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.
More so than any faulty intelligence estimates on long lance torpedo capabilities, wasn't it the Imperial fleet's emphasis on night fighting training which gave them an advantage in The Slot?
Without question. However, when it comes to military capabilities, I think military intelligence tends to err in favor of matching up well with existing capabilities, rather than perhaps revise doctrine in the face of an expanded threat.
To me, the perfect example today is the modern aircraft carrier. Sure, it's superb for projecting force against a country in the developing world. But how long do you think a carrier will last in a combat zone against a determined, technologically sophisticated enemy such as the Chinese or the Russians? Heck, even the French or Iranians.
I know this flys against every WWII computer game out there these days, but the Tiger tanks sucked.
AMEN!
There are also things like how fast the turret could turn....and the fact they broke down A LOT.
Too many wargamers (board type) also love them because the games are pretty much "how big is the gun, how thick is the armor" slug-fests that only highlight the strengths of tanks like the Tiger while ignoring massive weaknesses.
Ditto for wargames that fail to reflect that Japanese zeros had huge survivability issues and that their damage control on ships sucked. These sure came into play as the war drug on.
The Sherman mainly got it's bad rep when it had to fight in France where our green crews were going up against more veteran tank crews in optimal (for them) match-up conditions.
There are also things like how fast the turret could turn....and the fact they broke down A LOT.
Too many wargamers (board type) also love them because the games are pretty much "how big is the gun, how thick is the armor" slug-fests that only highlight the strengths of tanks like the Tiger while ignoring massive weaknesses.
Ditto for wargames that fail to reflect that Japanese zeros had huge survivability issues and that their damage control on ships sucked. These sure came into play as the war drug on.
The Sherman mainly got it's bad rep when it had to fight in France where our green crews were going up against more veteran tank crews in optimal (for them) match-up conditions.
Ah, the "PanzerBlitz" factor. A good point you just made. Everybody always looked at the attack and defense values on the Panther and Tiger counters, but there wasn't ever a reliability factor. I guess that rolling a dice to see if the tread slipped on any given turn would have slowed down the rate of play.
The other thing is that the entire point of Blitzkrieg is NOT to fight the enemy strength to strength, but rather find the weak point, break through, and run amok in the enemy's rear areas, causing havoc and severing supply lines. For that, the Sherman (And the earlier models of German tanks) was superbly equipped.
To me, the perfect example today is the modern aircraft carrier. Sure, it's superb for projecting force against a country in the developing world. But how long do you think a carrier will last in a combat zone against a determined, technologically sophisticated enemy such as the Chinese or the Russians? Heck, even the French or Iranians.
Is the aircraft carrier OUR version of the Maginot Line? Whereas the French spent untold sums preparing themselves to fight another Verdun are we wasting resources preparing to refight Midway and the Phillipine Sea?
The Sherman mainly got it's bad rep when it had to fight in France where our green crews were going up against more veteran tank crews in optimal (for them) match-up conditions.
And the Germans had the advantages of being on the defensive. Indeed, it may be that it was the defensive that the German heavies were best suited for.
"According to Belton Y. Cooper in his memoir of his 3rd Armored Division service, Death Traps, the final combat losses of the division were nothing less than breathtaking. The division was nominally assigned by table of organization 232 medium tanks (a total which included ten M26 Pershing tanks that made it into combat). It lost 648 tanks totally destroyed in combat, and 1,100 needing repair. Of those 1,100 tanks, nearly 700 had been knocked out in combat. According to Cooper, the 3rd Armored therefore lost close to 1,350 medium tanks in combat, for a total loss rate of 580 percent."
And the Germans had the advantages of being on the defensive. Indeed, it may be that it was the defensive that the German heavies were best suited for.
Yep. I was thinking of that when I considered the "conditions". Good point.
The Germans took major poundings from our artillery, air-power etc. during offenses.
"According to Belton Y. Cooper in his memoir of his 3rd Armored Division service, Death Traps, the final combat losses of the division were nothing less than breathtaking. The division was nominally assigned by table of organization 232 medium tanks (a total which included ten M26 Pershing tanks that made it into combat). It lost 648 tanks totally destroyed in combat, and 1,100 needing repair. Of those 1,100 tanks, nearly 700 had been knocked out in combat. According to Cooper, the 3rd Armored therefore lost close to 1,350 medium tanks in combat, for a total loss rate of 580 percent."
Odd little coincidence. I went to church with Belton Cooper. He passed away two years ago. An honorable man.
He and I discussed this very subject. I know there's an enormous difference between dispassionately discussing the calculus of a war and watching one's buddies die in horrible ways at the hands of an 88mm shell from a Tiger.
However, what we can discuss is the fact that overall American casualties in the campaign in France were 40,000 killed, 165,000 wounded, 20,000 wounded, while the Germans suffered somewhere close to 700,000 casualties and the loss of France within 90 days. I think this speaks eloquently to the doctrine of U.S. forces in Western Europe, of which the superior mobility and reliability of the Sherman played an important role.
I think this speaks eloquently to the doctrine of U.S. forces in Western Europe, of which the superior mobility and reliability of the Sherman played an important role.
Oh, I didn't post that paragraph to prove any particular point. It was just something that I stumbled upon and thought would be of interest.
As for US doctrine military doctrine, one of the most maligned aspects of that doctrine was the "over reliance" on artillery, a vastly under discussed topic. I say maligned because while not a huge fan of military history, I from time to time, get involved in these discussions, particularly on European forums. When I do the charge always seems to be that the U.S. hid behind artillery fire, which seems infinitely logical to me particularly if I had been an infantry soldier. So, I suspect that while the Sherman was a vital part of the Allied offensive on the Western front, airpower and artillery played a much more significant role.
Oh, I didn't post that paragraph to prove any particular point. It was just something that I stumbled upon and thought would be of interest.
As for US doctrine military doctrine, one of the most maligned aspects of that doctrine was the "over reliance" on artillery, a vastly under discussed topic. I say maligned because while not a huge fan of military history, I from time to time, get involved in these discussions, particularly on European forums. When I do the charge always seems to be that the U.S. hid behind artillery fire, which seems infinitely logical to me particularly if I had been an infantry soldier. So, I suspect that while the Sherman was a vital part of the Allied offensive on the Western front, airpower and artillery played a much more significant role.
I totally agree. American artillery was superb. No one, even the Germans, could touch it.
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.
