Jump to content


The Chieftain's Hatch: Fury's Tiger Standoff


  • Please log in to reply
591 replies to this topic

Blackhorse_Six_ #21 Posted Sep 27 2014 - 19:43

    Major

  • Players
  • 53253 battles
  • 10,030
  • [HHT] HHT
  • Member since:
    03-19-2011

View Postrogue_viking, on Sep 27 2014 - 14:36, said:

My history knowledge comes from the United States Military Academy West Point. Class of 01. As well as talking to other Vets who were actually there. I didnt disagree with everything the chieftan said, only the one point.  So since you want to throw random insults, without knowing the facts, go troll elsewhere. I posted what is taught and what is called common knowledge.

 

Be that it as it may ...

 

You may also be have your guns confused ...

 

Yes, the 75 was fairly ineffective vs the front of a Tiger, but later on, the 76 firing HVAP could punch a Tiger well enough in the frontal aspect ...

 

The greater difficulty was stand-off.

 

BTW, West Point does not give you a corner on the market - it is still just a Bachelors Degree ...

 

No Negs Assigned



Daigensui #22 Posted Sep 27 2014 - 19:43

    Major

  • Players
  • 31914 battles
  • 29,987
  • [KANCO] KANCO
  • Member since:
    11-09-2012

View Postmaxw007, on Sep 27 2014 - 11:16, said:

Look at the exploits of Michelle Whittman and his Exploits in the Tiger One.This was a Hero of the German people .He Died in Battle and he is  almost forgotten because he was on the Wrong Side .Why not make a Movie about him just like the Crew of the Tank Fury except in his Tiger 007. This is a Well documented bibliography with one who just fought against other soldiers and used his cunning and experience to Protect not just himself but his whole crew as well.

Politics and the way we see history is not as Open Minded as it should be.

 

Likely the fact he was an outright National Socialist who was with the movement from near the beginning and joined the SS on his own wishes. This isn't about being open-minded, it is about idolizing scum.

 

 

View Postmaxw007, on Sep 27 2014 - 11:16, said:

Tigers were a Quality Tank!! True Over engineered and  only made in small quantities  but they were a Shock to the Allied Tankers !!

Give Credit where Credit is do  and let history speak for itself in a Clear and Non Clouded manner.

If the Tiger was Made as made in Greater Quantity like the American Tanks the outcome might have been different and this standoff and its  outcome might have been different as well.

 

Quality? You mean the constant breaking down, the outdated gun that was soon overtaken by others, the weakness to the point it wasn't considered a problem until about half an year after it was first deployed?



SFC_Storm #23 Posted Sep 27 2014 - 19:44

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 15366 battles
  • 3,855
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View Postrogue_viking, on Sep 27 2014 - 11:36, said:

My history knowledge comes from the United States Military Academy West Point. Class of 01. As well as talking to other Vets who were actually there. I didnt disagree with everything the chieftan said, only the one point.  So since you want to throw random insults, without knowing the facts, go troll elsewhere. I posted what is taught and what is called common knowledge.

 

They aren`t random insults at all.

 

You are just showing how little you know about the actual topic.

 

"Common Knowledge" is wrong in 90% of the cases with Sherman history.

 

Please provide some evidence showing all these 15:1 tank battles. EnsignExpendable has proven many times this is a huge fabrication.

 

"Sorry chieftan, The last point you made about the Tiger having trouble 1v1 w a sherman (minus the 105mm firefly) is false. "

Also 105mm Firefly? What are you talking about? You mean 17 pounder, it didnt have a 105mm? Also another huge myth that the Firefly was so much better than the normal 76mm. Seriously read what Chief has written before. But if you dont know what gun the Firely had, and dont know the 76mm FIrefly using normal ammo was similar to the 76mm using normal ammo, how are you even qualified to argue vs a WW2 tank expert?

 

"Bottom line, a heads up fight Sherman vs Tiger = dead Sherman"

 

This might have been true in 1943, when we barely saw any Tigers, but this was simple not true later on and a 76mm was far superior in every way. But going to westpoint if you know about modern warfare mobility usually beats slow lumbering strong units and the Tiger was no different. A patient crew in an M4 who stalked a Tiger would defiantly killed him. They would kite the enemy and destroy them.

 

You have every single historical myth about Sherman vs Tiger other than "They burned like lighters"

 

CHief has become one of the "Experts" in the modern field of Shermans and US tanks and is always at national archives digging up reports that were classified or buried and has access to huge amounts of documents, so for you to say "Sorry but your wrong" and then say the exact same arguments which have been repeated over and over on German lover tank forums with no evidence except you went to Westpoint...Well isnt it obvious?


Edited by SFC_Storm, Sep 27 2014 - 19:50.


