±Recent Visitors

Recent Visitors to Com-Central!

±User Info-big


Welcome Anonymous

Nickname
Password

Membership:
Latest: HighestAce
New Today: 0
New Yesterday: 0
Overall: 6648

People Online:
Members: 0
Visitors: 914
Total: 914
Who Is Where:
 Visitors:
01: Community Forums
02: Home
03: Home
04: Community Forums
05: Community Forums
06: Community Forums
07: Community Forums
08: CPGlang
09: Community Forums
10: Home
11: Photo Gallery
12: Home
13: Community Forums
14: Community Forums
15: Community Forums
16: Statistics
17: Community Forums
18: Community Forums
19: Community Forums
20: Statistics
21: Community Forums
22: Photo Gallery
23: Home
24: Member Screenshots
25: Home
26: Community Forums
27: Home
28: Community Forums
29: Community Forums
30: Home
31: Community Forums
32: News Archive
33: Community Forums
34: Community Forums
35: Home
36: Home
37: Community Forums
38: Community Forums
39: Community Forums
40: Home
41: Community Forums
42: Home
43: Community Forums
44: Community Forums
45: Community Forums
46: Community Forums
47: Home
48: Community Forums
49: Home
50: Home
51: Home
52: Community Forums
53: Community Forums
54: Community Forums
55: Community Forums
56: Community Forums
57: Home
58: Home
59: Home
60: Community Forums
61: Member Screenshots
62: Photo Gallery
63: Home
64: Community Forums
65: Community Forums
66: Community Forums
67: Community Forums
68: Home
69: Home
70: Home
71: Community Forums
72: Member Screenshots
73: Community Forums
74: Member Screenshots
75: Community Forums
76: Community Forums
77: Downloads
78: Community Forums
79: Home
80: Community Forums
81: Community Forums
82: Home
83: Community Forums
84: Photo Gallery
85: Community Forums
86: Home
87: Community Forums
88: Community Forums
89: CPGlang
90: Community Forums
91: Home
92: Home
93: Community Forums
94: Community Forums
95: Community Forums
96: Home
97: Home
98: Community Forums
99: Home
100: Community Forums
101: Community Forums
102: Community Forums
103: Community Forums
104: Home
105: Community Forums
106: Community Forums
107: Home
108: CPGlang
109: Community Forums
110: Downloads
111: Community Forums
112: Community Forums
113: Community Forums
114: Community Forums
115: Home
116: Community Forums
117: Community Forums
118: Community Forums
119: Photo Gallery
120: Home
121: Downloads
122: Home
123: Community Forums
124: Home
125: CPGlang
126: Community Forums
127: Home
128: Community Forums
129: Community Forums
130: Community Forums
131: Home
132: Photo Gallery
133: Community Forums
134: Community Forums
135: Community Forums
136: Community Forums
137: Photo Gallery
138: Community Forums
139: Home
140: Community Forums
141: Community Forums
142: Statistics
143: Community Forums
144: Community Forums
145: Photo Gallery
146: Community Forums
147: Home
148: Photo Gallery
149: Community Forums
150: Community Forums
151: Home
152: Home
153: Your Account
154: Community Forums
155: Home
156: Photo Gallery
157: Community Forums
158: Home
159: Community Forums
160: Community Forums
161: Home
162: Home
163: Community Forums
164: Community Forums
165: Home
166: Community Forums
167: Community Forums
168: Downloads
169: Home
170: Community Forums
171: Home
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: Community Forums
181: Community Forums
182: Community Forums
183: Community Forums
184: Community Forums
185: Home
186: Home
187: Community Forums
188: Community Forums
189: Community Forums
190: Community Forums
191: Community Forums
192: Community Forums
193: Community Forums
194: Community Forums
195: Community Forums
196: Community Forums
197: Community Forums
198: Home
199: Community Forums
200: Community Forums
201: Community Forums
202: Community Forums
203: Community Forums
204: CPGlang
205: News Archive
206: Home
207: Home
208: Home
209: Community Forums
210: Community Forums
211: Community Forums
212: Home
213: Community Forums
214: Community Forums
215: Community Forums
216: Community Forums
217: Home
218: Photo Gallery
219: Community Forums
220: Community Forums
221: Community Forums
222: Home
223: Community Forums
224: Home
225: Home
226: Community Forums
227: Community Forums
228: Community Forums
229: Community Forums
230: Home
231: Community Forums
232: Community Forums
233: Home
234: Home
235: Home
236: Community Forums
237: Community Forums
238: Community Forums
239: Member Screenshots
240: Community Forums
241: Home
242: Community Forums
243: Community Forums
244: Home
245: Community Forums
246: Downloads
247: Community Forums
248: Downloads
249: Home
250: Community Forums
251: Community Forums
252: Home
253: Community Forums
254: Community Forums
255: Home
256: Home
257: Community Forums
258: Community Forums
259: Community Forums
260: Community Forums
261: Community Forums
262: Community Forums
263: Community Forums
264: Community Forums
265: Home
266: Photo Gallery
267: Home
268: Community Forums
269: Community Forums
270: Home
271: Home
272: Community Forums
273: Home
274: Home
275: Community Forums
276: Community Forums
277: Community Forums
278: Home
279: Home
280: Downloads
281: Home
282: Community Forums
283: Community Forums
284: Home
285: Photo Gallery
286: CPGlang
287: Community Forums
288: Home
289: Home
290: Community Forums
291: Community Forums
292: Downloads
293: Community Forums
294: Community Forums
295: Community Forums
296: Home
297: Home
298: Community Forums
299: Downloads
300: Community Forums
301: Community Forums
302: Home
303: Community Forums
304: Home
305: Community Forums
