encountered by the US on only two occasions. In both cases, the tanks employed were light, amphibious PT-76s that proved no match for American firepower.
32. PATTOM_081008_297.JPG: The Armored Soldier's Fight: The enemy generally avoided infantry assaults on positions occupied by US armor. Instead, mots combat engagements involving tanks, armored cavalry, and mechanized infantry resulted form meeting engagements (encounters on patrol), ambushes, counter-ambushes, or the reinforcement of embattled friendly units in contact. Ambushes using RPG-2s and recoilless rifles were particularly dangerous to the M113s and M551 Sheridans that lacked the heavier armor of the M48A3. The introduction of the improved RPG-7 also posed a lethal threat to the M48A3. However, the land mine proved the most dangerous weapon employed against American armor. Mines accounted for 75 percent of American armor losses. In a theater of operations with no front line, mine warfare was so prolific that frequently new mines would be placed as quickly as old mines were located and removed. Unfortunately, too many mines were discovered only when a vehicle drove over them.
33. PATTOM_081008_300.JPG: Counter-Ambush Tactics: Sudden ambush by RPGs, mortars, and small arms, became a common experience in Vietnam. Armor and cavalry units therefore developed battle drills to shape their response to such attacks. Generally, vehicles were instructed to drive through an ambush while returning fire against suspected enemy positions. Once clear of the immediate ambush, the column regrouped and counterattacked, relying on its armor, firepower, and simple aggressiveness to overrun the ambushers. In some cases, helicopters or mortar support were also used to suppress and destroy hostile forces. If time and circumstances permitted, a flanking move was undertaken to prevent the ambushing forces from escaping. In every case, however, armored units were encouraged to attack and maintain contact with an otherwise elusive enemy. Maneuver and firepower were then exploited to eliminate the erstwhile attackers.
34. PATTOM_081008_303.JPG: Force Protection: The Herringbone Formation: The dense foliage of the Vietnamese countryside provided ample cover for ambushers. In the event a column was caught by surprise, a common defensive tactic was to have the combat vehicles immediately deploy into a herringbone pattern, with alternating vehicles turning to the right and left side of the road and directing immediate and intense fire with all their weapons fire toward the outside of the thin perimeter they had thus formed. This perimeter would provide some protection for more vulnerable vehicles on the road. The herringbone formation was also used to provide security when vehicles halted.
35. PATTOM_081008_306.JPG: Thunder Runs: To combat enemy sappers who seemed to lay mines almost as quickly as the American units left the area, high-speed patrols were launched up roadways where the sappers were operating. Referred to as "thunder runs," these random patrols sought to preempt mine laying and ambush preparations. The columns generally comprised armored vehicles and were intended to engage the enemy. When encounters occurred, the columns relied on firepower, mobility, and armor protection to destroy enemy forces. In many respects, the thunder run constituted a reconnaissance in force, since they tested enemy preparations and deliberately sought contact. Often, a thunder run preceded a supply or troop convoy to ensure their safe passage. The thunder run proved one of the more effective means of taking the fight to the enemy.
36. PATTOM_081008_310.JPG: Armor and Air Cavalry Cooperation: In another significant departure from conventional doctrine, armored units, traditionally used as the exploitation force, often engaged enemy forces, while airmobile infantrymen deployed to outmaneuver them. Helicopters permitted airmobile infantry to move rapidly to block enemy movements. They relied on the firepower of helicopter gunships, which mounted an array of rockets and machine guns. Air cavalry provided armored columns a means of vertically enveloping the enemy. New doctrine soon evolved to exploit the relative strengths of ground and air cavalry. Given the extremely dense foliage, ground units frequently relied on air cavalry to guide them to their objectives and provide security from the air while in motion.
37. PATTOM_081008_313.JPG: Armor's Many Missions: By the autumn of 1967, when a substantial armored force had been built up in Vietnam, US Army doctrine identified the missions of armored cavalry as reconnaissance, security, and economy of force. In Vietnam, armored cavalry also performed convoy escort, search and destroy (mounted and dismounted), cordon and search, search and clear, route clearing, and base defense. Tank battalions were often tasked to link up with airmobile infantry, once the latter had been landed. Tanks with attached infantry also executed missions similar to those of armored cavalry. Both tank and armored cavalry units provided security for land clearing teams and supported the pacification program. On some occasions, tanks were employed in an indirect mode, supplementing available artillery.
38. PATTOM_081008_316.JPG: Dispersed Operations: Another notable departure from standard armored doctrine lay in the deliberate employment of tanks and mounted units in small numbers dispersed over broad areas. Armored doctrine was oriented toward fighting massed Warsaw Pact formations in Central Europe. However, the absence of any significant armored threat in Vietnam, coupled with the universal demand for the firepower and mobility of armor, resulted in the detachment of armor platoons and companies to conduct separate missions. Such dispersion, however, created difficulties for logistics and maintenance support. Many armored units, operating far from established American base camps, routinely conducted their own maintenance and vehicle recovery operations -- whether equipped to do so or not.
39. PATTOM_081008_318.JPG: Mechanized and Armored Combat Operations in Vietnam (MACOV): The employment of armor to Vietnam proposed doctrinal and training challenges for mounted units. The operational environment of Vietnam differed dramatically from the Central Europe setting and Warsaw Pact threat on which armored doctrine was based. To determine more effective means of employing armor in a counterinsurgency role, the Army undertook a study of mounted operations in Vietnam. This work, known as the Mechanized and Armored Combat Operations in Vietnam (MACOV) study, was completed in 1966-1967. It drew on the experiences of the US Army, Marine Corps, and South Vietnamese mechanized infantry, cavalry, and tank units. The final result was an exhaustive analysis that served as a tactical guidebook for the use of armor in counterinsurgency operations.
40. PATTOM_081008_321.JPG: Large-Scale Operations Against the Viet Cong: Armor soon emerged as a key player in battling the Viet Cong. The mechanized units, which originally deployed without armor, were re-equipped in country. The increase in armor strength permitted the conduct of large scale search-and-destroy operations that incorporated large numbers of vehicles. In these missions, mounted forces searched through jungle areas, seeking contact with the Viet Cong. When they did encounter the enemy, they attacked with massed firepower. Often such missions involved an entire brigade. Operations Cedar Falls and Junction City exemplified the use of army in search-and-destroy operations. In both cases, allied units moved into War Zone C and the Iron Triangle, notorious enemy-controlled strongholds near Saigon. Junction City resulted in some of the fiercest combat of the war. Mounted units used their mobility to help ensnare hostile forces, whose only chance of escape lay in fighting their way through the cordon. In doing so, many Viet Cong cells were eliminated. During the course of Operation Junction City, many American fire support bases became subject to direct assaults, triggering engagements at Prek Klok II, Ap Bau Bang II, and Fire Base Gold.
41. PATTOM_081008_324.JPG: Armor on the Demilitarized Zone; Separating North and South Vietnam was a demilitarized zone (DMZ). North Vietnamese conventional forces routinely infiltrated across the DMZ to attack targets in South Vietnam. However, the arrival of the 1st Brigade, 5th Infantry Division, in 1968 posed an obstacle to them. This unit included mechanized infantry, armor, and cavalry. It operated as a concentrated mass, capable of rapid response to enemy incursions. After several clashes with this mechanized force, the North Vietnamese sought to avoid contact. The 1st Brigade therefore shifted its focus to identifying, tracking, and destroying North Vietnamese and Viet Cong personnel throughout its area of operations. The unit achieved considerable success in part by working closely with local South Vietnamese soldiers and agents. In this manner, important operations linkages were established among the brigade, civilians, and South Vietnamese government and military personnel.
42. PATTOM_081008_327.JPG: Vietnamization and American Withdrawal: In 1969, the Nixon administration began working to end America's involvement in Vietnam. General Creighton Abrams assumed command of American forces in Vietnam and became responsible for planning an American exit strategy that would not leave South Vietnam unable to defend itself. The plan required the gradual removal of US forces, simultaneous with a large-scale influx of military equipment for the South Vietnamese military. Training and close cooperation between Vietnamese and American units also helped to shape the tactics and command techniques of the former. Diplomatically, the United States worked with China and the Soviet Union to reduce the flow of military support to North Vietnam. By 1972, responsibility for the war's conduct had largely passed to the South Vietnamese. As American forces returned home, armor and cavalry remained among the last to leave. They were considered the most effective ground forces, since they combined firepower, mobility, and protection.
43. PATTOM_081008_330.JPG: Invasion of Cambodia: Disrupting the Enemy's Lines of Communication: When American forces began to withdraw from South Vietnam, a major operation was launched into Cambodia in 1970. This operation targeted the Ho Chi Minh Trail, by then a sophisticated supply route capable of supporting vehicular traffic. In the last large-scale commitment of armored forces during the war, American mounted troops attacked the Ho Chi Minh Trail and enemy staging areas in Cambodia. On 1 May 1970, the 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment attacked with supporting South Vietnamese infantry. Communist forces fought stubbornly, but they proved unable to resist the firepower of mounted combat units and suffered severe losses. The armored cavalry penetrated 60 kilometers in one day, with only two killed and sixteen wounded. North Vietnamese losses totaled 138 for the same period and thousands for the entire operation. In addition, large caches of supplies were found and destroyed. As a result of these actions, communist forces temporarily lost their ability to conduct offensive operations.
44. PATTOM_081008_337.JPG: 1972 Easter Offensive: South Vietnamese troops began to assume the military roles previously held by American units as these returned to the United States. It was expected that an all-out attack would be launched against South Vietnam by the North Vietnamese once the Americans left the country. The attack actually occurred when 70,000 American troops were still present, but most of these soldiers were support rather than combat soldiers. The offensive sought to defeat South Vietnamese forces and embarrass the United States as it withdrew from Vietnam. The massive attacks began near Easter 1972, and became known as the "Easter Offensive." South Vietnamese forces conducted counterattacks, which forced a communist withdrawal. American air and logistics support played a critical role in sustaining the South Vietnamese and interfering with communist operations. In an aerial campaign, known as the "Linebacker Offensive," US aircraft attacked North Vietnam's economic and military infrastructure, undermining its ability to continue operations and ultimately ending the offensive. The Easter Offensive demonstrated the growing ability of South Vietnamese forces to fight effectively without significant assistance from American ground forces.
45. PATTOM_081008_340.JPG: South Vietnam's Demise: Following the defeat of the Easter Offensive, North Vietnam agreed to a cease-fire in 1973. The termination of hostilities lasted two years, during which the last American soldiers returned to the United States. In 1975, the North Vietnamese launched a large-scale invasion of South Vietnam, overrunning that country and unifying all of Vietnam under a communist banner.
46. PATTOM_081008_343.JPG: Armored Casualties: During the course of the Vietnam War, 725 US Army armor soldiers died in combat. Symptomatic of the high-profile role played by armored units, the highest loss rate for any MOS present in Vietnam proved to be 11E (Armor Crewman). Scouts suffered 1,127 killed during the war.
47. PATTOM_081008_345.JPG: Cold War: The Cold War Begins: In the aftermath of World War II, tension emerged between the Soviet Union and its wartime allies Britain and the United States, who feared the growth of Soviet influence in Europe. Wartime operations had resulted in pro-Soviet communist governments assuming power in Poland, Rumania, Hungary, and Bulgaria. Yugoslavia, although communist controlled, remained independent of Soviet or Western influence. The Iron Curtain: Along the boundary between East and West Germany, a political, economic, and cultural divide existed. Over time, this boundary became fortified and symbolized the tension between the democracies of western Europe and the United States and the communist states of eastern and southern Europe. In 1946, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill dubbed this line an "iron curtain," a term which remained in use throughout the Cold War years.
48. PATTOM_081008_349.JPG: The Communist Threat and Containment: Successive American governments believed that communism would continuously seek to expand its influence globally through a variety of means that were not limited to military conflict. Therefore, the United States sough to contain communism and prevent its spread, using political, economic, and military measures. In Europe, the Marshall Plan aimed at rebuilding war-torn nations. This plan provided massive United States aid to such nations. It also served to strengthen the ability of central and western European nations to resist communism. In 1949, many of these nations joined the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), a military alliance intended to deter Soviet aggression. Military strength would support the political goals of containment.
49. PATTOM_081008_352.JPG: American Military Strategy During the Cold War: Over the forty-four years that the United States acted as the guardian against communist aggression in Europe, American strategy, based on a mix of conventional forces and nuclear weapons, changed to meet the changing threat.
50. PATTOM_081008_355.JPG: "The over-all mission of our Armed Forces in unmistakably clear. It is to support our national policies and at the same time to maintain the peace. It is the deterrence of war which is our primary objective -- not only the deterrence of the general atomic war about which we hear so much, but also the deterrence or the suppression of situations short of general war which if unarrested may lead to the attrition of our world position, or to be extension of hostilities into the great general war which it is our primary purpose to avoid. In my judgment, all of our Armed Forces -- the Army, Navy, and Air Force -- must justify their existence by their contribution, present or potential, to the deterrence of war." -- General Maxwell B. Taylor, Chief of Staff, December 1958 From Massive Nuclear Retaliation to Massive Tank Battles: In the 1950s, the United States relied on a policy of massive retaliation to counter Soviet actions. Aggression was to be deterred through the threat of American nuclear devastation of the Soviet Union. The utility of massive retaliation diminished as the Soviets began to acquire their own arsenal of nuclear weapons. Therefore, in the 1960s, American defense policy began to emphasize a greater mix of nuclear and conventional force capabilities. An expansion of American military force did occur throughout the decade, but much of it was drawn into the Vietnam War. Indeed, until that conflict's end, a fear existed that the Soviets would exploit American involvement in Vietnam through direct military action in Central Europe.
51. PATTOM_081008_358.JPG: Defending Against The Surprise Communist Attack: The Arab-Israeli War of October 1973 added a new dimension to American Cold War strategy and preparations. In that conflict, the Untied States supported Israel, while the Soviet Union provided military aid to the Arab nations. The surprise nature of the Arab attack highlighted the potential nature of a broader conflict in Europe. With little advance notice, Warsaw Pact forces might cross the border with West Germany. American plans assumed the availability of sufficient time to mobilize and deploy large numbers of troops in Europe to blunt an invasion, but the prospect of a surprise invasion forced a re-evaluation of plans and preparedness. Consequently, the Army focused on improving the combat readiness of its active component and expediting National Guard and Reserve mobilization and training. In 1973, the Army established the Training and Doctrine Command to oversee readiness.
52. PATTOM_081008_361.JPG: The Need to Save Europe: From Mobile to Active Defenses: In Europe, American military planners expected to wage a mobile defense to blunt, then stop, and finally counterattack a Soviet invasion. However, this strategy required American forces to possess the ability to maneuver, including the voluntary abandonment of territory. By the 1970s, the notion of abandoning any part of West Germany had become politically untenable. Therefore, the US Army began to develop a new doctrine, known as "Active Defense," to guide operations. This doctrine focused on the importance of winning the first battle against numerically superior odds through emphasis of firepower, technology, maneuver, supporting fires, and an array of intelligence assets. Evening the Odds in Battle: REFORGER: To ensure the rapid reinforcement of American formations in Europe, the Army also began a series of exercises in the late 1960s known as the Return of Forces to Germany (REFORGER). American forces deployed from the United States to Germany where they were immersed in training maneuvers. REFORGER provided experience in moving troops to the anticipated battlefields of Europe and helped improve readiness. The numerous REFORGER assignments over the decades also served to demonstrate American military ability to the Soviets.
53. PATTOM_081008_364.JPG: AirLand Battle: A True Combined Arms Fight: In the 1980s, the Army adopted a new doctrine designed to defeat a Warsaw Pact invasion of Central Europe by waves of attacking forces. In the past, the Army had intended to defend against each wave in succession. However, the magnitude of the likely Soviet attack force made it uncertain whether such a defensive posture would succeed. Therefore, the Army developed a concept for defeating each attacking echelon at once. Known as AirLand Battle, this doctrine relied on the integrated operation of conventional ground forces, helicopters, and aircraft. It also exploited the capabilities of several new weapons systems, known as the "Big Five," which included the Abrams main battle tank, the Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle, the Blackhawk utility helicopter, the Apache attack helicopter, and the Patriot air defense system. Training also continued to improve, especially once the National Training Center (NTC) opened in 1982. At the NTC, mock battles were fought against a permanent opposition force (OPFOR) modeled on Soviet combat organizations. All these measures endured that the US force buildup of the 1980s resulted in better trained, better equipped, and more effective Soldiers [sic] poised to defeat a Soviet invasion. Their presence helped to end the Cold War.
54. PATTOM_081008_367.JPG: Armor in the Cold War: At the tactical level, armored units constituted the backbone of America's ability to defend against a Soviet attack. However, post World War II demobilization reduced the number of armored divisions from 16 to one. The 2nd Armored Division remained the only active armored formation in the Army until 1951. In that year, the 1st Armored Division was reactivated, followed by the 3rd and 4th Armored Divisions in 1955. From 1953 to 1968, these four formations constituted the bulk of the Army's active component armored spearhead. They were supposed by an additional six National Guard armored divisions. Additional armored assets were also available in the tank battalions that became organic to infantry divisions after World War II, ensuring at least a minimal armored presence wherever infantry deployed.
55. PATTOM_081008_370.JPG: US Armor Training in Germany: Inside the Federal Republic of Germany, armored units conducted training on military complexes that once supported the German Wehrmacht, such as Hohenfels, Grafenwohr, and Vilseck. The threat posed by the nearby presence of Warsaw Pact forces ensured continuous attention to maintenance, training, and overall combat readiness. Units might be called to respond to an invasion at any time, regardless of weather. Training reflected this reality, despite the hardship this sometimes imposed on soldiers. For cavalry units, regular border patrols offered the constant possibility of direct contact in some form with East German security.
56. PATTOM_081008_373.JPG: Cold War Border Security: All along the border with Soviet Bloc nations, NATO had safeguards to restrict entry of dangerous communist infiltrators and provide advanced warning of any aggressive military actions by the Warsaw Pact. Every road in and out of Soviet Bloc territory had an armored checkpoint on the border. Along the stretches of territory without roads, American armored cavalry regiments patrolled and surveyed communist territory to provide intelligence and advanced warning of an invasion.
57. PATTOM_081008_441.JPG: Iraqi War: Iraq and the Road To War: Following the 1991 Gulf War, Iraq was subjected to United Nations restrictions. No-fly zones were established in the northern and southern areas of the country, and efforts undertaken to prevent Iraq's possession of weapons of mass destruction. The sale of oil, Iraq's principal export, was limited to levels sufficient to provide food and medicine for the Iraqi population. These measures sought to reduce the threat to regional stability posed by Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Instead of abiding by these UN mandates, however, Iraq routinely violated them and encouraged the perception that it possessed weapons of mass destruction. Iraq provided moral and financial support to Middle Eastern terrorist organizations. Brutal suppression of Shiites and Kurds occurred within Iraq, while UN efforts to inspect potential biological and chemical production sites met with interference. After the September 2001 terrorist attacks upon the United States, President Bush declared a global war on terror and identified Iraq as part of an "axis of evil" believed to support and sponsor terrorism. In 2003, the US-led military alliance invaded Iraq to depose Saddam Hussein and guarantee the absence of weapons of mass destruction.
58. PATTOM_081008_444.JPG: Operation Iraqi Freedom: The Plan: While diplomacy continued to encourage Iraq compliance with UN resolutions, military preparations for a possible conflict began in 2002. The basic plan envisioned the use of concentric strikes against targets throughout Iraq. Through a combination of air and missile attacks, information operations, and a ground campaign, the US-led coalition intended to undermine Iraq's ability to resist and trigger the collapsed of Saddam Hussein's government. A thrust to Baghdad from Kuwait constituted the main effort. The city represented the center of Saddam Hussein's political authority, and its isolation and capture was considered critical to a successful campaign. Other objectives, however, included the destruction of scud missile launchers in western Iraq to prevent their use against Israel and coordination with Kurdish forces in northern Iraq. Continuous air attacks against military targets were to accompany these ground actions. Preparations for these operations anticipated determined resistance, particularly inside Baghdad, and Saddam Hussein's possible use of biological or chemical weapons. After hostilities ended, coalition forces planned to assist in Iraq's reconstruction and transition to a democratic state.
59. PATTOM_081008_447.JPG: The War Begins: On 17 March 2003, President Bush issued an ultimatum to Iraq, demanding the departure of Saddam Hussein and his two sons within 48 hours. On 19 March, the deadline elapsed, and military operations began to depose Saddam Hussein's regime and disarm Iraq. Coalition forces included combat forces principally from the US, UK, and Australia, although many other nations provided different forms of support. The war opened with an air attack intended to eliminate the senior leaders of Iraq, including Saddam Hussein. Ground operations began shortly afterward in response to the Iraqi regime's efforts to sabotage and destroy Iraq's oilfields. The oilfields represented the nation's best chance of economic recovery in the wake of Saddam Hussein.
60. PATTOM_081008_450.JPG: Central, Southern, and Northern Operations: the US Army's 3rd Infantry Division bore responsibility for leading the drive to Baghdad. Its task lay in the destruction of Iraqi forces encountered and isolation of the city. The United States' 1st Marine Expeditionary Force and Britain's 1st Armoured Division constituted a supporting effort. They would secure the city of Basra and the oilfields of southern Iraq to prevent their destruction. They would also protect the 3rd Infantry Division's right flank during its drive to Baghdad. The 82nd Airborne and 101st Air Assault Divisions also supported the main drive to Baghdad. The 82nd Airborne and 101st Air Assault Divisions also supported the main drive to Baghdad. They bore responsibility for eliminating resistance bypassed by the 3rd Infantry Division and assaulting Baghdad. The 4th Infantry Division planned to invade Iraq via Turkey, but the Turkish government would not agree to this action. The 4th Infantry Division therefore redeployed to Kuwait. Responsibility for operations in northern Iraq shifted to Special Forces operatives working with Kurdish fighters and the 173rd Airborne Brigade. This unit intended to conduct an air deployment into northern Iraq.
61. PATTOM_081008_454.JPG: 3rd Infantry Division: Spearheading the Drive to Baghdad: The 3rd Infantry Division constituted the principal formation tasked with the drive to Baghdad. This heavy division constituted a powerful armored strike force. On the eve of battle, it included 247 M1A1 tanks, 264 M2/M3 Bradley Fighting Vehicles, 54 Paladin Howitzers, 18 Multiple Launch Rocket Systems (MLRS), 18 AH-64 Apache attack helicopters, 16 OH58D Kiowa helicopters, and 15 UH-60 Blackhawk utility helicopters. Division organization centered on four brigade combat teams -- one of which contained much of the division's aviation -- plus Task Force Iron, an infantry force built around the 187th Infantry Regiment. Other assets, including maintenance and supply assets, remained under division control to support critical operations by the brigade combat teams. The combined armed nature of the division permitted its training and method of fighting. The 3rd Cavalry Squadron, 7th Cavalry Regiment constituted the formation's primary reconnaissance unit and generally led the division's advance to Baghdad.
62. PATTOM_081008_455.JPG: Tank Battle at Mahmudiyah: On April 3, while moving toward Baghdad, Company C, 1st Battalion, 64th Armor, received orders to destroy Republican Guard elements in the town of Mahmudiyah. The American tanks entered the town amid increasing small arms fire only to discover several T-72s and BMP infantry fighting vehicles. A close rank tank battle erupted in the streets. While some Iraqi vehicles tried to use the alleys and backstreets to gain side shots against the Abrams tanks, others remained in concealed positions, including one T-72 in a parking garage. During the ensuing, freewheeling firefight American tankers found themselves engaging -- and being engaged -- by Iraqi armor at ranges from 50 to 300 meters. At lead one American tank destroyed a T-72 only to be showered with burning metal from the exploding tank. Another Iraqi tank received a hit, which blasted its turret atop a three-story building. Within five minutes, C Company had destroyed seven T-72s and two BMPs. For the American tankers accustomed to tank engagements at 2,000+ meters, however, the encounter proved an intense, adrenaline-charged introduction to the uncertain nature of war.
63. PATTOM_081008_458.JPG: Armor Adapts -- Close-Range Engagements: Operation Iraqi Freedom posed several challenges to American Armor personnel. Regularly trained to engage and destroy targets at long range with precision fire, tank and Bradley gunners found themselves thrust repeatedly into short range firefights of only a few hundred meters or less. Often such engagements erupted with little warning and hostile fire was suddenly received from multiple directions at once. During the drive to Baghdad, the thunder runs, and subsequent operations, tankers routinely engaged enemy personnel with M4 carbines and their sidearm. Moreover, fights generally occurred in an urban setting. Collectively, these experiences forced tank and Bradley crews to focus upon individual marksmanship and close range engagements. Armor training also changed to reflect these realities, placing greater emphasis upon personal weapons, including knives. Ironically, however, the Iraq experience has increased the desire for armor in both urban and non-urban environments. The heavy armor and weaponry of the tank and Bradley have made them invaluable on today's battlefield.
64. PATTOM_081008_461.JPG: Saddam Loyalists Resist Furiously: The 3rd Infantry Division began its planned drive to Baghdad, and it soon captured international attention. Led by the 3rd Squadron, 7th Cavalry, the 3rd Infantry Division advanced toward the capital. It confronted and overcame a variety of threats, including conventional and unconventional forces. The former, however, diminished as the Iraqi army disintegrated. Resistance therefore fell to a mix of militia and paramilitary organizations loyal to Saddam Hussein. The Saddam Fedayeen proved the most determined of these groups, often utilizing suicide tactics. Iraqi fighters routinely used civilian vehicles to carry them into combat. American soldiers dubbed such transport the "poor man's HMMWV." Many of these civilian vehicles attempted to ram American combat vehicles and were destroyed. Iraqi resistance often occurred in the form of ambushes with small arms, rocket propelled grenades (RPGs), and mortars. These attacks often occurred at close range with little warning.
65. PATTOM_081008_464.JPG: 3rd Infantry Division Liberates Baghdad: The continuous attacks on the 3rd Infantry Division did not stop its advance. The division generally bypassed major urban areas, leaving them to be cleared by the 10st Air Assault and 82nd Airborne Divisions. The 3rd Infantry Division reached and penetrated the Karbala Gap, a natural checkpoint that channeled movement onto only two principal roads. Aggressive action then seized a bridge across the Euphrates River, permitted direct access to Baghdad. Initially, the capital was to be encircled and reduced with dismounted forces. However, the speed with which the city was reached led to an armored reconnaissance in force to test opposition. Dubbed "thunder runs," two such operations were conducted successfully by the 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division, on 5 and 7 April. Despite sometimes intense fighting, these actions demonstrated the ability of American armor to move at will in the Iraqi capital and directly triggered the collapse of Saddam Hussein's regime.
66. PATTOM_081008_467.JPG: Thunder Run to Baghdad: In early April, the 3rd Infantry Division reached the outskirts of Baghdad. Although stiff resistance was expected inside the city, few details of the Iraqi defenses were known. On 5 April, the 3rd Infantry Division's 1st Battalion, 64th Armor Regiment launched a thunder run into Baghdad to test the enemy's strength. In the morning hours, it began to move along Highway 8 into Baghdad. The attack surprised the Iraqis. The American tanks advanced amid morning traffic and meandering civilians were surprised at the sudden appearance of an armored column. However, the tanks began to receive fire from bunkers, buildings, rooftops, and overpasses. The tanks were hit repeatedly by small arms fire and rocket-propelled grenades, but the crews continued to fight with their hatches open for better visibility. Crew members engaged the enemy with machine guns, M4 carbines, and sidearms -- often at very short range. Civilian vehicles -- some packed with explosives -- attempted to ram the tanks and Bradleys. Despite the volume of fire directed at the American vehicles, only one tank was disabled. The column completed its mission and reached the Baghdad International Airport, controlled by the 3rd Infantry Division's 1st Brigade Combat Team. In the wake of the American tanks lay dozens of destroyed vehicles and hundreds of dead and wounded fighters, many from militia and paramilitary organizations. The thunder run demonstrated the ability of American armor to move at will in Baghdad. However, the significance of this event went unreported by the international news media.
67. PATTOM_081008_470.JPG: The Second Thunder Run: Here To Stay: The tactical success of the first thunder run, however, did not trigger the collapse of Saddam Hussein's regime. Instead, international media continued to repeat the Iraqi government's claim that US forces were tied down in heavy fighting and had not entered the city. Consequently, the 3rd Infantry Division conducted a second thunder run on 7 April. This time, the entire 2nd Brigade Combat Team was employed and arrangements were made to include a Fox News team. The objective of this attack lay in occupying key sites in Baghdad, including the Republican Palace and parade grounds, where Saddam Hussein had once reviewed his soldiers. The brigade combat team planned to seize and hold three objective points along the route, dubbed Larry, Mo, and Curly. With these positions secured, supplied could reach the advance elements at the parade ground and ensure the entire brigade's ability to hold its positions overnight against anticipated counterattacks. As the American armored column moved forward, it met the same, intense resistance encountered on the first thunder run. Mortar rounds, small arms, rocket propelled grenades, and snipers constituted the principal threat. A command post was hit and several supply vehicles ignited. However, all of the objectives were secured and supplies delivered to each point. Moreover, the success of the operation was communicated to the world when Fox News held a live broadcast from the Republican Palace and parade ground. Saddam Hussein's regime collapsed within days.
68. PATTOM_081008_473.JPG: Organized Resistance Collapses: By 10 April just three days after the second thunder run, organized resistance in Baghdad collapsed together with Saddam Hussein's government. US forces also began to move into northern Iraq. The 173nd Airborne Brigade, which included one tank and one mechanized infantry company, used its air mobility to enter northern Iraq. there the brigade conducted operations in conjunction with Special Forces operatives and Kurdish fighters, seizing Mosul and Kirkuk. South of Baghdad, the 2nd Armored Cavalry Regiment assumed responsibility for securing lines of communication to and from Baghdad. Additional forces moved west to the capital toward the Syrian border, while the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment and the 4th Infantry Division prepared to enter Iraq. With the war apparently ending, operations shifted to stability and support. On 1 May [2003!], President Bush declared major combat operations ended, although some Ba'athist party loyalists were expected to continue resistance.
69. PATTOM_081008_477.JPG: The Rise of the Anti-Coalition Insurgency: Much of the Iraqi populace appeared to react euphorically to the fall of Saddam's regime in April 2003. The Coalition Provisional Authority assumed temporary leadership over Iraq, pending the creation of a new Iraqi government. Coalition military forces focused upon security and the restoration of basic services long neglected by Saddam Hussein. These efforts required time and the involvement of the Iraqi people, who proved cautious in their dealings with the coalition. In June, coalition forces began encountered Improvised Explosive Devices and ambushes by RPGs and small arms. Terrorists initiated suicide bombings and kidnapped foreign and Iraqi civilians supporting efforts to rebuild Iraq. They murdered several of the hostages to intimidate ordinary civilians and foreign governments alike. Despite these acts, the coalition partners worked systematically to build a new Iraq with an elected government and a military loyal to the state rather than to one man. American forces also focused upon counter terror operations that included weapons seizures, the apprehension of terrorist leaders, and raids upon suspected terrorist strong points. In December, Saddam himself was captured by soldiers of the 4th Infantry Division.
70. PATTOM_081008_480.JPG: Counterinsurgency Operations: In 2004, several locations considered terrorist strong points became the target of major operations by American forces. Fallujah, An Najaf, and Sadr City all witnessed significant fighting. In these instances, terrorists sought to use the urban landscape to offset the technological superiority of American troops. The resultant battles occurred at short range amid streets, houses, and market places. Terrorists sought to use mosques and holy sites as shields. However, such tactics failed when confronted with the intelligent use of combined arms tactics and aggressive maneuver. Moreover, terrorist actions that caused widespread loss of life, especially among civilians, failed to prevent the first free elections in Iraq or the subsequent crafting the nation's first constitution. The year 2005 opened with promise for the emerging democracy, but it still faced threats from terrorists and sectarian violence. Coalition forces remained focused on providing security, training Iraqi soldiers and police, and rebuilding the nation.
71. PATTOM_081008_483.JPG: Armor's Adaptation to Counterinsurgency -- Dismount! Armor Soldiers also learned to operate dismounted, conducting the same patrols, raids, security details, and checkpoints traditionally associated with infantry. Additional training in clearing buildings and fighting on foot also became standard for Armor personnel. While these types of actions differ from the more traditional mounted experience, they have also permitted Armor Soldiers an opportunity to interact more effectively with the Iraqi population. Such interaction helped to build better relations and a degree of trust considered critical to the success of the counterinsurgency.
72. PATTOM_081008_486.JPG: The Battle for Fallujah: The city of Fallujah was a hotbed of anti-coalition activity by late 2004. In November, about 15,000 US Army, Marine, and Iraqi forces assaulted insurgents entrenched there. The main attack force included the Army's 2nd Squadron, 7th Cavalry, and 2nd Battalion, 2nd Infantry; the Marine Corps 1st and 7th Regiments; and friendly Iraqi troops. Supporting elements established a cordon around the city to prevent a terrorist withdrawal. The attack methodically cleared buildings and roadblocks, sweeping through the city from north to south. Enemy fighters had dug trenches, built bunkers, emplaced IEDs, rigged buildings and vehicles with explosives, and stored massive quantities of weapons and equipment in caches across the city. The American forces relied upon combined arms teams of Abrams tanks, Bradley infantry fighting vehicles, infantry, fire support, and close air attacks. Unmanned aerial vehicles also provided continuous reconnaissance and identified targets. Despite the grueling nature of the operation and the sudden eruption of short range firefights, American tanks and infantry steadily eliminated the stubborn defenders. The battle ended with the destruction of the terrorist presence in Fallujah.
73. PATTOM_081008_489.JPG: January Elections: Iraq's first democratic elections were held on 30 January 2005. Despite terrorist intimidation, some 8.5 million Iraqis voted, representing 58 percents of all eligible voters. The Shiite-dominated United Iraqi Alliance, headed by Ibrahim al-Jaafari, received 140 out of 275 seats in the National Assembly, while the Kurdistan Alliance List received 75 and the Iraqi List received 40. Several other smaller parties, such as the Iraqi Turkmen Front, the Islamic group of Kurdistan/Iraq, and the National Union, received the remainder of the open seats in the assembly. The assembly's first tasks were to select a three-member Presidency Council and draft a constitution. The January elections marked an important step toward building a new Iraq built upon choice rather than fear.
Multi Column: Number of columns of thumbnails to appear per page (normally defaults to 3): [1 col] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]
AAA "Gem": AAA considers this location to be a "must see" point of interest. To see pictures of other areas that AAA considers to be Gems, click here.
Wikipedia Description: General George Patton Museum
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The General George Patton Museum (formerly the Patton Museum of Cavalry and Armor) is a museum in Fort Knox, Kentucky dedicated to General George S. Patton, Jr's life and the history of armoured warfare, from World War I through the present day. The museum is administered by the U.S. Army Armor Center, Fort Knox, and is one of the largest in the U.S. Army Museum System.

The original museum was dedicated on May 30, 1949. The present building was constructed between 1972 and 1992 without cost to the U.S. Government by the Patton Museum Foundation, Inc. with funds donated by thousands of individuals and organizations from around the world.

There are static displays of various tanks, other armour and a few helicopters. The museum also includes a number of Patton's personal effects, dating from the World War II, including his office van and touring car.

Other historically significant vehicles and equipment are located in Keyes Park, adjacent to the Museum. In Keyes Park, you can see the history of Armor up close.

Vehicles in Keyes Park:

* World War I: the French Renault FT17, the U.S. version of the FT-17, and the British Mark V.
* World War II: the U.S. M4 Sherman tank, the Soviet Union T-34, and the German Tiger II.
* Vietnam: The M48 Patton tank and M551 Sheridan tanks.
* Desert Storm: is represented with the U.S. M1 Abrams tank and the Soviet built T-72 tank.

On December 12, 2005, museum officials announced that the museum will remain at Fort Knox, despite the fact that the Army's Armor Center is moving to Fort Benning, Georgia as part of a major realignment of military bases. The Army will build a new museum at Ft. Benning to be named "The National Armor and Cavalry Museum".
Bigger photos? To save server space, the full-sized versions of these images have either not been loaded to the server or have been removed from the server. (Only some pages are loaded with full-sized images and those usually get removed after three months.) I still have them though. If you want me to email them to you, please send an email to guthrie.bruce@gmail.com and I can email them to you, or, depending on the number of images, just repost the page again will the full-sized images.
Directly Related Pages: Other pages with content (KY -- Fort Knox -- Patton Museum of Cavalry and Armor) directly related to this one: [Display ALL photos on one page]:
- 2008_KY_PattonWWI: KY -- Fort Knox -- Patton Museum of Cavalry and Armor (World War I) (77 photos from 2008)
- 2008_KY_PattonP: KY -- Fort Knox -- Patton Museum of Cavalry and Armor (Patton room) (43 photos from 2008)
- 2008_KY_PattonO: KY -- Fort Knox -- Patton Museum of Cavalry and Armor (outside yard) (44 photos from 2008)
Same Subject: Click on this link to see coverage of items having the same subject: [Museums (History)]
2008 photos: Trips this year: (1) Civil War Preservation Trust annual conference in Springfield, Missouri , (2) a week in New York, (3) a week in San Diego for the Comic-Con, (4) a driving trip to St. Louis, and (5) a visit to dad and Dixie's in Asheville, North Carolina. Ego strokes: A picture I'd taken last year during a Friends of the Homeless event was published in USA Today with a photo credit and everything! I became a volunteer photographer with the AFI/Silver theater. Equipment this year: I was using three cameras -- the Fuji S9000 and the Canon Rebel Xti from last year, and a new camera, the Fuji S100fs. The first two cameras had their pluses and minuses and I really didn't have a single camera that I thought I could use for just about everything. But I loved the S100fs and used it almost exclusively this year. Number of photos taken this year: 330,000.
Connection Not Secure messages? Those warnings you get from your browser about this site not having secure connections worry some people. This means this site does not have SSL installed (the link is http:, not https:). That's bad if you're entering credit card numbers, passwords, or other personal information. But this site doesn't collect any personal information so SSL is not necessary. Life's good!
Limiting Text: You can turn off all of this text by clicking this link: [Thumbnails Only]
Photo Contact: [Email Bruce Guthrie].