Mosinski2 #24 Posted Sep 27 2014 - 19:51

    Private

  • Players
  • 5608 battles
  • 6
  • [-LHN-] -LHN-
  • Member since:
    08-18-2013
my problem is that the trailer explicitly shows Brad's Sherman bouncing a shot from a tiger that's at most 100 meters away. That's the equivalent of a cops bullet proof vest stop a round from an m82 50 cal sniper rifle point blank. To say that Fury wont have at least one layer of plot armor on is just as crazy as saying the Sherman wouldn't have a chance.

Daigensui #25 Posted Sep 27 2014 - 19:54

    Major

  • Players
  • 31914 battles
  • 29,987
  • [KANCO] KANCO
  • Member since:
    11-09-2012

View PostMosinski2, on Sep 27 2014 - 11:51, said:

my problem is that the trailer explicitly shows Brad's Sherman bouncing a shot from a tiger that's at most 100 meters away. That's the equivalent of a cops bullet proof vest stop a round from an m82 50 cal sniper rifle point blank. To say that Fury wont have at least one layer of plot armor on is just as crazy as saying the Sherman wouldn't have a chance.

 

Not sure if I remember this correctly, but while Fury is a 76 mm, apparently use of HE or something indicates it should have been a 75 mm.

Carl #26 Posted Sep 27 2014 - 19:57

    Staff sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 6389 battles
  • 400
  • Member since:
    07-23-2010
I can't speak for any posters here but one thing i have heard said about the Tiger vs Sherman matchup is that whilst there was supposed to be HVAP ammo available, and many of the internal documents at HQ level indicated it was present, the reality is it was often common for them to not have it even if the charts said they did. It was a similar situation with a lot of other tiger killing options, what doctrine said should happen and what actually happened in reality where rarely the same. Certainly i don't doubt HVAP and other stuff i mentioned accounted for any number of easy Tiger kills. But equally there where times when shortfalls in reality compared to what doctrine said should be happening would have made Tiger's very hard to deal with.

SFC_Storm #27 Posted Sep 27 2014 - 20:14

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 15366 battles
  • 3,855
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View PostMosinski2, on Sep 27 2014 - 11:51, said:

my problem is that the trailer explicitly shows Brad's Sherman bouncing a shot from a tiger that's at most 100 meters away. That's the equivalent of a cops bullet proof vest stop a round from an m82 50 cal sniper rifle point blank. To say that Fury wont have at least one layer of plot armor on is just as crazy as saying the Sherman wouldn't have a chance.

 

I think that is what Chief was saying when he said he has other problems with that scene.

 

View Postrogue_viking, on Sep 27 2014 - 11:53, said:

 

I never said it did. I was simply stating it to show I was not some random [edited]. And the fact that a supposed (just going by his profile) fmr NCO would make such an assumption is quite saddening. Im pretty sure that he shoulda learned while in the 5th to never assume. Ive had extensive dealing with those guys and they always struck me as first rate (for a bunch of snake eaters ;) ) ... Either way, he can hate me or not, it doesnt matter. Chances are if he was in the sandbox with the 5th our paths have crossed, and should they cross again ill still buy him a cold one. And prob give him hell grunt to grunt.

 

I dont hate you. Its just for most of us who have been here a while, we have literally heard this EXACT bit of posting, and since Chief linked like 3-4 other articles dispelling most that stuff I assumed it would be done by now.

 

Also if you had said, "What I heard from X , Y , Z was" or "The way I learned it was" , but to say "Your wrong for X Y Z" when you obviously are arguing with a guy who on this topic is considered [esp with his access to documents] a authority on the topic, well it just looks bad.

 

I wasn`t trying to insult as much as point out he is an expert and you are not. My bad if it came off badly, but hey im a NCO and we really run the Army and dont get the credit for it, so I`ll take an officer down every chance I get whether its right or wrong :)



Blackhorse_Six_ #28 Posted Sep 27 2014 - 20:15

    Major

  • Players
  • 53253 battles
  • 10,030
  • [HHT] HHT
  • Member since:
    03-19-2011

View PostCarl, on Sep 27 2014 - 14:57, said:

I can't speak for any posters here but one thing i have heard said about the Tiger vs Sherman matchup is that whilst there was supposed to be HVAP ammo available, and many of the internal documents at HQ level indicated it was present, the reality is it was often common for them to not have it even if the charts said they did. It was a similar situation with a lot of other tiger killing options, what doctrine said should happen and what actually happened in reality where rarely the same. Certainly i don't doubt HVAP and other stuff i mentioned accounted for any number of easy Tiger kills. But equally there where times when shortfalls in reality compared to what doctrine said should be happening would have made Tiger's very hard to deal with.

