Myths of World War Two

[Vigil 687]

That the M4 Sherman was a terrible tank. 

It was actually a pretty good tank, provided it had a diesel engine (only the US Army used gasoline-powered M4s. The USMC and lend-lease (both British and Soviet) M4s were diesel powered). It didn't fair well against German armor when unsupported (but neither did Soviet armor), but it wasn't a bad tank. Soviet tankers assigned to "Emchas" (lend-lease M4s) actually quite liked them until 1945... when Soviet propaganda started gearing up for the Cold War and decided that they were horrible. The up-gunned, later models of the M4 were used in Korea and fought well against what many consider to be the "best" tank of WWII: The T-34/85. 

The Sherman, in fact, continued to soldier on in the IDF (up-gunned, up-armored, and up-engined - the so-called M50 and M51 "Isherman" or "Super Sherman" models) until the 1970s, in which period it faced (and acquitted itself well against) more modern armor such as the Soviet IS-3, T-54/55, and T-62, American M47/M48 Pattons, and British Centurions. 

Edited May 28, 2015 by Vigil

[Tipperary 2,370]

Soviet tankers assigned to "Emchas" (lend-lease M4s) actually quite liked them until 1945... when Soviet propaganda started gearing up for the Cold War and decided that they were horrible.

This is mostly in comparison to the T-34s, which were cramped and a blotch and a half to see out of even after they upgraded the turrets.

Edited May 28, 2015 by Tipperary

[Vigil 687]

 

Soviet tankers assigned to "Emchas" (lend-lease M4s) actually quite liked them until 1945... when Soviet propaganda started gearing up for the Cold War and decided that they were horrible.

This is mostly in comparison to the T-34s, which were cramped and a blotch and a half to see out of even after they upgraded the turrets.

 

Which is not nothing, given how many historians - particularly armchair historians - like to believe that the T-34 was the best tank of the war. 

[Stoneface 3,750]

Steven J. Zaloga has written many books on WWII even some that directly compare tank types like Panther vs Sherman. I suggest you check out Amazon and Osprey Publishing for some of his works. He's also an exceptional model builder.

A good example of Nazi stupidity is in the use of tank turrets as static emplacements. The Panther variant used in Italy had two levels, housed six men and a crap load of ammo. They were very effective once dug in. They required a special trailer to move them from the rail line to the jobsite and a crain to off load. They used more steel than a Panther tank! Lack of roads hampered the installation, lack of the special trailers was a problem as was the time to install them. Not to mention Allied photo recon. There are several good books on this subject.

Finally, the USA produced more Shermans in less than 4 years than Nazi Germany's total tank production. The only tank produced in greater numbers was the Soviet T34. I think the Sherman total was 50,000+.

[WarriorPoet 352]

I wasn't able to think of an actual myth to post yesterday, but I think something should be said for the 71st anniversary of D-Day.

My maternal grandpa was there with the Screaming Eagles, and a week later my paternal grandpa arrived with Patton's engineers. The first was a combat medic, and as such, had a rucksack of cigarettes he jumped with - but could not distribute them that night because lighting them would give away their position. The latter was in logistics, laying pipe and driving deuce-and-a-half trucks to deliver gas - he was billeted in a mansion in Cherbourg, something that always amused him.

So, maybe that's a myth - that D-Day was perfectly successful as planned; in fact, all the airborn misdrops were a disaster but for the grit of the men who either stuck to their objective or linked up with another company to complete theirs, and got the job done.

[Gadge 4,294]

The best mark of Sherman of the war was the firefly.   It was the only one with a decent chance of a first shot kill at a reasonable range on german heavy armour.

[Vigil 687]

The best mark of Sherman of the war was the firefly.   It was the only one with a decent chance of a first shot kill at a reasonable range on german heavy armour.

 

The 17-pounder was not much beloved of British tank crews, however, because of the lack of a good (or any, I don't remember) HE shell for it until after the war. The American 76mm did get a good HVAP round, but not until the last months of the war. 

I'm pretty sure that no Firefly Shermans were ever built on chassises with HVSS suspensions, either. 

So, M4A3E8: 76mm gun plus HVSS suspension, but gasoline-powered. Firefly: 17-pdr plus diesel-powered, but poorer mobility. Given the lack of a good HE shell for the Firefly - makes it difficult to take out enemy positions and emplacements, which is most of what tanks did - I'd have to say that I think the E8 was the better tank. If the E8 had been diesel powered, it would be (IMHO) flat out the best Sherman tank of the war. 

But that's just, like, my opinion, man.

Edited June 8, 2015 by Vigil

[Gadge 4,294]

Im pretty sure the 17pdr had a HE shell, the field gun type certainly did i just dont think crews carried it because it was not their role in the platoon or squadron.

 

You'd have one firefly in every four shermans (later one firefly or challenger with three cromwells supporting it), the supporting tanks dealt with HE targets, the fireflys job was to give them a chance against german heavy armour.

 

We've probably read different sources but i seem to recall reading the firefly was pretty well loved, the only problem the crews had was that they were a high priority target and easy to make out with the huge barrel... its why you see a lot of them with end of the barrel painted light grey or in a disruptive camo scheme

 

Diesel engines also meant they brewed up less rapidly IIRC

[Gadge 4,294]

Its not a myth but one of my fave tank stories of WWII was the guards division captured panther tank they used called 'cuckoo'

 

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/pinecone1/325992016

 

I think it was used for a while at the head of the column until it broke down.

[Gosric 696]

Talking about myths. I just watched Fury after avoiding it because of the disrespect sown by the director on Remebrance day.
Decent looking action sequences if one doesnt analyze the blaster firing tanks and MGs. ..And ignores some serious flaws like slow marching SS. vanishing panzerfausts and incredibly inconsisent depiction of weapon effects. And evidently no research on tank capabilities in a movie about tanks.

But i just noticed the director was responsible for U-571 so i shouldn't have expected accuracy

Edited June 10, 2015 by Gosric

[Vigil 687]

Talking about myths. I just watched Fury after avoiding it because of the disrespect sown by the director on Remebrance day.

Decent looking action sequences if one doesnt analyze the blaster firing tanks and MGs. ..And ignores some serious flaws like slow marching SS. vanishing panzerfausts and incredibly inconsisent depiction of weapon effects. And evidently no research on tank capabilities in a movie about tanks.

But i just noticed the director was responsible for U-571 so i shouldn't have expected accuracy

 

What tank capabilities are you referring to?

[Kyrios Mirage 588]

So, maybe that's a myth - that D-Day was perfectly successful as planned;

Given the well-publicized clustertruck that was Omaha, I don't see that as being the case. Also landing the Utah troops on the wrong beach, and not securing several D-Day objectives for several weeks are likewise fairly well known.

[Gosric 696]

A couple of things come to mind immediately. Such as the lack of penetration of the Fury's main gun and the thicknesses of german tank armour. And loosely related the effect of two potato mashers on a human body inside a small closed in area

[Gadge 4,294]

I think that d-day was considered a 'success'  because the 'realists' in the planning stages expected every beach to be like Omaha

 

Omaha was only very very bad because the US refused to use the UKs 'funnies' (specially adapted heavy beach clearing tanks) and relied on flotation screen shermans for support.... shermans that were released too soon and a lot sank in the sea before getting near the beach.