±Recent Visitors

Recent Visitors to Com-Central!

±User Info-big


Welcome Anonymous

Nickname
Password

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

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

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

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 590

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

- Skeet

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


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

C

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

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

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


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


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

Cool

_________________
TTFN
Jim

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

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

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

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

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

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 25, 2006
Posts: 34

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


Well that at least I agree with!

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

Neil


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

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

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

Neil


Just a quick google...




_________________
TTFN
Jim

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Neil


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



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

Cool

_________________
TTFN
Jim

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

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

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

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

Neil


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


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

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

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 25, 2006
Posts: 34

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

Cheers from France

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

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 26, 2006
Posts: 61

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

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

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


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


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

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

- Al_Bowie

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


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


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


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


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


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

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



Jump to:  


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