 

No dispute there ...



rogue_viking #29 Posted Sep 27 2014 - 20:17

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 13065 battles
  • 49
  • [H2OW] H2OW
  • Member since:
    06-08-2013

View PostSFC_Storm, on Sep 27 2014 - 14:44, said:

"Bottom line, a heads up fight Sherman vs Tiger = dead Sherman"

 

 But going to westpoint if you know about modern warfare mobility usually beats slow lumbering strong units and the Tiger was no different. A patient crew in an M4 who stalked a Tiger would defiantly killed him. They would kite the enemy and destroy them.

Oh I dont discredit that at all. My point was VERY focused and on one statement. 1v1, a Tiger kills Sherman. I even stated that Chieftan was very correct about having to get the flanks/back of a tiger. The trailer shows the sherman in a straight up, face to face with a tiger. Doesnt show it kiting him, it doesnt show the sherman using any tactics at all. From what it does show, that is about to be a dead sherman. And no, the 88 was definitely not more accurate. Its hard to be accurate with a converted AA gun design. Its more of the spray and pray. But face to face at <100m as it shows in the preview, even a rookie Tiger crew would cause a sherman to have a terminal case of lead poisoning...



Blackhorse_Six_ #30 Posted Sep 27 2014 - 20:18

    Major

  • Players
  • 53253 battles
  • 10,030
  • [HHT] HHT
  • Member since:
    03-19-2011

View PostSFC_Storm, on Sep 27 2014 - 15:15, said:

We Enlisted have other, more colorful terms for you "Gentlemen"  :)

 

Easy, Sar'n Storm - I made E-6 ...

 

I know what an FO is ...



SFC_Storm #31 Posted Sep 27 2014 - 20:18

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 15366 battles
  • 3,855
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View PostCarl, on Sep 27 2014 - 11:57, said:

I can't speak for any posters here but one thing i have heard said about the Tiger vs Sherman matchup is that whilst there was supposed to be HVAP ammo available, and many of the internal documents at HQ level indicated it was present, the reality is it was often common for them to not have it even if the charts said they did. It was a similar situation with a lot of other tiger killing options, what doctrine said should happen and what actually happened in reality where rarely the same. Certainly i don't doubt HVAP and other stuff i mentioned accounted for any number of easy Tiger kills. But equally there where times when shortfalls in reality compared to what doctrine said should be happening would have made Tiger's very hard to deal with.

 

I thought Doctrine was they had 10-15 HVAP, so at your 3x less maybe they did carry just a few a pop.

 

I know that in 1944 your right, but in 1945 we were pretty well supplied even with things like HVAP luxury.



SFC_Storm #32 Posted Sep 27 2014 - 20:21

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 15366 battles
  • 3,855
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View Postrogue_viking, on Sep 27 2014 - 12:17, said:

Oh I dont discredit that at all. My point was VERY focused and on one statement. 1v1, a Tiger kills Sherman. I even stated that Chieftan was very correct about having to get the flanks/back of a tiger. The trailer shows the sherman in a straight up, face to face with a tiger. Doesnt show it kiting him, it doesnt show the sherman using any tactics at all. From what it does show, that is about to be a dead sherman. And no, the 88 was definitely not more accurate. Its hard to be accurate with a converted AA gun design. Its more of the spray and pray. But face to face at <100m as it shows in the preview, even a rookie Tiger crew would cause a sherman to have a terminal case of lead poisoning...

 

But you realize your talking about a 75mm Derp Sherman. The one in the movie [76mm] MURDERED Tigers frontally at 1500m and easily whomped a Tiger at angle almost.

 

76mm Penned 120mm+ and had double the rate of fire as the Tiger, with 2x its mobility and more accuracy. There is no chance in hell that he bounces at that range from the front, unless it was a dud.

 

So your mixing up your tanks heavily. And as other stated the 75mm`s did kill Tigers frontally after multiple shots.

 

E6 Sherman= Better in every way

E2-4 Sherman= needs sides

 

The reason the Tiger was so scary was it was in 1942 when the Rus t34 was the most OP tank there was and it had a derpy 76mm cannon and armor a 75mm Sherman could kill easily. By 1944 Tigers were scared of Hellcats+Jacksons+M10`s+76mm Shermans+ 105mm Shermans+Fireflys and was pretty much killed by anything we had that killed tanks.

 

Lastly at that range the Tiger cannot traverse his turret fast enough to nail him.


Edited by SFC_Storm, Sep 27 2014 - 20:26.


rogue_viking #33 Posted Sep 27 2014 - 20:28

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 13065 battles
  • 49
  • [H2OW] H2OW
  • Member since:
    06-08-2013

View PostSFC_Storm, on Sep 27 2014 - 15:14, said:

 

 

I dont hate you. Its just for most of us who have been here a while, we have literally heard this EXACT bit of posting, and since Chief linked like 3-4 other articles dispelling most that stuff I assumed it would be done by now.

