Just wanted to let you all know, on Sun. night 8:00pm...the hist. ch. is having a show "Suicide Missions" it's on the Sherman tanks against the Tigers and Panthers. Just thought you might be interested.
Huffy
History Ch.
Moderator: MOD_SPWaW
Speaking of the History Channel anybody been watching World War 2 in Color ?? that clip of those P-47's peeling over into a dive with Glenn Millers "When The Angels Sing" gives me goose bumps just thinking back on it earlier this evening
"For Americans war is almost all of the time a nuisance, and military skill is a luxury like Mah-jongg. But when the issue is brought home to them, war becomes as important, for the necessary periods, as business or sport. And it is hard to decide which
I think it's excellent. The quality is very nice.
It is broken down into 3 parts. Part I covers 1937-1941 to include pre war film, blitzkrieg footage, and battle of Britain footage. Part II covers 1941 to early 1944 with Pearl Harbor coverage, and quite a bit of Operation Barbarossa and Stalingrad. Part III then focuses on Operation Overlord, with minimal footage of D-Day, and then the close of the Pacific War.
To me it brought the war more to life, almost like it happened just 10 years ago. It's worth it, in my opinion.
It is broken down into 3 parts. Part I covers 1937-1941 to include pre war film, blitzkrieg footage, and battle of Britain footage. Part II covers 1941 to early 1944 with Pearl Harbor coverage, and quite a bit of Operation Barbarossa and Stalingrad. Part III then focuses on Operation Overlord, with minimal footage of D-Day, and then the close of the Pacific War.
To me it brought the war more to life, almost like it happened just 10 years ago. It's worth it, in my opinion.
-
MECH ENGINEER
- Posts: 36
- Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2000 10:00 am
- Location: Canandaigua, NY, USA
I would like to add something to the original post, Suicide Missions, Sherman tanks. I read the book, Death Traps, by Belton Cooper. I knew right along that the Sherman tank was a piece of crap. I really didn't realize how big until I read page viii."The 3rd AD entered combat in Normandy with 232 M4 Sherman tanks. During the European Campaign, the Division had some 648 Sherman tanks completely destroyed in combat and we had another 700 knocked out, repaired and put back into operation. (hang on to something or sit down) This was a loss rate of 580 percent" That was just one armored division!!!! Remember this was America fielding these tanks, the country that brought you the M-1 Garand, P-51 Mustang, B-17 Flying Fortress, Liberty Ships, Essex class aircraft carriers, C-47 Dakota, M-3 half-tracks, jeeps, M1911A1, B-29 Super Fortress, Iowa class battleships and nuclear weapons. If you ever want to be knocked out of your socks, read Death Traps.
------------------
"When do we get our flamethrowers, Top?"
------------------
"When do we get our flamethrowers, Top?"
"When do we get our flamethrowers, Top?"
If you compare M4 Shermans to 1944/45 German Armor it don't look good 1 on 1.
If you compare M4 Shermans production quanity to German tank production it looks better.
If you compare US/Allied combined arms/combat support/air superiority/comand control superiority/artilery and ammo availablity superiority/unified command concepts/resupply/reinforcement/overall mobility/ and tactical communitcations superiority.... well maybe what needs to be added is the 2000 some german tanks knocked out along with the 1400 so M4's that the 3rd AD lost on their way across europe .
When was it ever just about individual tank or any other individual weapons system .
i have heard it said that the best antitank weapon in 1985 was a Pershing II.
If you compare M4 Shermans production quanity to German tank production it looks better.
If you compare US/Allied combined arms/combat support/air superiority/comand control superiority/artilery and ammo availablity superiority/unified command concepts/resupply/reinforcement/overall mobility/ and tactical communitcations superiority.... well maybe what needs to be added is the 2000 some german tanks knocked out along with the 1400 so M4's that the 3rd AD lost on their way across europe .
When was it ever just about individual tank or any other individual weapons system .
i have heard it said that the best antitank weapon in 1985 was a Pershing II.
"For Americans war is almost all of the time a nuisance, and military skill is a luxury like Mah-jongg. But when the issue is brought home to them, war becomes as important, for the necessary periods, as business or sport. And it is hard to decide which
-
MECH ENGINEER
- Posts: 36
- Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2000 10:00 am
- Location: Canandaigua, NY, USA
I agree it's all about combined arms, manufacturing might, logistics, naval power, communications and air power. Alright Ammo Sgt, now I(2Lt Butterbar) want you to go mount up on that tank(a sherman) and be prepared to move out against the germans. How would like to be a US tanker? I sure as Hell wouldn't. Unless the sky is black from fighter bombers overhead. Not only was there the big cats(tigers and panthers) but also, panzerfausts, panzerschrecks and ATG's.
------------------
"When do we get our flamethrowers, Top?"
------------------
"When do we get our flamethrowers, Top?"
"When do we get our flamethrowers, Top?"
