utter Mince!
Most German transport were horses.
1/4 werer motorized.mechanized in normandy. not to mention seized french vehicles
therefore 3/4 were non-motorised, i.e. foot / horse-drawn.
yes, but practically all the horses were killed/left in falaise. the amount of seized personal vehicles were staggering. before the pocket was narrowing, more then 100,000 german troops escaped. then 60,000 more when it closed. also, fuel that was earmarked for the panzers were given to the vehicles, since there was no reasonable way for the fuel guzzling panzers to escape…
I like the looks of the casted hull Sherman the best but on gun and armor performance it couldn’t hold a candle to the Tigers. Mass production is what made the Sherman great. If 5 were destroyed they had 10 the next day to replace. The problem with the Tigers is they were made to good, they took to long to build.
(I apologize for kicking this thread up, but this seems to be a worthy, timeless discussion piece).
The Germans and Americans also referred to the M-4 Sherman as a “Ronson.” It was a morbid allusion to the Ronson lighter company’s slogan, “always lights on the first strike.”
My source for this is an excellent History Channel prgram under the title of a series that was called “Suicide Missions,” a series that focused on the worst jobs one could have in the wartime military. Driving a Sherman was one apparently. The series was later renemed to “Dangerous Missions,” I assume there was some objections by vets that felt they weren’t out to get killed intentionally. But this is without a doubt the best program I’ve seen on this. It featured a series of interviews with WWII vets including American, British, Germans, and Canadian. I highly recommend seeing it if you haven’t, some of the first hand stories told by vets are amazing, and the program also discusses upgrades to the tank that met with limited success, and the introduction ot the M26 Pershing tank at the end of the War, and why it wasn’t introduced earlier.
Actually, they have it for sale on DVD, but $25 seems a little steep for an hour program.
http://store.aetv.com/html/product/index.jhtml?id=72391&browseCategoryId=&location=&parentcatid=cat580012&subcatid=
I like the Sherman provided it was an upgrade, the essential problem with the vehicle was that the majority had the same gun and armor as the initial 1942 versions. The Firefly and the American M4A3E2 (“easy-eight”) version certainly gave the crews a fighting crack at a Panther, or at least equaled he Panzer MkIV (since there were actually few Panthers, and very few Tigers, in Normandy)…
No German or Soviet tank went on in front line service for over two years of the war without significant upgrades. I think the main problem here was that the 500-600HP FORD engine was a major limiting factor. One simply could not just weld more armor on without sacrificing speed and performance, and Patton wanted a fast tank, not a heavy one. It was also hard to retool American factories churning these engines out, and R & D was often sacrificed in favor of mass production, even the Pershings that supplimented the Shermans late in the War still were drastically underpowered because a new, more powerful, engine was never developed until after the War…
They did produce a Diesel engined version that saw service with the Soviets and in the Pacific.
There was also the Sherman ‘Jumbo’ which had thicker frontal armour than a Tiger 1 or Panther, very few of these were produced though.
Here’s a nice sight dedicated to the various Sherman models:
(off topic) Right now im making an M4 sherman plastic model 1:35 scale, its coming along great!
True, but diesel engines are more expensive, and complex. And the Ford V-8 could be cracked out by the hundreds per day, if not more.
I wasn’t aware the diesel saw more action in the Pacific, interesting. You’d think more’d been sent to the ETO since the Japanese had a hard time knocking out ANY Allied tanks…
Yeah, unfortunately, they only made about 250 “Jumbos.” I really don’t think the Allies took into account the human factor of tanks crews being killed, wounded, and traumatized from facing the technologically superior German tanks.
(off topic) My M4 Sherman is complete!
That’s not off-topic. I wouldn’t mind modeling once again, since it’s relaxing and might be good for my budding hypertension.
But, it’s hard to find quality, detailed model kits anymore…
I bought the M4 from Tamiya.
Official designation: M4A3
Common designation: Sherman IV
Type: Medium Tank
Manufacturer: Ford, Grand Blanc
M4A3 Production: 12,596
Total M4 Production: Approx. 49,234
Engine: GAA-III V-WC
Horsepower: 400 at 2,600 rpm
Crew: 5
Weight (tons): 32.3 Gearbox: Synchromesh, 5 forward 1 reverse
Length (meters): 7.52 Speed (km/hr): 47
Width (meters): 2.68 Range (km): 130
Height (meters): 3.25 Radio: SCR528, Push-button (FM)- voice-operated
Standard Armament: One 75mm - 105mm, One .50 cal AA, One .30 cal coaxial, One .30 cal hull
Traverse: 360° (36°/sec) powered
Elevation: +25° to -10°
Ammunition: 97, 300, 4750
Armour (mm): Front Side Rear Top/Bottom
Turret: 75 50 50 25
Hull Upper: 50 38 38 25
Hull Lower: 38 38 38 12
Here is a bit more information about the sherman :roll:
Sturmtruppen wrote:
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.
That’s exactly why I don’t like the Sherman. Whenever I see one I think of young men being sent to war in inferior equipment. If a Government sends its young men off to fight they have a duty to at least provide them with equipment which will match that of the enemy in terms of firepower and protection. Ease of maintenance and superior numbers is always nice to have but I can’t look at these things without thinking about the unfairness of being sent to war in something that the enemy could pick off at a far greater range than I could hit back.
Now a Firefly would be a completely different kettle of fish, if only the Sherman had teh Firefly’s gun from day one then things would have been completely different.
The u.s. really didnt’ want to have tanks to engage in battles with other tanks. They want’ed a tank that is fast lightweight to be used as infantry support and a scouting tank.
I heard that Patton was against the deployment of heavier tanks like the M26 Pershing, to augment the Sherman. I guess he felt that they weren’t needed and would have just slowed things down… What people tend to forget was that the bulk of the German armored forces were not Tigers. They had a few more Panthers around, but really I’m under the impression that the Tigers and Panthers where the center piece of the battle, while they’re ranks were filled out by support Jagdpanzers and Panzer MkIVs, which an upgraded Sherman “Easy-8,” Fire-Fly, or Jumbo could easily handle. Only if they had actually done what the Germans had done with the MkIV, and upgraded a 1942-vintage Sherman tank with additional armor and a high velocity gun… That’s what is criminal I think, two years is an eternity in warfare…
Did u know that we used american tanks from various periods of time 9n this war ???
Do you mean WWII Yugloslavia?