±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: 1048
Total: 1048
Who Is Where:
 Visitors:
01: Member Screenshots
02: Home
03: Community Forums
04: Downloads
05: Community Forums
06: Home
07: Statistics
08: Home
09: Photo Gallery
10: Home
11: Photo Gallery
12: Photo Gallery
13: Home
14: Community Forums
15: Community Forums
16: Photo Gallery
17: Photo Gallery
18: Photo Gallery
19: Community Forums
20: Member Screenshots
21: Community Forums
22: Community Forums
23: Photo Gallery
24: Photo Gallery
25: Photo Gallery
26: Community Forums
27: Home
28: Photo Gallery
29: Member Screenshots
30: News Archive
31: Photo Gallery
32: Home
33: Photo Gallery
34: Your Account
35: Home
36: Home
37: Photo Gallery
38: Photo Gallery
39: Community Forums
40: Member Screenshots
41: Photo Gallery
42: Community Forums
43: Community Forums
44: Community Forums
45: Photo Gallery
46: Home
47: Photo Gallery
48: Home
49: Downloads
50: Photo Gallery
51: Home
52: Downloads
53: Community Forums
54: Photo Gallery
55: Photo Gallery
56: Photo Gallery
57: Photo Gallery
58: Community Forums
59: Photo Gallery
60: Photo Gallery
61: Community Forums
62: Photo Gallery
63: Downloads
64: Home
65: Photo Gallery
66: Home
67: Photo Gallery
68: Community Forums
69: Statistics
70: Home
71: Photo Gallery
72: Photo Gallery
73: Photo Gallery
74: Home
75: Home
76: Home
77: Home
78: Home
79: Home
80: Community Forums
81: Community Forums
82: Photo Gallery
83: Community Forums
84: Community Forums
85: Photo Gallery
86: Photo Gallery
87: Photo Gallery
88: Photo Gallery
89: Home
90: Member Screenshots
91: Photo Gallery
92: Community Forums
93: Photo Gallery
94: Member Screenshots
95: Community Forums
96: Photo Gallery
97: Community Forums
98: Downloads
99: Photo Gallery
100: Photo Gallery
101: Community Forums
102: Photo Gallery
103: Photo Gallery
104: Home
105: Community Forums
106: Photo Gallery
107: Photo Gallery
108: Photo Gallery
109: Photo Gallery
110: Home
111: Photo Gallery
112: Home
113: Home
114: Community Forums
115: Home
116: Home
117: Home
118: Photo Gallery
119: Photo Gallery
120: Photo Gallery
121: Member Screenshots
122: Statistics
123: Home
124: Community Forums
125: Photo Gallery
126: Community Forums
127: Photo Gallery
128: Photo Gallery
129: Photo Gallery
130: Photo Gallery
131: Photo Gallery
132: Photo Gallery
133: Community Forums
134: Community Forums
135: Photo Gallery
136: Downloads
137: Photo Gallery
138: Statistics
139: Member Screenshots
140: Home
141: Photo Gallery
142: Home
143: Photo Gallery
144: Downloads
145: Photo Gallery
146: Member Screenshots
147: Photo Gallery
148: Photo Gallery
149: Downloads
150: Member Screenshots
151: Photo Gallery
152: Photo Gallery
153: Community Forums
154: Community Forums
155: Home
156: Photo Gallery
157: Photo Gallery
158: Home
159: Home
160: Home
161: Downloads
162: Home
163: Home
164: Photo Gallery
165: Home
166: Home
167: Photo Gallery
168: Photo Gallery
169: Home
170: Member Screenshots
171: Photo Gallery
172: Photo Gallery
173: Photo Gallery
174: Photo Gallery
175: Community Forums
176: Community Forums
177: Photo Gallery
178: Statistics
179: Photo Gallery
180: Downloads
181: Photo Gallery
182: Home
183: Photo Gallery
184: Home
185: Downloads
186: Statistics
187: Community Forums
188: Photo Gallery
189: Home
190: Photo Gallery
191: Community Forums
192: Photo Gallery
193: Photo Gallery
194: Photo Gallery
195: Home
196: Photo Gallery
197: Photo Gallery
198: Photo Gallery
199: Statistics
200: Home
201: Home
202: Downloads
203: Photo Gallery
204: Photo Gallery
205: Statistics
206: Photo Gallery
207: Photo Gallery
208: Community Forums
209: Photo Gallery
210: Statistics
211: Photo Gallery
212: Photo Gallery
213: Photo Gallery
214: Photo Gallery
215: Downloads
216: Photo Gallery
217: Community Forums
218: Photo Gallery
219: Downloads
220: Photo Gallery
221: Community Forums
222: Member Screenshots
223: Photo Gallery
224: Community Forums
225: Photo Gallery
226: Community Forums
227: Community Forums
228: Downloads
229: Photo Gallery
230: Community Forums
231: Photo Gallery
232: Home
233: Community Forums
234: Community Forums
235: Photo Gallery
236: Downloads
237: Photo Gallery
238: Home
239: Photo Gallery
240: Photo Gallery
241: Home
242: Home
243: Community Forums
244: Photo Gallery
245: Photo Gallery
246: Photo Gallery
247: Community Forums
248: Photo Gallery
249: Photo Gallery
250: Downloads
251: Photo Gallery
252: Photo Gallery
253: Downloads
254: Photo Gallery
255: Member Screenshots
256: Photo Gallery
257: Photo Gallery
258: Photo Gallery
259: Photo Gallery
260: Home
261: Home
262: Photo Gallery
263: Photo Gallery
264: Home
265: Community Forums
266: Home
267: Community Forums
268: Photo Gallery
269: Home
270: Community Forums
271: Community Forums
272: Home
273: Downloads
274: Photo Gallery
275: Photo Gallery
276: Photo Gallery
277: Community Forums
278: Photo Gallery
279: Photo Gallery
280: Photo Gallery
281: Photo Gallery
282: News Archive
283: Photo Gallery
284: Downloads
285: News Archive
286: Community Forums
287: Photo Gallery
288: Home
289: Home
290: Home
291: Home
292: Photo Gallery
293: Home
294: Community Forums
295: Home
296: Home
297: Community Forums
298: Photo Gallery
299: Photo Gallery
300: Photo Gallery
301: Photo Gallery
302: Home
303: Photo Gallery
304: Home
305: Statistics
306: Home
307: Photo Gallery
308: Photo Gallery
309: Photo Gallery
310: Community Forums
311: Photo Gallery
312: Community Forums
313: Photo Gallery
314: Photo Gallery
315: Photo Gallery
316: Photo Gallery
317: Member Screenshots
318: Downloads
319: Home
320: Photo Gallery
321: Community Forums
322: Home
323: Photo Gallery
324: Photo Gallery
325: Community Forums
326: Downloads
327: Photo Gallery
328: Photo Gallery
329: Downloads
330: Downloads
331: Community Forums
332: Photo Gallery
333: Community Forums
334: Photo Gallery
335: Community Forums
336: Community Forums
337: Statistics
338: Member Screenshots
339: Photo Gallery
340: Home
341: Home
342: Home
343: Community Forums
344: Home
345: Home
346: Home
347: Home
348: Home
349: Home
350: Photo Gallery
351: Community Forums
352: Home
353: Home
354: Home
355: Home
356: Photo Gallery
357: Home
358: Home
359: Home
360: Home
361: Home
362: Home
363: Home
364: Home
365: Home