In the book *Brute Force*, Ellis tells a story that took place during one battle. It seems this road was covered by an 88mm gun. The attacking battalion kept pounding on this position and sending tanks down the road. Later, the Lt. in charge of this gun was taken prisoner. Asked how the "master race" could have fallen to the lowly Americans, the Lt is reported as saying, "I ran out of ammunition before you ran out of tanks".Originally posted by Huffy:
Well, I never read the book...but I gotta tell you I am a little nervous about the show...probly not gonna like what I hear...but thank you for sharing with us...
A friend of mine who I introduced to SPWAW said, I can't play the Americans....how did we ever win any battles..
Take care all....
Huffy
Also, weren't the US tanks mechanically superior to the German tanks? Granted, the Panthers and Tigers were technically superior, but... What would a commander rather have? Lots and lots of under-gunned and under-armored tanks, or just a few technically superior tanks? A tank in the field beats 5 in the garage.
Lou
Ok i guess i better get in my ol' Sherman and get after them thar Gerry tanks...lets see hmmm got WP for my mortar and the freq's to div arty (oh ya do know Most Shermans got a little mortar ? right?) and todays call signs for CaBRank an hmmm the radio works ... oh yeah and some main gun ammo ..i hardly ever use it but ya never know ......
Honey look what followed me home can i keep it ....
Darlin no ya can't keep the whole dang Divsion ....
Honey aw darn ..
Honey look what followed me home can i keep it ....
Darlin no ya can't keep the whole dang Divsion ....
Honey aw darn ..
"For Americans war is almost all of the time a nuisance, and military skill is a luxury like Mah-jongg. But when the issue is brought home to them, war becomes as important, for the necessary periods, as business or sport. And it is hard to decide which
Would you be happier in a PZKWIV? A Cromwell? Against the above mentioned threats, a TIGER? Basically the US Army was thrown into an offensive campaign against an army that had learned the art of anti-tank warfare the hard way! We started with two basic problems that could have been fixed. The first was doctrine. The separation of Tank and Tank Distroyer was a dismal failure. Basically, stock (2 year old?) M4s had to fight tanks they were not properly armed to fight and M10s were forced to muck about with German infantry in open top vehicals! This doctrine was so important to those at the higher levels of the army that most rational attempts to improve the tank park were scuttled. For all it's faults the Sherman is a good tank, it just was not allowed to show it's stuff. You have enough info in the WAW OB. Look at the M4a3e8 objectively. Tigers DO fear this tank! The Soviets who got some from lend lease loved them! They served in gaurds formations by the way. This should have been the standard battle tank by Normandy! It wasn't, I think there was something like six available. EVERYBODY was telling Ordanance Command that the Sherman needed upgrading and little was done. The British built Fireflies, very bad news. The US built M36 Jacksons (Sherman hull). At ordinance an experimental M4 was fitted with a Pershing Turret! Worked fine. So well in fact they brought the modification to the attention of higher ups who weren't interested!!? There's room in the US OB, make this model, M4a3 with the Pershings main gun and Turret armor. Then run these competantly against German opposition. When the Isreali's ran Shermans against T-34/85s the result was what? ALL Isreali Sherman were brought up to what was basically, at least, the M4a3e8 standard. Then they whent up from there. The M50 "SuperSherman" is a M4 with a copy of they Panthers 75L70! The M51 "ISherman" has a French medium velocity 105mm. The M4's inherant strenths were reliability (they ran, the point in the previous post is well made) and a very well designed turret. The Shermans turret is fast rotating and has probably the best gun laying equipment used during the war (Good turrets bad guns opposite the Russian problem of good guns poor turrets). As to teh US Army in SPWAW, use the WHOLE US OB. Unlike the REAL US Army tankers you don't have an idiotic doctrine to stay within! Mix and match. Use recon to find what's out there. Don't blunder into infantry with M18s or Panzers with your M4/105s. Buy Artillary, US guns are cheaper, faster, more accurate and available than anyone elses! If you run blindly along in M4s you'll get hurt. Play the "Good Start" Campaign in North Africa/Sicily. You'll find your Shermans and M10s Quite effective. Again you're not straight-jacketed into dumb doctrine or formations (Armored infantry platoons with only two rifle squads?). I'll go out on a limb, the US Army may have the best OVERALL OB in SPWAW. A US infantry squad(with Bazooka) has the best weapon set of all infantry in the game. Artillary far and away the best, Off board and ON! That Misc. button is a gold mine, Best half-tracks (those with an "A", M3A1). Check out the best dime per pound weapon in the game, the M15 SPAA (if you haven't figured SPAAs out give'm a try)! Ouch! Even the Armor button has some gems. Jumbo M4a3s, M18 (my personal favorite US tank), M36, M4/105, M5, M4 dozer/flail and M26 are all excellent choices. Which is better a PZIIanything or an M5. Compare the M4/105 to the StuH 42 or the SU-122, doesn't look so bad does it! Is the SU-85 better than the M18 or the SU-100 better than the M36, in all honesty NO. How about a Marder? Or Hetzer? Nashorns ARE special. Finally compare the M26 to the Panther, the edge goes to the crew. So, if you can't win with the US Army do what the GI did, be creative! That 88 bothering you? Back off and pound him with 155s for a while, that'll take off some of his vinigar!Originally posted by MECH ENGINEER:
I agree it's all about combined arms, manufacturing might, logistics, naval power, communications and air power. Alright Ammo Sgt, now I(2Lt Butterbar) want you to go mount up on that tank(a sherman) and be prepared to move out against the germans. How would like to be a US tanker? I sure as Hell wouldn't. Unless the sky is black from fighter bombers overhead. Not only was there the big cats(tigers and panthers) but also, panzerfausts, panzerschrecks and ATG's.
