Jump to content


M4 Sherman Tank - Historically, A Total Death Trap - VIDEO


  • Please log in to reply
407 replies to this topic

CapturedJoe #201 Posted Jun 11 2016 - 18:50

    Captain

  • Players
  • 4214 battles
  • 1,917
  • Member since:
    09-18-2013

View PostCavScout19D, on Jun 11 2016 - 18:48, said:

 

My point was meant to be an indictment on French capabilities; France's high command simply wasn't ready for the war that was coming and it showed. They weren't the only ones, to be sure, as others just had time and/or space to figure it out. 

 

Agreed, the French command failed while the soldiers did their duty.

madogthefirst #202 Posted Jun 11 2016 - 18:53

    Major

  • Players
  • 24117 battles
  • 8,825
  • Member since:
    12-28-2011

View PostCavScout19D, on Jun 11 2016 - 09:48, said:

 

My point was meant to be an indictment on French capabilities; France's high command simply wasn't ready for the war that was coming and it showed. They weren't the only ones, to be sure, as others just had time and/or space to figure it out. 

Like before the the war broke out in Europe USA made lots of M2 Meds which was like a pillbox on tracks. Only once war broke out was it clear that it was a piss poor design and we could end up needing bigger guns on tanks. With Britain asking for tanks the M3 Lee was created to bring a larger gun to the battlefield while we worked on how to shove it into a turret.



SovietTankDestroyer #203 Posted Jun 11 2016 - 19:09

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 15222 battles
  • 419
  • Member since:
    02-09-2013
It amazed me that people still use Belton Cooper. Shermans were sufficient and better in some cases to German tanks.

RamaLamaDingDong2 #204 Posted Jun 11 2016 - 19:12

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 27213 battles
  • 4,182
  • Member since:
    03-02-2015

View PostWulfeHound, on Jun 11 2016 - 11:48, said:

Soviets counted anything that caused the tank to not be in combat as a loss, hence the inflated numbers.

 

So did any other army except germans...

dmckay #205 Posted Jun 11 2016 - 19:37

    Major

  • Players
  • 12984 battles
  • 5,223
  • Member since:
    07-23-2013

Breakout in Normandy in August 1944.  Operation Cobra.  Patton and the 3rd army swept 100's of miles across France in their fast dependable Shermans.  They were surrounding and destroying German units, capturing towns, villages, before the Germans even knew they were there.  3rd army could not have done this in gas guzzling, mechanically horribly unreliable Tigers and Panthers. This is testimony to a medium tank, the Sherman, doing what it was designed to do and it did it well. Perfect tank for offensive breakout attacks. Superior for surrounding and killing infantry and killed more German tanks when it did engage them than the Germans did Shermans.  That is the truth.

 

I do not mean to be a pr#ck but it is glaringly obvious that some who have posted on this thread have, at best, only a sophomoric knowledge of WWII in Europe and only believe what they NEED to believe rather than the truth.  I swallowed a lot of this German tank/weapons superiority crap when I was a kid.  Then I got serious in my teens about what actually went down in Europe in WWII.  It was a wake-up call.  Bluntly the Germans got stomped....both in the air and on the ground. The Russians stomped them also.  They really stomped them and good.



Redshirt4Life #206 Posted Jun 11 2016 - 19:41

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 5886 battles
  • 1,347
  • Member since:
    07-17-2015

View PostCavScout19D, on Jun 11 2016 - 18:48, said:

 

My point was not meant to be an indictment on French capabilities; France's high command simply wasn't ready for the war that was coming and it showed. They weren't the only ones, to be sure, as others just had time and/or space to figure it out. 

 

Edit: Fixed grammar 

 

A great example of the French loss being as you describe, rather then the numbers of tanks.

One country which was quite familiar with modern war tactics was the new country of Greece. They had very few tanks and planes, and they were all obsolete. They were not considered a major threat and it was left to the Italians to take the country over. The italians had the gear, the planes, and the tanks over the Greeks, but the Greeks knew how to fight, much like Germany. The Greek counter-attack was so overwhelmingly successful against the superior Italian force that Germany had to redirect its forces from Russia in order to save Italy from the Greeks. Even the German invaders found themselves taking extreme losses. The German paratroopers were massacred before the battle was over, and prior to Greece's occupation, the allies found their first victory against the axis powers in a country with a paltry military force.