366: Home
367: Home
368: Home
369: Home
370: Home
371: Downloads
372: Photo Gallery
373: Community Forums
374: Member Screenshots
375: Community Forums
376: Home
377: Community Forums
378: Community Forums
379: Photo Gallery
380: Photo Gallery
381: Home
382: News Archive
383: Photo Gallery
384: Photo Gallery
385: Member Screenshots
386: Community Forums
387: Community Forums
388: Home
389: Home
390: Photo Gallery
391: Photo Gallery
392: News Archive
393: Photo Gallery
394: Photo Gallery
395: Home
396: Photo Gallery
397: Community Forums
398: Photo Gallery
399: Photo Gallery
400: Community Forums
401: Community Forums
402: Member Screenshots
403: Photo Gallery
404: Photo Gallery
405: Home
406: Member Screenshots
407: Photo Gallery
408: Photo Gallery
409: Photo Gallery
410: Downloads
411: Community Forums
412: Home
413: Photo Gallery
414: Photo Gallery
415: Photo Gallery
416: News Archive
417: Photo Gallery
418: Photo Gallery
419: Photo Gallery
420: Photo Gallery
421: News
422: Photo Gallery
423: Photo Gallery
424: Photo Gallery
425: Community Forums
426: Photo Gallery
427: Community Forums
428: Photo Gallery
429: Photo Gallery
430: Photo Gallery
431: Community Forums
432: Home
433: Photo Gallery
434: Photo Gallery
435: Photo Gallery
436: Community Forums
437: Community Forums
438: Photo Gallery
439: Photo Gallery
440: Community Forums
441: Community Forums
442: Photo Gallery
443: Photo Gallery
444: Community Forums
445: Photo Gallery
446: Community Forums
447: Community Forums
448: Community Forums
449: Home
450: Member Screenshots
451: Photo Gallery
452: Home
453: Photo Gallery
454: Photo Gallery
455: Community Forums
456: Community Forums
457: Member Screenshots
458: Home
459: Photo Gallery
460: Photo Gallery
461: Photo Gallery
462: Member Screenshots
463: Home
464: Photo Gallery
465: Photo Gallery
466: Community Forums
467: Photo Gallery
468: Home
469: Community Forums
470: Photo Gallery
471: Statistics
472: Community Forums
473: Community Forums
474: Community Forums
475: Downloads
476: Home
477: Photo Gallery
478: Photo Gallery
479: Photo Gallery
480: Photo Gallery
481: Photo Gallery
482: Photo Gallery
483: Downloads
484: Photo Gallery
485: Photo Gallery
486: Home
487: Photo Gallery
488: Photo Gallery
489: Photo Gallery
490: Photo Gallery
491: Photo Gallery
492: Photo Gallery
493: Community Forums
494: Photo Gallery
495: Photo Gallery
496: Downloads
497: Member Screenshots
498: Community Forums
499: Photo Gallery
500: Photo Gallery
501: Photo Gallery
502: Downloads
503: Photo Gallery
504: Home
505: Community Forums
506: Photo Gallery
507: Community Forums
508: Downloads
509: Statistics
510: Home
511: Member Screenshots
512: Photo Gallery
513: Photo Gallery
514: Member Screenshots
515: Photo Gallery
516: Community Forums
517: Home
518: News Archive
519: Photo Gallery
520: Photo Gallery
521: Home
522: Community Forums
523: Photo Gallery
524: Community Forums
525: Community Forums
526: Photo Gallery
527: Community Forums
528: Photo Gallery
529: Photo Gallery
530: Photo Gallery
531: Home
532: Community Forums
533: Photo Gallery
534: Home
535: Photo Gallery
536: Community Forums
537: Community Forums
538: Photo Gallery
539: Home
540: Member Screenshots
541: Home
542: Downloads
543: Photo Gallery
544: Photo Gallery
545: Home
546: Photo Gallery
547: Downloads
548: Photo Gallery
549: Downloads
550: Home
551: Community Forums
552: Member Screenshots
553: Member Screenshots
554: Community Forums
555: Photo Gallery
556: Community Forums
557: Community Forums
558: Photo Gallery
559: Community Forums
560: Member Screenshots
561: Photo Gallery
562: Community Forums
563: Home
564: Home
565: Home
566: Photo Gallery
567: Home
568: Home
569: Home
570: Home
571: Home
572: Home
573: Home
574: Home
575: Home
576: Home
577: Home
578: Home
579: Home
580: Home
581: Photo Gallery
582: Home
583: Home
584: Downloads
585: Home
586: Community Forums
587: Downloads
588: Photo Gallery
589: Photo Gallery
590: News Archive
591: Member Screenshots
592: Photo Gallery
593: Photo Gallery
594: Photo Gallery
595: Photo Gallery
596: Community Forums
597: Photo Gallery
598: Photo Gallery
599: Photo Gallery
600: Photo Gallery
601: Home
602: Downloads
603: Photo Gallery
604: Photo Gallery
605: Community Forums
606: Photo Gallery
607: Photo Gallery
608: Photo Gallery
609: Photo Gallery
610: Photo Gallery
611: Downloads
612: Photo Gallery
613: Downloads
614: Photo Gallery
615: Community Forums
616: Community Forums
617: News Archive
618: Downloads
619: Photo Gallery
620: Photo Gallery
621: Member Screenshots
622: Photo Gallery
623: Home
624: Downloads
625: Photo Gallery
626: Member Screenshots
627: Photo Gallery
628: Photo Gallery
629: Photo Gallery
630: Community Forums
631: Home
632: Photo Gallery
633: Community Forums
634: Community Forums
635: Community Forums
636: Photo Gallery
637: Photo Gallery
638: Photo Gallery
639: News
640: Photo Gallery
641: Community Forums
642: Photo Gallery
643: Home
644: Photo Gallery
645: Photo Gallery
646: Photo Gallery
647: Home
648: Home
649: Photo Gallery
650: Photo Gallery
651: Photo Gallery
652: Photo Gallery
653: Home
654: Home
655: Photo Gallery
656: Community Forums
657: Home
658: Community Forums
659: Home
660: Photo Gallery
661: Member Screenshots
662: Home
663: Home
664: Photo Gallery
665: Home
666: Home
667: Home
668: Home
669: Downloads
670: Home
671: Photo Gallery
672: Statistics
673: Community Forums
674: Downloads
675: Community Forums
676: Community Forums
677: Photo Gallery
678: Community Forums
679: Photo Gallery
680: Community Forums
681: Photo Gallery
682: Member Screenshots
683: Photo Gallery
684: Home
685: Photo Gallery
686: Photo Gallery
687: Photo Gallery
688: Photo Gallery
689: Home
690: Photo Gallery
691: Photo Gallery
692: Downloads
693: Photo Gallery
694: Photo Gallery
695: Downloads
696: Photo Gallery
697: Community Forums
698: Home
699: Photo Gallery
700: Member Screenshots
701: Photo Gallery
702: Member Screenshots
703: News
704: Community Forums
705: Home
706: Photo Gallery
707: Member Screenshots
708: Photo Gallery
709: Community Forums
710: Photo Gallery
711: Photo Gallery
712: Photo Gallery
713: Community Forums
714: Community Forums
715: Community Forums
716: Photo Gallery
717: Downloads
718: Photo Gallery
