±Recent Visitors

Recent Visitors to Com-Central!

±User Info-big


Welcome Anonymous

Nickname
Password

Membership:
Latest: cgsimpson
New Today: 0
New Yesterday: 0
Overall: 6645

People Online:
Members: 0
Visitors: 641
Total: 641
Who Is Where:
 Visitors:
01: Photo Gallery
02: Community Forums
03: News Archive
04: Community Forums
05: Community Forums
06: Community Forums
07: Community Forums
08: Downloads
09: Community Forums
10: Your Account
11: Community Forums
12: Community Forums
13: Community Forums
14: Community Forums
15: Statistics
16: Downloads
17: Community Forums
18: Community Forums
19: Statistics
20: Community Forums
21: Photo Gallery
22: Community Forums
23: Community Forums
24: Community Forums
25: Home
26: Downloads
27: Community Forums
28: Community Forums
29: Downloads
30: Community Forums
31: Community Forums
32: Photo Gallery
33: Community Forums
34: Home
35: Community Forums
36: Photo Gallery
37: Community Forums
38: Community Forums
39: Community Forums
40: Community Forums
41: Community Forums
42: Your Account
43: Community Forums
44: Community Forums
45: Photo Gallery
46: Home
47: Community Forums
48: Photo Gallery
49: Community Forums
50: Photo Gallery
51: Statistics
52: Photo Gallery
53: Downloads
54: Downloads
55: Community Forums
56: Community Forums
57: Community Forums
58: Downloads
59: Community Forums
60: Community Forums
61: Member Screenshots
62: Home
63: Community Forums
64: Community Forums
65: Community Forums
66: Community Forums
67: Community Forums
68: Community Forums
69: Community Forums
70: Community Forums
71: Community Forums
72: News Archive
73: Community Forums
74: Photo Gallery
75: Photo Gallery
76: Community Forums
77: Community Forums
78: News Archive
79: Statistics
80: Photo Gallery
81: Downloads
82: Community Forums
83: Your Account
84: Community Forums
85: Community Forums
86: News Archive
87: Community Forums
88: Community Forums
89: Photo Gallery
90: Community Forums
91: Community Forums
92: Home
93: Home
94: Your Account
95: Community Forums
96: Community Forums
97: Community Forums
98: Community Forums
99: Photo Gallery
100: Community Forums
101: Community Forums
102: Community Forums
103: Photo Gallery
104: Photo Gallery
105: Community Forums
106: Community Forums
107: Community Forums
108: Community Forums
109: Photo Gallery
110: Home
111: Home
112: Community Forums
113: Community Forums
114: Community Forums
115: Community Forums
116: Community Forums
117: Community Forums
118: Community Forums
119: Tell a Friend
120: Photo Gallery
121: Downloads
122: Community Forums
123: Community Forums
124: Photo Gallery
125: Photo Gallery
126: Home
127: Community Forums
128: Community Forums
129: Community Forums
130: Photo Gallery
131: Photo Gallery
132: Community Forums
133: Community Forums
134: Home
135: Home
136: Member Screenshots
137: Home
138: Photo Gallery
139: Community Forums
140: Community Forums
141: Community Forums
142: Community Forums
143: Community Forums
144: CPGlang
145: Community Forums
146: Member Screenshots
147: Community Forums
148: Community Forums
149: Community Forums
150: Member Screenshots
151: Community Forums
152: Community Forums
153: Community Forums
154: Home
155: Community Forums
156: Community Forums
157: Community Forums
158: Community Forums
159: Community Forums
160: Community Forums
161: Community Forums
162: Community Forums
163: Community Forums
164: Downloads
165: Community Forums
166: Community Forums
167: Community Forums
168: Community Forums
169: Photo Gallery
170: Home
171: Photo Gallery
172: Community Forums
173: Community Forums
174: Community Forums
175: Community Forums
176: Community Forums
177: Community Forums
178: Community Forums
179: Community Forums
180: Photo Gallery
181: Community Forums
182: Community Forums
183: CPGlang
184: Community Forums
185: Community Forums
186: Community Forums
187: Home
188: Home
189: Community Forums
190: Community Forums
191: Community Forums
192: Home
193: Community Forums
194: Your Account
195: Photo Gallery
196: Community Forums
197: Community Forums
198: Photo Gallery
199: Photo Gallery
200: Community Forums
201: CPGlang
202: Community Forums
203: Home
204: Community Forums
205: Home
206: Member Screenshots
