Named after Civil war General Sherman. Who was known for his famous “march to the sea” The Sherman is a very interesting tank. To most allied soliders they were called “purple heart boxes” but the did help change the tide of war in many conflicts. More Sherman tanks were made than all than all of the German tanks of WW2. In my opinion, engineering disaster or not, this tank help changed the war. Just as much as the Russian T-34.
Sherman Tank infront of the Arc de Triumph. Spl???
Funny notes:
That M4A2 General Sherman was used as railroad tractor till 1996. Now is it part of exchibition in WWII Museun in Moskow.
Few Sherman was sended to metal recycle factory in 1995… sad.
Israel army used M4 Sherman in wars 1967 and 1973…
Last battle use of Sheran tanks was in Civil War in Yugoslavia in 1991-1995.
Sherman tank,
officially M4 GENERAL SHERMAN, main battle tank designed and built by the United States for the conduct of World War II. The M4 was the most widely used tank series in the war, being employed not only by the U.S. Army and Marine Corps but also by British, Canadian, and Free French forces. The M4 was employed in North Africa, Sicily, Italy, and western Europe and throughout the Pacific Theatre. A total of 49,324 tanks was produced in 11 plants between 1942 and 1946.
When World War II began in 1939, the United States lagged far behind the major European states in the development of tank technology and armoured warfare doctrine. The fall of France in May 1940 awoke and alarmed the United States. The German army had defeated France in a matter of weeks through the use of a new operational doctrine based on fast-moving, massed armoured formations supported by air power. America’s leaders became convinced that the U.S. Army needed a new main battle tank at least equal to that employed by the Germans and that it had to adopt German operational doctrine. To that end, in July 1940 the War Department authorized the development of a new medium tank, and it also authorized the organization of the first armoured divisions. By the time the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor in 1941, the United States had five armoured divisions organizing and training for war in Europe.
The first American main battle tank employed in combat in World War II was the M3 General Grant. The British fought with this tank in North Africa as early as 1941. The M3 was the result of a crisis atmosphere that was prevalent immediately following the fall of France. It is likely that no tank in history ever went from design to production faster than the General Grant. Its major defect was its gun mount: the 75-millimetre gun was carried in a sponson in the right front of the hull and could traverse only 15 degrees to each side–a major disadvantage in tank battles. However, the M3 was only an interim measure. Production ceased in late 1942, when the M4 went into full production.
The M4 prototype debuted in 1941 and was accepted for production that October. Its designers consciously emphasized speed and mobility, limiting the thickness of the armour and the size of the main gun, thereby compromising on firepower and survivability. The M4’s main armament was a short-barreled, low-velocity 75-millimetre gun, and its armour thickness was a maximum of 75 millimetres and a minimum of 12 millimetres (3 inches and 0.5 inch, respectively). The tank had a maximum speed of 24 to 29 miles (38 to 46 kilometres) per hour and a range of 100 to 150 miles, depending on the series (M4 to M4A3E2). The M4 carried a crew of five–commander, gunner, loader, driver, and codriver/hull gunner. The vehicle weighed around 33 tons, depending on the series. A typical power plant was a 425-horsepower gasoline engine.
The M4 entered active service with the British in North Africa in October 1942. It was roughly in the same class as the German Panzerkampfwagen IV (Pz. IV), which at that time weighed 26 tons, had a road speed of 20 miles per hour, and mounted a 60-millimetre gun. Later model German tanks were much improved, so that, by the time of the Normandy Invasion in June 1944, the M4 was outclassed by superior tanks such as the Pz. V Panther and the Pz. VI Tiger. The American penchant for mass production tended to stymie innovations in technology, and American doctrinal thinking tended to remain stuck in the pre-war period, when the tank was seen as primarily an infantry support weapon. As a result, the M4 was not up-gunned until late in the war, and American, British, and Canadian tank crews consistently faced better German tanks. The M4 had a faster rate of fire and greater speed, but both the Panther and Tiger had significantly greater range and accuracy. The German tanks were also more survivable. Consequently, it took superior numbers for Anglo-American forces to defeat German armoured formations. The most notable effort to break the Germans’ qualitative advantage was the “Firefly,” a Sherman equipped with a 76.2-millimetre (or “17-pounder”) long-barreled gun.
For the Normandy Invasion and subsequent campaigns on the European continent, the M4 was retrofitted with special-purpose devices by both the Americans and the British. The British added flails (a system of rotors and chains) to clear paths through minefields, and American servicemen added jury-rigged plows for breaking through hedgerows in the bocage country of Normandy. Perhaps the most famous variation was the “Duplex Drive,” or DD, tank, a Sherman equipped with extendable and collapsible skirts that made it buoyant enough to be launched from a landing craft and make its way to shore under propeller power. The M4 also was transformed into the M32 Tank Recovery vehicle and the M4 Mobile Assault Bridge carrier. Numerous devices of all sorts were fitted onto the Sherman’s versatile, reliable chassis, making it the workhorse of the Anglo-American armies of World War II.
sherman tank details:
Developed by the Americans, used as a euphamism for stroking one out by British and Commonwealth Forces ever since… 
All i know is that i would not want to be in one of these when i see the Panther or Tiger tank coming. :shock: Good thing these were pretty fast for a tank. :?