719: Photo Gallery
720: Community Forums
721: Photo Gallery
722: Community Forums
723: Statistics
724: Community Forums
725: Photo Gallery
726: Home
727: Home
728: Photo Gallery
729: Your Account
730: Photo Gallery
731: Community Forums
732: Photo Gallery
733: Photo Gallery
734: Statistics
735: Photo Gallery
736: Photo Gallery
737: Photo Gallery
738: Home
739: Community Forums
740: Home
741: Photo Gallery
742: Community Forums
743: Photo Gallery
744: Photo Gallery
745: Member Screenshots
746: Photo Gallery
747: News Archive
748: Home
749: Photo Gallery
750: Statistics
751: Photo Gallery
752: Photo Gallery
753: Downloads
754: Photo Gallery
755: Photo Gallery
756: Statistics
757: Community Forums
758: Photo Gallery
759: Downloads
760: Home
761: Community Forums
762: Photo Gallery
763: Photo Gallery
764: Downloads
765: Photo Gallery
766: Photo Gallery
767: Photo Gallery
768: Photo Gallery
769: Member Screenshots
770: Photo Gallery
771: Community Forums
772: Photo Gallery
773: Photo Gallery
774: Photo Gallery
775: Photo Gallery
776: Photo Gallery
777: Photo Gallery
778: Photo Gallery
779: Photo Gallery
780: Photo Gallery
781: Photo Gallery
782: Photo Gallery
783: Photo Gallery
784: Community Forums
785: Community Forums
786: Community Forums
787: Community Forums
788: Photo Gallery
789: Community Forums
790: Home
791: Photo Gallery
792: Photo Gallery
793: Photo Gallery
794: Home
795: Statistics
796: Photo Gallery
797: Community Forums
798: Treasury
799: Downloads
800: Photo Gallery
801: Community Forums
802: Photo Gallery
803: Photo Gallery
804: Photo Gallery
805: Community Forums
806: Photo Gallery
807: Photo Gallery
808: Community Forums
809: Photo Gallery
810: Photo Gallery
811: Downloads
812: Downloads
813: Home
814: Photo Gallery
815: Photo Gallery
816: Photo Gallery
817: Home
818: Photo Gallery
819: Home
820: Home
821: Home
822: Home
823: Home
824: Community Forums
825: Downloads
826: Home
827: Downloads
828: Home
829: Downloads
830: Photo Gallery
831: Photo Gallery
832: Photo Gallery
833: Home
834: Photo Gallery
835: Photo Gallery
836: Community Forums
837: Photo Gallery
838: Downloads
839: Home
840: Photo Gallery
841: Home
842: Community Forums
843: News Archive
844: Photo Gallery
845: Member Screenshots
846: Photo Gallery
847: Community Forums
848: Photo Gallery
849: Photo Gallery
850: Home
851: Member Screenshots
852: Photo Gallery
853: Photo Gallery
854: Photo Gallery
855: Photo Gallery
856: Photo Gallery
857: Community Forums
858: Photo Gallery
859: Community Forums
860: Photo Gallery
861: Community Forums
862: Photo Gallery
863: Community Forums
864: Photo Gallery
865: Downloads
866: Photo Gallery
867: Photo Gallery
868: Home
869: Photo Gallery
870: Photo Gallery
871: Photo Gallery
872: Community Forums
873: Downloads
874: Photo Gallery
875: Community Forums
876: Statistics
877: Downloads
878: Photo Gallery
879: Photo Gallery
880: Community Forums
881: Photo Gallery
882: Photo Gallery
883: Statistics
884: Community Forums
885: Photo Gallery
886: Downloads
887: Community Forums
888: Community Forums
889: Member Screenshots
890: Home
891: Community Forums
892: Home
893: Home
894: Member Screenshots
895: Member Screenshots
896: Photo Gallery
897: Member Screenshots
898: Home
899: Community Forums
900: Photo Gallery
901: Home
902: Community Forums
903: Home
904: Photo Gallery
905: Home
906: Home
907: Photo Gallery
908: Your Account
909: Downloads
910: Home
911: Photo Gallery
912: Downloads
913: Home
914: Community Forums
915: Photo Gallery
916: Photo Gallery
917: Photo Gallery
918: Community Forums
919: Home
920: Photo Gallery
921: Home
922: Photo Gallery
923: Photo Gallery
924: Downloads
925: Member Screenshots
926: Photo Gallery
927: Home
928: Home
929: Photo Gallery
930: Community Forums
931: Downloads
932: Community Forums
933: Home
934: Community Forums
935: Photo Gallery
936: Community Forums
937: Home
938: Photo Gallery
939: Photo Gallery
940: Community Forums
941: Community Forums
942: Member Screenshots
943: Photo Gallery
944: Home
945: Community Forums
946: Photo Gallery
947: Community Forums
948: Home
949: Community Forums
950: Community Forums
951: News Archive
952: Home
953: Photo Gallery
954: News Archive
955: Community Forums
956: Home
957: Community Forums
958: Statistics
959: Photo Gallery
960: Photo Gallery
961: Photo Gallery
962: Community Forums
963: Photo Gallery
964: Home
965: Downloads
966: Downloads
967: Community Forums
968: Photo Gallery
969: Community Forums
970: Photo Gallery
971: Downloads
972: Community Forums
973: News Archive
974: Photo Gallery
975: Community Forums
976: Community Forums
977: Community Forums
978: Photo Gallery
979: Community Forums
980: Home
981: Community Forums
982: Photo Gallery
983: Photo Gallery
984: Member Screenshots
985: Downloads
986: Community Forums
987: Photo Gallery
988: Your Account
989: Photo Gallery
990: Downloads
991: Home
992: Home
993: Home
994: Community Forums
995: Statistics
996: Community Forums
997: News
998: Photo Gallery
999: Home
1000: Home
1001: Photo Gallery
1002: Community Forums
1003: Photo Gallery
1004: Photo Gallery
1005: Home
1006: Photo Gallery
1007: Statistics
1008: Photo Gallery
1009: Photo Gallery
1010: Community Forums
1011: Photo Gallery
1012: Statistics
1013: Photo Gallery
1014: Statistics
1015: Community Forums
1016: Home
1017: Photo Gallery
1018: Photo Gallery
1019: Photo Gallery
1020: Photo Gallery
1021: Photo Gallery
1022: Photo Gallery
1023: Photo Gallery
1024: Photo Gallery
1025: Photo Gallery
1026: Photo Gallery
1027: Photo Gallery
1028: Downloads
1029: Home
1030: Photo Gallery
1031: Community Forums
1032: Photo Gallery
1033: Photo Gallery
1034: Home
1035: Photo Gallery
1036: Photo Gallery
1037: Photo Gallery
1038: Home
1039: Member Screenshots
1040: Photo Gallery
1041: Downloads
1042: Photo Gallery
1043: Home
1044: Member Screenshots
1045: Home
1046: News Archive
1047: Downloads
1048: 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 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
Roy_A_Lingle
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 1997
Location: El Paso & Ft Bliss, Texas
PostPosted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 7:12 am
Post subject: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted Facts

