Author Topic: m4a3 sherman and some others  (Read 9385 times)

Offline Die Hard

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2205
Re: m4a3 sherman and some others
« Reply #90 on: May 10, 2009, 12:17:50 PM »
This is part of a 1943 Allied intelligence bulletin on German army organization (more accurate and detailed descriptions can be found in postwar publications, but should not be posted here for reasons of copyright):


GERMAN TANK MAINTENANCE AND RECOVERY

1. INTRODUCTION

The German Army attaches the utmost importance to the effective maintenance and prompt recovery of vehicles. In the German armored divisions, each tank company, battalion, and regimental headquarters has a repair section. Moreover, each tank regiment is provided with a workshop company consisting—for a regiment of six companies—of a headquarters platoon, 1st and 2d (repair) platoons, 3d (recovery) platoon, an armory section, workshops for communications equipment, and a company supply section. Larger regiments may be given added strength. According to pre-war organization, a tank regiment of three battalions had—in addition to its workshop company—a light workshop platoon. Although little information about the workshop platoon has been available since 1940, it is believed that the strength of the unit has been increased.

2. DUTIES OF UNITS

a. Repair Sections

Repair sections are responsible for the general maintenance of tanks, their armament, and their radio apparatus.

In camp and rest areas, a repair section checks the serviceability of vehicles in the unit to which it is attached; during this period, mechanics are sent to the workshop company for advanced training, or else master mechanics are brought in to give instruction.

On the march, repair sections travel with the tank units and deal with all vehicle or equipment breakdowns that can be repaired with field equipment and in less than 4 hours. If a tank breaks down, the repair section leader inspects it to determine the nature of the damage. If the damage warrants it, the tank is handed over to the recovery platoon of the workshop company to be towed away. Otherwise, two mechanics with a motorcycle and sidecar stay with the tank to make repairs, while the other elements of the repair section travel in the rear of the column—if possible, on higher ground, from which they can spot breakdowns. In this way, one vehicle after another of the repair section stays behind—ordinarily the motorcycles, but if the damage is serious, a converted PzKw I tank without turret or armament. The repair section truck always stays with the repair vehicle left farthest to the rear.

In battle, the company repair sections are under the order of the battalion commander and are directed by a battalion motor-transport officer. On the march, they follow closely behind the fighting units and range over the battle area, looking for broken-down tanks. If a tank cannot be repaired on the spot, it is made towable, and its position is reported to the workshop company's recovery platoon.

Repair sections are not allowed to undertake the welding of armor gashes longer than 4 inches. In battle, the regimental headquarters repair section is attached to a battalion.

b. Workshop Companies

(1) General.—The workshop company operates as far as 15 to 20 miles behind the fighting tanks of its regiment, except that the recovery platoon works in the battle area, mainly to tow out disabled tanks. The workshop company handles repair jobs which take up to 12 hours. Repair jobs requiring up to 24 hours are sent back to rear repair bases.

The workshop company has its own power and light system, power tools, a crane, and apparatus for electric welding and vulcanizing. Existing facilities on the spot, such as factories, are used whenever possible.

(2) Tank Recovery Platoon.—According to information received from prisoners of war, the towing vehicles and trailers of the recovery platoon are sent forward to regimental headquarters and operate under its direction. The current method is to send two or three recovery vehicles forward with the fighting units. These vehicles advance in the line of attack and cruise across the width of the battle front. The Germans believe that hostile forces will be preoccupied with the German tanks and therefore will not attack the recovery vehicles, even when they come very close.

If a member of a tank crew orders the driver of a recovery vehicle to tow his tank to the rear, the former assumes responsibility for the action (in case it should later prove that the damage was unimportant and could have been fixed on the spot by a repair section). It is always permissible, however, to request that a damaged vehicle be towed away if it is in danger of being shot up.

The towing vehicle usually goes forward alone, and tows a disabled tank away by tow ropes. Towing is used in preference to loading on a trailer. A prisoner of war explains that in the North African desert the latter operation may take as long as 20 minutes—and time is precious in front-line recovery. Prisoners state that trailers are being used less and less and that their use is confined chiefly to roads. On roads a higher speed can be maintained, and the trailers neither cut up the road surfaces nor weave as much as a towed tank. In roadless parts of the desert, trailers are resorted to where the ground is bad, and towing is done where the ground affords reasonably good going.

The recovery platoon is not given the whole responsibility for the important work of salvaging tanks. In case of retirement, the Germans use combat tanks to tow disabled tanks. Instances have been reported in which, even during battles, combat tanks have been employed both to protect towing operations and to assist in the towing.

