±Recent Visitors

Recent Visitors to Com-Central!

±User Info-big


Welcome Anonymous

Nickname
Password

Membership:
Latest: cgsimpson
New Today: 0
New Yesterday: 0
Overall: 6646

People Online:
Members: 0
Visitors: 166
Total: 166
Who Is Where:
 Visitors:
01: Community Forums
02: Community Forums
03: Photo Gallery
04: Downloads
05: Community Forums
06: Community Forums
07: Community Forums
08: Home
09: Community Forums
10: Community Forums
11: Home
12: Community Forums
13: Community Forums
14: Community Forums
15: Community Forums
16: CPGlang
17: CPGlang
18: Community Forums
19: Community Forums
20: CPGlang
21: Community Forums
22: Photo Gallery
23: Home
24: CPGlang
25: Member Screenshots
26: CPGlang
27: Community Forums
28: CPGlang
29: Community Forums
30: CPGlang
31: CPGlang
32: Community Forums
33: CPGlang
34: Community Forums
35: Home
36: Downloads
37: CPGlang
38: Community Forums
39: CPGlang
40: Community Forums
41: Community Forums
42: Community Forums
43: Community Forums
44: Community Forums
45: Home
46: Home
47: Photo Gallery
48: Photo Gallery
49: CPGlang
50: CPGlang
51: CPGlang
52: CPGlang
53: Photo Gallery
54: Community Forums
55: Community Forums
56: Community Forums
57: Member Screenshots
58: CPGlang
59: Community Forums
60: Community Forums
61: Community Forums
62: Community Forums
63: Downloads
64: Community Forums
65: Home
66: Downloads
67: Community Forums
68: Community Forums
69: Member Screenshots
70: CPGlang
71: Community Forums
72: Community Forums
73: Community Forums
74: Community Forums
75: CPGlang
76: Home
77: Community Forums
78: CPGlang
79: Community Forums
80: Home
81: Community Forums
82: Home
83: Community Forums
84: Photo Gallery
85: Community Forums
86: Community Forums
87: Community Forums
88: Home
89: CPGlang
90: Home
91: CPGlang
92: Community Forums
93: Photo Gallery
94: Community Forums
95: Community Forums
96: CPGlang
97: CPGlang
98: Community Forums
99: Community Forums
100: Community Forums
101: Community Forums
102: Community Forums
103: Community Forums
104: Community Forums
105: Community Forums
106: Community Forums
107: Community Forums
108: CPGlang
109: Community Forums
110: CPGlang
111: Community Forums
112: Photo Gallery
113: Community Forums
114: Community Forums
115: Home
116: CPGlang
117: CPGlang
118: Community Forums
119: Community Forums
120: CPGlang
121: Community Forums
122: Community Forums
123: Community Forums
124: Community Forums
125: CPGlang
126: CPGlang
127: Community Forums
128: Photo Gallery
129: CPGlang
130: Community Forums
131: Community Forums
132: CPGlang
133: Community Forums
134: Community Forums
135: CPGlang
136: Community Forums
137: CPGlang
138: CPGlang
139: CPGlang
140: CPGlang
141: Community Forums
142: Community Forums
143: Community Forums
144: CPGlang
145: CPGlang
146: Community Forums
147: CPGlang
148: Home
149: Community Forums
150: Community Forums
151: Community Forums
152: CPGlang
153: CPGlang
154: Home
155: Community Forums
156: Home
157: CPGlang
158: CPGlang
159: Your Account
160: Community Forums
161: Community Forums
162: Community Forums
163: Home
164: Home
165: CPGlang
166: Community Forums

Staff Online:

No staff members are online!
Interesting photo of a Sherman Firefly
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
Post new topic    Reply to topic    Printer Friendly Page     Forum Index ›  AFV News Discussion Board

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

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 25, 2006
Posts: 146

PostPosted: Wed Apr 12, 2006 9:33 am
Post subject: Re: Interesting photo of a Sherman Firefly

- Dontos
Claus

An important note to that would be the wearing of vehicle protective helmets with 'ear phones'. There is a remarkable amount of hearing protection afforded to the crew by wearing the helmets.