Hey Folks!

I was thinking that sense this subject comes up from time to time, maybe it would be a good idea to start a thread on just the Sherman tank.

What I did was copy all the posts, along with Jeff's great M4A3 HVSS 76mm photo, about the Sherman that were posted in the 4th ID Museum thread. Hope this is OK with everyone.

Hey Doug! Could you make this one a 'sticky' so it will stay at the top of the forum? Also if this is not OK, is there a better way to do this?

Photo by Jeff Button 4th Infantry Division Musuem Ft. Hood Texas July 2006


HF_Evolution Joined: Dec 22, 2005 Posts: 1
Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2006 1:23 pm Post subject: Re: 1st Cav Museum at Ft Hood...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nice picture of the Sherman, the British much to the disgust of the yanks stuch a 17pounder cann on in many of there Shermans, thinking the american gun was not good enough, they called this tank a Firefly. The Germans knicknamed them "Tommy Cookers", as when they were hit the brewed up (burst into flames, and the crews were usualy cooked. They were not at all as good as the german Arour, no way near, but there advantage was numbers. As one german tank commander said" As they came over the hill we destoyed them, all day, by the night the burning wrecks were all over the place and we congradulated our selves, next morning they came swarming over the hill again, we could not stop them and had to with draw."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

C_Sherman Joined: Jan 24, 2006 Posts: 151
Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2006 5:01 pm Post subject: Re: 1st Cav Museum at Ft Hood...
Quote:
Doug_Kibbey wrote:
Be gentle with him, Guys....
End of Quote

Where to start, where to start? There is so much wrong with that post that I wonder if it is intentionally intended to create a controversy. New guy, one post, and he starts with that...

I'll leave it to the others to set him straight. We've done this too many times now!

C
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Doug_Kibbey Joined: Jan 23, 2006 Posts: 1055
Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 3:14 am Post subject: Re: 1st Cav Museum at Ft Hood...

Well, I mention only in passing that there was a broadcast over the weekend on Discovery or Military Channel that used much of the same language all in the space of an hour. My impression is that someone young and new to these discussions has just seen it and is parroting some of the things he garnered from those shows.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
bsmart Joined: Jan 23, 2006 Posts: 408
Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 1:41 am Post subject: Re: 1st Cav Museum at Ft Hood...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Okay - I'm home now so lets lay out the defense of the Sherman

the 17pdr was a very good antitank gun, but it had poor HE performance. The 75mm had excellent HE performance but by 1944 mediocre armor piercing capability. The 75mm was being replaced by the 76mm gun (That is what the pictured tank is equipped with) The 76mm had moderate AP capability combined with good HE capability. Since most Shermans in American units spent their time dealing with antitank guns, buildings, machine gun emplacements, etc. HE performance was very important. The Sherman had one big advantage over the German tanks. It's powered turret was excellent. The Sherman used a hydraulic power system that was fast and smooth. The power drive for the panther ran off a power takeoff from the drivetrain. If the engine had a heavy load and the power traverse was used it could stall the engine. Consequently many units had policies that the power traverse was not to be used. I've seen some reports that it was sometimes diconnected completly. I've seen reports where Panthers and Shermans had meeting engagements where the Sherman was able to slew the turret around and get killing shots off before the Panther could swing it's gun around. There are also cases where in narrow streets the Pnather could not swing it's gun around due to hitting buildings or trees

'Tommy Cooker' or 'Ronson' - Yes early Shermans tended to burn when hit by German AP rounds. This was not due to the gasoline fuel. The ammo stowage in early Shermans was high and in the side sponsons. This combined with a very effective HE filler used by the Germans in their AP rounds led to a large number of secondary explosions. An interim solution was applique armor that was applied to Shermans to put heavier protection over these areas (and a few others that were found). The British did not use an explosive filler in their AP rounds. They used either solid shot or American AP that had the explosive filler removed (I assume they were delivered with the cavity empty and that they did notactually remove the explosive charge that the Americans designed the rounds for). So even if a British tank penetrated a German tank all it did was punch a hole in the tank. There would be some secondary damage (There are very few places inside a tank you wouldn't hit some other equipment) but nothing like the explosive charge in the German round would cause.

'The German Tanks were better armored than the Sherman' - Yes. The Panther was about 45 tons compared to the Shermans 35 tons. Ten tons of weight is a lot of armor. The U.S. had to design the Sherman to be shipped half way around the world to be used. The Germans had to send a Panther 500-1000 miles from the factory, generally via rail or road shipment. The Americans had to plan un unloading Shermans in ports where the heavy lifting equipment was out of commision or across beaches where ther was no heavy cargo handling equipment at all. So they had to be able to unload using ships cargo gear. This limited the size of the vehicle.

The German tanks may have been better armored but the Sherman was much more reliable. The U.S. demanded much higher reliability from it's vehicles than other armies did. I believe this was due to two factors. Again the U.S. knew it would be operating at the end of a very long supply line. They would not be able to send tanks back to stateside depots for major maintenance. The Germans assumed that the tank would be returned to the factory for major overhauls. Also the American automotive industry was probably the most advanced in the world at the time they could mass produce heavy equipment to good tolerances better than anyone else in the world.

When the Sherman entered production there was supposed to be a heavy tank to compliment the Sherman. In 1941-42 the Sherman was as good as any other medium tank in the world. The M-6 Heavy tank was being tested but was given a lower priority than the Sherman and the Stuart.

The M-6 had problems with the transmission (it was probably at least as reliable as any other countries heavy tank but did not meat American reliability standards) and given the extreme shipping constraints of the 1942-early 44 period when they were attempting to build up an army in the U.K. in the face of the Uboat campaign it was decided to not give the very heavy M-6 (50-60 tons) a high priority.