306: Community Forums
307: Community Forums
308: Community Forums
309: Community Forums
310: Community Forums
311: Community Forums
312: Community Forums
313: Home
314: Home
315: Community Forums
316: Home
317: Community Forums
318: Photo Gallery
319: Community Forums
320: Community Forums
321: Photo Gallery
322: Home
323: Community Forums
324: Community Forums
325: Home
326: Community Forums
327: Community Forums
328: Community Forums
329: Home
330: Community Forums
331: Community Forums
332: Community Forums
333: Home
334: News
335: Community Forums
336: News Archive
337: Community Forums
338: Home
339: Community Forums
340: Community Forums
341: Community Forums
342: Home
343: Home
344: Community Forums
345: Community Forums
346: Community Forums
347: Home
348: Home
349: Home
350: Home
351: Home
352: Community Forums
353: Photo Gallery
354: Community Forums
355: Community Forums
356: Community Forums
357: Home
358: Community Forums
359: CPGlang
360: Community Forums
361: Community Forums
362: Community Forums
363: Community Forums
364: Community Forums
365: Community Forums
366: Community Forums
367: Home
368: Community Forums
369: Community Forums
370: Community Forums
371: Community Forums
372: Home
373: Community Forums
374: Community Forums
375: Home
376: Home
377: Community Forums
378: Community Forums
379: Community Forums
380: Photo Gallery
381: Community Forums
382: Community Forums
383: Community Forums
384: Home
385: Community Forums
386: Home
387: Community Forums
388: Home
389: Community Forums
390: Community Forums
391: Community Forums
392: Community Forums
393: Community Forums
394: Home
395: Community Forums
396: Community Forums
397: Community Forums
398: Community Forums
399: Community Forums
400: Community Forums
401: Community Forums
402: Community Forums
403: Home
404: Home
405: Home
406: Community Forums
407: Home
408: Community Forums
409: Photo Gallery
410: Community Forums
411: Community Forums
412: Community Forums
413: Photo Gallery
414: Community Forums
415: Member Screenshots
416: Home
417: Photo Gallery
418: Community Forums
419: Community Forums
420: Downloads
421: Home
422: Community Forums
423: Home
424: Community Forums
425: Community Forums
426: Community Forums
427: Community Forums
428: Community Forums
429: Community Forums
430: Home
431: Community Forums
432: Community Forums
433: Community Forums
434: Home
435: Community Forums
436: Community Forums
437: Community Forums
438: Home
439: Home
440: Community Forums
441: Home
442: Community Forums
443: Community Forums
444: Community Forums
445: Community Forums
446: Home
447: Downloads
448: Community Forums
449: Home
450: Community Forums
451: Community Forums
452: Home
453: Home
454: Community Forums
455: Community Forums
456: Home
457: Community Forums
458: Home
459: Home
460: Community Forums
461: Community Forums
462: Home
463: Community Forums
464: Home
465: Home
466: Community Forums
467: Community Forums
468: Downloads
469: Community Forums
470: Home
471: Community Forums
472: Community Forums
473: Community Forums
474: Community Forums
475: Community Forums
476: Community Forums
477: Home
478: Community Forums
479: Home
480: Community Forums
481: Community Forums
482: Home
483: Home
484: Community Forums
485: Community Forums
486: Community Forums
487: Home
488: Community Forums
489: Home
490: Community Forums
491: Community Forums
492: Community Forums
493: Community Forums
494: Community Forums
495: Community Forums
496: Photo Gallery
497: Community Forums
498: Photo Gallery
499: Community Forums
500: Home
501: Photo Gallery
502: Community Forums
503: Community Forums
504: CPGlang
505: Home
506: Community Forums
507: Community Forums
508: Home
509: Community Forums
510: Home
511: Community Forums
512: Community Forums
513: Home
514: Community Forums
515: Community Forums
516: Community Forums
517: Community Forums
518: Downloads
519: Community Forums
520: Community Forums
521: Community Forums
522: Community Forums
523: Community Forums
524: Home
525: Community Forums
526: Home
527: Community Forums
528: Supporters
529: Community Forums
530: Community Forums
531: Community Forums
532: Community Forums
533: Home
534: Community Forums
535: Community Forums
536: Home
537: Community Forums
538: Community Forums
539: Community Forums
540: Community Forums
541: Home
542: Home
543: Community Forums
544: Downloads
545: Community Forums
546: Community Forums
547: Member Screenshots
548: Home
549: Home
550: Community Forums
551: Community Forums
552: Community Forums
553: Downloads
554: Community Forums
555: Community Forums
556: Home
557: Home
558: Community Forums
559: Community Forums
560: Community Forums
561: Community Forums
562: Community Forums
563: Home
564: Home
565: Community Forums
566: Home
567: Member Screenshots
568: Community Forums
569: Downloads
570: Community Forums
571: Community Forums
572: Community Forums
573: Home
574: Home
575: Home
576: Community Forums
577: Community Forums
578: Community Forums
579: Community Forums
580: Home
581: Community Forums
582: Community Forums
583: Community Forums
584: Home
585: Community Forums
586: Downloads
587: Home
588: Community Forums
589: Community Forums
590: Community Forums
591: Community Forums
592: Home
593: Community Forums
594: Home
595: Community Forums
596: Community Forums
597: Community Forums
598: Community Forums
599: Community Forums
600: Community Forums
601: Community Forums
602: Home
603: Community Forums
604: Community Forums
605: Community Forums