Recovered tanks are towed to an assembly point behind the combat area. Trailers may be used to take the disabled tanks from the assembly point to a workshop company.

According to prisoners of war, the drivers of recovery vehicles have done front-line duty for about 8 days at a time, and then worked at the rear, between assembly points and workshops. One prisoner who had been a driver reported that he usually had a crew of two unskilled men with him. It was his opinion that skill was not so necessary as a fair amount of intelligence and plenty of courage.

c. Light Workshop Platoon

A German document from North Africa gives detailed instructions for organizing a workshop platoon in a two-battalion tank regiment (which normally would not have this unit). In this case, a good illustration of how flexible German organization can be, personnel was obtained for the platoon by breaking up the battalion headquarters repair sections of the two battalions. This platoon was smaller than the workshop platoon designated by the pre-war organization for a tank regiment of three battalions, and was to operate in place of the battalion headquarters repair sections, under direct regimental command. The platoon was to serve as a link between the workshop company and the company repair sections. Like the latter, it would handle work requiring less than 4 hours. In attack, it would follow the central axis of advance, keeping in close touch with the workshop company's recovery platoon.

The light workshop platoon was to work on brakes, gears, and clutches of PzKw II's; on damaged gear-mechanisms of PzKw III's; and on valve defects in all types of truck and tank engines, except PzKw III's and PzKw IV's. Also, the platoon was to repair electrical and fuel systems; salvage and tow wheeled vehicles; repair wheeled vehicles; perform autogene welding and soldering work; and charge and test batteries and electrical apparatus.
It is better to be violent, if there is violence in our hearts, than to put on the cloak of nonviolence to cover impotence.

-Gandhi

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Re: m4a3 sherman and some others
« Reply #91 on: May 10, 2009, 12:27:01 PM »
Oh, Wittmann it was.
Anyway, did anyone hear of this Sherman guy:
"Lafayette G. Pool was born on July 23, 1919, on a farm in Odem, Texas. He graduated from high school in Taft, Texas in 1938. He attended an all boys Catholic Academy where he graduated as class valedictorian. Afterwards, he enrolled in Texas, A and I College, as an engineering major. He left college to enlist in the Army on June 13, 1941. He took basic training at San Antonio, Texas, and then was sent to Camp Beauregard, Louisiana, to the newly forming 3d Armored Division. He landed with his unit at Normandy in June, 1944. As an M4 "Sherman" Tank Commander in Company I, 3d Battalion, 32d Armored Regiment, he led his crew across France and Belgium and led his Task Force in 21 separate attacks. In 80 days he and his crew destroyed 258 German vehicles, captured 250 German soldiers, and killed an estimated over 1000 German soldiers. In his final battle SSG Pool was blow from the turret of his tank and his right leg was shattered and had to be removed. He was discharged from the Army in June of 1946. He was recalled to active duty in 1948 to serve as an instructor with 3d Armored Division at Fort Knox, Kentucky. He retired from the Army on September 19, 1960 as a Chief Warrant Officer 2d Class. His military decorations included Distinguished Service Cross, Silver Star, Legion of Merit, Purple Heart, French Croix de Guerre with Bronze Star, Belgium Fourragere. Lafayette Pool passed away in his sleep on May 30, 1991."

Link
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/archive/index.php/t-4346.html
More, although some things there may make one cough...
http://www.3ad.com/history/wwll/pool.pages/armor.myths.htm
And more...
http://www.3ad.com/history/wwll/pool.lafayette.htm

It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline Die Hard

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2205
Re: m4a3 sherman and some others
« Reply #92 on: May 10, 2009, 12:35:22 PM »
Oh yes, "Lafe" was an exceptional tank commander. Got 12 German tanks to his credit and hundreds of other vehicles, and only lost three Shermans in the process. No wonder the US Army wanted him back after the war to serve as an instructor.
It is better to be violent, if there is violence in our hearts, than to put on the cloak of nonviolence to cover impotence.

-Gandhi

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Re: m4a3 sherman and some others
« Reply #93 on: May 10, 2009, 01:24:16 PM »
Sort of brings it into the light that the main target of a tank would not typically have to be another tank.
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline Die Hard

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2205
Re: m4a3 sherman and some others
« Reply #94 on: May 10, 2009, 04:37:07 PM »
The main target of most tanks are other tanks. In France though there were far more allied tanks around than German. The Germans didn't even credit other targets than tanks, even if Wittmann had his own private scoreboard for AT guns. In his opinion they were the worst enemy.
It is better to be violent, if there is violence in our hearts, than to put on the cloak of nonviolence to cover impotence.