When a heavy tank did become available logistics again reared its demanding head. The Pershing was wider than the Sherman. This meant that every Bailey Bridge would have to be modified or risk being damaged by the wider tracks of the Pershing. So they were held back until after most of the major rivers were crossed (and the port of Antwerp with it's heavy cargo gear was operational)

There was a very good article titled "Tank Myths" comparing the Sherman to it's chief rival for fame (not The Panther, the T-34) in the September/October 2001 issue of Armor by Charles M. Bailey the author of "Faint Praise" a book I have been looking for for a long time since it is considered to be one of the definitive books on US WWII tank development

I think only one other tank in WWII could even compare to the Sherman. The T-34 and the Sherman both started life at about the same time and continued to be built and improved throughout the war. The M4A3E8 was a far different tank from the M4A1 'Michael' that was originally delivered to the British in early '42
_________________
Bob Smart
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob, I'll play devil's advocate for the sake of discussion...

bsmart wrote:

'The German Tanks were better armored than the Sherman' - Yes. The Panther was about 45 tons compared to the Shermans 35 tons. Ten tons of weight is a lot of armor. The U.S. had to design the Sherman to be shipped half way around the world to be used. The Germans had to send a Panther 500-1000 miles from the factory, generally via rail or road shipment. The Americans had to plan un unloading Shermans in ports where the heavy lifting equipment was out of commision or across beaches where ther was no heavy cargo handling equipment at all. So they had to be able to unload using ships cargo gear. This limited the size of the vehicle.

Neil wrote:
Hindsight being 20-20 and primary role of the Sherman as infantry support granted, but if the traditional wisdom holds true that it took 3-4 Shermans to take out 1 Panther or Tiger - doesnt that mean the US ended up shipping 105-140 tons per kill? Seems like a smaller number of heavy tanks, even in the Panther weight class, would have been more efficient - shipping-wise - than all those Shermans... In fact, it would seem like there was a lot of wasted tonnage shipped...

Even if you grant that the primary role of the Sherman was infantry support, seems like a high-low mix might have been appropriate. The heavier Panther-class tanks could have been offloaded using LSTs no? Even M6s and T23s, with heavier armor than the Sherman, might have been a good stop-gap measure until the Pershing arrived...

bsmart wrote:
The M-6 had problems with the transmission (it was probably at least as reliable as any other countries heavy tank but did not meat American reliability standards) and given the extreme shipping constraints of the 1942-early 44 period when they were attempting to build up an army in the U.K. in the face of the Uboat campaign it was decided to not give the very heavy M-6 (50-60 tons) a high priority.

Neil wrote:
Again, hindsight 20-20, seems like M6s or T23s would have been a better use of shipping constraints than some of those Shermans...

bsmart wrote:
When a heavy tank did become available logistics again reared its demanding head. The Pershing was wider than the Sherman. This meant that every Bailey Bridge would have to be modified or risk being damaged by the wider tracks of the Pershing. So they were held back until after most of the major rivers were crossed (and the port of Antwerp with it's heavy cargo gear was operational)

Neil wrote:
How come this was only a concern for the Americans? Sure, there are lots of stories of Tigers, etc not being able to cross bridges, but it doesnt seem like this was a big concern for the Germany army... Point being, if the Germans can get around the same rivers & bridges (admittedly in retreat), seems like Pershings could have done the same...

bsmart wrote:
The M4A3E8 was a far different tank from the M4A1 'Michael' that was originally delivered to the British in early '42

Neil wrote:
Granted, but it has to seem that the Armor folks were a little too obsessive over the "tank" being an infantry support weapon. Even a mix of US Sherman Fireflies - not taking up more more weight at all, but with some additional ammo supply headaches - would have been a good decision. What would have been the impact of US mass-produced Fireflies been on the battlefield in 1944?

Neil
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
bsmart Joined: Jan 23, 2006 Posts: 408
Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 2:57 am Post subject: Re: 1st Cav Museum at Ft Hood...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm having trouble with the multiple level quotes so

Did we actually need more shipping because it took multiple Shermans to handel a 'Cat' That assumes that if you had brought over a limited number of 'anti-Cat' tanks you would be able to have one where you needed it when you needed it. Isn't that similar to the Tank destroyer doctrine of having some unist who were supposed to hunt enemy tanks? Problem is you can't know where they would show up so everyone has to be ready to handle the enemy tanks.

Why was the logistics only a US problem (actually an allied problem) Well The defender has some options on when to drop bridges (unless the zoomies get them first ) And there were times when German tanks were trapped because bridges had been destroyed. And one of the factors that slowed down the German ardennes spearheads in December of 44 were the tenacious defense of bridges by American Engineer units.

I don't think the U.S. obscessed on 'infantry support' If anything I think they obcessed on 'Tanks shouldn't fight tanks' and the use of tanks as a breakthrough weapon to run rampant in the enemies backfield once a hole had been made in the line. In that role the reliable Sherman excelled.

The big problem would have been building enough 17pdrs. It would have taken too long to 'americanize' it to be built in American factories (The British weapons that were adapted for U.S. production had been decided on early in the war when they had the 12 months or so needed to ramp up production lines. I've always thought there should have been a 90mm Sherman. The M36 showed it would fit. It was already in U.S. production. so could have been incorporated much faster than a new British gun.

There was an offer by Ordnance to supply 100+ M6s (with 105mm guns, not howitzers but long guns) to Europe but the command didn't want the logistics issues.
_________________
Bob Smart (bsmart
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Roy_A_Lingle Joined: Jan 24, 2006 Posts: 515
Location: El Paso & Ft Bliss, Texas
Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 3:00 am Post subject: Re: 1st Cav Museum at Ft Hood...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Folks!

Good posts Bob! Good counter post Neil!

A number of other factors that also impacted the Sherman, but then there is so much to the Sheman story, are:

the effect of General McNair on just about everything,
the mistaken belief that the 76mm and it's round could deal with Panther and Tiger tanks prior to June 6, 1944,
the mistaken doctrine that the tank destroyers could take care of all German armor,
the fact that combat engineer bridge units didn't have a pontoon bridge system in the ETO, until late 1944, that could safely support a vehicle as heavy as the Sherman on German rivers,

I am starting to get the feeling that we all need to get together and write a book about all the points and couter points of the Sherman. That way we can just link new guys like 'HF Evolution' over to it.

Surprised Idea

Bottom, line, it and the T34 won the war and that is the only thing that counts in the end. To 'HF Evolution' that comes from a CIA that once though much like your post.

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
bsmart
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 2523
Location: Central Maryland
PostPosted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:48 am
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted Facts

- Roy_A_Lingle
Hey Folks!


I am starting to get the feeling that we all need to get together and write a book about all the points and couter points of the Sherman. That way we can just link new guys like 'HF Evolution' over to it.