606: Community Forums
607: Community Forums
608: Home
609: Community Forums
610: Community Forums
611: Downloads
612: Community Forums
613: Home
614: Community Forums
615: Community Forums
616: Home
617: Community Forums
618: Home
619: News Archive
620: Community Forums
621: Community Forums
622: Photo Gallery
623: Community Forums
624: News
625: Community Forums
626: Home
627: Community Forums
628: Community Forums
629: CPGlang
630: Community Forums
631: Photo Gallery
632: Community Forums
633: Community Forums
634: Community Forums
635: Home
636: Community Forums
637: Home
638: Community Forums
639: Community Forums
640: Community Forums
641: Home
642: Home
643: CPGlang
644: Community Forums
645: Community Forums
646: Community Forums
647: Community Forums
648: Community Forums
649: Home
650: Member Screenshots
651: Community Forums
652: Community Forums
653: Community Forums
654: Community Forums
655: Community Forums
656: Home
657: Home
658: Community Forums
659: Community Forums
660: Home
661: Home
662: Community Forums
663: Home
664: Community Forums
665: Home
666: Community Forums
667: Community Forums
668: Member Screenshots
669: Home
670: Home
671: Home
672: Member Screenshots
673: Home
674: CPGlang
675: Community Forums
676: Community Forums
677: Community Forums
678: Community Forums
679: Community Forums
680: Home
681: Home
682: Community Forums
683: Community Forums
684: Community Forums
685: Community Forums
686: Community Forums
687: Home
688: Home
689: News Archive
690: Home
691: Community Forums
692: Community Forums
693: Community Forums
694: Home
695: Community Forums
696: Community Forums
697: Community Forums
698: Community Forums
699: Community Forums
700: Community Forums
701: Home
702: Home
703: Community Forums
704: Community Forums
705: Downloads
706: Community Forums
707: Home
708: Community Forums
709: Community Forums
710: Home
711: Photo Gallery
712: Community Forums
713: Photo Gallery
714: Community Forums
715: Community Forums
716: Community Forums
717: Community Forums
718: Community Forums
719: Community Forums
720: Home
721: Community Forums
722: Community Forums
723: Community Forums
724: Downloads
725: Community Forums
726: Community Forums
727: Community Forums
728: Photo Gallery
729: Community Forums
730: Community Forums
731: Community Forums
732: CPGlang
733: Member Screenshots
734: Community Forums
735: Community Forums
736: Home
737: Home
738: Community Forums
739: Member Screenshots
740: News Archive
741: Community Forums
742: Community Forums
743: Community Forums
744: Photo Gallery
745: Home
746: Home
747: Home
748: Community Forums
749: Community Forums
750: Community Forums
751: Community Forums
752: Downloads
753: Community Forums
754: Home
755: Home
756: Home
757: Community Forums
758: Community Forums
759: Community Forums
760: Community Forums
761: Home
762: Photo Gallery
763: Community Forums
764: CPGlang
765: Home
766: Home
767: Community Forums
768: Home
769: Community Forums
770: Community Forums
771: Community Forums
772: Community Forums
773: Community Forums
774: Community Forums
775: Community Forums
776: Home
777: Home
778: Community Forums
779: Community Forums
780: Community Forums
781: Home
782: Home
783: Community Forums
784: Community Forums
785: Home
786: Community Forums
787: Community Forums
788: Home
789: Home
790: Community Forums
791: Home
792: Home
793: Community Forums
794: Photo Gallery
795: Community Forums
796: Community Forums
797: Home
798: Community Forums
799: Home
800: Home
801: Home
802: Community Forums
803: Downloads
804: Community Forums
805: Community Forums
806: Community Forums
807: Statistics
808: Community Forums
809: Community Forums
810: Supporters
811: Community Forums
812: Home
813: Community Forums
814: Home
815: Photo Gallery
816: Community Forums
817: Community Forums
818: Home
819: Photo Gallery
820: Community Forums
821: Community Forums
822: Home
823: Home
824: Community Forums
825: Community Forums
826: Community Forums
827: Community Forums
828: Home
829: Community Forums
830: Home
831: Home
832: Community Forums
833: CPGlang
834: Community Forums
835: Community Forums
836: Community Forums
837: Community Forums
838: Community Forums
839: Home
840: Home
841: Home
842: Home
843: Home
844: Community Forums
845: Community Forums
846: Home
847: Community Forums
848: Community Forums
849: Home
850: Home
851: Community Forums
852: Community Forums
853: Community Forums
854: Home
855: Community Forums
856: Community Forums
857: Community Forums
858: Home
859: Community Forums
860: Home
861: Home
862: Community Forums
863: Home
864: Photo Gallery
865: Home
866: Home
867: Community Forums
868: Community Forums
869: Home
870: Community Forums
871: Community Forums
872: Home
873: Community Forums
874: Home
875: Community Forums
876: Community Forums
877: Community Forums
878: Home
879: Community Forums
880: Home
881: Home
882: Home
883: Community Forums
884: Home
885: Community Forums
886: Photo Gallery
887: Community Forums
888: Downloads
889: Community Forums
890: Community Forums
891: Community Forums
892: Community Forums
893: Community Forums
894: Home
895: CPGlang
896: Community Forums
897: Community Forums
898: Community Forums
899: Home
900: Home
901: Community Forums
902: Community Forums
903: Member Screenshots
904: Community Forums
905: Statistics
906: CPGlang
907: Photo Gallery
908: Community Forums
909: Photo Gallery
910: Community Forums
911: Home
912: Community Forums
913: Downloads
914: Community Forums