207: Community Forums
208: Community Forums
209: Community Forums
210: CPGlang
211: Community Forums
212: Home
213: Photo Gallery
214: Community Forums
215: CPGlang
216: Downloads
217: Community Forums
218: Community Forums
219: Community Forums
220: Photo Gallery
221: Photo Gallery
222: Home
223: Home
224: Photo Gallery
225: Your Account
226: Community Forums
227: Statistics
228: Community Forums
229: Community Forums
230: Community Forums
231: Community Forums
232: Community Forums
233: Community Forums
234: Community Forums
235: Community Forums
236: Community Forums
237: Photo Gallery
238: Community Forums
239: Community Forums
240: Community Forums
241: News Archive
242: Community Forums
243: Community Forums
244: Community Forums
245: Home
246: Community Forums
247: Community Forums
248: Community Forums
249: Community Forums
250: Community Forums
251: Home
252: Community Forums
253: Photo Gallery
254: Your Account
255: Community Forums
256: Downloads
257: Community Forums
258: Downloads
259: Community Forums
260: Community Forums
261: Community Forums
262: Photo Gallery
263: Community Forums
264: Community Forums
265: Community Forums
266: Community Forums
267: Member Screenshots
268: Community Forums
269: Community Forums
270: Downloads
271: Community Forums
272: Community Forums
273: Photo Gallery
274: Community Forums
275: Community Forums
276: Community Forums
277: Community Forums
278: Community Forums
279: Downloads
280: Photo Gallery
281: Photo Gallery
282: Home
283: Community Forums
284: Community Forums
285: Downloads
286: Photo Gallery
287: Downloads
288: Home
289: Community Forums
290: Community Forums
291: Community Forums
292: Community Forums
293: Photo Gallery
294: Community Forums
295: Community Forums
296: Community Forums
297: Community Forums
298: Community Forums
299: Community Forums
300: Community Forums
301: Member Screenshots
302: Photo Gallery
303: Community Forums
304: Community Forums
305: Community Forums
306: Community Forums
307: Downloads
308: Photo Gallery
309: Community Forums
310: Community Forums
311: Community Forums
312: Community Forums
313: Photo Gallery
314: Community Forums
315: Your Account
316: Home
317: Community Forums
318: Community Forums
319: Community Forums
320: Photo Gallery
321: Community Forums
322: Community Forums
323: Your Account
324: Statistics
325: Photo Gallery
326: Community Forums
327: Community Forums
328: Home
329: Community Forums
330: Community Forums
331: Community Forums
332: Home
333: Community Forums
334: CPGlang
335: Community Forums
336: Community Forums
337: Member Screenshots
338: Downloads
339: Photo Gallery
340: Community Forums
341: Photo Gallery
342: Photo Gallery
343: Community Forums
344: Community Forums
345: Photo Gallery
346: Photo Gallery
347: Photo Gallery
348: Community Forums
349: Photo Gallery
350: Community Forums
351: Photo Gallery
352: Your Account
353: Community Forums
354: Community Forums
355: Photo Gallery
356: Community Forums
357: Community Forums
358: Downloads
359: Community Forums
360: Home
361: Community Forums
362: Community Forums
363: Member Screenshots
364: Community Forums
365: Home
366: Community Forums
367: Photo Gallery
368: Community Forums
369: Community Forums
370: Member Screenshots
371: Community Forums
372: Community Forums
373: Community Forums
374: Member Screenshots
375: Home
376: Community Forums
377: Member Screenshots
378: Community Forums
379: Photo Gallery
380: Home
381: Community Forums
382: Photo Gallery
383: Community Forums
384: Community Forums
385: Community Forums
386: Community Forums
387: Downloads
388: Photo Gallery
389: Community Forums
390: Downloads
391: Photo Gallery
392: Community Forums
393: Home
394: Community Forums
395: Home
396: Home
397: Home
398: Home
399: Photo Gallery
400: Community Forums
401: Downloads
402: Photo Gallery
403: Community Forums
404: Community Forums
405: Community Forums
406: Home
407: Community Forums
408: CPGlang
409: Photo Gallery
410: Community Forums
411: Photo Gallery
412: Community Forums
413: Community Forums
414: Community Forums
415: Community Forums
416: Photo Gallery
417: Member Screenshots
418: News Archive
419: Community Forums
420: Community Forums