Panther on the hill? Try an M18 end run, sneaky bazooka team, pound him with Jumbos at long range then pop up an M10 at close range after he buttons, Knock him off with a couple M36 Jacksons on Your Hill or finally give up and call the P-47s in. OR punch a hole through his side with an M5. Use what your offered and RECON RECON RECON!
Musashi
Amen Brother Musashi can i get an AMEN for the good Brother Helliuia Helliuia couldn't have said it better myself
Hmmm wonder why so many Shermans are still combat effective, probably why so many T-34 variants are still knockin around so much more to tankin than guns and armor i think it is just that the tracks on them are so cute and those little wheels too cute
Hmmm wonder why so many Shermans are still combat effective, probably why so many T-34 variants are still knockin around so much more to tankin than guns and armor i think it is just that the tracks on them are so cute and those little wheels too cute
"For Americans war is almost all of the time a nuisance, and military skill is a luxury like Mah-jongg. But when the issue is brought home to them, war becomes as important, for the necessary periods, as business or sport. And it is hard to decide which
Having played WB's Utah to the Rhine, and now playing Watchword Freedom - I'm already missing the fast response of the US artillery and the 7 hex range of the M9 Bazooka.Originally posted by Huffy:
<SNIP>
A friend of mine who I introduced to SPWAW said, I can't play the Americans....how did we ever win any battles..
Take care all....
Huffy
I managed to complete U2R using just one platoon of shermans all the way (upgraded to 76mm by battle 3, introduced 2 M4a3e8's for the final battle) - tried M36 once in support forces with little success.
Having enjoyed the US forces I'm not looking forward to the Brits/ Commonwealth with the PIAT (2 HEX RANGE
)Well said, Musahsi. I'm glad you mentioned the Israeli "Isherman". I believe there is an old Russian proverb (or it could have come from anywhere) that states, "The Perfect is the Enemy of the Good Enough". The Sherman was "good enough". Maybe more so. The Isherman is a perfect example. The Sherman platform is probably one of the most versatile tank platforms of the war. Where the Germans, French, and to some extant the British were designing tanks for every occasion (although the Germans did impressive things with obsolete chassis), the US built a tank that was pressed into more roles than I think any other. PLUS, buy building a jack-of-all-trades tank, you can make metric buttloads of them. There is safety in numbers.
Lou
Lou
-
MECH ENGINEER
- Posts: 36
- Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2000 10:00 am
- Location: Canandaigua, NY, USA
I'd rather be home keeping Rosie the Reveter happy. The campaign in Western Europe was a war of movement, of armored conflict developed to the state of art for that time period. Everything was built around the tank, still is. Half tracks, keep the infantry up with the tanks. Mech Engineers keep the tanks mobile on the battlefield. SP artillery keep up with the tanks. SP AAA keep up with the tanks. Tactical air force keep the tanks out of trouble, keep the tanks rolling forward. Everything the US had to support the tank was very good equipment. The tank(Sherman) was not.(No, Lou) Where to start on the M4 Sherman. It was powered by an aircrft radial type engine, the spark plugs tended to foul from the excessive idling. M2 75mm main gun had a muzzle velocity of 2,050 fps, too slow. The tracks were too narrow. Armor too thin. M4A1, only 10 to 15 percent of 3rd AD's 232 tanks were M4A1, same tank 76mm gun and different turret to accomodate the gun. Oh sure the Easy 8 model was a decent tank but how available were they? They are not even mentioned in Death Traps. I would love to see a production breakdown of the 60,000 Shermans built,how many of what model. I'm going to ramble a bit here on. Of course the Soviets loved the Sherman, they had a better model than the US did. Why, Because Stalin bitched directly to Roosevelt during one of their meetings that the Shermans caught fire too easy. So, after that the Soviet exports were built with diesel engines. I've read some threads, on that other vicious forum, where some europeans were talking to some german veterans about WWII. The old Nazi's said the Americans were pretty predictable, recon followed by either artillery or fighter bombers. Which is a pretty sound tactic considering the situation. Again that's Death Traps by Belton Cooper.
------------------
"When do we get our flamethrowers, Top?"
------------------
"When do we get our flamethrowers, Top?"
"When do we get our flamethrowers, Top?"