Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No debate with anything written here. But in regards to the German tanks - I think the Russian KV tanks and even the French tanks (during that 1940 period anyways) outgunned and outweigned the German tanks.
Russian tanks were more than a match one-on-one for the Tigers. What the German's had, however, were superior tactics in mobile warfare. That and the German 88's as an antitank gun.
Less than 20% of the German Army moved by machine,after the breakout from Normandy in Operation Cobra(the only time during the war where stategic airpower affected a tatical battle),the US Army became the masters of mobile warfare,one operational port and we would have been in Germany in '44.
I have a real bone to pick with you. It seems EVERY post you make drives me to give you Rep points but I can't because I gave you one just a short while ago. So now you're going to make me go out and spread more Rep points around so that I can keep up with giving you the Rep points you deserve.
Man, you're just making me work tooooooo hard!
Cut it out!
LOL
No seriously, as always your posts are right on the mark.
Ken
Why, thank you. Coming from you, that's very flattering. And just keep the rep points coming. That way, you're resisting the rising tide of mediocrity. LOL.
I'm very disappointed by the lack of criticism of my post!If we felt truly threatened by German armor,we could have gotten the M26 Pershing to the battlefield in greater numbers much faster,upgunned to the 17pdr(77mm)or 90mm faster when it proved that the upgunned 76mm Sherman wasn't a world beater versus armor,Ike was banking on this weapon and it dissapointed severely.I believe it represents the one time in WW2 when the US made a decision for quantity over quality and thus larger casualties in the armored forces,lets see if THAT gets us started!
Oh, I don't want to have a throwdown, especially since I admire your posts. But I'm not sure if you can call the results of Operation Cobra an indictment of the Sherman. After all, the projected D+100 after Normandy had Allied forces not even to Paris, when the true D+100 had German forces almost completely out of the country. To me, this vindicates the prevailing American doctrine of light, fast, and reliable, thereby leading to a very swift rout of the Germans in France.
Less than 20% of the German Army moved by machine,after the breakout from Normandy in Operation Cobra(the only time during the war where stategic airpower affected a tatical battle),the US Army became the masters of mobile warfare,one operational port and we would have been in Germany in '44.
I would agree with you, although Montgomery was a boob. I think the better strategy would have been to execute another amphibious landing in Belgium as a flanking move, rather than the really unnecessary invasion of Southern France. That would have served to have cleared out the islands near Antwerp, put additional pressure on the German forces in Holland, and provided a strong logistical advantage for Patton's sweep into Germany. Plus the small German forces in the South of France would have died on the vine.
Their production was a wonder. Sometimes quantity IS more important than quality. For years now the US military has been taking the opposite approach -and SO FAR it has worked. However in some cases the policy has gone to the extreme. Not wishing to change the subject but consider the case of the B-2 bomber. It is an amazing aircraft to be sure, but the fact is we only built 21 of the things (down from an original request of 135). That is WAY too few aircraft, no matter how advanced they are. When you factor in the risk of attrition from accidents and planes out of commission for one reason or another it leaves us with a very small number of such aircraft.
The Liberty Ship were obviously the exact opposite approach. The ships were not all that advanced or exceptional in any way, but we built so darned many of them. This was the same approach taken with the Sherman. In combat it was not really a match for the latest German tanks (though it was OK against the older models) but it was very reliable and easy to maintain and THOSE are important factors as well when judging any combat vehicle. The Tiger tanks (both models) were ferocious in battle but both had pretty major reliability problems - and if a tank is broken down it can't fight.
So yeah a lot of American tankers lost their lives because the Sherman was no match for a Tiger (or a Panther for that matter (a MUCH better tank than the Tigers in my opinion)) but then again how many American tankers would have died if our tanks had been a bit better but not nearly as numerous?
Along with mechanical reliablity, range, gunnery and protection, numbers matter a great deal.
Less than 20% of the German Army moved by machine,after the breakout from Normandy in Operation Cobra(the only time during the war where stategic airpower affected a tatical battle),the US Army became the masters of mobile warfare,one operational port and we would have been in Germany in '44.
Yes indeed, most people do not realize that for all the vaunted mechanization of the Wehrmacht, it was still largely a horse-drawn army. Both the British and the American forces (and later the American-equipped Free French) were far more mechanized than the Germans.
No debate with anything written here. But in regards to the German tanks - I think the Russian KV tanks and even the French tanks (during that 1940 period anyways) outgunned and outweigned the German tanks.
Russian tanks were more than a match one-on-one for the Tigers. What the German's had, however, were superior tactics in mobile warfare. That and the German 88's as an antitank gun.
Liberty Ships (reciprocating engines=slow speed) were in fact supplanted by Victory Ships(turbine engines,greater cargo capacity,higher speed=greater survivability),so when we had a better design we fielded it,aircraft,warships,parachutes included.We did not do the same with our armored force,that was my point.
Oh, I don't want to have a throwdown, especially since I admire your posts. But I'm not sure if you can call the results of Operation Cobra an indictment of the Sherman. After all, the projected D+100 after Normandy had Allied forces not even to Paris, when the true D+100 had German forces almost completely out of the country. To me, this vindicates the prevailing American doctrine of light, fast, and reliable, thereby leading to a very swift rout of the Germans in France.
Operation Cobra was where the Sherman shined,not sure what you thought I meant
Reading that book left me awestruck by the courage of the men who fought in those tanks...
Here's a book review:
Quote:
In early 1944, the US Army faced a critical decision regarding its armored forces: should it retain the M4 Sherman as its primary tank or accelerate production of the new M26 Pershing heavy tank? Although many armored commanders favored the Pershing, the tank debate continued until Lt Gen George S. Patton, the Army’s leading tank "expert," entered the fray. Patton favored the smaller (and supposedly more mobile) Sherman, noting that "tanks were not supposed to fight other tanks, but bypass them if possible, and attack enemy objectives in the rear." Ultimately, senior Allied commanders—including Gen Dwight Eisenhower—backed Patton and decided to increase production of the Sherman. It remains one of the most disastrous choices of World War II—arguably, a decision that lengthened the war and became a literal death sentence for thousands of tank-crew members.
The consequences of the Sherman decision are brutally detailed in Belton Cooper’s vivid memoir Death Traps. A maintenance officer who served in the legendary Third Armored Division ("Spearhead"), Cooper was charged with the critical task of locating damaged Shermans, directing their recovery, and ensuring the flow of new or repaired tanks to frontline units. From the Normandy invasion to V-E day, Cooper witnessed the folly of Patton’s logic firsthand. The author calculates (with only a touch of irony) that he "has seen more knocked out tanks than any other living American."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