421: Community Forums
422: Community Forums
423: Photo Gallery
424: Downloads
425: Community Forums
426: Community Forums
427: Community Forums
428: Community Forums
429: Community Forums
430: Community Forums
431: Community Forums
432: Community Forums
433: Community Forums
434: Community Forums
435: Downloads
436: Community Forums
437: Community Forums
438: Photo Gallery
439: News
440: Home
441: Home
442: Community Forums
443: Photo Gallery
444: Community Forums
445: Community Forums
446: Community Forums
447: Community Forums
448: Community Forums
449: Community Forums
450: Downloads
451: Photo Gallery
452: Photo Gallery
453: CPGlang
454: Member Screenshots
455: Community Forums
456: Home
457: Community Forums
458: Your Account
459: Community Forums
460: Community Forums
461: Community Forums
462: Community Forums
463: Community Forums
464: Community Forums
465: News
466: Community Forums
467: CPGlang
468: Community Forums
469: Community Forums
470: Photo Gallery
471: Community Forums
472: Community Forums
473: Home
474: Community Forums
475: Home
476: Community Forums
477: Home
478: Community Forums
479: Community Forums
480: Community Forums
481: Community Forums
482: Home
483: Home
484: Community Forums
485: Home
486: Member Screenshots
487: Community Forums
488: Home
489: CPGlang
490: Community Forums
491: Community Forums
492: Community Forums
493: Photo Gallery
494: Community Forums
495: Community Forums
496: Community Forums
497: Community Forums
498: Community Forums
499: Home
500: Community Forums
501: Community Forums
502: Community Forums
503: Community Forums
504: Community Forums
505: Photo Gallery
506: Photo Gallery
507: Community Forums
508: Photo Gallery
509: Community Forums
510: Home
511: Community Forums
512: Community Forums
513: Home
514: Community Forums
515: Community Forums
516: Community Forums
517: Downloads
518: Community Forums
519: Home
520: Community Forums
521: Photo Gallery
522: Community Forums
523: Home
524: Community Forums
525: Photo Gallery
526: Community Forums
527: Downloads
528: Community Forums
529: Home
530: Community Forums
531: Community Forums
532: Community Forums
533: Community Forums
534: Home
535: Downloads
536: Community Forums
537: Community Forums
538: Community Forums
539: Community Forums
540: Community Forums
541: Community Forums
542: Photo Gallery
543: Community Forums
544: Community Forums
545: Downloads
546: Community Forums
547: News Archive
548: Community Forums
549: Community Forums
550: Home
551: Community Forums
552: CPGlang
553: Your Account
554: Home
555: Community Forums
556: Community Forums
557: Community Forums
558: Photo Gallery
559: Photo Gallery
560: Photo Gallery
561: Photo Gallery
562: Community Forums
563: Photo Gallery
564: Home
565: Home
566: Community Forums
567: Home
568: Home
569: Community Forums
570: Community Forums
571: Community Forums
572: Community Forums
573: Community Forums
574: Community Forums
575: Community Forums
576: Home
577: Community Forums
578: Photo Gallery
579: Community Forums
580: Home
581: Photo Gallery
582: Community Forums
583: Community Forums
584: Community Forums
585: Member Screenshots
586: Statistics
587: Community Forums
588: Community Forums
589: Community Forums
590: News
591: Community Forums
592: Community Forums
593: Community Forums
594: Community Forums
595: Community Forums
596: Community Forums
597: Community Forums
598: Photo Gallery
599: Home
600: Community Forums
601: Community Forums
602: CPGlang
603: Community Forums
604: Community Forums
605: Community Forums
606: Home
607: Community Forums
608: Your Account
609: Community Forums
610: Downloads
611: Downloads
612: Community Forums
613: Photo Gallery
614: Community Forums
615: Downloads
616: Home
617: Community Forums
618: Community Forums
619: Home
620: Photo Gallery
621: Member Screenshots
622: Community Forums
623: Community Forums
624: Community Forums
625: Photo Gallery
626: Community Forums
627: Community Forums
628: Community Forums
629: Community Forums
630: Statistics
631: Community Forums
632: Community Forums
633: Community Forums
634: Community Forums
635: Photo Gallery
636: Home
637: Community Forums
638: Community Forums
639: Home
640: Photo Gallery
641: Downloads