 

In ww2 there were countries who knew war post-ww1 and those who didn't. The weapons of war themselves were secondary to this knowledge.

View Postdmckay, on Jun 11 2016 - 16:43, said:

Just as the ancient Greek historians juiced up the numbers and the capabilities of the Persians who attacked them in the Persian Wars so did Americans in regard to the Germans in WWII.  Why?  The badder azz you make the enemy the sweeter the victory but there exists lots of myths.  The Tiger was made into a myth.... So many myths exist about German weapons in WWII.  So many.

 

Wiki- Military History of Greece-

"The only Greek territory remaining free by May 1941 was the large and strategically important island of Crete, which was held by a large but weak Allied garrison consisting primarily of the combat-damaged units evacuated from the mainland without their heavy equipment, especially transport. To conquer it, the German High Command prepared "Unternehmen Merkur", the largest airborne attack seen to date.

 

The attack was launched on May 20, 1941. The Germans attacked the three main airfields of the island, at the northern towns of Maleme, Rethimnon, and Heraklion, with paratroopers and gliders. The Germans met stubborn resistance from the British, Australian, New Zealand and the remaining Greek troops on the island, and from local civilians. At the end of the first day, none of the objectives had been reached and the Germans had suffered around 4,000 casualties."

 

^that was just a little greek island and it repelled the largest airborn attack of the time. Did such a people need bother exaggerating their historic military achievements? Its entirely plausable based on their recent history :izmena:

 


Edited by Redshirt4Life, Jun 11 2016 - 19:43.


dmckay #207 Posted Jun 11 2016 - 19:49

    Major

  • Players
  • 12984 battles
  • 5,223
  • Member since:
    07-23-2013

View PostRedshirt4Life, on Jun 11 2016 - 13:41, said:

 

A great example of the French loss being as you describe, rather then the numbers of tanks.

One country which was quite familiar with modern war tactics was the new country of Greece. They had very few tanks and planes, and they were all obsolete. They were not considered a major threat and it was left to the Italians to take the country over. The italians had the gear, the planes, and the tanks over the Greeks, but the Greeks knew how to fight, much like Germany. The Greek counter-attack was so overwhelmingly successful against the superior Italian force that Germany had to redirect its forces from Russia in order to save Italy from the Greeks. Even the German invaders found themselves taking extreme losses. The German paratroopers were massacred before the battle was over, and prior to Greece's occupation, the allies found their first victory against the axis powers in a country with a paltry military force.

 

In ww2 there were countries who knew war post-ww1 and those who didn't. The weapons of war themselves were secondary to this knowledge.

 

Wiki- Military History of Greece-

"The only Greek territory remaining free by May 1941 was the large and strategically important island of Crete, which was held by a large but weak Allied garrison consisting primarily of the combat-damaged units evacuated from the mainland without their heavy equipment, especially transport. To conquer it, the German High Command prepared "Unternehmen Merkur", the largest airborne attack seen to date.

 

The attack was launched on May 20, 1941. The Germans attacked the three main airfields of the island, at the northern towns of Maleme, Rethimnon, and Heraklion, with paratroopers and gliders. The Germans met stubborn resistance from the British, Australian, New Zealand and the remaining Greek troops on the island, and from local civilians. At the end of the first day, none of the objectives had been reached and the Germans had suffered around 4,000 casualties."

 

^that was just a little greek island and it repelled the largest airborn attack of the time. Did such a people need bother exaggerating their historic military achievements? Its entirely plausable based on their recent history :izmena:

 

Good post but Crete did eventually fall after a gallant defense.  The Germans took huge casualties in that attack and if I am not mistaken German paratroopers were never used again it was so bad.  Never again dropped from the air into combat is what I mean.

 

Also, I have nothing but respect for the fighting spirit of the Greeks.  For a small country they did their bit in WWII. I salute them.


Edited by dmckay, Jun 11 2016 - 20:33.


