HistoryNet.com RSS
ArmchairGeneral.com RSS

HistoryNet.com Articles
America's Civil War
American History
Aviation History
Civil War Times
MHQ
Military History
Vietnam
Wild West
World War II

ACG Online
ACG Magazine
Stuff We Like
War College
History News
Tactics 101
Carlo D'Este
Books

ACG Gaming
Boardgames
PC Game Reviews

ACG Network
Contact Us
Our Newsletter
Meet Our Staff
Advertise With Us

Sites We Support
HistoryNet.com
StreamHistory.com
Once A Marine
The Art of Battle
Game Squad
Mil. History Podcast
Russian Army - WW2
Achtung Panzer!
Mil History Online

Go Back   Armchair General and HistoryNet >> The Best Forums in History > Historical Events & Eras > World War II > Armor in World War II

Notices and Announcements

Armor in World War II Discuss all aspects & disciplines of World War II Armor here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old 25 Jun 16, 08:06
JBark's Avatar
JBark JBark is offline
Lieutenant General
France
5 Year Service Ribbon Most Significant/Influential Tank Campaign Most Significant/Influential Fighter Campaign Most Significant/Influential Multi-Role Aircraft C 
Greatest/Best Tank of WW2 Campaign 
 
Real Name: John
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Wayne
Posts: 3,427
JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200]
Quote:
Originally Posted by m kenny View Post
The above in a nutshell.
For every 3 tanks penetrated 2 men are 'lost' to the Unit.
For every KO tank with 5 dead there are 6 KO tanks with no crew wastage
Could you post the source please (and why are pages cut off?)
__________________
John

Play La Marseillaise. Play it!
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 25 Jun 16, 08:26
Cult Icon's Avatar
Cult Icon Cult Icon is offline
General of the Forums
United_States
Distinguished Service Award 5 Year Service Ribbon Most Significant/Influential Tank Campaign 
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: NE US
Posts: 7,156
Cult Icon is simply cracking [600]
Cult Icon is simply cracking [600] Cult Icon is simply cracking [600] Cult Icon is simply cracking [600] Cult Icon is simply cracking [600] Cult Icon is simply cracking [600] Cult Icon is simply cracking [600] Cult Icon is simply cracking [600] Cult Icon is simply cracking [600] Cult Icon is simply cracking [600] Cult Icon is simply cracking [600] Cult Icon is simply cracking [600]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurt Knispel View Post

IMHO the Sherman was the best all around tank in WWII with the Soviet T-34 and the German Mark IV (with the HV 75mm) close seconds.
The Sherman was better than the PzIV but it also was a much later design than the other two. The PzIV and T-34 were pre-hostilities. I agree with nick that a churchill/compromise type of tank was better for the situation in the 44.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 25 Jun 16, 08:47
m kenny's Avatar
m kenny m kenny is offline
Lieutenant General
UK
ACG Ten Year Service Award 5 Year Service Ribbon 
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: North-East England
Posts: 3,844
m kenny is a jewel in the rough [500]
m kenny is a jewel in the rough [500] m kenny is a jewel in the rough [500] m kenny is a jewel in the rough [500] m kenny is a jewel in the rough [500] m kenny is a jewel in the rough [500] m kenny is a jewel in the rough [500] m kenny is a jewel in the rough [500]
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBark View Post
Could you post the source please (and why are pages cut off?)
Because it has over 300 pages. I will ferret out the exact title later.
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 25 Jun 16, 08:51
JBark's Avatar
JBark JBark is offline
Lieutenant General
France
5 Year Service Ribbon Most Significant/Influential Tank Campaign Most Significant/Influential Fighter Campaign Most Significant/Influential Multi-Role Aircraft C 
Greatest/Best Tank of WW2 Campaign 
 
Real Name: John
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Wayne
Posts: 3,427
JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurt Knispel View Post
Yes you have to factor everything in since we are talking about the best all-around tank remember?.....

