Polish Tankettes vs German Panzers

[Wolfdog91]

Thought this was pretty cool. Maneuverability vs heavy armor. Reminds me of how effective the Toyota war was.


https://youtu.be/tPO4eHQCT-A

[GregLaROCHE]

That was enjoyable to watch. Thanks for posting it.

[M-Tecs]

The US tank doctrine for WWII was maneuverability and expendability of very large numbers of light tanks would overwhelm the entrenched heavy German tanks of limited numbers.

[Wayne Smith]

Two points - the Poles caused more German casualties than did the French. 2) The US doctrine also included tank destroyers with an open turret and a high velocity 75mm gun. Very effective.

[GhostHawk]

The Sherman typically traveled in packs of 5. When the first tank blows up the other 4 scatter. In the end, one of the Shermans would be behind the panzer close enough for a killing shot through the weaker rear armor. Most often 1 or 2 Sherman's would survive. The others would be picked up, rinsed out, repainted, repaired, brought back to fighting condition and a new crew installed. It would be back to war in a short period of time.

[Wolfdog91]

https://youtu.be/qX3-oehjkvw

[Misery-Whip]

Marked for later. When there is more time.

[M-Tecs]

https://www.mathscinotes.com/2017/09/ww2-tank-production-comparison-between-combatants/

The Allied strategy of using massive numbers of medium-quality tanks proved effective against the German army. As Stalin used to say, "Quantity has a quality all its own."...................

Tank doctrine was an issue for the US Army because they focused on using tanks to support infantry and tank destroyers were to be used against tanks. The M4 Sherman was excellent in an infantry support role, and the Tank Destroyer M36's 90 mm gun was capable of stopping German heavy armor. However, the tank destroyer concept overall was a failure as German tanks had a habit of attacking where you did not expect – many M4 Sherman's ended up battling German heavy tanks that they were not designed to fight. The US did eventually mount a high-velocity 76 mm guns in the Sherman, which improved the situation, but this came too late for many crews.

[lightman]

My Dad was a Radio Man in Korea. I think the radio He carried weighed something like 50 pounds. He was later offered a position on a Tank Crew and turned it down. He said a Tank wasn't anything but a steel coffin.

[HWooldridge]

The Sherman typically traveled in packs of 5. When the first tank blows up the other 4 scatter. In the end, one of the Shermans would be behind the panzer close enough for a killing shot through the weaker rear armor. Most often 1 or 2 Sherman's would survive. The others would be picked up, rinsed out, repainted, repaired, brought back to fighting condition and a new crew installed. It would be back to war in a short period of time.

If you haven't already done so, watch the movie "Fury" with Brad Pitt. His group of Shermans do this exact maneuver with a Tiger 1 tank.

[TurnipEaterDown]

Really a sidebar (very much off to the side...): I do believe that GIs nicknamed the Sherman "Ronson", because 'it always lit'.

There are Always a variety of compromises in design.
Besides the compromise on teh Sherman main gun which some called feeble (noted above, not designed to battle a Tiger or other heavy German tanks), the nickname highlighted the other "big" compromise decision to fuel w/ gasoline rather than diesel. Lots easier for supply & logistics when you can send 1 fuel out for land based vehicles.

Worse risk for fire, but that is very much secondary to actually having crews reliably in the field doing what needs doing.

[45_Colt]

True about the Sherman attacking the rear of the German tanks. Their only weak spot.

One item that really needs to be known, is logistics. The Germans rolled their tanks out of the factory and right to the front lines. They could build them as big and heavy as required.

While we (the Allies), had to transport them across an ocean and then across a channel. Eventually across the ocean directly to the ports in Europe.

It wasn't an easy effort.

As for fuel, which is very important to keep the machines running. The Allies ran hoses/pipes across the channel (under water, on the sea bed). The British side had pumping stations, while the French side had receiving stations. This took place at the same time as D-Day.

45_Colt

[Kestrel4k]

So many heroes. :shock:

[Alex_4x4]

So many heroes. :shock:

:-)

[Thumbcocker]

There were about 1300 Tigers produced. Most were deployed on the Eastern front. U.S. tank crews had a survival rate of over 90%. Sherman's fought and destroyed Panthers.

In testing Sherman's were light years ahead of mist tanks in reliability and ease of maintenance. Just after DAY SS panzer division DasReich was ordered north from the south if France. Due to sabotage by French rail workers there were no flat cars to move the tanks. Having to drive on the roads resulted in a large percentage of the units Panthers being out of action due to burned out engines and transmissions. It has become fashionable to trash the Sherman but it more than held its own in infantry support and anti tank roles.

[CFE223]

Thanks for the video. Very entertaining. Now I want a cockroach instead of a tiger.

Chuck S.