Staff Online:

No staff members are online!
The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted Facts
The AFV ASSOCIATION was formed in 1964 to support the thoughts and research of all those interested in Armored Fighting Vehicles and related topics, such as AFV drawings. The emphasis has always been on sharing information and communicating with other members of similar interests; e.g. German armor, Japanese AFVs, or whatever.
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Post new topic    Reply to topic    Printer Friendly Page     Forum Index ›  AFV News Discussion Board

View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
C_Sherman
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 590

PostPosted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 8:06 pm
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted F

- Skeet

This same vet used to talk about the German 88's. A lot of what he spoke about seemed to indicate they could have been 88's. But a lot of what he said made me wonder how (why?) the German's could be using 88's like that, i.e. indirect fire into camps/parks on reverse slopes. I posted that question a while back, and the consenus was that lot's of WWII vets from the ETO referred to all German artillery as 88's.


In noticed that the German combat diaries I've seen all indicate that the 88 was frequently used in the indirect fire role. I recall specifically that this was so in North Africa in particular. So it's possible for indirect fire to have come from 88's. That said, I agree that Allied GI's had a tendency to call any incoming "88 fire".

C

_________________
A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it
will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.
-Herm Albright

Sic gorgiamus allos subjectatos nunc!
Back to top
View user's profile Photo Gallery
JimWeb
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 1439
Location: The back of beyond
PostPosted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 9:05 pm
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted F


I don't know of any 76mm gun Shermans being issued to British units (Like the GAA engined M4A3 the U.S. tended to keep the 76mm Shermans for themselves, but 76mm gunned M4A2s were sent to the Soviets)


Yeah those miserly yanks only sold us 1,330 M4A1 w/76mm aka Sherman IIA and an unknown number of M4A3 w/76mm aka Sherman IVA. I beleive they went mostly to Italy. My units regimental history speaks of receiving them as replacements for the 75s until practically the whole regiment was 76mm equipped.

Cool

_________________
TTFN
Jim

If your not a member of JED then your
not serious about anything military..

***********************
www.jedsite.info
JED Military Equipment
***********************
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website ICQ Number
Neil_Baumgardner
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 3942
Location: Arlington, VA
PostPosted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 9:41 pm
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted Facts

Oddly enough you dont see very many pictures at all (at least that I have seen) of British Sherman 76s... Lots of 75s & Fireflies, but I cant remember any pictures of 76s in British colors...

Neil
Back to top
View user's profile
Al_Bowie
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 25, 2006
Posts: 34

PostPosted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 10:03 pm
Post subject: Distorted Facts

I love the wonderful thoughtless generalisations that such threads dredge up.
Particularly the one about a Panther being worth Four or Five Shermans. This gross generalisation is so wrong in the context of any rational discussion as to be laughable.
Consider this:
If those figures were true then the amount of Shermans deployed to the NWE theatre must have been greater than the actual number. Whilst a Panther in Defence (And I stress Defence - usually ambush) could take a number of Shermans to destoy it the truth also holds true for the Sherman as the battles at the closing of the Falaise pocket indicate and the early Cobra battles where the odds were reversed with up to 12 panthers being KO'd by A troop of Shermans in Defensive position.
Anyone who studies warfare will understand that the defender on prepared ground of his choosing holds all the trumps. The oncoming enemy may lose two or three tanks before even locating his assailant (as Michael Wittman found to his peril). This does not make it a better AFV by any stretch of the imagination. The other part to this is that the five vehicles lost whilst "stalking" the assailant may not all be attributed to the Assailant but its infantry screen or mutually supporting AT or AFV.
THe Panther was a mechanical basket case and was extremely unreliable. The Sherman on the other hand just kept going as wass evidenced in the Normandy breakouts by both US and Brit/Cwealth/Polish forces. The Brits were clocking up huge distances of road march which is extremely taxing on an armoured vehicle and still managed to keep it up. The much vaunted Panther and Tiger would have suffered up to 80% mechanical loss if they attempted the same thing.
The Sherman was an excellent product for the time and like the equally excellent T34 grew to meet the threat. The HVAP 76 mm Shermans with HVAP were a pretty good match for the Panther and even Tiger an could engage these at good battle ranges.
The ability to produce the Sherman easily and in Huge numbers was a very decisive factor and if you did an analysis based on cost effectiveness I know that the Panther would not win.