It is still a 'deafening' profession. (The proof being my own hearing loss and constant 'ringing' in my ears after 21 years in and around tanks!)


Good point about the headgear. I now the "ringing feeling" from diring long trips on motorcycle, but luckily, that disappears after a day or so of rest. Smile

Claus B
Back to top
View user's profile
J.McGillivray
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 149

PostPosted: Wed Apr 12, 2006 10:29 pm
Post subject: Re: Interesting photo of a Sherman Firefly

In the book “Tank Tactics from Normandy to Lorraine� by Roman Jarymowycz there is a Canadian Analysis of Sherman Casualties for the period 6 June to 10 July in Appendix G. The final part of the study is entitled:

“Further Study of Tank Hit but not Penetrated and Remained in Action.�
Total Tanks inspected 124
Hits failing to Penetrate 83
Back to top
View user's profile
SHAWN
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 31, 2006
Posts: 484

PostPosted: Thu Apr 13, 2006 8:19 pm
Post subject: Re: Interesting photo of a Sherman Firefly

very interesting...
i will try to get my hands on that book. i have many an inquiry... like of the tanks inspected, how many had follow up shots that did penetrate? what vehicles exactly where inspected and under what circumstances did they receive hits? etc.......
can i ask what else the study details?
Back to top
View user's profile Photo Gallery
Neil_Baumgardner
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 3942
Location: Arlington, VA
PostPosted: Thu Apr 13, 2006 8:59 pm
Post subject: Re: Interesting photo of a Sherman Firefly

Along similar lines, does this book go into platoon-level tactics, formations, etc?

Neil
Back to top
View user's profile
J.McGillivray
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 149

PostPosted: Fri Apr 14, 2006 11:26 am
Post subject: Re: Interesting photo of a Sherman Firefly

Hello Shawn, Neil,

The problem with most published studies like this is the lack of detail, and of context.

First the timing of the study would have being just after the fall of Caen and at about the time of the transfer of the 3rd Canadian Infantry Division and the 2nd Armoured Brigade from the British 1st Corps to the 2nd Canadian Corps.

Most of the study deals with a detailed analysis of 45 Sherman casualties. The study doses not give the details as to where these tanks are located, or the details of how they became casualties. However, I suspect that these 45 tanks are most likely 2CAB Shermans located in the tank graveyard at Bray, and that they are “total losses�.

The last part of the study contains the information I posted in my previous post. Those 124 Shermans are most likely the ones which were in service with 2CAB at the time of inspection, on the 10th of July or soon afterwards.

So in total the study covers 169 tanks. There are a total of 148 hits reported with 62 penetrations and 86 hits which failed to penetrate.

What is missing from the study are those tanks which were KOed, but were recovered and under going repair.

As per the book in General, it seems to deal more with Armoured doctrine then with detailed unit tactics. It is of the vain that everything German and Russian is good, while everything allied is bad, with things Canadian being the very worst. There is a lot of interesting information presented in the book, but I strongly disagree with the authors analysis and conclusions.

www.rienner.com/viewbo...71&catid=6
Back to top
View user's profile
SHAWN
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 31, 2006
Posts: 484

PostPosted: Fri Apr 14, 2006 8:06 pm
Post subject: Re: Interesting photo of a Sherman Firefly

i am interesting in reading it. i think i will order it.
thanks!
Back to top
View user's profile Photo Gallery
J.McGillivray
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 149

PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2006 10:15 pm
Post subject: Re: Interesting photo of a Sherman Firefly

My largest complained with Jarymowycz’s book concerns his treatment of the Goodwood, Cobra and Spring Operations. He, along with many others, treats these Operations as being separate and totally independent of each other. He also ignores the impact of the bad weather on their planning and conduct.

