The Sherman Tank what an amazing vehicle!!

The Sherman? Mass produced in their thousands. Fine! if you look at in that light. What you have to take into consideration is "How long does it take to produce a man? And then to train him? It was the terrible cost in tank crews lives that made it just about the most disasterous weapon of war ever.

The Goodwood operation cost us 400 tanks......Some were recovered and some crews. There was this attitude of "We shall go and get another 400" Ok, but it takes at least Eighteen years to make a crew member.

This Country had given so much and had lost so many killed around the world that we were running out of men. To such an extent that some divisions vanished, and the men used as reinforcements for other units.

The Sherman was a death trap, and the enemy knew it. damn great tall thing. inviting solid shot......And got it.
Sapper

 

The Sherman? Mass produced in their thousands. Fine! if you look at in that light. What you have to take into consideration is "How long does it take to produce a man? And then to train him? It was the terrible cost in tank crews lives that made it just about the most disasterous weapon of war ever.

The Goodwood operation cost us 400 tanks......Some were recovered and some crews. There was this attitude of "We shall go and get another 400" Ok, but it takes at least Eighteen years to make a crew member.

This Country had given so much and had lost so many killed around the world that we were running out of men. To such an extent that some divisions vanished, and the men used as reinforcements for other units.

The Sherman was a death trap, and the enemy knew it. damn great tall thing. inviting solid shot......And got it.
Sapper
And thats why the tankers made the tactics.Who is so stuped to go face to face with the tank that overcome his tank.Sherman is enough good with the support of granediers and anti tank crew.

 

get it right ! The Sherman tank was probably the worst disaster of WW2. Up against the Panther the loss for a Panther was reckoned to be 5 to6 Shermans for one Panther, and ahellof a lot more for a Tiger.
Sapper

I think that's an exaggeration for Panther, at least in the general picture. Its side armour was scarcely thicker than Sherman's own, and vulnerable to the 75mm. at 1000 yards and beyond, whereas Tiger's was twice as thick, and a tough proposition except at point blank range. With the volumes of armour the Allies could deploy, Panther could only hope to maintain face-front to the enemy in special conditions like those of Market Garden.

Yes, we could've done with something better, and attempts - some successful within limits - to improve or replace Sherman were continuous.

But should we've lengthened the war and allowed Ivan to take most of Western Europe? Or switched resources out of the equally vital aircraft industry? These are the sort of choices that would've had to be made.

Sherman did the work in front of it, and it and its crews deserve all the more respect for the fact that it was difficult.

Regards,
MikB

 

Oh yeah, we wanted to take pictures and were laughing so much they wouldn't let us!!

 

Yeah excellent, massed produced rubbish. Ask any WW2 tanker if he was happy going into battle in one. Not a chance! And that's what matters; not the tanks, but the PEOPLE inside them.

Ok, the Firefly was a big improvement thanks to the 17pdr, but let's face it you still had to get the 1st shot in AND make it count. Your armour wasn't going to keep anything decent out.

Not nice to see Mr Dyas talking about it, but here goes YouTube - Tiger tank - MWittman

 

Omar bradley even believed that the Sherman's quality was only found in numbers.

 

To compere Tiger and Sherman is like to comper Elephant and fly ,its just funny.Sherman isn't build to fight agaist such a strong tank.
The sherman is made to comper agaist Srug and outher older german tanks.When the Shermans faced the Panthers the US known that one Sherman cant face Panther ,thats why they made Pershing and with a little bit destraction from the Sherman Pershing can destroy a Panther.

And about the tiger.Nothing can face tiger nothing is better ,thats where the tricks enter in use.A little bit hiding and waiting and you could catch the tiger in the ass.But on a clear field ,you can just pray to miss you.

 

I wish a Tiger would destroy this thread.....

 

I do not really like shermans I like panthers tigers and panzer3s and 4s

 

That Sherman crushing the car, is that a 17 pound gun? Seems very long for a 75.

 

Can anyone provide any primary evidence of the famous "5 Shermans to one Panther/Tiger" claim?
After a comment elsewhere I'm intrigued, the rough statistics and tactical evidence don't appear to bear this out on a first look.

This got me to actually start looking at tank battles between US (I left the British et al out to avoid different tactics and orgainzation) armored units and German ones between roughly D-Day and Jan 45. So far (and this is ancedotial at this point....it will take alot more effort for detailed results) I have found the following:

1. Battles between US armor and Tiger tanks is extremely rare. There are just a handful of actions. The Tigers usually do a bit better than the Shermans but not anywhere close to 3 to 1 let alone 5 or 10 to 1.

2. In battles where one side is defending from a prepared position the attacker usually takes slightly more losses than the defender regardless of who the defender is. The US generally terminates such actions by maneuver forcing the Germans to withdraw whether they are attacking or defending.

3. In battles where both sides are maneuvering, such as a meeting engagment, the Germans usually take heavier losses and have to withdraw.

4. The Panther and other heavier German tanks only have an advantage at long range and when they are being attacked head on. Neither condition usually exists and when it does the advantage is very temporary.

5. Overall, in tank on tank battles the US usually gives as good or better than they take. The value of heavier armor and bigger guns on German tanks is hardly any, if any at all, advantage in European tank combat.

6. The majority of Shermans and tank destroyers are lost to antitank guns and panzerfaust usually in an ambush. But, these do not count in the survey as they are not tank-on-tank actions.

The big US advantages that create the above are:

1. Better communications
2. Better orgainzation
3. Tanks with faster turret traverse and crew coordination allowing them to get the first round in. This is an absolutely huge advantage. Time and again the Germans are unable to get their tank guns on target before taking several hits one of which is usually fatal.
4. Use of combined arms. The Germans simply do not make good practice of combined arms. Most of their tank attacks are made without reconnissance, artillery support, and frequently they operate in small groups rather than enmasse.

 

Come on, Terry, now you're in the Mythbusters team?

 

I think this thread amy finally be heading in the direction it was supposed too....