CapturedJoe #208 Posted Jun 11 2016 - 21:33

    Captain

  • Players
  • 4214 battles
  • 1,917
  • Member since:
    09-18-2013

View PostRedshirt4Life, on Jun 11 2016 - 19:41, said:

 

One country which was quite familiar with modern war tactics was the new country of Greece. They had very few tanks and planes, and they were all obsolete. They were not considered a major threat and it was left to the Italians to take the country over. The italians had the gear, the planes, and the tanks over the Greeks, but the Greeks knew how to fight, much like Germany. The Greek counter-attack was so overwhelmingly successful against the superior Italian force that Germany had to redirect its forces from Russia in order to save Italy from the Greeks.

 

That invasion never should've happened, the Italian staff knew they lacked the supplies and transports required but the buffoon Mussolini pushed it through. Not unlike the French, the Italians fought and died while their generals were messing around like idiots...



The_Chieftain #209 Posted Jun 11 2016 - 23:54

    Military Specialist

  • Administrator
  • 12420 battles
  • 9,871
  • [WGA] WGA
  • Member since:
    09-08-2011

View Postdmckay, on Jun 11 2016 - 18:49, said:

Good post but Crete did eventually fall after a gallant defense.  The Germans took huge casualties in that attack and if I am not mistaken German paratroopers were never used again it was so bad.  Never again dropped from the air into combat is what I mean.

 

 

Battle of the bulge. Wasn't successful



Flarvin #210 Posted Jun 11 2016 - 23:57

    Major

  • Players
  • 53656 battles
  • 15,122
  • Member since:
    03-29-2013

View Postmadogthefirst, on Jun 10 2016 - 22:03, said:

How are people still urging this, the Sherman is one of the best tanks built in WWII. Unlike other countries back then we didn't build crap.

 

It kind of helps when your factors are completely safe from enemy attacks.



Flarvin #211 Posted Jun 11 2016 - 23:58

    Major

  • Players
  • 53656 battles
  • 15,122
  • Member since:
    03-29-2013

View PostWulfeHound, on Jun 11 2016 - 11:36, said:

Congratulations on believing decades old Cold War propaganda

 

Yes those red belly commies did it.



Flarvin #212 Posted Jun 12 2016 - 00:10

    Major

  • Players
  • 53656 battles
  • 15,122
  • Member since:
    03-29-2013

View PostCavScout19D, on Jun 11 2016 - 12:48, said:

 

My point was not meant to be an indictment on French capabilities; France's high command simply wasn't ready for the war that was coming and it showed. They weren't the only ones, to be sure, as others just had time and/or space to figure it out. 

 

Edit: Fixed grammar 

 

You can not just blame French high command. WWI and the loses France took played heavily on this too. WWI almost wiped out a generation of France, and pretty much destroyed its economy. France as a whole was traumatized by WWI, which pretty much hampered foreword looking by their miltary. 



CaspianF #213 Posted Jun 12 2016 - 01:21

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 19259 battles
  • 274
  • [KGS] KGS
  • Member since:
    08-03-2013

View Postclydethecat, on Jun 11 2016 - 09:45, said:

It's a fact the Sherman was a more advanced tank than anything the Germans produced, for one, every Sherman produced had a stabilized gun, something the Nazis were unable to develop during the war, because they sucked at tank design.  I

 

The Germans also never fielded a tank with a cast turret (as far as I know - certainly not in any number), presumably because they couldn't.

Arkai #214 Posted Jun 12 2016 - 02:09

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 36683 battles
  • 190
  • Member since:
    12-24-2011

View PostWulfeHound, on Jun 10 2016 - 21:55, said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Granted this last one is for the M3 Light and M3 Medium, but it's still relevant

 

 

 

So you took quotes from mostly 1942 I gather when the Sherman was facing pz iii's and pz iv's in africa......good for you.

 

The Sherman was not as bad as some claimed it to be, but it most certainly is far from the war-winning tank that this new crusade wants to paint it as. Zaloga in his book on the Sherman says it 'was good enough' to win the war; hardly an enthusiastic endorsement.



Walter_Sobchak #215 Posted Jun 12 2016 - 02:11

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 236 battles
  • 5,140
  • Member since:
    11-22-2010

View PostCaspianF, on Jun 11 2016 - 19:21, said:

 

The Germans also never fielded a tank with a cast turret (as far as I know - certainly not in any number), presumably because they couldn't.