If you have ever been to America you can see the surplus of these that we had. That and artillery. Just about every American town has an American Legion (Usually a bar for Veterans) and you will see either a Sherman tank or an Artillery peice in front somewhere. 
it`s nicer when you have some panzershreck / bazooka to defeat enemy tanks.
what about panzer?
The Germans called the Sherman a “Tommy Cooker” because they burned so easily when hit :shock:
I know it took a Brit to give it a decent gun (Firefly with 17 pdr) , but it gave us the numbers to overcome better German tanks.
Wouldn’t fancy facing a King Tiger in one though.
By same reason soviet soldiers called brittish “Valentine” Mk I and mk III “Mathilda mk II” (with 40mm cannon) tanks a “mobile crematorium” ans “coffin on tracks” … about 2400 various brittish tanks was delivered in USSR by lend-lease.
By same reason soviet soldiers called brittish “Valentine” Mk I and mk III “Mathilda mk II” (with 40mm cannon) tanks a “mobile crematorium” ans “coffin on tracks” … about 2400 various brittish tanks was delivered in USSR by lend-lease.[/quote]
:lol:
Erwin , when you quote, please add the url or at least cut the embarassing phrases. :lol:
Erwin , when you quote, please add the url or at least cut the embarassing phrases. :lol:[/quote]
I cutted the info from lots of sites,so,that`s the ressult.
i will cute phrases when i have time.
OK
By same reason soviet soldiers called brittish “Valentine” Mk I and mk III “Mathilda mk II” (with 40mm cannon) tanks a “mobile crematorium” ans “coffin on tracks” … about 2400 various brittish tanks was delivered in USSR by lend-lease.[/quote]
:lol:[/quote]
And would you care to explain exactly what is funny about large numbers of Soviet soldiers dying due to inferior equipment? :evil:
By same reason soviet soldiers called brittish “Valentine” Mk I and mk III “Mathilda mk II” (with 40mm cannon) tanks a “mobile crematorium” ans “coffin on tracks” … about 2400 various brittish tanks was delivered in USSR by lend-lease.[/quote]
:lol:[/quote]
And would you care to explain exactly what is funny about large numbers of Soviet soldiers dying due to inferior equipment? :evil:[/quote]
I agree i dont find it funny. At least the Soviets came up with a tank that was pretty good. The Sherman was an engineering disaster. Just goes to show that superior technology is not always the answer. Superior numbers…and well proved in many cases…can turn the tides of war.
USA had a better tank than sherman in their army???
of course they do, sherman tank is just light tank imo
There were several versions of the Sherman in the allied inventory.
The Sherman 1 was first used in action in north Africa by the brits, it had the edge on Rommels panzers, was more vesatile and for the first time in allied armies packed a good punch while being survivable and very manouverable.
The Sherman was constantly upgraded and by the time it reached Normandy appeared as the Sherman 76 in the US army, the 76 while still not able to defeat a Panther/Tiger head on at range could defeat it closer in. A specially modified version was called the Sherman Jumbo, this had a lot of extra plate added to it and was quite formidable, there are numerous accounts of the Jumbo taking frontal hits from Panther/Tiger and surviving. Although there were only a couple of hundred Mods carried out.
The Brits did a Mod that put the most effective allied AT gun, the 17 pounder into the Sherman, thus creating the most effective allied tank of ww2, the Sherman Firefly. To carry out this Mod the gun had to be revolved round 90 degrees so that it basically lay on its side. This meant that the crew was reduced to 4 from 5 men and the gunner had to load left handed. For normandy each tank platoon would consist of 1 Firefly and 3 normal Sherman. The job of the normal Shermans was to distract the German armour long enough for the Firefly to engage the enemy. by the end of the war there was enough production to equip every sherman unit with Fireflies.
Another little known fact was that all versions of the Sherman had a gun stabiliser, making it much more effective on the move, unlike the Axis or even soviet vehicles. It was also extremely reliable and easy to maintain compared to the complicated Axis vehicles.
This made it a formidable weapon as there were always lots available as opposed to the Axis vehicles which were so complicated that they broke a lot. It was also built in more numbers than any other tank in ww2 and in my opinion the equal or better of a T-34 85.
A much maligned vehicle, undeservedly so.
Have a look:
http://www.britannica.com/normandy/week3/sherman01.html?ref=news0604nmview
good work!
I was watching a show on The Military Channel the other day, and they said the Sherman widely used in WWII was not meant to be a main battle tank, but an Infantry Support unit. That’s why it had such light armor and such a small cannon.
really?,but the sherman finished as the most ussed tank in the united states army during ww2.sadly,i don´t have military channel 
,but i have history channel,and it has some nice videos of ww2,some of them in color!.