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
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: Thu Aug 03, 2006 3:09 pm
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted F

- Neil_Baumgardner


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.



The 3-1 rule is, as you say, a rule of hand. However, it has been validated many times over in actual combat, and remains an accepted rule in military planning. It can be adjusted based on the preparation of the defense and other factors, but most often it is adjusted upwards rather than downwards. In urban terrain, the ratio is significantly larger, with the advantage to the defender. For the Allies in NWE, I would say higher is more likely, based on Allies unfamiliarity with terrain, German preparation time, and other advantages held by defending Germans.

Patton's belief in offensive advantage had nothing to do with invalidating the 3-1 rule, but spoke rather to a way of avoiding the engagement. His thesis, still in current use by the US Army (among others), is that speed in the offense will deny the enemy the opportunity to prepare a defense, and creates opportunities to avoid defensive battles altogether. Controlled speed and decisive action preserve initiative and freedom of action to the attacker, allowing him to set the time and place of the fight. Thus, it negates the 3-1 advantage of the defender by avoiding the defensive "fair fight". The advantage remains, it just doesn't apply.

However, this offensive advantage applies more at the operational level of warfare (Division and above), which was of course Patton's domain. Below that, the ebb and flow of the battlefield will inevitably result in attacks against a prepared defender, whether we want it to or not. The overall principle of offensive speed may still apply, but at some level the attacker still has to "take that hill".

Since the ratios in question are at that lowest tactical level, where a single tank or platoon of tanks stands in the way of the advance, Patton's offensive advantage is less applicable and the 3-1 rule will dominate the action. Changes in these advantages may certainly be debated, but experience shows that 3-1 is on average correct.

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!


Last edited by C_Sherman on Thu Aug 03, 2006 3:46 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Photo Gallery
Doug_Kibbey
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 4678
Location: The Great Satan
PostPosted: Thu Aug 03, 2006 3:23 pm
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted F

Further to Chuck's excellent points, a lot of the advantage to offensive operations when not avoiding the stronger defensive postions altogether, is the ability to concentrate one's forces (exercising "initiative", as Chuck mentioned) at the place of the attacker's choosing. By doing so, the attacker can assemble a numerical ratio equal to or greater than the theoretical one attributed to the defender.
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website Photo Gallery
Neil_Baumgardner
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 3942
Location: Arlington, VA
PostPosted: Thu Aug 03, 2006 4:05 pm
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted F

- C_Sherman
- Neil_Baumgardner


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.



The 3-1 rule is, as you say, a rule of hand. However, it has been validated many times over in actual combat, and remains an accepted rule in military planning. It can be adjusted based on the preparation of the defense and other factors, but most often it is adjusted upwards rather than downwards. In urban terrain, the ratio is significantly larger, with the advantage to the defender. For the Allies in NWE, I would say higher is more likely, based on Allies unfamiliarity with terrain, German preparation time, and other advantages held by defending Germans.

Patton's belief in offensive advantage had nothing to do with invalidating the 3-1 rule, but spoke rather to a way of avoiding the engagement. His thesis, still in current use by the US Army (among others), is that speed in the offense will deny the enemy the opportunity to prepare a defense, and creates opportunities to avoid defensive battles altogether. Controlled speed and decisive action preserve initiative and freedom of action to the attacker, allowing him to set the time and place of the fight. Thus, it negates the 3-1 advantage of the defender by avoiding the defensive "fair fight". The advantage remains, it just doesn't apply.

However, this offensive advantage applies more at the operational level of warfare (Division and above), which was of course Patton's domain. Below that, the ebb and flow of the battlefield will inevitably result in attacks against a prepared defender, whether we want it to or not. The overall principle of offensive speed may still apply, but at some level the attacker still has to "take that hill".