Regards,Kurt
I was asking how we can factor in everything.
__________________
John

Play La Marseillaise. Play it!
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 25 Jun 16, 09:04
JBark's Avatar
JBark JBark is offline
Lieutenant General
France
5 Year Service Ribbon Most Significant/Influential Tank Campaign Most Significant/Influential Fighter Campaign Most Significant/Influential Multi-Role Aircraft C 
Greatest/Best Tank of WW2 Campaign 
 
Real Name: John
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Wayne
Posts: 3,427
JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cult Icon View Post
The Sherman was better than the PzIV but it also was a much later design than the other two. The PzIV and T-34 were pre-hostilities. I agree with nick that a churchill/compromise type of tank was better for the situation in the 44.
I'd have to ask what part of the fighting (in '44) you'd be referring to. Mobility was an important factor and the Churchill was a little on the slow side.
__________________
John

Play La Marseillaise. Play it!
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 25 Jun 16, 09:18
MarkV's Avatar
MarkV MarkV is online now
General of the Forums
UK
Most Significant/Influential Multi-Role Aircraft C 
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Tenbury Wells
Posts: 12,139
MarkV is simply cracking [600]
MarkV is simply cracking [600] MarkV is simply cracking [600] MarkV is simply cracking [600] MarkV is simply cracking [600] MarkV is simply cracking [600] MarkV is simply cracking [600] MarkV is simply cracking [600] MarkV is simply cracking [600] MarkV is simply cracking [600] MarkV is simply cracking [600] MarkV is simply cracking [600] MarkV is simply cracking [600]
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBark View Post
I'd have to ask what part of the fighting (in '44) you'd be referring to. Mobility was an important factor and the Churchill was a little on the slow side.
Mobility is more than just top speed and the Churchill could handle things like high banks and deep ditches better which is probably a useful factor in the boccage
__________________
Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe (H G Wells)
Mit der Dummheit kaempfen Goetter selbst vergebens (Friedrich von Schiller)
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 25 Jun 16, 10:17
Don Juan's Avatar
Don Juan Don Juan is offline
First Lieutenant
UK
Most Significant/Influential Tank Campaign 
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Here
Posts: 678
Don Juan has demonstrated strength of character [100] Don Juan has demonstrated strength of character [100] Don Juan has demonstrated strength of character [100] Don Juan has demonstrated strength of character [100] Don Juan has demonstrated strength of character [100] Don Juan has demonstrated strength of character [100] Don Juan has demonstrated strength of character [100] Don Juan has demonstrated strength of character [100] Don Juan has demonstrated strength of character [100]
Always amazing how the Sherman, one of the most unprepossessing but generally successful weapons of WWII, attracts such heated debate.

It's as absurd as getting angry and emotional about the Jeep or C-47.
__________________
"Looting would not be tolerated within the Division, unless organised with the knowledge of C.O.'s on a unit basis."
- 15/19 Hussars War Diary, 18th March 1945
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 25 Jun 16, 10:29
Kurt Knispel's Avatar
Kurt Knispel Kurt Knispel is offline
Major
United_States
 
Real Name: Paul
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: NY by way of Ireland
Posts: 1,105
Kurt Knispel has demonstrated strength of character [100] Kurt Knispel has demonstrated strength of character [100] Kurt Knispel has demonstrated strength of character [100] Kurt Knispel has demonstrated strength of character [100] Kurt Knispel has demonstrated strength of character [100] Kurt Knispel has demonstrated strength of character [100] Kurt Knispel has demonstrated strength of character [100] Kurt Knispel has demonstrated strength of character [100] Kurt Knispel has demonstrated strength of character [100]
Quote:
Originally Posted by m kenny View Post
And yet the proportion of all KO tanks that were hit by AP shot (55% of Allied, 45% of German from memory)is not that much different for either side. Another fact that seems to have escaped you.
Thanks for your post # 53. This is the sort of stuff I know you have on hand and could provide here. Do you have similar proof of the above statement?

Regards,Kurt
__________________
Our world at Khe Sanh was blood, death, and filth with deafening gunfire and blinding explosions as a constant soundtrack...Barry Fixler
http://sempercool.com/
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 25 Jun 16, 10:36
Kurt Knispel's Avatar
Kurt Knispel Kurt Knispel is offline
Major
United_States
 
Real Name: Paul
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: NY by way of Ireland
Posts: 1,105
Kurt Knispel has demonstrated strength of character [100] Kurt Knispel has demonstrated strength of character [100] Kurt Knispel has demonstrated strength of character [100] Kurt Knispel has demonstrated strength of character [100] Kurt Knispel has demonstrated strength of character [100] Kurt Knispel has demonstrated strength of character [100] Kurt Knispel has demonstrated strength of character [100] Kurt Knispel has demonstrated strength of character [100] Kurt Knispel has demonstrated strength of character [100]
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBark View Post
I was asking how we can factor in everything.
Yes that would be a time consuming endeavor....