 

I think it also had something to do with their preference for face hardened plate.  But yeah, they were not all that into large scale castings. 

WulfeHound #216 Posted Jun 12 2016 - 02:23

    Major

  • Players
  • 12913 battles
  • 26,179
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    04-03-2011
And then by '43(?) they had to stop face hardening their armor because the Allies started fielding capped AP shells

Edited by WulfeHound, Jun 12 2016 - 02:30.


dmckay #217 Posted Jun 12 2016 - 02:52

    Major

  • Players
  • 12984 battles
  • 5,223
  • Member since:
    07-23-2013

View PostArkai, on Jun 11 2016 - 20:09, said:

 

So you took quotes from mostly 1942 I gather when the Sherman was facing pz iii's and pz iv's in africa......good for you.

 

The Sherman was not as bad as some claimed it to be, but it most certainly is far from the war-winning tank that this new crusade wants to paint it as. Zaloga in his book on the Sherman says it 'was good enough' to win the war; hardly an enthusiastic endorsement.

 

Good enough is enough.  Hitler was utterly clueless about American production capabilities as were the Japanese (except for Yamamoto who had spent time in U.S. in his youth). We could not be bombed.  We applied the mass production perfected in Detroit which had built millions of cars and trucks and tractors by1941. The war winning effort was due also to allied superiority in virtually all types of weapons.  I mean that.  Virtually all. Air, ground, naval. Everything it took was overall superior to axis stuff.... certainly by 1943.

FrozenKemp #218 Posted Jun 12 2016 - 03:02

    Major

  • Players
  • 50962 battles
  • 8,981
  • Member since:
    04-24-2011

View PostRedshirt4Life, on Jun 11 2016 - 13:41, said:

^that was just a little greek island and it repelled the largest airborn attack of the time. Did such a people need bother exaggerating their historic military achievements? Its entirely plausable based on their recent history :izmena:

 

 

Crete isn't exactly a small island, but the Battle of Crete was a serious loss for the Allies, even if the German paratroopers did get savaged :-/  But you're right about the success of the Greeks against the Italians.

 

 At a roughly similar time, but starting a little after, the Brits also dealt a huge blow to Italian forces in North Africa in Operation Compass. 



Flarvin #219 Posted Jun 12 2016 - 03:10

    Major

  • Players
  • 53656 battles
  • 15,122
  • Member since:
    03-29-2013

View Postdmckay, on Jun 11 2016 - 20:52, said:

 

Good enough is enough.  Hitler was utterly clueless about American production capabilities as were the Japanese (except for Yamamoto who had spent time in U.S. in his youth). We could not be bombed.  We applied the mass production perfected in Detroit which had built millions of cars and trucks and tractors by1941. The war winning effort was due also to allied superiority in virtually all types of weapons.  I mean that.  Virtually all. Air, ground, naval. Everything it took was overall superior to axis stuff.... certainly by 1943.

 

Many of the high level Japanese know they could not win a long term war against the USA.

 

But they thought they could hit the USA so hard in the beginning that the USA public would demand peace. And then some got so intoxicated by the quick overwhelming victories they had in the beginning, they started to believe their own propaganda. 



dmckay #220 Posted Jun 12 2016 - 03:32

    Major

  • Players
  • 12984 battles
  • 5,223
  • Member since:
    07-23-2013

View PostFlarvin, on Jun 11 2016 - 21:10, said:

 

Many of the high level Japanese know they could not win a long term war against the USA.

 

But they thought they could hit the USA so hard in the beginning that the USA public would demand peace. And then some got so intoxicated by the quick overwhelming victories they had in the beginning, they started to believe their own propaganda. 

 

Victory disease.  Germans had it also....until Stalingrad and El Alamein. War was won by allies Dec 7 1941.  Barring a miracle.   America in!  As Churchill said in his series of books on WWII the night after the Pearl Harbor attack..."So we have won after all.  Now it is simply the proper application of overwhelming force."  He saw it immediately and said he slept the sleep of the saved.

Edited by dmckay, Jun 12 2016 - 03:35.





2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users