Since the ratios in question are at that lowest tactical level, where a single tank or platoon of tanks stands in the way of the advance, Patton's offensive advantage is less applicable and the 3-1 rule will dominate the action. Changes in these advantages may certainly be debated, but experience shows that 3-1 is on average correct.
C


Chuck, very good points. As a student of military history & analysis, I'm impressed. Only counterpoint or question I would make is that at what point does offensive advantage at the operational level filter or "trickle" down to tactical advantage?

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

Offline Offline
Joined: Jun 10, 2006
Posts: 3

PostPosted: Thu Aug 03, 2006 7:28 pm
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted F

If you persist there are some very good figures in this thread.

www.feldgrau.net/phpBB...sc&start=0




For Normandy the following extract is illuminating:



"It is very difficult to determine the ‘exchange’ ratios in terms of effectiveness between two opposing weapons systems, even in a generalized sense. And the ‘ratios’ bandied about in this case are simply not relative measure of effectiveness, but rather they are relative measures of loss, which are not the same thing. In other words, if the Allies lost 300 tanks and the Germans 100, then a 3-to-1 loss ratio exists. But that does not mean that there was a 3-to-1 ratio of effectiveness. However, if we could know that that 100 Allied tanks were lost to German tanks and 100 German tanks were lost to Allied tanks, then we possibly could say that there was a 1-to-1 ratio of relative effectiveness between them. Unfortunately, as in some many cases of such historical analysis, the data simply can’t support such a conclusion one way or another and can be manipulated virtually any way one desires - all in quite a reasonable and logical manor.

Overall cause of loss for tanks varies according to time period and the reports cited. Thus, according to WO 291/1186 in the ETO it was:

Mines 22.1%
AT guns 22.7%
Tanks 14.5%
SP Guns 24.4%
Bazooka 14.2%
Other 2.1%

This may be compared to a sample of 506 US First Army tanks lost (destroyed and damaged) between 6 June and 30 November 1944.

Mines 18.2%
AT/Tank guns 46.2%
Artillery 7.3%
Mortars 1.8%
Bazooka 13.6%
Other 12.9%

Now as far as American tank losses in Normandy go we have the following data from various reports:

In terms of the cause of loss, in June of 32 tanks examined, 18 were to ‘AT guns’ (56.25%), 9 to PF/PS (28.13%), 1 to mines (3.13%), and 1 to ‘artillery’ (3.13%). Unfortunately we do not know if the AT guns were just that or if they were mounted on armored vehicles of some type. However, we do know that 6 of those 18 were lost on D-Day, so cannot have been lost to anything other than the emplaced guns of the beach defenses.

In July, of 73 examined, 41.1% were lost to AT guns, 32.88% to PF/PS, 16.44% to mines, 4.11% to mines and 4.11% to unknown causes.

In August, of 130 examined, 55.38% were lost to AT guns, 18.46 to unknown causes, 13.08% to mines, 6.15% to artillery, 5.38% to PF/PS, and 1.54% to mortars.

Overall, losses to ‘AT guns’ appear to have been somewhere around 50% in Normandy (the monthly average is 50.91%) and were not far off the ‘norm’ of 46.2%.

From 6 June to 1 July (26 days), First Army wrote off 187 M4-75mm and 44 M5.
From 2 to 29 July (28 days), First Army wrote off 208 M4-75mm, 12 M4-76mm, 4 M4-105mm, and 67 M5.
From 30 July to 2 September (35 days), First Army wrote off 237 M4-75mm, 38 M4-76mm, 6 M4-105mm, and 69 M5.
From 3 to 28 September (26 days), First Army wrote off 123 M4-75mm, 33 M4-76mm, 10 M4-105mm, and 34 M5.
From 1 August to 2 September (33 days), Third Army wrote off 221 M4-75mm and 94 M5.
From 3 to 30 September (28 days), Third Army wrote off 48 M4-75mm, 61 M4-76mm, 2 M4-105mm, and 37 M5.
From 9 September to 5 October (27 days), Ninth Army wrote off 2 M4-75mm.

Thus roughly:
‘June’ 231
‘July’ 291
‘August’ 665
‘September’ 350
Total = 1,537

From the above we could presume that roughly 780 were due to tank and AT guns. Using the WO figures, then perhaps 223 were to 'tank guns.'

For the British cause of loss in Normandy we have but a single document that appears relevant. That is O.R.S. 2 Report No. 12, Analysis of 75mm Sherman Tank Casualties Suffered Between 6th June and 10th June 1944. That document reports that of 45 Sherman tanks examined a total of 40 or 89% were lost to ‘AP shot,’ 4 or 9% to mines and 1 or 2% to unidentified causes.

British losses are given as:

June – 146
July – 231
August – 834
September - ?
Total = 1,211 (est. 1,568)

Unfortunately I have been unable to determine the British September totals, but given the overall similarity with the American figures it is probably not unreasonable to suppose that they were about 350 as well (if the proportionality with June-August were maintained, then it would be 357. If we presume that the above cause of loss was consistent for June and July, then about 336 were probably lost to ‘AP shot,’ which is probably an underestimate. If we presume that percentage applied throughout, then a total of 1,396 were possibly lost to ‘AP shot,’ which is probably an exaggeration. Using the total ‘AP shot’ weapons from WO 292/1186 (61.6) we would probably derive a more accurate estimate of 966. On the other hand, if we accept the figures from WO 291/1186 by type of AP weapon, then we can estimate that only 227 were lost to ‘tank guns’ and if that figure is applied to the Allied total loss, then perhaps only 450 were lost to ‘tank guns.’