Regards,Kurt
__________________
Our world at Khe Sanh was blood, death, and filth with deafening gunfire and blinding explosions as a constant soundtrack...Barry Fixler
http://sempercool.com/
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 25 Jun 16, 10:39
Kurt Knispel's Avatar
Kurt Knispel Kurt Knispel is offline
Major
United_States
 
Real Name: Paul
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: NY by way of Ireland
Posts: 1,105
Kurt Knispel has demonstrated strength of character [100] Kurt Knispel has demonstrated strength of character [100] Kurt Knispel has demonstrated strength of character [100] Kurt Knispel has demonstrated strength of character [100] Kurt Knispel has demonstrated strength of character [100] Kurt Knispel has demonstrated strength of character [100] Kurt Knispel has demonstrated strength of character [100] Kurt Knispel has demonstrated strength of character [100] Kurt Knispel has demonstrated strength of character [100]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Juan View Post
Always amazing how the Sherman, one of the most unprepossessing but generally successful weapons of WWII, attracts such heated debate.

It's as absurd as getting angry and emotional about the Jeep or C-47.
Quite correct you are. I wonder how many different threads (I have seen quite a few in my first year here) were started here on ACG about the Sherman tank which lead down a long and winding debate over the "best tank of WWII"

Regards, Kurt
__________________
Our world at Khe Sanh was blood, death, and filth with deafening gunfire and blinding explosions as a constant soundtrack...Barry Fixler
http://sempercool.com/
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links

  #71  
Old 25 Jun 16, 17:47
JBark's Avatar
JBark JBark is offline
Lieutenant General
France
5 Year Service Ribbon Most Significant/Influential Tank Campaign Most Significant/Influential Fighter Campaign Most Significant/Influential Multi-Role Aircraft C 
Greatest/Best Tank of WW2 Campaign 
 
Real Name: John
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Wayne
Posts: 3,427
JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurt Knispel View Post
I do not understand the last post by a Sherman tank expert. Throwing in all the intangibles is what makes this fun. The Allies had complete air superiority after D- day and often carpet bombed observed German Tank locations.
C'mon J.B. you can do better then that.....
Regards,Kurt
I am not an expert on the Sherman tank and do not apprecite this label. Give me a specific area for discussion and I will be very happy to participate, make a suggestion like your last one about simply viewing tank kills and crew casualties vs tanks fielded and I don't need to do more than point out that this shows nothing.
__________________
John

Play La Marseillaise. Play it!
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 25 Jun 16, 18:39
JBark's Avatar
JBark JBark is offline
Lieutenant General
France
5 Year Service Ribbon Most Significant/Influential Tank Campaign Most Significant/Influential Fighter Campaign Most Significant/Influential Multi-Role Aircraft C 
Greatest/Best Tank of WW2 Campaign 
 
Real Name: John
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Wayne
Posts: 3,427
JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200]
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkV View Post
Mobility is more than just top speed and the Churchill could handle things like high banks and deep ditches better which is probably a useful factor in the boccage
Yes, I knew this would be brought up. I don't think the dividers of the bocage were that much of a problem, the Stuart handled them I think the Sherman could. Wasn't the problem that the thin belly armor was exposed when the tanks went over them?
__________________
John

Play La Marseillaise. Play it!
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 25 Jun 16, 19:43
JBark's Avatar
JBark JBark is offline
Lieutenant General
France
5 Year Service Ribbon Most Significant/Influential Tank Campaign Most Significant/Influential Fighter Campaign Most Significant/Influential Multi-Role Aircraft C 
Greatest/Best Tank of WW2 Campaign 
 
Real Name: John
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Wayne
Posts: 3,427
JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200] JBark is walking in the light [200]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Juan View Post
Always amazing how the Sherman, one of the most unprepossessing but generally successful weapons of WWII, attracts such heated debate.

