'President' tank?

Maybe just some confusion between M4 and M4A1 possibly, did they consider them as different types. They would have already encountered the M3 Lee/Grant in Spring 1942. The only other American type would have been the M3 Stuart and it couldn't be that. Never heard of the 'President' before though.

 

Is there nothing else that reached theatre around the same time, Archer, Valentine??

Kev

 

What about the M10?
They came into service in North Africa .


naah much later on wasnt it, Tunisia. Gotta be plain confusion.

 

Could the 'President' be 'Priest'?

Now I'll have a look at the report...

If the President is noted for strong armour, could it be a case of President > Prime Minister > Churchill; we had them at Alamein?

It seems we can have the big gun with the too-thin armour (Priest) or the right armour with a too-small gun (Churchill). I'm leaning towards the Churchill - the Germans ought to know a tank from a self-propelled gun.

 

The only priestly president I am aware of came much later, Jimmy Carter was a pastor, I think. Or a peanut farmer. Or both.

 

Wasn't it Eisenhower that put God into the constitution or something?

Za, I meant the M7 GMC aka Priest. Its 105mm gun corresponds to the report, though not much else does.

 

Better late than never.
The intercepted report:
View attachment 24242 View attachment 24243 View attachment 24244 View attachment 24245 View attachment 24246 View attachment 24247 View attachment 24248

Little snippet on the old 3.7's as AT guns business too:
"Employment of new English 9.39cm Anti-Aircraft gun contributed to disabling of German tanks."

I cannot get my head around the fact that the report states that they (The Germans) were at a disadvantage against the Sherman and the British 3.7" weapons.

The German forces had 88mm which as far as I have read were superior to the Shermans 75mm gun.

I find the reports extremely interesting.

As for the name President being used, perhaps this is just a mistake taken from the M3 Grant, who was both a General and later a President.

Regards
Tom

 

...the report states that they (The Germans) were at a disadvantage against the Sherman and the British 3.7" weapons

Did you not see the covering letter:

Dear Adolf,
It may have come to your attention that we are losing. Much as I'd like to blame the Eyeties, we had them with us when we were winning. Obviously, it is impossible that we are being outgeneralled and outfought by the English and their colonials so they must be cheating and have some new superweapons. Please find attached our incontrovertible evidence of same.
Lots of love,
Erwin

The sad thing is that we've been quite happy to swallow that line of reasoning as well.

 

The German forces had 88mm which as far as I have read were superior to the Shermans 75mm gun.

It would be interesting to know how many Über88s there were in Afrika at any time after all. Being the kind of weapon they were, a little inter-arm cooperation could get rid of them. I suppose RA would lick their lips and say "Hmmm, targets!"

 

Statistically, that has to happen once in a very long while.

 

I think the key point is that with the Shermans, 75s & HE, the tankies had a chance of doing that themselves without RA assistance.
The 75mm was intended as a support weapon, not AT whereas we had been saddled with very good (at least at the time they were conceived) AT guns and only MGs to use against soft targets. Even the CS variants were meant for putting out smoke, not HE.

 

Nope, the Shermans to do that would be using direct fire, thereby exposing themselves as targets to the mighty acht-achts. The advantage of artillery is that they can shoot indirect. That's what arms-cooperation is for: one covers the shortcomings of the others.

 

That I am aware of, the former usual 2pdr was completely ineffective in that respect lacking a HE shell, as things that went bang! were of the RA realm. Good for 3.7 and 5 PaKs, but I wouldn't recommend the tactic against 8.8 Fl. Any statistics on this?

 

lacking a HE shell


I won't, I won't, I just won't...