-Gandhi

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Re: m4a3 sherman and some others
« Reply #95 on: May 11, 2009, 03:30:08 AM »
Well, with Lafe's score, the main VICTIMS were definately not other tanks....
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline Die Hard

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2205
Re: m4a3 sherman and some others
« Reply #96 on: May 11, 2009, 09:39:45 AM »
You can say that about many things, but you don't see P-47 pilots painting little trucks and cars on the side of their Thunderbolts. Tanks like the M4 or Panther were designed and deployed to engage and kill other tanks. Naturally there are a lot more half-tracks, trucks and jeeps on a battlefield than tanks, but while it is the job of a tank to destroy any enemy vehicle it encounters only the enemy tanks actually offer a challenge. Given enough time, fuel and ammunition a single M4 could have destroyed every German half-track, truck and car in Europe with ease. No big deal.

So while other vehicles were more numerous, they were secondary targets to tanks. It's quite obvious really; if confronted by an enemy tank and a truck what would a tank gunner engage first? The truck? I think not.  :lol
It is better to be violent, if there is violence in our hearts, than to put on the cloak of nonviolence to cover impotence.

-Gandhi

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Re: m4a3 sherman and some others
« Reply #97 on: May 11, 2009, 11:55:30 AM »
Main=main. I should have said more frequent or most common.
And the P47's might have run out of space if they counted that :D
I must disagree on the purpose though. Was the Sherman built to kill primarily tanks? You had variants for many roles, and isn't the specification "infantry support"? You also have the restrictions of weight and such, ending in a compromise.
Of course the most deadly threat becomes the primary target at once (if there is a chance to kill it), but for instance, not all fighters were necessarily built just to fight fighters, however being bounced by enemy fighters would change a pre-planned strike or interception into a dogfight.
What is an army consisting of anyway? Do you realize the value of vehicles in WW2? At operation Barbarossa, the majority of the German army relied on horse transport, or so they say. Killing out the supply lines, which rather have some tanks there as cover rather than the bulk gives a good stranglehold, so I think that the importance of killing cars and trucks should not be overlooked.
Same goes with strongholds, pillboxes, arty hidden inside buildings etc. Targets they are, all of them.
So, you had shermies in many shapes and sorts, although restricted mostly to a certain frame.
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline Die Hard

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2205
Re: m4a3 sherman and some others
« Reply #98 on: May 11, 2009, 12:59:13 PM »
The most common target will always be the most numerous enemy vehicle, and that will always be light utility vehicles like jeeps and trucks; so yes, they should be overlooked. You don't measure the mettle of a tank commander by how many trucks he's destroyed or how many helpless infantrymen he's machinegunned. I'm infinitely more impressed with the 12 tanks "Lafe" destroyed than the hundreds of other vehicles and infantry; they're just fluff.

One M4 Sherman vs. 1,000 trucks = No danger, no effort, no contest. No respect.

One M4 Sherman vs. one PzKpfW IV = Mortal danger, Panzer is very difficult to kill, life or death combat. Respect.

Simple really.


It is better to be violent, if there is violence in our hearts, than to put on the cloak of nonviolence to cover impotence.

-Gandhi

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Re: m4a3 sherman and some others
« Reply #99 on: May 11, 2009, 01:03:12 PM »
You forget halftracks, gun positions and such. Much metal flying through the air with a madman sticking out of the hatch all the time :D
1000 vehicles vs one shermie....aww.
1 Sherman vs a Panzer IV, mortal danger for both, depending on just about everything, the most important question being what gun the Shermie has. Is it a firefly or not? Then the question is the one hit.....
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline Die Hard

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2205
Re: m4a3 sherman and some others
« Reply #100 on: May 11, 2009, 01:08:50 PM »
Pointless to discuss anything with you Angus. Good bye.
It is better to be violent, if there is violence in our hearts, than to put on the cloak of nonviolence to cover impotence.

-Gandhi

Offline BigPlay

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1044
Re: m4a3 sherman and some others
« Reply #101 on: May 11, 2009, 03:08:24 PM »
On a more serious note, this is the part I don't understand.  If you admit that the Germans engineered their equipment to the extent that they could not be repaired and maintained in the field, but rather needed to be towed back to a repair depot -- then how can you object to the characterization that they were de facto more difficult to maintain in the field?