The other factor overlooked in most of these arguments is the quality of the German Tank crews who had vast experience at both offensive and defensive operations by the time Normandy occured. Most of the US and Brit Formations were rank amatueurs at this in comparison. The integrated all arms philoshphy of the Germans also added to this.

With the exception of the T34 no other ww2 vehicle has had such a career or was so adaptable as to still be going with such success at the end of the War. If the Germans had abandoned the Panther and tiger and concentrated on upgrading the Pz IV family then the numbers they would have had avail and the reliability these proven designs had would have offered more vehicles and some of the results of history may have varied.

Logistics is the lynch pin of any camapign and the ability to support one major type of tank lowers the logisic burden thereby allow your logisic chain to function at its max efficiency. Diluting your logistics across a diverse range of vehicle types reduces your logistic efficiency severly hampering your ability to conduct mobile operations.

The Sherman is a much maligned and denigrated vehicle but to misquote a cartoon of the time "It got their the fastest with the mostest" and did the job asked of it. If some decisions such as arming a percentage of Shermans with the 17pdr in both US and Brit service had been taken earlier along with the introduction of the 76 armed HVSS shermans then it would have had a lot more success but hindsight is onl avail after the fact.

Cheers
Al Bowie
Dedicated Shermaholic
Back to top
View user's profile
Neil_Baumgardner
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 3942
Location: Arlington, VA
PostPosted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 10:46 pm
Post subject: Re: Distorted Facts

- Al_Bowie
I love the wonderful thoughtless generalisations that such threads dredge up.
Particularly the one about a Panther being worth Four or Five Shermans. This gross generalisation is so wrong in the context of any rational discussion as to be laughable.
Consider this:
If those figures were true then the amount of Shermans deployed to the NWE theatre must have been greater than the actual number. Whilst a Panther in Defence (And I stress Defence - usually ambush) could take a number of Shermans to destoy it the truth also holds true for the Sherman as the battles at the closing of the Falaise pocket indicate and the early Cobra battles where the odds were reversed with up to 12 panthers being KO'd by A troop of Shermans in Defensive position.
Anyone who studies warfare will understand that the defender on prepared ground of his choosing holds all the trumps. The oncoming enemy may lose two or three tanks before even locating his assailant (as Michael Wittman found to his peril). This does not make it a better AFV by any stretch of the imagination. The other part to this is that the five vehicles lost whilst "stalking" the assailant may not all be attributed to the Assailant but its infantry screen or mutually supporting AT or AFV.


I'll admit a bit more thorough research is needed into WWII kill ratios. However, even if the generalization/anecdote its true (which I havent seen any contest with actual data), its likely not the case that there would have had to have been more Shermans than there were. It simply would mean that of Sherman vs Panther/Tiger engagements, that was the kill ratio, keeping in mind that such engagements would be a subset of all engagements that took place. I'm sure there were plenty of Panthers & Tigers that were not destroyed by Shermans, or even tanks. Therefore they dont contribute to the kill ratio. Similarly, not all Shermans faced Panthers & Tigers, so any number of Shermans would not contribute to the kill ratio either...

If someone could point me in the direction of any sort of accumulation of WWII tank kill ratio data I'd appreciate it.


THe Panther was a mechanical basket case and was extremely unreliable. The Sherman on the other hand just kept going as wass evidenced in the Normandy breakouts by both US and Brit/Cwealth/Polish forces. The Brits were clocking up huge distances of road march which is extremely taxing on an armoured vehicle and still managed to keep it up. The much vaunted Panther and Tiger would have suffered up to 80% mechanical loss if they attempted the same thing.