Thus, we may estimate that the upper limit of Allied tanks lost to ‘AP shot’ (tanks, AT guns and assault guns) was perhaps 2,176, while probably the lower limit lost to ‘tank guns’ was about 450.

German losses were:

June – 1 Pz-IV(k), 124 Pz-IV(l), 80 Pz-V, 19 Pz-VI (L56) = 224
July – 149 Pz-IV(l), 125 Pz-V, 14 Pz-VI (L56) = 288
August – 49 Pz-IV(l), 41 Pz-V, 15 Pz-VI (L56) = 105
September – 12 Pz-IV(k), 581 Pz-IV, 540 Pz-V, 72 Pz-VI (L56), 23 Pz-VI (L70) = 1,228
Total = 1,845

Cause of loss for German tanks is given for a select set in O.R.S. 2 Report No. 17, Analysis of German Tank Casualties in France, 6th June 44 – 31st August 1944. In that report, for the period of 6 June-7 August a sample of 53 tanks resulted in 48% lost to ‘AP shot.’ For 8-31 August 1944 that dropped to just 11% due to the high number of abandoned tanks in that period. From that we may presume that the June-July total loss to ‘AP shot’ may have been about 246, while for August-September it may have been about 147, for a total of about 393.

Thus, using these very rough methods, we can assume that the upper limit of the ratio of Allied to German tank losses to ‘AP shot’ may have been as high as 2,176-to-393, or about 5.54-to-1. Probably closer would be an ‘AP shot’ ratio of roughly 1,746-to-393, or about 4.44-to-1. The tank-versus-tank ratios are possibly similar although it could be argued to be as low as 673-to-393, or 1.71-to-1, aboutthe same as the overall loss ratio. Nevermind that this comparison is probably irrelevent.

Overall then we may postulate a total of about 3,105 Allied to 1,845 German tanks written off, or about a 1.68-to-1 ratio of losses, again, a number that has nothing to do with the relative effectiveness of the Allied versus the German tanks. However, it is probably very relevant in terms of the overall Allied-versus-German combat effectiveness.

Of course the real upshot is that these comparisons are probably not very illuminating, nor very surprising, given that the Germans were fighting mostly on the tactical defensive, with tanks that were in general more effective than Allied types.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

So much for the 5:1 loss ratio for Allied tanks!
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 8:16 pm
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted F

Interesting info mkenny. This is somewhat as I expected. The only way to get a real true measure would be from unit records (rather than inspections of damage afterwards), but I suspect tank crews may not have recorded kills quite as much as pilots do... The Germans probably did - since they had more focus on "tank aces," but that only gives you half the numbers...

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

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 590

PostPosted: Thu Aug 03, 2006 9:00 pm
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted F

- Neil_Baumgardner


Chuck, very good points. As a student of military history & analysis, I'm impressed. Only counterpoint or question I would make is that at what point does offensive advantage at the operational level filter or "trickle" down to tactical advantage?

Neil


Hi again Neil,

Your question found the seam between the science and "art" of warfare! The answer is also the key to "modern" manuever warfare.

The offensive advantage exists down to the tactical level, in a very dynamic way (dynamic, in the sense of rapid interactive and interdependant changes). The effect can be very localized, and depends greatly on the relative capabilities of the players. Basically, the offensive advantage comes from being "inside the decision cycle" of the adversary, acting before or while they react to your previous actions. Flexible, mentally nimble leaders are key to attaining this advantage, in addition to equipment that can support them.

The advantage comes when the attacker retains the initiative, and manuevers to bypass or overwhelm specific points in the defenders' arrangements.

By being where the Germans were not, or turning a flank, or focussing overwhelming force at a weak point, before the Germans could react or move their own forces, the Allies could achieve this advantage and avoid the attack against prepared defense. The Sherman actually fed this advantage for the Allies, by being faster than the German defenders could. That they did not always exploit this ability says more about the leadership than it does about the tanks and other vehicles the Allies employed.

In the defense, eliminating the advantage requires agile command and control systems and leadership, as well as mobility to counter the attackers' moves. The faster the attacker can adjust or shift effort, the more agile and responsive the defender must be.

The Germans were at a general disadvantage in the defense, most of the time. Arguably, their command and leadership was not as systemically reactive, both at the operational level (Hitler being the final authority for moving divisions), and at the tactical level. Their command and control systems were damaged and fragmented, and their tactical intelligence picture was largely incomplete. A subtle psychological handicap occurred because the Germans were accustomed to reacting to their own slower, less mechanized equipment in training. This meant that the Germans were often incapable of reacting in a timely way to Allied actions, even when those actions appeared ploddingly slow on the surface. So the Allies often achieved the offensive advantage, not always intentionally.