Surprised Idea


Sgt, Scouts Out! Smile


Funny thing about this group, the same idea seems to come to several of us at almost the same time.

I started working on a 'In Defense of the Sherman' document/article last night at home. I ended up putting some of the information in the post but still have the beginnings of the document at home in Word. I decided that if I create such a document I need to be able to document things better than 'I read somewhere' or 'as I remember being told'. Not that it will be a scholarly work but without documentation it just becomes 'he said, she said'. So I am starting to recheck some of my sources, and possibly find sources for 'facts' that I have always assumed are documented somewhere.

I know I'm not the only one who has defended the Sherman here in the past, and I sure don't consider myself an expert, so as it develops I'll be looking for input from other folks.

Also after PM'ing Doug I'm going to try and attach the 'Tank Myths' article I mentioned in my previous post.

The system doesn't seem to allow PDF files as attachments. I'll see if I can convert it to something else but I thought PDF was pretty much a standard.

Second attempt - Below is a link to the article out at the Armor Magazine Web Site.

www.knox.army.mil/armo...yths01.pdf

When you connect up to their 'Back issue' page a comment pops up about needing a username and passowrd to access articles from 2001 and forward. I don't have any such thing so I'm not sure what they mean but if anyone has problems getting to the article I'd like to know.

Disclaimer - I am not responsible for the hours you will lose as you explore other interesting articles that you stumble across out there. That was always my problem when researching papers at school. When I found an article in the stacks that applied to my paper I found 3 others that didn't directly apply but were too interesting to ignore and I'd get sidetracked for hours.

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

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 1997
Location: El Paso & Ft Bliss, Texas
PostPosted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 9:20 am
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted F

Hi Bob! Hi Folks!

Excellent! That was what I was thinking. Find the facts and pull them together here in one place. I have in mine a couple of photos that I think will help.

No problem with linking to the Myths article.
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: Tue Aug 01, 2006 11:13 am
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted Facts

[quote="Roy_A_Lingle"]Hey Folks!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
bsmart Joined: Jan 23, 2006 Posts: 408
Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 2:57 am Post subject: Re: 1st Cav Museum at Ft Hood...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm having trouble with the multiple level quotes so

Did we actually need more shipping because it took multiple Shermans to handel a 'Cat' That assumes that if you had brought over a limited number of 'anti-Cat' tanks you would be able to have one where you needed it when you needed it. Isn't that similar to the Tank destroyer doctrine of having some unist who were supposed to hunt enemy tanks? Problem is you can't know where they would show up so everyone has to be ready to handle the enemy tanks.


However the British doctrine of mixing a Firefly in every tank platoon seems to have worked fairly well. While you might not have wanted to put an M6 or T23 in every Sherman platoon, you could have put a heavy tank platoon in every company for example. That would have ensured a good distribution on the battlefield.

IMO, the problems with Tank Destroyer doctrine were: 1) tank destroyers couldnt stand up in fights due to lighter armor; 2) tank destroyers were held at divisional level, which ensured they were almost never where they were needed...


Why was the logistics only a US problem (actually an allied problem) Well The defender has some options on when to drop bridges (unless the zoomies get them first ) And there were times when German tanks were trapped because bridges had been destroyed. And one of the factors that slowed down the German ardennes spearheads in December of 44 were the tenacious defense of bridges by American Engineer units.


Granted, but let me turn this a little way. Did the Germans only blow up bridges on the Western front? While the Rhein is much bigger, there are certainly lots of rivers to cross in Poland. How come the Soviets dont seem to have had much a problem getting their KV-1s & JS-2s across those rivers? Basically, I have a hard time believing that the US industrial juggernaught could not have solved this bridging problem if there had been some advance planning for the introduction of US heavy tanks.


I don't think the U.S. obscessed on 'infantry support' If anything I think they obcessed on 'Tanks shouldn't fight tanks' and the use of tanks as a breakthrough weapon to run rampant in the enemies backfield once a hole had been made in the line. In that role the reliable Sherman excelled.

The big problem would have been building enough 17pdrs. It would have taken too long to 'americanize' it to be built in American factories (The British weapons that were adapted for U.S. production had been decided on early in the war when they had the 12 months or so needed to ramp up production lines. I've always thought there should have been a 90mm Sherman. The M36 showed it would fit. It was already in U.S. production. so could have been incorporated much faster than a new British gun.


I'll admit this is the crux of the problem - Hindsight 20-20 of how dangerous Panthers & Tigers would be in 44. There's very little time from June 44 to May 45 to turn around any production decisions. So basically any changes would have had to have been decided upon before Normandy.

They would have had to come up with a new armored turret for that 90mm gun, but that does seem like a minor problem. It seems like there were several different options available to the US at the time - M6s, T23s, and upgraded Shermans - but none were taken into service unfortunately.

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

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 31, 2006
Posts: 484

PostPosted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 11:58 am
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted Facts

Woah!!! debating the pros and cons of the sherman here again...
i guess this rodeo has already kicked off!
roy, will you be the referee, things may get bloody?

shawn
Back to top
View user's profile Photo Gallery
JeffStringer
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 637

PostPosted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 12:13 pm
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted F

All I gotta say about the Sherman is 'tanks for the nice desktop! Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile
Doug_Kibbey
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 4678
Location: The Great Satan
PostPosted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 12:17 pm
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted F

Call it a hunch, but I suspect this thread won't wander too far from the front page without any special help from me.

As Neil has directed us to a clickable link to the PDF file, there's no need to upload it here, but as with all things in cyberspace ether, it's a good idea to save that article for those that are interested.
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website Photo Gallery
bsmart
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 2523
Location: Central Maryland
PostPosted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 1:54 pm
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted Facts

Lets see if I have the quote thing figured out

- Neil_Baumgardner

However the British doctrine of mixing a Firefly in every tank platoon seems to have worked fairly well. While you might not have wanted to put an M6 or T23 in every Sherman platoon, you could have put a heavy tank platoon in every company for example. That would have ensured a good distribution on the battlefield.

IMO, the problems with Tank Destroyer doctrine were: 1) tank destroyers couldnt stand up in fights due to lighter armor; 2) tank destroyers were held at divisional level, which ensured they were almost never where they were needed...



