Discussion in 'Weapons, Technology & Equipment' started by kfz, Nov 11, 2006.
Nice gams, I mean guns.
It's an M4A39.
I suspect that soldier is an imposter. The skirt doesn't look like it meets regulations. Not complaining, just an observation.
I've seen this one - Furry is the uncut prequel to Shaving Ryan's Privates.
It's not bad but the DDs are obviously fake...
Well, the shade of color (colour) of her overseas cap seems a bit dark, but it coincides with the US Army issue M-1943 field uniform. The M-1943 was of the newer, darker OD7 (olive drab) variety. In use, the M-1943 was very popular with the men in the field, being relatively comfortable and having large amounts of pocket space. It looks as if her blouse is a modified Ike Jacket and her shorts are of parachute material. Me personally, I prefer khakis. Just an observation.
Swedish impressions of the Sherman – Swedish tank archives
Swedish impressions of the Sherman, part 2 – Swedish tank archives
(Noticed as Mr Reed mentioned this S Tank thread on Twatter. All of the blog is worth a read.)
Had to share this one:
I'm uncomfortable that M3s aren't on the list.
I mean: 'American Medium'...
And Rams were allowed in.
M4 Sherman - The Workhorse of D-Day
From 21st September 2019
Medium Tank M4A1 (76) Sherman in Ugandan Service - Tanks Encyclopedia
Sort of provides a perspective on size
From the link in this thread - WWII In Color
#54 Private First Class N. E. Carling stands beside the American M4 Sherman medium tank ‘Killer’ on Kwajalein Atoll.
A Bit late to the party but quite off, 1st would be unit resources (LAD/Unit Wksp) resaponsible for small repairs by interchange of parts etc, 2nd would be a Brigade/Formation Workshop responsible for major unit assembly repairs etc. We now get into a blurred area 3&4. 3rd is heavy repairs, minor rebuilds etc and is typically Divisional based but also Corps and Army level. 4th is Rebuild/Factory level repairs and typically Army level or above.
of course your last paragraph highlights to me something equally overlooked and that is the Germans were defending so had (generally) the ability to choose the ground for the engagement and if well enough concealed get the first shots away. This factor is almost always overlooked in comparing Western Allied to german engagements. Interestingly when the Germans counterattacked as they did in strength a few times such as Ruaray, Arracourt and against the Canadians at Norrey en Bessin etc they got mauled on a Goodwood scale. More interestingly is all three actions I have cited had little in the way of Air Support due to Weather (Arracourt - although they engaged later in the aftermath), Fire Missions (Norrey where Naval Bombardment going further inland kept the planes away) and Ruaray (.Weather) the damage was done by a combination of tnaks well positioned with a screen of AT (mobile or Static) and supporting Artillery which if you study the Goodwood battles is pretty much the same but reversed. The Defender in normal military wisdom is regarded as having a 3-1 advantadge and not due to the superiority of his weapons
Fully agree with you Al. It's something that's often overlooked but absolutely fundamental.
One of the reasons I have harped on about Buckley's Normandy book so often.
Definitely doesn't overlook - explains it thoroughly in the most crystal clear manner.
If you're attacking against HV guns in defensive positions, it isn't so much the quality of your armour, troops or plan you're up against - more sheer physics.
Super Sherman getting its Cummins V8 replaced. Seems to be the worst engine ever made by Cummins and was soon dropped.
That is an outstanding book, strongly recommended to anyone interested both in Normandy and the whole Allied v. German armor controversy.
Having just completed studying under John at Wolverhampton may I endorse the commendation of this book. However there is a shorter academic work that covers some of Poop's points well and demolishes some of the "good tank country" myths. This is Marc Milner (University of New Brunswick), Reflections on Caen, Bocage and the Gap: A Naval Historian’s Critique of the Normandy Campaign, Canadian Military History, Vol 7 Issue 2. It is possible to download this - sorry I don't have a link but there is enough here to find it with a google (other search engines are available).
Somehow missed this Forgotten Weapons vid from December last year.
Moran & Gun Jesus get together for an hour long chat about Sherman armament.
Basically, the Youtube content I'm looking for.
If they could get Jay Leno in to discuss the E8's automotive features with it's owner I'd be even more content...
Reflections on Caen, Bocage and the Gap: A Naval Historian’s Critique of the Normandy Campaign
Separate names with a comma.