It's as absurd as getting angry and emotional about the Jeep or C-47.


I have often wondered about the discusions about the M4, here, on other forums and on the pages of the books we read. The opinions of the quality of the M4 vary widely and the discussions go on and on, often become very passionate or heated. It seems the more information that becomes available has little influence on the opinions. I can't know for certain, of course, but I have come to wonder if the opinions of the M4 have much to do with one central idea "Why couldn't the great industrial giant USA make a better tank?" Of course the "better tank" was the perfect engine, best gun, thickest armor, best flotation and suspension and all the best things that went with them. The fact that the US was satisfied to make one tank, improve it occasionally, but never get involved in the battle of tank evolution that other countries participated in irritates many students of armor, it would seem. In this thread it has been pointed out that the US went through multiple generations of other weapons, certainly they should have done the same with tanks. I will state what I have come to believe about the use of tanks in WWII. Tanks were primarily used to shoot HE...blow stuff up...enemy troops, bunkers, trucks, buildings and more. They carried AP rounds, some were very good at killing other tanks, but the primary role is born out in the numbers of postwar studies. The US, like most of the other armor producing countries of the war, also designed threaded armored vehicles (TD's) that had the primary design in mind to kill tanks (though they were also called on to shoot HE.) The need of many here and on other forums to continue to discuss primarily the AP role of a tank and rate tanks almost exclusively on their ability to fight other tanks is almost useless, certainly tiresome. The US came up with a design for a tank which worked very well for a number of reasons. It ended up being durable, reliable versatile and capable of firing HE out of a good gun, the 75mm. This kind of machine wins wars. US tankers liked this canon for the job it did as did the British who mounted a similar canon on their tanks as well as using American M4's in good numbers. The evidence is overwhelming that the use of HE was the most important job that would be done by tanks in WWII. I believe that the Russians and Germans misused their resources in taking part in a duel of trying to produce the tank killing heavies(?) when the battles would be won with the mediums tossing HE.
__________________
John

Play La Marseillaise. Play it!

Last edited by JBark; 25 Jun 16 at 23:02..
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 26 Jun 16, 00:25
panther3485's Avatar
panther3485 panther3485 is online now
ACG Forums - Field Marshal
Australia
Distinguished Service Award - 2nd Award ACG Ten Year Service Award 5 Year Service Ribbon Most Decisive Battle Campaign, 2008 
Greatest Westerns Campaign Greatest Spy Movies Campaign Greatest Blunders Campaign Best Pin-Up Of World War II 
Most Significant/Influential Tank Campaign Most Significant/Influential Fighter Campaign Most Significant/Influential Multi-Role Aircraft C Model Forum Group Build (Multiple) 
Greatest/Best Tank of WW2 Campaign 
 
Real Name: Paul
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 28,984
panther3485 has achieved enlightenment [1200+] panther3485 has achieved enlightenment [1200+] panther3485 has achieved enlightenment [1200+] panther3485 has achieved enlightenment [1200+] panther3485 has achieved enlightenment [1200+] panther3485 has achieved enlightenment [1200+]
panther3485 has achieved enlightenment [1200+] panther3485 has achieved enlightenment [1200+]
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBark View Post


I have often wondered about the discusions about the M4, here, on other forums and on the pages of the books we read. The opinions of the quality of the M4 vary widely and the discussions go on and on, often become very passionate or heated. It seems the more information that becomes available has little influence on the opinions. I can't know for certain, of course, but I have come to wonder if the opinions of the M4 have much to do with one central idea "Why couldn't the great industrial giant USA make a better tank?" Of course the "better tank" was the perfect engine, best gun, thickest armor, best flotation and suspension and all the best things that went with them. The fact that the US was satisfied to make one tank, improve it occasionally, but never get involved in the battle of tank evolution that other countries participated in irritates many students of armor, it would seem. In this thread it has been pointed out that the US went through multiple generations of other weapons, certainly they should have done the same with tanks. I will state what I have come to believe about the use of tanks in WWII. Tanks were primarily used to shoot HE...blow stuff up...enemy troops, bunkers, trucks, buildings and more. They carried AP rounds, some were very good at killing other tanks, but the primary role is born out in the numbers of postwar studies. The US, like most of the other armor producing countries of the war, also designed threaded armored vehicles (TD's) that had the primary design in mind to kill tanks (though they were also called on to shoot HE.) The need of many here and on other forums to continue to discuss primarily the AP role of a tank and rate tanks almost exclusively on their ability to fight other tanks is almost useless, certainly tiresome. The US came up with a design for a tank which worked very well for a number of reasons. It ended up being durable, reliable versatile and capable of firing HE out of a good gun, the 75mm. This kind of machine wins wars. US tankers liked this canon for the job it did as did the British who mounted a similar canon on their tanks as well as using American M4's in good numbers. The evidence is overwhelming that the use of HE was the most important job that would be done by tanks in WWII. I believe that the Russians and Germans misused their resources in taking part in a duel of trying to produce the tank killing heavies(?) when the battles would be won with the mediums tossing HE.
(my bold)
I'm in complete agreement with you up until the bolded bit in your closing sentence. The misuse of resources, such as it was, was pretty much a German thing alone, IMHO.
From my reading, I don't think it really applies to the Russians to anything like the same extent as the Germans who seem to have been in a class of their own with this. However, for the latter it is - to a degree at least - understandable I think.
I believe the major driving factors for the Germans were (a) the practical discovery in 1941 that newer models of Soviet tanks had a markedly superior gun/armour combination compared to the best German tanks; and
(b) that especially with the failure to knock out the Soviet Union by the end of 1941, they would be engaged in a much longer struggle that potentially involved facing growing numbers of such Soviet tanks; and that the Soviets themselves could be expected to continue to improve their machines in any case.
With the commitment to a multi-front war against three major powers, the Germans knew they could never compete in terms of production but they seem to have strongly believed that regaining a qualitative edge particularly in AT gunpower & armour protection was at least part of the answer to the numerical disparity.
(At the same time, one suspects that German pride only added to the motivation?) In any case, the AT performance of their newer tank guns in particular was greatly emphasized.

For their part, the Soviets - while improving and further developing their tanks and up-gunning as well as up-armouring where reasonably possible - seem always to have continued to ensure a good HE capability in their tank guns, as at least an equal priority and in certain cases greater than, the focus on AP capability. Even if it was, in one case at least, as much by practicalities of circumstance as by design intent.
Regardless, I see little evidence that AT capability became as much of an over-riding focus for Soviet tanks, as it did for the Germans. Rather, it was more a case of overall/general upgrade in gun-power, with HE capability being improved in parallel as much as if not more than AT capability.
IMO, the Soviets were far more pragmatic about such things.
__________________
"England expects that every man will do his duty!" (English crew members had better get ready for a tough fight against the combined French and Spanish fleets because that's what England expects! However, Scotland, Wales and Ireland appear to expect nothing so the Scottish, Welsh and Irish crew members can relax below decks if they like!)

Last edited by panther3485; 26 Jun 16 at 01:13..
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 26 Jun 16, 08:55
MarkV's Avatar
MarkV MarkV is online now
General of the Forums
UK
Most Significant/Influential Multi-Role Aircraft C 
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Tenbury Wells
Posts: 12,139
MarkV is simply cracking [600]
MarkV is simply cracking [600] MarkV is simply cracking [600] MarkV is simply cracking [600] MarkV is simply cracking [600] MarkV is simply cracking [600] MarkV is simply cracking [600] MarkV is simply cracking [600] MarkV is simply cracking [600] MarkV is simply cracking [600] MarkV is simply cracking [600] MarkV is simply cracking [600] MarkV is simply cracking [600]
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBark View Post
Yes, I knew this would be brought up. I don't think the dividers of the bocage were that much of a problem, the Stuart handled them I think the Sherman could. Wasn't the problem that the thin belly armor was exposed when the tanks went over them?
The Stuarts and Shermans went over some of them the Churchill was just better at it - its not so much an issue of going over as not getting ditched
__________________
Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe (H G Wells)
Mit der Dummheit kaempfen Goetter selbst vergebens (Friedrich von Schiller)
Reply With Quote
Reply

Please bookmark this thread if you enjoyed it!


Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:08.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.