IIRC, soon after the M-16 was introduced, it was fairly well disliked because of the time and care needed to keep it clean and in proper firing condition.  This was especially true when compared to the communists' weapon of choice, the AK-47, which as the joke went, fired better when crusted in mud.

Similarly, when compared to the simpler/more rugged/"farm boy friendly" Allied tanks, the German armor was more difficult to maintain in the field. 

It would seem to be an accurate statement to me.


two big differences between the M-16 and the ak-47. The M-16 is a precision and very accurate firearm. The Ak is not. I knew a couple special froces guys who were in Viet nam. One did carry around the Ak for a while but opted not to use it. One reason was that he didn't want to be confused as the enemy because of the Ak's distinctive sound and it was a very hard gun to shoot  accurately. Your also wrong about the M-16. When Colt first introduced the weapon it was a sound firearm. The US Army were the culprits with the constant changes that they put it through I am surprised that it even worked as well as it did. My brother in law was in the Army in Viet Nam and he had nothing to say bad about the weapon. We went shooting one day and someone brought a AR-15 with them. After all these years he was able to field strip and reassemble the thing in a matter of minutes. The owner was squeaking the whole time while he was doing it afraid that he would leave him  with a pile of parts.

Offline GtoRA2

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8339
Re: m4a3 sherman and some others
« Reply #102 on: May 11, 2009, 04:34:30 PM »


Now, to something different....or not. The Panther. I was looking at the overlapping wheels, partially because of them being a part of the armour. Then I was tempted to go surfing on google and wiki (I know, completely ignorant stuff...but...) and I could not find an heir to the Panther. None of today's tanks have that system as far as my 5 minutes showed me. But WHY? It looks good, forms a part of the armour, there is a claim that it's no worse in the field than other systems, it gave s superbly smooth ride etc at the time and so on. So why did the design die? Or didn't it?

Because contrary to the propaganda being spewed in this thread by some people, the Panther design has many flaws and was not all that revalutionary.  Frankly the road wheel system and automotive setup had the same flaws as the Sherman. IE, the engine in the back forces you to run a drive shaft through the hull under the turret. THis is what made the sherman so tall, it did the same for the panther. On top of that, the transmission and final drives in the Panther were NOT easy to change. You had to pull the whole drivers compartment to get to them. Atleast on the sherman the whole front of the hull unbolted so you could get to everything easy.

If you look at post war tank design. Just about every tank has the motor, tranny and final drives all in the back.  Calling the interleaved road wheels good because they were armored seems like looking at the bright sideof things and not the flaws.  Notice not one single modern or post war AFV uses suspension like that. I really doubt its as claimed "because the winners didnt like that better stuff".  The US was incorperating the lessons learned from fighting german tanks into it's later tank designs.

My sources are not wiki, but the excelent books on the Panther by Jentz. The combat reports on the Panther are amusing.  In many cases in Normady like 40% were abandoned by their own crews.  Seems odd for such a perfect weapon. 
« Last Edit: May 11, 2009, 04:36:27 PM by GtoRA2 »

Offline GtoRA2

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8339
Re: m4a3 sherman and some others
« Reply #103 on: May 11, 2009, 04:38:00 PM »
You forget halftracks, gun positions and such. Much metal flying through the air with a madman sticking out of the hatch all the time :D
1000 vehicles vs one shermie....aww.
1 Sherman vs a Panzer IV, mortal danger for both, depending on just about everything, the most important question being what gun the Shermie has. Is it a firefly or not? Then the question is the one hit.....

The 76mm gun on the later shermans had no trouble at all with the Panzer 4.


Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Re: m4a3 sherman and some others
« Reply #104 on: May 11, 2009, 04:50:35 PM »
Haha, I thought I was alone with my rather humble opinions.
"Calling the interleaved road wheels good because they were armored seems like looking at the bright sideof things and not the flaws.  Notice not one single modern or post war AFV uses suspension like that."
This is what I called for. Well the overlapping wheels. I mean, if the design was that superb, being flawed only by material problems, why did it not carry on and rule the design AFTER the war???

Anyway, "Pointless to discuss anything with you Angus. Good bye."

Had a lot of people trying to get me into a religion. All in vain. So chao for that. Go for hot chow.

BTW, just wondering, has anyone here being doing heavy machinery in dirt, or driving on tracks?
Just a caterpillar will run rounds about a WW2 tank if it's sandy or boggy. It will weight less though.
Was lucky enough to see a bulldozer doing a lot of fixing and tugging of both tanks and half-tracks. WW2 stuff. It did baffle me how quickly they had problems in loose sand. Very little elevation and all is bad.


It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)