Granted, although I'd probably only describe the initial Panthers as true "basketcases." Keep in mind the Panther was good enough to have been kept in use by the French army until the early 1950s; and were also prized by Soviet crews, so much that they impressed Germany personnel to keep them going...


The Sherman was an excellent product for the time and like the equally excellent T34 grew to meet the threat. The HVAP 76 mm Shermans with HVAP were a pretty good match for the Panther and even Tiger an could engage these at good battle ranges.


While I think the Sherman was a great & venerable tank, I wouldnt argue it grew as much as the T-34, at least during WWII. The Soviets upgraded the T-34 with the 85mm gun during the war, while it took the French and Israelis to upgrade the Sherman with similar weapons post-war...


The ability to produce the Sherman easily and in Huge numbers was a very decisive factor and if you did an analysis based on cost effectiveness I know that the Panther would not win.


I wouldnt argue that the US should have producted Panthers instead of Shermans, but that a cost-effective heavier tank could have been fielded (likely by Normandy if they acted quickly enough & with foresight) as a complement to Sherman and would have been a good use of "limited" shipping.


With the exception of the T34 no other ww2 vehicle has had such a career or was so adaptable as to still be going with such success at the end of the War. If the Germans had abandoned the Panther and tiger and concentrated on upgrading the Pz IV family then the numbers they would have had avail and the reliability these proven designs had would have offered more vehicles and some of the results of history may have varied.


Part of the success & adaptability of the T-34 and Sherman is due to the fact that the US & USSR won WWII, leading to several generations of improvements afterwards. If the Germans had won (thank god not!), I have no doubt we would have seen 88mm armed Panthers and quite possibly even eventually 105mm armed Panthers in the postwar years. I'm not so sure (especially taking the French experience) that the Tiger or Tiger II would have had the same longevity...


The Sherman is a much maligned and denigrated vehicle but to misquote a cartoon of the time "It got their the fastest with the mostest" and did the job asked of it. If some decisions such as arming a percentage of Shermans with the 17pdr in both US and Brit service had been taken earlier along with the introduction of the 76 armed HVSS shermans then it would have had a lot more success but hindsight is onl avail after the fact.


Well that at least I agree with!

Neil
Back to top
View user's profile
bsmart
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 2523
Location: Central Maryland
PostPosted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 11:03 pm
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted Facts

I don't have data at hand but I'm not sure there was much difference between the 85mm in the T34 and the 76mm in the Sherman. Both were moderate upgrades from the original gun but neither was the very high velocity gun that the 17pdr or 75L70 of the Panther were. I'm not sure the French post war experience with the Panther proves or disproves the tanks reliability. It wasa peacetime army with peacetime priorities. I doubt they were run hard at all.

_________________
Bob Smart ([email protected])
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
Neil_Baumgardner
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 3942
Location: Arlington, VA
PostPosted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 11:20 pm
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted Facts

- bsmart
I don't have data at hand but I'm not sure there was much difference between the 85mm in the T34 and the 76mm in the Sherman. Both were moderate upgrades from the original gun but neither was the very high velocity gun that the 17pdr or 75L70 of the Panther were.


I stand corrected, it appears the 76mm HVAP had somewhat to much better penetration than the Soviet 85mm gun.

Tony Williams gave the following values on another board for penetration at 1,000 yards, striking at 30 degrees from the optimum:
forum.axishistory.com/...41edd627bf

76mm: 89mm (134mm with HVAP ammo)
17 pdr: 118mm (170mm with APDS ammo)
85mm: 84mm

The following also gives penetration values for the Sherman 76 & T-34/85 against the Tiger I:
www.fprado.com/armorsite/tiger1.htm

Neil


Last edited by Neil_Baumgardner on Wed Aug 02, 2006 11:23 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile
JimWeb
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 1439
Location: The back of beyond
PostPosted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 11:22 pm
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted F

- Neil_Baumgardner
Oddly enough you dont see very many pictures at all (at least that I have seen) of British Sherman 76s... Lots of 75s & Fireflies, but I cant remember any pictures of 76s in British colors...

Neil


Just a quick google...




_________________
TTFN
Jim

If your not a member of JED then your
not serious about anything military..