As currently executed by the users of the Abrams/Challenger2/Leo6-class militaries, speed and agility is a cornerstone of tactical operations. Historical narratives of the Gulf War and emerging histories of the Iraq War make it clear that the rapid actions in the attack left defenders befuddled, confused and vulnerable. Current efforts to digitalize combat vehicles and even individual soldiers are not just "gee whiz, because we can", they are designed to shorten the decision cycle even further. This serves well in the offense, and will serve to negate the offensive advantage in the defense.

Whew. Somebody please tell me all this makes sense? (See what happens when you get me going?)

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
Roy_A_Lingle
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 1997
Location: El Paso & Ft Bliss, Texas
PostPosted: Fri Aug 04, 2006 12:14 am
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted F

HI Chuck! Hi Folks!

- C_Sherman

Whew. Somebody please tell me all this makes sense? (See what happens when you get me going?)


It makes sense to me! Smile
I think all that was once known as the advantage of the element of surpise.

Possible an example of your post would be the Frence during 1940. They had the best tanks in Europe at the beginning of 1940, but by the end of that year, all those tanks were destoryed or being put to use by the Germans. The Germans got inside the Frence leadership desicion cycle and the rest is history.

I think that is also an example of one can not just take one AFV and compair it's spec.s to another. Two tanks facing off at high noon on main street doesn't happien very often.

Well done everyone!

HF, you still here?
The sound bits of TV show many times leave a lot of the story out. Do you have any questions now?

Some little items:
From Steve J. Zaloga's The M4 Sherman at War, The Europena Theatre 1942-1945, page 31.
"One US tank battalion was equipment with Fireflys in Italy, but received them too late to see combat action."

From R.P. Hunnicutt's Sherman book, page 213.
"On 9 August (1944), General Omar Bradley directed his Twelfth Army Group, Armor Section to request an allotment of tanks armed with the British 17 pounder."

Didn't happien due to a shortage of reserve tanks.

"The effort to obtain 17 pounder tanks was revivied later in the middle of February 1945..."
...the Twelfth Army Group requested an initail conversion of 160 Shermans with further conversions dependent on battle experience. Later, this was cut to 80 because of limitations in the British ammunition supply. .....only the first few began to arrive in mid March (1945). These were allocated to the Ninth Army, but there is no record of their use prior to the end of the war. In fact, the Ninth Army After Action Report indicates that the delivery of 40 17 pounders tanks was expected, but it does not record their arrival."

Some notes on Pershing numbers, all from Hunnicutt's Pershing book.
Production of the T-23E3 started during the fall of 1944.
20 of the first 40 vehicles completed shipment to Antwerp, Belgium in January of 1945.
All assigned to 12th U.S. Army Group, They were past along to 1st U.S. Army, with ten each going to the 3rd and 9th Armored Divisions.
February 25th (1945) 3RD AD was ready and the 9th AD was ready three days later.

Late March (1945) 40 more arrived, going to Ninth Army with 22 to the 2nd AD and the other 18 going to the 5th AD. The 2nd AD tankers received a 45 minute briffing and then move out with their new tanks.
30 issued to the 11th AD which started operations on Apirl 21 (1945).

"The flow of Pershings to Europe continued until by VE Day there were 310 in the Theater of whch 200 had been issued to the troops." Page 38.

What does all this tell us? Once the first problem of 'Doctrine' was starting to be over come, this was the best that could be done to get 17 pounder Shermans and T-23E3 90mm gun tanks into the hands of the troops.

Someone made a comment about the Soviets did a better job of upgrading their tanks than the U.S. did.

Soviets who had been working on tank designs during the 1930s had a head start over the U.S. Army which was impacted by a shortage of funds during that time.

I think that same poster also said that the Germans did a better job of upgrading and designing tanks. Will, the Germans were forced to. They ran into the T-34 and the KV-1 tanks the Soviets where just starting to field at the start of the Eastern Front war. They saw that both better tanks and AT Gun systems were needed to counter those Soviet Tanks.

The Soviets in turn were forced to up grade their tanks to counter the newer German tanks.

The U.S. on the other hand, was still working under a bad doctrine that prevented heavier tanks being developed and fielded. Until post D-Day, the U.S. was also working under the false believe that the 76mm tank cannon could do the job. Intell and after actions reports being received back in the states from actions in North Africa and Italy supported the believe that the doctrine (with more towed and less self propelled anti-tank units) could get the job done.

I feel that all the technical problems (and they were many and they are all very real) are just smoke screens reasons for not changing the doctrine.

Sgt, Scouts Out! Smile

_________________
"You can never have too much reconnaissance."
General G.S. Patton Jr.
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: Fri Aug 04, 2006 1:42 am
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted F

- C_Sherman

Hi again Neil,

Your question found the seam between the science and "art" of warfare! The answer is also the key to "modern" manuever warfare.

The offensive advantage exists down to the tactical level, in a very dynamic way (dynamic, in the sense of rapid interactive and interdependant changes). The effect can be very localized, and depends greatly on the relative capabilities of the players. Basically, the offensive advantage comes from being "inside the decision cycle" of the adversary, acting before or while they react to your previous actions. Flexible, mentally nimble leaders are key to attaining this advantage, in addition to equipment that can support them.


Very good points. This is where the Air Force's OODA (Observe, Orient, Decide, Act) loop comes from as well as the Army's "See First, Understand First, Act First & Finish Decisively."

However, having just taken a class of History of Military Operations from a real Clausewitz disciple, I can tell you this is anethema to a traditional Clausewitzian view (and possibly derided as Jominian) - although I think it can fit within Clausewitz...

Of course Clausewitz also argued that good military leaders should NOT be students of history (he seemed to believe you were either a military genius or you werent) and that weather "rarely plays a factor." Tell the latter to Napoleon (1812) & Hitler (1942)....


The advantage comes when the attacker retains the initiative, and manuevers to bypass or overwhelm specific points in the defenders' arrangements.

By being where the Germans were not, or turning a flank, or focussing overwhelming force at a weak point, before the Germans could react or move their own forces, the Allies could achieve this advantage and avoid the attack against prepared defense. The Sherman actually fed this advantage for the Allies, by being faster than the German defenders could. That they did not always exploit this ability says more about the leadership than it does about the tanks and other vehicles the Allies employed.

In the defense, eliminating the advantage requires agile command and control systems and leadership, as well as mobility to counter the attackers' moves. The faster the attacker can adjust or shift effort, the more agile and responsive the defender must be.

The Germans were at a general disadvantage in the defense, most of the time. Arguably, their command and leadership was not as systemically reactive, both at the operational level (Hitler being the final authority for moving divisions), and at the tactical level. Their command and control systems were damaged and fragmented, and their tactical intelligence picture was largely incomplete. A subtle psychological handicap occurred because the Germans were accustomed to reacting to their own slower, less mechanized equipment in training. This meant that the Germans were often incapable of reacting in a timely way to Allied actions, even when those actions appeared ploddingly slow on the surface. So the Allies often achieved the offensive advantage, not always intentionally.

As currently executed by the users of the Abrams/Challenger2/Leo6-class militaries, speed and agility is a cornerstone of tactical operations. Historical narratives of the Gulf War and emerging histories of the Iraq War make it clear that the rapid actions in the attack left defenders befuddled, confused and vulnerable. Current efforts to digitalize combat vehicles and even individual soldiers are not just "gee whiz, because we can", they are designed to shorten the decision cycle even further. This serves well in the offense, and will serve to negate the offensive advantage in the defense.


Bingo, just what I was talking about above.


Whew. Somebody please tell me all this makes sense? (See what happens when you get me going?)
C


Certainly, and I have enjoyed it. I guess my point/question is, with the US (or at least Patton) often employing this form of warfare, how often did it negate the Germans' defensive tactical advantage? You said the Germans were at a general disadvantage on the defense, does this mean they usually did not enjoy a 3-1 advantage? If so, were any "kill-ratios" that remained due to the differing capabilities of the forces/tanks, instead of defensive advantage?

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

Offline Offline
Joined: Jul 20, 2006
Posts: 3

PostPosted: Fri Aug 04, 2006 2:07 am
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted F

Albert Speer, Nazi Minister of Armaments 1942-1945 writes in his memoirs
"Inside the Third Reich" 1969

"In October 1944, I tried once more to win Hitler over to the idea of light tanks: On the southwestern front (Italy) reports on the cross-county mobility of the Sherman have bveen very favorable. The Sherman climbs mountains which our tank experts consider inaccessible to tanks. One great advantage is that the Sherman has a very powerful motor in proportion to its weight. Its cross-country mobility on level ground (in the Po Valley) is, as the Twenty-Sixth Division reports, definitely superior to that of our tanks. Everyone involved in tank warfare is impatiently waiting for lighter and therfore more maneuverable tanks which, simply by having superior guns, will assure the necessary fighting power.
Back to top
View user's profile
Roy_A_Lingle
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 1997
Location: El Paso & Ft Bliss, Texas
PostPosted: Fri Aug 04, 2006 10:22 am
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted Facts

Hi Neil! Hi Folks!

I copied this from that mess I used to start this thread.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neil_Baumgardner Joined: Jan 24, 2006 Posts: 507
Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 2:13 am Post subject: Re: 1st Cav Museum at Ft Hood...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neil wrote:
Bob, I'll play devil's advocate for the sake of discussion...

The heavier Panther-class tanks could have been offloaded using LSTs no?

Yes, but I don't think very many LSTs would have been available for that. The time frame for available LSTs in the MTO had a big impacted on the Anzio landings do to the need to transfered all of them to England for Overlord. Then they needed to be transfered back to the MTO for the landings in Southern France, followed by another transfer to the PTO.

Any movement of M6 or other heavier tanks could only have been done by the Liberties and other types of cargo ships. As it was, the first design of the Liberties could not even load or unload the early M4 Shermans. Some time during the war, only the cranes by the hold right in front of the bridge was upgraded to lift Shermans.

Part of the delay with the 12 T-23E3s that were shipped to the PTO was the problem with getting them off the ship after it arrived.

My 2 cents on using LSTs.
Sgt, Scouts Out! Smile

_________________
"You can never have too much reconnaissance."
General G.S. Patton Jr.
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    Reply to topic    Printer Friendly Page    Forum Index ›  AFV News Discussion Board
Page 4 of 4
All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4



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