Well the U.S. solved the problem the same way, by mixing 76mm Shermans in platoons with 75mm tanks. One problem was that the Armored Divisions got first dibs on the 76mm gunned tanks so had replaced almost all their 75mm tanks before the independent battalions got any. The British didn't have this problem as bad because their 'independent battalions' were equiped with Churchills and so never got a chance to get Fireflys (adopting a Panther was one posssible solution :-))

I'll admit that I'm trying to seperate the doctrine problem from the equipment problem. The U.S. already had two different types of companies in a Battalion. Three companies of Shermans and One company of Stuarts. Granted we could think about replacing the Stuarts with a Heavy company but How many tanks would that have taken? My sources are at home but how many battalions were deployed in Europe? There were 14(?) Armored Divisions each with 6 battalions (?) that would be 84 companies of heavies. At 17 tanks per company that would be 1428 tanks just assigned to Armored Divisions. That doesn't allow for pipeline, spares, training, etc. That still leaves the independent battalions without a 'Cat Killer' I think there was almost one independent Battalion for each Infantry Division so with 40+ Infantry Divisions in Europe that would be another 40 companies for another 680 tanks. We are now up to over 2000. To get 2000 tanks in the field in September 1944 when would the production decision have to be made? I suspect September of 43 at the latest ( I actually think it would have been before January of 43)


Granted, but let me turn this a little way. Did the Germans only blow up bridges on the Western front? While the Rhein is much bigger, there are certainly lots of rivers to cross in Poland. How come the Soviets dont seem to have had much a problem getting their KV-1s & JS-2s across those rivers? Basically, I have a hard time believing that the US industrial juggernaught could not have solved this bridging problem if there had been some advance planning for the introduction of US heavy tanks.


Well the Soviet army worked on a 'prep for three months then sprint to the next river' 'prep for three months sprint till you run out of supplies' mode. Very often the river crossing was the first, well prepared stage of the offensive. The Western allies tried to keep a continuous offense running crossing obsticals as they were reached. I also think terrain is a bigger problem in western Europe then in Eastern Europe. The Soviets also standardised on a wider gauge. I do not belived they used standardised bridging components as much.



I'll admit this is the crux of the problem - Hindsight 20-20 of how dangerous Panthers & Tigers would be in 44. There's very little time from June 44 to May 45 to turn around any production decisions. So basically any changes would have had to have been decided upon before Normandy.

They would have had to come up with a new armored turret for that 90mm gun, but that does seem like a minor problem. It seems like there were several different options available to the US at the time - M6s, T23s, and upgraded Shermans - but none were taken into service unfortunately.

Neil


The limited time is the crux of the problem. But I think that the design of the Sherman made it possible to get a 90mm deployed. If you use a T23 turret (the one used for the 76mm) you only need towork up a new front mount and Mantlet. The entire gun system is connected to the unit bolted in the front of the turret. That was why it was so easy to mount the 17pdr in the Sherman turret. After the war they even mounted the 76mm in the original turret for MAP sales. so converting a gunmount from an M36 should have been straightforward that would only require thickening the armor on teh M36 mantlet and possibly putting some counterweight (applique armor?) on the aft flanks of the Sherman turret to keep the rotating balance. then replace the ammo storage (which was worked out for the M36B1 which used M4A3 hulls) and issue to units.

I know for once I am oversimplifying but I wanted to make the point that we didn't need an all new turret. There was an upgraded Sherman, the M4A3E8, on its way. The Northwest European Campaign just completed much faster than expected. ( I think some 'projections' had the allies stopping at the Seine to build up supplies for several months and the push into central Germany not happening till the summer of 45. That timeframe would have allowed many more units to be equiped with 76mm Shermans and Pershings.

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

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 2523
Location: Central Maryland
PostPosted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 1:56 pm
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted Facts

- SHAWN
Woah!!! debating the pros and cons of the sherman here again...
i guess this rodeo has already kicked off!
roy, will you be the referee, things may get bloody?

shawn


I don't think it will get bloody. Most of us are gentlemen here, and the others we'll beat to a pulp so quick they won't have time to bleed Twisted Evil

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

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 4678
Location: The Great Satan
PostPosted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 2:03 pm
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted Facts

- bsmart
- SHAWN
Woah!!! debating the pros and cons of the sherman here again...
i guess this rodeo has already kicked off!
roy, will you be the referee, things may get bloody?

shawn


I don't think it will get bloody. Most of us are gentlemen here, and the others we'll beat to a pulp so quick they won't have time to bleed Twisted Evil



Which makes my few duties here just soooooo much easier. Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website Photo Gallery
Roy_A_Lingle
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 1997
Location: El Paso & Ft Bliss, Texas
PostPosted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 2:18 pm
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted F

Hi Folks!

This post will try to look at the bridging problems.

When the developers started drawing up the Sherman tank, they were limited in how much it could weight. That limit came for the Combat Bridging Engineers M2 Treadway Pontoon bridge system.

In the first photo you can see that the saddles (the metal frame) that holds up the treadways and spread the load out acrossed the pontoon is at or below water level. The tank is a M4A1 VVSS 75mm version. It is pressing the limits of that bridge system to support the vehicle. That bridge could not have support the M-6 or T-23 heavy tanks. Notice the clearance between the treadway edges and the VVSS track block. Just a few inchs to spare on both sides. No room for a wider tank. No room for M4 with HVSS!

This photo is from Hunnicutt's Sherman book, page 182, M4A1s loading into an LST April 6 1943.



In the next photo we see another M4A1 VVSS 75 crossing a treadway bridge over the "Durance River in southern France on 25 August 1944."
The pontoons are larger and the saddles are above water.

This photo is from Stevn J. Zaloga's The M4 Sherman at War, The European Theatre 1942-1945, page 22


Why is this important? Between April 1943 and August 1944, someone had to request that the Engineer Command be allocated more steel for larger saddles and more rubber for larger pontoons. I don't have any facts yet, but I would not be surpised if the Engineer Command also needed larger or heavier cargo trucks to carry the larger pontoons with their larger and heavier saddles. All items that needed room within the available shipping space and had to get to the ETO.

Why ship heavier tanks if what you have can just bearly do the job for the vehicle you already have? Why ship heavier tanks that will be left behind at the first large ditch or smallest of rivers?

Is this the one and over all stopper to heavier tanks? NO! It is just ONE of many problems that added up to the idea that the Sherman is 1. Good enough (at first), and 2. it's to late, it will have to do for now.

I seam to remember of picture of T-23 crossing a Bailey Bridge. As soon as I can find it, I will add it to this post.

Spot Report!
Sgt, Scouts Out! Smile

P.S.
Sorry Shawn, I can't be a ref for this one. I am one of those guys who before hanging out here, bought all that Sherman was no good and why couldn't this country do better point of view. I am now one of those guys who thinks those who did it, did the best they could at the time and for anything to have been done different, changes would have had to have been made long before the post D-Day battles exposed the Sherman's weakness vis German Cats.

_________________
"You can never have too much reconnaissance."
General G.S. Patton Jr.


Last edited by Roy_A_Lingle on Wed Aug 02, 2006 5:41 am; edited 1 time in total
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: Tue Aug 01, 2006 3:03 pm
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted F

- Roy_A_Lingle

When the developers started drawing up the Sherman tank, they were limited in how much it could weight. That limit came for the Combat Bridging Engineers M2 Treadway Pontoon bridge system.

<snip>That bridge could not have support the M-6 or T-23 heavy tanks. Notice the clearance between the treadway edges and the VVSS track block. Just a few inchs to spare on both sides. No room for a wider tank. No room for M4 with HVSS!


I'm sorry, but this sounds to me like putting the cart before the horse, or in this case the bridge before the tank... The bridge is designed to support the tank, the tank is designed to destroy infantry, fight tanks, etc, not to support the bridge. I understand this argument a little better when you're talking shipping, airlift or even rail-transport - for the first two at least you may have pretty big design constraints.

Designing the tank to fit the bridge seems a little backwards to me. Seems like if you decide you're going to have heavier tanks, you design bridges to handle said tanks - not decide you cant have heavier tanks because your current bridges cant handle them... Afterall, I would think its easier to design & build new heavier bridges than a heavier tank...


Why is this important? Between April 1943 and August 1944, someone had to request that the Engineer Command be allocated more steel for larger saddles and more rubber for larger pontoons. I don't have any facts yet, but I would not be surpised if the Engineer Command also needed larger or heavier cargo trucks to carry the larger pontoons with their larger and heavier saddles. All items that needed room within the available shipping space and had to get to the ETO.


I'll admit I am expecting quite possibly too much centralized planning & forethought than was present.

But when set against the context of the vast production output of the United States during WWII, including the immense shipping capacity - I am starting to "buy" less and less the shipping constraints issue. Especially considering the wasted space & tonnage taken up by shipping Shermans (and all the bridging to carry them) that get killed vs Cats vice a smaller amount of heavier tanks. In terms of shipping tonnage per kill, the balance still appears to be tipped in favor of heavier tanks. But again, hindsight is 20-20...


Why ship heavier tanks if what you have can just bearly do the job for the vehicle you already have? Why ship heavier tanks that will be left behind at the first large ditch or smallest of rivers?


I just suspect the river issue is not that big. Bridging could have been designed & shipped to support heavier tanks, assuming the forethough had been there c1943 that this was the plan... 20-20 hindsight, it would appear that this lesson might have been learned from the encounters with the Tiger in North Africa...

At the very least, the Brits somehow understood that more firepower was needed, on the tank... Was it really productionization that killed Firefly acceptance in the US? If I remember correctly, it was a lack of recognition of the need for such firepower & resistance to a new round...


Is this the one and over all stopper to heavier tanks? NO! It is just ONE of many problems that added up to the idea that the Sherman is 1. Good enough (at first), and 2. it's to late, it will have to do for now.


Agree with the "will have to do for now" part. Again, what I'm expecting is forethought c1943... That being said, if the forethought had been there, I think all of these other issues could have been rather easily solved - and at a better usage of "limited" shipping.


I seam to remember of picture of T-23 crossing a Bailey Bridge. As so as I can find it, I will add it to this post.


That would be interesting...


Sorry Shawn, I can't be a ref for this one. I am one of those guys who before hanging out here, bought all that Sherman was no good and why couldn't this country do better point of view. I am now one of those guys who thinks those who did it, did the best they could at the time and for anything to have been done different, changes would have had to have been made long before the post D-Day battles exposed the Sherman's weakness vis German Cats.


Ironically I've probably come the other way... I certainly think the Sherman was a pretty good tank that was able to do much of its job fairly well & fairly reliably. But I now am probably at the conclusion that there was too much institutional resistance to the lessons emerging from North Africa (ie the ones the Brits understood at least) and that decisions could have been made in '43 to include a number of heavier tanks for Normandy & beyond...

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

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 2523
Location: Central Maryland
PostPosted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 7:35 pm
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted Facts

Neil - I think you are expecting much to fast reaction time from the planning process. Many of the production decisions that affected deployment in Normandy were made in 1942. They were constantly being examined and modified but the lead time for these items was long. They not only had to be produced but sent to a port, stored while it waited for a ship loaded on a ship, the ship themn had to wait for a convoy to assemble. Then the convoy plodded across the Atlantic at 6-8 knots. When it made it to Britian it would wait in the harbor for it's turn to unload. It would then be stored in a field until it was time to start loading for the trip across the Channel. Then it would be unloaded and wait until it was needed to be issued to troops.

I really wish we had shipping records for some of the vehicles and tanks that were used by units in Europe. I think you would be surprised at the time from factory acceptance to actual issue to line units.

Also while I find Roys photos very interesting it isn't the bridging problem I've read about. The problem I remember had to do with the width of the road panels of the bailey kits. There was a modification kit thatwidened the roadwaybut without the modification the Pershing would damage the sides of the trackways and the braces supporting them weakening the bridge. The modification kits were available but not in large enough quantitys to allow them to be issued to every bridging unit.

_________________
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: Tue Aug 01, 2006 7:55 pm
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted Facts

- bsmart
Neil - I think you are expecting much to fast reaction time from the planning process. Many of the production decisions that affected deployment in Normandy were made in 1942. They were constantly being examined and modified but the lead time for these items was long. They not only had to be produced but sent to a port, stored while it waited for a ship loaded on a ship, the ship themn had to wait for a convoy to assemble. Then the convoy plodded across the Atlantic at 6-8 knots. When it made it to Britian it would wait in the harbor for it's turn to unload. It would then be stored in a field until it was time to start loading for the trip across the Channel. Then it would be unloaded and wait until it was needed to be issued to troops.


Granted, totally, utterly granted... However, at least in terms of a better armed Sherman (setting heavier tanks aside for a moment), I have hard time believing the British industrial base was more agile than the American industrial base in the ability to get Sherman Fireflies or 90s into the field... Even so, it does seem a little shortsighted to me, to not plan for sending any heavier tanks (even starting in 1942), be they M6s or T23s, etc.

I guess my point is we had heavier tanks under development or even in limited production & fielding. We certainly had the shipping to get them there, in time even. And we could have built better bridges to handle them. At the very least, a better armed Sherman could have been fielded. But no one saw the need in 1942/1943...

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

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 3942
Location: Arlington, VA
PostPosted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:07 pm
Post subject: Re: The Sherman Tank, The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted Facts

BTW, while I know this is the exception, not the rule - but the M26 Pershing went from first acceptance (November '44) to combat in Europe (February '45 - the Zebra Mission) in no less than 4 months...

If a similiar expedited effort had been mounted (again, with "malice forethought," etc), you could have had M6s ready in the UK by March '43 (from a December '42 first acceptance), M6A1s in the UK by April '43 (from a January '42 first acceptance), or T23s in the UK by January 1944 (from an October '43 first acceptance). The latter is just in time for Normandy...

And we're talking first acceptance to in combat. Nevermind training in between. I know this was not the norm, but it could have been done...

With the same timelines, how soon could we have had US Sherman Fireflies or 90s in the field? Certainly in limited numbers at first, but quickly growing.

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 1 of 4
All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Go to page 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