***********************
www.jedsite.info
JED Military Equipment
***********************
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website ICQ Number
Neil_Baumgardner
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 3942
Location: Arlington, VA
PostPosted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 11:25 pm
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted Facts

Jim, thanks. For whatever reason, I dont remember seeing any pics of British Sherman 76s before... Were there any British Easy Eights?

Neil
Back to top
View user's profile
JimWeb
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 1439
Location: The back of beyond
PostPosted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 11:30 pm
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted F

- Neil_Baumgardner
Jim, thanks. For whatever reason, I dont remember seeing any pics of British Sherman 76s before...

Neil


I think there must have been quite a few in Italy - strangely enough not many fireflies... must have been because of the 76mm shermans.



I hadn't realised that the british used Chaffee's during the war till I was going through the regimental photo albums once and spotted that the 9th Lancers had them in the recce troop during early 1945.

Cool

_________________
TTFN
Jim

If your not a member of JED then your
not serious about anything military..

***********************
www.jedsite.info
JED Military Equipment
***********************
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website ICQ Number
bsmart
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 2523
Location: Central Maryland
PostPosted: Thu Aug 03, 2006 12:28 am
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted F

- JimWeb
- Neil_Baumgardner
Jim, thanks. For whatever reason, I dont remember seeing any pics of British Sherman 76s before...

Neil


I think there must have been quite a few in Italy - strangely enough not many fireflies... must have been because of the 76mm shermans.


See - even the British thought the 76mm Sherman was equivalent to a Firefly!! Laughing Laughing Laughing

_________________
Bob Smart ([email protected])
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
Al_Bowie
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 25, 2006
Posts: 34

PostPosted: Thu Aug 03, 2006 1:27 am
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted F

British use of the 76 Sherman.
The British were supplied with a great number of 76 M4A1 VVSS Shermans but mainly used them in Italy. They were used by 2 RTR and the South African 6 AD there. One of the Shots above is a C Sqn 2 RTR vehicle. Interestingly the Brits put a Firefly in each troop of 2 RTR and had a 4 veh tp consisting of 2 76 and 2 Fireflies by wars end. The Brits decided not to employ the 76 Sherman in NWE and passed the vehicles to the Polish who used them in Holland / Germany. They also retained their Fireflies in each tp.
There is anecdotal evidence to indicate that Guards AD got some 76's by wars end.
The Brits were going to acquire the M4A2 76 HVSS and got about 9 of these for trials by wars end. This is the variant the Canadians settled on post war although they took A3's to Korea from US stock to ease the logistical burden.
The only other HVSS vehicle the Brits got was the M4 105 in very ltd numbers in Italy (most went to the Poles).

BTW the point I made about numbers does not indicate that the Panther killed 5 shermans for itself being killed. these would have been killed by a variety of threats such as infantry AT, AT and mutually supporting tanks. I notice you completely overlook the fact that the Panthers were fighting in sited defence giving them a three to one theoretical advantage to start with. If you analyse the Normandy / Falaise and cobra period battles where the Germans were forced to counterattack against vehicles in defensive position the ratios are about 3 to one in favourr of the Sherman highlighting the fact that it is the situation more than the vehicle that accts for the discrepency.

My comments regarding the longevity if you re read them are WW2 related and NOT post war although the Sherman did continue for a long period post war.
THe French used the Panthers ONLY until the US MAP could provide significant amounts of 76 Shermans and a ltd amount of Pershings. If you can get hold of the Shrivenam Report on the Panther from the ones the Brits trialled you will see its reputation far exceeds its capabilities and the Late Panther was as equal a basket case reliability wise as the early ones. Its breakdown rate was lower but it was still extremely high. The only thing the Brits liked about the Panther was the Gun and Optics. The French liked the Gun also and developed it post war. The guns in the M50 and M51 Israeli Shermans are direct descendants of the Panthers excellent 75.
Cheers
Al
Back to top
View user's profile
the_shadock
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: May 27, 2006
Posts: 2865
Location: Normandy, France
PostPosted: Thu Aug 03, 2006 4:12 am
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted F

- bsmart
I'm not sure the French post war experience with the Panther proves or disproves the tanks reliability. It wasa peacetime army with peacetime priorities. I doubt they were run hard at all.