 

Also if you had said, "What I heard from X , Y , Z was" or "The way I learned it was" , but to say "Your wrong for X Y Z" when you obviously are arguing with a guy who on this topic is considered [esp with his access to documents] a authority on the topic, well it just looks bad.

 

I wasn`t trying to insult as much as point out he is an expert and you are not. My bad if it came off badly, but hey im a NCO and we really run the Army and dont get the credit for it, so I`ll take an officer down every chance I get whether its right or wrong :)

Valid point across the board, and your NCO is showing ;) And Ill never argue the fact that NCO's run the military. IDC if POTUS jumps up and down like an idiot, nothing gets done til an NCO signs off on it. And it wouldnt be the first time gettin my happy a** busted by an NCO, I grew up in the house of a Drill Sergeant. SO yes i do know when to sit down, shut up, and let the guy w the stripes handle what needs to be done...



The_Chieftain #34 Posted Sep 27 2014 - 20:33

    Military Specialist

  • Administrator
  • 14350 battles
  • 9,929
  • [WGA] WGA
  • Member since:
    09-08-2011

I've deleted some comments which contribute nothing to the conversation.

 

It is my sad experience that the military's level of education outside the proscribed course curriculum and requirements is unfortunately low, especially when one goes to the level of technical specifications, and can be somewhat superficial when it comes to historical analyses. (Look at how AFVID is taught and tested today, as my personal favourite).

 

The bottom line is that a non-HVAP 76mm shell could indeed still bounce off a Tiger 1, especially if it hit the reinforced parts of the mantlet or an angled front hull. That result was, however, by no means guaranteed, and the 76mm had a far chance of punching through. It was no longer the act of desperation to be firing rounds at a Tiger.

 

The ricochet off Pitt's tank doesn't seem unreasonable given the very shallow angle of impact on the front slope.



Lert #35 Posted Sep 27 2014 - 20:44

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 44735 battles
  • 25,715
  • Member since:
    09-02-2010

View PostDaigensui, on Sep 27 2014 - 19:43, said:

it is about idolizing scum.

 

You can admire a man's skill in warfare without letting his political views come into play.

 

Fact was that Wittmann was an SS officer.

Fact was that Wittmann was a very good TC.

 

Those two are not related.



rogue_viking #36 Posted Sep 27 2014 - 20:44

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 13065 battles
  • 49
  • [H2OW] H2OW
  • Member since:
    06-08-2013

View PostThe_Chieftain, on Sep 27 2014 - 15:33, said:

It is my sad experience that the military's level of education outside the proscribed course curriculum and requirements is unfortunately low, especially when one goes to the level of technical specifications, and can be somewhat superficial when it comes to historical analyses. (Look at how AFVID is taught and tested today, as my personal favourite).
 

Sadly I do agree wholeheartedly. But that isnt exclusive to just military education in the US



Daigensui #37 Posted Sep 27 2014 - 20:51

    Major

  • Players
  • 31914 battles
  • 29,987
  • [KANCO] KANCO
  • Member since:
    11-09-2012

View PostLert, on Sep 27 2014 - 12:44, said:

You can admire a man's skill in warfare without letting his political views come into play.

 

Fact was that Wittmann was an SS officer.

Fact was that Wittmann was a very good TC.

 

Those two are not related.

 


Fine, a National Socialist scum who was a propaganda tool with hyper-inflated kill claims to the point it hid the stupidly hyperaggressive method of fighting that caused much casualties on his side so he could have a slightly better record.

 

He was never a good TC.

 [content was fine, restored after penalty appeal]

~GM/Mod Teams



Lert #38 Posted Sep 27 2014 - 20:55

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 44735 battles
  • 25,715
  • Member since:
    09-02-2010

View PostDaigensui, on Sep 27 2014 - 20:51, said:

He was never a good TC.

 

Alright, I'll bite. Sources?

Dominatus #39 Posted Sep 27 2014 - 21:16

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 10311 battles
  • 13,790
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    12-21-2010

View PostLert, on Sep 27 2014 - 15:55, said:

Alright, I'll bite. Sources?

Doyle has a rather good description of him over on OTT. To call him a bad TC is a bit of a stretch, but his reputation is rather significantly overblown thanks to Nazi propaganda. He only destroyed 7 tanks at Villers-Bocage, although that still seems to hold the record the most tanks knocked out by a single crew in a single action during the war. That said, he was judged by the Wehrmacht as more a liability than an asset due to his fighting style.


Edited by Dominatus, Sep 27 2014 - 21:17.


Scootaloo23 #40 Posted Sep 27 2014 - 21:23

    Major

  • Players
  • 10253 battles
  • 8,045
  • Member since:
    02-06-2012
What I got out of this: Soooo...they shoulda used a Turbo Panther right?




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users