First you must remember that during the months of June and July, Montgomery was the commander of all allied ground forces in Normandy. He was not just the British commander, but he also commanded the Americans and Canadian troops. He commanded the 21st Army Group which consisted of Bradley’s 1st US Army and Dempsey’s 2nd British Army.

Montgomery’s Big July offensive consisted of three Operations; Goodwood and Atlantic, followed two days later by Cobra. This was similar to what Montgomery had done at El Alamein. His intent was to launch an attack at one end of his front to draw in the German reserves, and then launch a second attack at the other side of the front. The second attack was to be Cobra and was the main effort. Although few Americans will acknowledge this, Montgomery was just as responsible for Cobra as he was for Goodwood. The overall concept was Montgomery’s, with the detailed planning being done at the Army and Corps level. The real architect of Goodwood was the British VIII Corps commander O’Conner, and not Montgomery. It was O’Conner who wanted to use an armoured corps, and with Dempsey’s help, he sold the idea to Montgomery. The planned start of Goodwood and Cobra was to be the 17th and 19th of July. But because of the problems the Americans had in capturing St. Lo and in securing their start line, both operations were pushed back to the 18th and the 20th.

Goodwood started off well on the 18th and made deep penetrations into the German defences. Although the British suffered high tank losses, their causalities in personnel were relatively light by Normandy standards. Most of the British tanks that were lost were later recovered and returned to service. The Canadian Corps, in spite of heavy fighting, had achieved all of their Atlantic objectives; but was ordered to push beyond them to help secure the Goodwood objectives.

On the 20th the weather turned against the Allies. Cobra was postponed due to bad weather. The Air force would not bomb without good weather, and Bradley would not start Cobra without the bombers. The British and Canadians were encountering stiffening resistance and increasing numbers of counterattacks. Added to this were thunder storms and the non-start of Cobra. With all of this Dempsey (not Montgomery) ordered the end of Goodwood.

Bradley was hoping he could launch Cobra on the 21st, and thus was furious with Montgomery for stopping Goodwood on the 20th. But because of continuing bad weather reports, Cobra was pushed back to the 24th. Also on the 21st Montgomery gave instructions to Guy Simonds to plan for operation Spring to start on the 25th, the day after the new start date of Cobra.

Simonds has claimed all along that Spring was planned as a holding attack. It was to start just after Cobra and was intended to delay the movement of German troops against Cobra. If the Germans did shift their forces on mass to counter Cobra, or started a general withdraw towards the Seine River, then Simonds had two British Armoured Divisions available to exploit the situation.

On the 24th the allied air forces took off to carryout the bombardment to open Cobra. However, because of thick ground mists, the air forces cancelled the attack and ordered the bombers back to base. Some bombers did not receive the recall order and dropped their bombs. The allied commanders were worried that this false start of Cobra had tipped off the Germans as to their intentions. Also they did not know when Cobra would start, because it was depended on the weather.

The role of Spring was now to keep the German attention focused on the area south of Caen, and away from the American sector.

While the Americans were sitting on their duffs between the 20th and the 25th, waiting for the weather to clear, the Canadians were engaged in heavy fighting. The Germans had continued their counter attacks. Also, the Germans rushed additional troops and armour to the area south of Caen. Because of the bad weather there was little aerial reconnaissance conducted over the German positions while Spring was being planned.

Spring started at 2am on the 25th of July. The Canadians were attacking a numerically superior German force occupying strong defensive positions, with excellent fields of fire, and possessing a technical edge in equipment. Also, unknown to the Canadians, the area for centuries, had being a mining district. It was a rabbit warren of underground mine tunnels and shafts. The Canadian troops would clear an area, only to have the Germans reappear behind them, literally out of the ground. Also Spring was not well supported by the air force. Cobra started on the 25th. Most of the allied air power was used to support Cobra, and Spring got the leftovers.

That’s enough for now.
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 2 of 2
All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Go to page Previous  1, 2



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