Personnally, I think that the French army had Panthers because it had nothing better, and was not allowed to produce its own tanks in late 40's. When you look at the uniforms of the French Expeditionary Corps in Indochina, you will see american, british, german, french equipement from WW1 and WW2, and even local or "field" made equipement. We didn't have a standard uniform. (and even now you will find in some French Army units, WW1 and WW2 equipment that are kept in stock, just in case..) That's typically a French problem that we still face today : NOT ENOUGH MONEY !!! and not enough spare parts to repair our vehicles. I have heard that 60% of our planes can't fly because of the lack of spare parts..
So I really think that the French army would not have used Panther tanks in the 50's if they had the choice..

Cheers from France

Pierre-Olivier
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
LeeW
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 26, 2006
Posts: 61

PostPosted: Thu Aug 03, 2006 11:04 am
Post subject: Re: Distorted Facts

- Neil_Baumgardner
...
While I think the Sherman was a great & venerable tank, I wouldnt argue it grew as much as the T-34, at least during WWII. The Soviets upgraded the T-34 with the 85mm gun during the war, while it took the French and Israelis to upgrade the Sherman with similar weapons post-war...

Well the US did have 105mm armed Shermans in WWII. The T-34 also had a lot more room for improvement. The T-34 76 didn't have a radio for the most part, lousey ergonomics, too small a turret, etc and the Soviet 76mm gun was inferior to the US 75 as you noticed the Soviet 85 was about the equivalant of the US 76 as far as AP performance goes but I think it's HE performance wasn't as good.


....
Part of the success & adaptability of the T-34 and Sherman is due to the fact that the US & USSR won WWII, leading to several generations of improvements afterwards. If the Germans had won (thank god not!), I have no doubt we would have seen 88mm armed Panthers and quite possibly even eventually 105mm armed Panthers in the postwar years. I'm not so sure (especially taking the French experience) that the Tiger or Tiger II would have had the same longevity...


Neither the US nor the Soviets really improved the M-4 or T-34 after the war. I'm not aware of many upgrades for the T-34 at all. The Sherman tended to be upgraded by third parties (Isreal, France, etc)
Back to top
View user's profile
Neil_Baumgardner
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 3942
Location: Arlington, VA
PostPosted: Thu Aug 03, 2006 11:37 am
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted F

- Al_Bowie

BTW the point I made about numbers does not indicate that the Panther killed 5 shermans for itself being killed. these would have been killed by a variety of threats such as infantry AT, AT and mutually supporting tanks. I notice you completely overlook the fact that the Panthers were fighting in sited defence giving them a three to one theoretical advantage to start with. If you analyse the Normandy / Falaise and cobra period battles where the Germans were forced to counterattack against vehicles in defensive position the ratios are about 3 to one in favourr of the Sherman highlighting the fact that it is the situation more than the vehicle that accts for the discrepency.


The 3-1 defense advantage rule is a rule of hand that dates back to Clausewitz, which can be adjusted to the particulars of any situation and may or may not have any validity. I will grant defense probably does have advantage, but whether its 2-1, 3-1, etc can vary... OTOH, there certainly have been many thinkers & generals, Patton may have been one of them, that believed in offensive advantage.


My comments regarding the longevity if you re read them are WW2 related and NOT post war although the Sherman did continue for a long period post war.


Okay, sure... Like I said, I'm not really denying that the Sherman as a very good versatile tank...


THe French used the Panthers ONLY until the US MAP could provide significant amounts of 76 Shermans and a ltd amount of Pershings.


I'm not so sure that is true, they kept them around far longer than was necessary by that measure - I dont think anyone had a want for Shermans in the early 1950s. Even the French 1947 report on the Panther (see 160-161 of Spielberger's Panther & its Variants) isnt exactly glowing. But my point is they respected it enough to keep it in service. I dont think they needed to for any other reason... The Soviets had the same respect for it, but they had plenty of JS-2s & -3s to go around. I believe the French Panthers were replaced by M47s... But I can see this discussion has becomes a tangent - Panther vs the Sherman rather than the utility of a hi-lo mix of heavier tanks to complement US Shermans...

Neil
Back to top
View user's profile
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    Reply to topic    Printer Friendly Page    Forum Index ›  AFV News Discussion Board
Page 3 of 4
All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next



Jump to:  


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum