The next tank has to be a Sherman...here is why

[MadDog1441]

What i would definetily like to see is some big AA guns, not Anti-air, but Anti-armor, so u could drive it via a jeep with a hitch to the site, then use the gun to shoot hardened targets like a base, or hanger. that would be cool

[pzvg]

Flakpanther, 2 37mm AA guns on panther hull,
that would hurt a lot  
P.S. can also bother the hell out of tanks,halftracks, and sheep.


------------------
pzvg- "5 years and I still can't shoot"

[-lynx-]

Pongo - no-one in his right mind shot from a moving tank hoping to hit even close to target. Gun stabilizers came well after WW2 plus suspension compare to modern tanks was so crude that I'd read somewhere that if WW2 tanks were to be used today they would be deemed to be unsafe for the crew...

------------------
-lynx-
13 Sqn RAF

[daddog]

I would like to see a Grant! :-) Of course an 88 would be nice also.

As for a Sherman, I will drive that also.


----------
daddog C.O.
332nd Flying Mongrels
 

[Badger]

Hans....

Some additional information for you on the real WWII world of the Panzer IV.

On February 7th of 1944, few remaining Panzer IV tanks from the 5th SS Panzer Division "Wiking" spearheaded the attempt to breakout from the Cherkassy Pocket against largely superior Soviet force. During the breakout, SS-Untersturmfuehrer Kurt Schumacher commanded two Panzer IVs, which counterattacked a Soviet tank company destroying in the process some 8 T-34 tanks. On the next day, Schumacher alone engaged another Soviet tank company and during both actions destroyed some 21 Soviet AFVs. For his achievement, he was awarded the Knight's Cross.

On the afternoon of June 11th of 1944, the 8th Company of the 12th SS Panzer Regiment (12th SS Panzer Division "Hitlerjugend") counterattacked the attempt by Canadian 6th Armored Regiment (along with support units) to capture the area of Le Mesnil-Patry. The 12th SS Panzer Regiment commanded by SS-Obersturmfuehrer Hans Siegel destroyed some 37 Shermans, while losing 2 Panzer IVs and forcing Canadians to retreat.

SS-Unterscharfuehrer Willy Kretzschmar, who commanded Panzer IV of the 5th Company of the 12th SS Panzer Regiment (12th SS Panzer Division "Hitlerjugend") destroyed some 15 Allied tanks during the Normandy battles, including the heavy fighting at Caen area.

By the way, a footnote.  The 6th Canadian Armored Regiment referred to above is actually the 1st Hussars, Royal Canadian Armoured Corps, my old unit.  I remember sitting through regimental history classes and being told that June 11th at Le Mesnil-Patry was often referred to as the "Black Day" of the regiment due to the licking it took against the Panzer IV's.

[Jochen]

Badger, can you tell me about the Centurion? I'm pretty interested about post war tank development.

What kind of gun did it have at first? I know it had 105 mm L7 at later marks. ANd was the gun stabilized and did it have night fighting equipment early on?

------------------
jochen
Geschwaderkommodore
Jagdgeschwader 2 'Richthofen' (Warbirds)

jochen
JG 2 'Richthofen' (Aces High)

I want to believe! Fw 190F-8 / G-8 / A-5 to Aces High!

If you ever get across the sea to England,
Then maybe at the closing of the day
The bars will all be serving German lager
Which means we won the war - hip hip hooray!

[Badger]

Hello -lynx-

 

Originally posted by -lynx-:
Pongo - no-one in his right mind shot from a moving tank hoping to hit even close to target. Gun stabilizers came well after WW2 plus suspension compare to modern tanks was so crude that I'd read somewhere that if WW2 tanks were to be used today they would be deemed to be unsafe for the crew...

With all due respect, this is not quite correct.  I didn't think it sounded quite right, so I checked with a local "vet" who is an expert in the Sherman and WWII equipment in general.  He landed at Normandy with the 6th Canadian Armored Regiment (1st Hussars), my old unit, using Shermans with the gyrostablized master weapon.

Both he and a separate source stated that the elevation gyrostabilizer was tested in April, 1941, first introduced on the 37mm guns of the light tanks, and introduced into the production M3 medium tank in January, 1942. Tests indicated that it resulted in 60% hits when the vehicle was moving at 10mph. The stabilizer was available on even the first models of Shermans, and reportedly gave it a distinct advantage over the German Mk IV.

The crews were instructed to destroy the device if the tank had to be abandoned. Despite the tests and the official position, most crews interviewed preferred to fire from a stable (halted) position.

To add personal experience, I have fired hundreds of APDS and APSH rounds from an M4A2E8 Sherman in motion on the MTR at speeds of 10mph to 20mph.  I found it highly effective for targets at less than 1,000 yds.  I actually got a few hits out to 1,500 yds, but although I'd never admit it to fellow gunners, it was pure luck.  

Anyway, it would be nice to see this capability designed into an AH game variant Sherman.  Obviously it would help mitigate the advantage that the Panzer IV had over the Sherman and would make for some very realistic and interesting tank battles.  The Sherman's main tactic of course would be to stay in motion using the gyrostabilization to return fire against stationary Panzer IV's, very similar to the 1944 engagements.

Regards,
Badger

By the way, as an aside, night vision equipment first appeared on German optics in the late 1930's.  This also was not a post WWII invention either and was actually installed on Panther V's I believe, for combat trials.



[This message has been edited by Badger (edited 04-19-2000).]

[Kieren]

Badger-

The Sherman I referred to above was the Firefly Sherman, with the "17 pounder" British gun. Reference material I can find states that it was a match, barely, for the Panzer IV. Does that match with anything you heard or experienced? If so, the Sherman is the perfect next tank for AH.

[Badger]

Hi kieren....

I agree with you.  I think it would barely be a match for the Panzer IV and yet if people worked together in troops (fire teams) with this variant against Panzer IV's, it could be quite a lot of fun.  Of course, AH would have to model some of the things about the Sherman that would permit it to utilize any advantages it had.  If that were the case, then I too would like to see the Sherman as the next tank modeled.

Why not hear what the guys that actually fought with them had to say about them.

"From Middle East AFV Technical Liaison Letter 25 16 December 1944

Sherman 17 Pdr (Ic) (Firefly)

About 100 of those are now in the theatre and issues have been made to 2nd and 7th Armd Bdes as well as 5th Can and 4th N.Z. Armd Bdes. Operational experience is scanty but certain points have already come up: -

The ammunition bin in the co-drivers compartment is of such a size and construction that it cannot be removed from the vehicle without removing the turret. This operation is necessary in order to carry out repairs to the right hand front steering brake. M.W.E.E. have a project for  investigating and suggesting a remedy and it appears probable that it will be necessary to make this bin of bolted instead of welded construction so that it can be dismantled and removed piecemeal.
R.A.C.T.D. have also hid some experience with Sherman Ic and have brought up a number of points. Their remarks, suggested remedies and comments by HQ R.A.C. have been circulated to all holding units and are reproduced as Appendix "A".

2nd Can Armd Regt of 5 Can Armd Bde have the following user comments:-

The crew found the turret space rather confined. This did not interfere with efficiency in action but it proved very tiring as there is less room for "relaxation" than in the normal Sherman.  Considerable practice is required in crew drill for the handling of amn. The driver plays an important part in this. The same regt gives the following operational account.

1. This regt received 4 Sherman Ic Firefly Tks, during a lull in battle, on 5 Oct 44.

2. After some discussion, it was decided to allot them all to one sqn, on the basis of one per tp. Since the tp ldr normally leads his tp in the sort of close country in which we are now operating, it was decided that the 17 pdr Shermans would be given to the Tp Sgts. (Sqn org - 4 tps each 3 tks).

3. Instr was commenced as soon as the kit had been checked. One offr and one sgt had just returned from a 17 pdr course at RACTD, having been flown both ways, and, in addition, a very competent sgt-instr from RACTD was attached to the Regt. It was not possible to incl firing in the brief trg progam.

4. On 14 Oct the 17 pdr tks saw their first action when this sqn provided close sp for an inf bn (H & PE) in an advance beyond SCOLO RIGOSSA. In the first afternoon this force gained approximately 1500 yds against stubborn resistance. Although the 17 pdr tks were kept rearmost in their tps, they were called upon to shoot up many houses and dug-outs, and the HE shell was found to be about the same as the 75mm. In the opinion of one tp sgt it "seems to knock out the back wall of the house"

5. An opportunity to observe its hole-punching capabilities came late in this first afternoon. One of the tp cpls spotted a Panther at about 300 yds range. He indicated it to his tp sgt and meanwhile fired one round of 75 mm AP at it. The tp sgt's gunner reports that as he laid the 17-pdr on the Panther, its turret was swinging slowly towards him and, as be fired, was still roughly 30 degrees off. Four rounds of 17-pdr AP were fired, all scoring direct hits. The Panther did not brew up, our own inf patrols, fearing recovery by the enemy, set fire to it during the ensuing night.

6. The remains of this tk may be seen at BULGARIA (mr 656045). There are two clean holes in it and three "gouges". One hole is in the side of the gun barrel, approx 3 in from the mantlet; since there is no hole out the other side of the barrel, and judging from the angle of penetration about 60 deg from normal) it seems probable that this AP round entered the turret via the breech of the gm. The other hole is in the side wall of the turret."

[Badger]

Hi jochen....

Great to be flying (tanking) with you post our WB experiences.........    

Anyway, to answer your question about the Centurion.  My memories of Centurions are more vague as I spent far less time in them as opposed to the M4A2E8 (76mm) Sherman.  It did have the British 105 gun, which had just been upgraded in the summer of 1963, from the 84mm (20 pounder) master weapon system.  The 105 was incredibly potent when engaging targets at longer ranges than the Sherman.  Yes, the gun was stabilized and we also had infrared night vision aids.

I wanted to clear something else up in general.  As I pointed out in an earlier message pertaining to gyroscopic stabilization for firing the master weapon on the move, this was NOT as post WWII innovation.  In a similar vain, infrared was also used in WWII, particularly on German equipment.  I have plagiarized some material from George Parada acknowledging full credit here for his research as follows:

"German Infrared Night-Vision Devices - Infrarot-Scheinwerfer

In 1936, AEG was ordered to start the development of infrared night-vision devices and in 1939, first successful prototype unit for use with 37mm Pak 35/36 L/45 anti-tank gun was constructed. In autumn of 1942, unit for use with 75mm PaK 40 L/46 anti-tank gun was constucted and was also mounted on Marder II (Sd.Kfz.131).

In mid 1943, first tests with infrared night-vision (Nacht Jager) devices and telescopic rangefinders mounted on Panther started. Two different arrangements / solutions were created and used on Panther tanks.

Solution A - Sperber (Sparrow Hawk) was made up of one 30cm infrared searchlight (with range of 600m) and image converter operated by the commander - FG 1250. From late 1944 to March of 1945, some Panzerkampfwagen V Panther Ausf G (and other variants) mounted with FG 1250, were succesfully tested. From March to April of 1945, approximately 50 Panthers Ausf G (and other variants) mounted with FG 1250, saw combat service on the Eastern Front and Western Front. Panthers with IR operated with SdKfz.251/20 Uhu (Owl) half-track with 60cm infra-red searchlight and Sd.Kfz.251/21 Falke (Falcon). This solution could be easily mounted on any type of armored fighting vehicle.

Solution B - Second more complicated arrangement / solution was "Biwa" (Bildwandler), which provided driver, gunner and commander with one 30cm infrared searchlight (with range of 600m) and image converter. Various variants of Panthers were converted and mounted with "Biwa". It was reported that tests were successful, but there is very few combat reports from the Eastern or Western Front.

Various units received IR Panthers including 116th Panzer Division (3rd company of 24th Panzer Regiment, Western Front, Summer of 1944), Sixth SS Panzer Army (Hungary, early 1945), Panzer Division Muncheberg and Clausewitz. One combat report is by a veteran of 1st SS Panzer Regiment of 1st SS Panzer Division "LSSAH", who states that few Panthers equipped with infrared night-vision devices possibly from 116th Panzer Division were used in 1944/45 during the Ardennes Offensive. In April of 1945, Panthers equipped with IR equipment (solution B) joined Panzer Division Clausewitz and in mid April near Uelzen destroyed entire platoon of British Comet cruiser tanks. Also on April 21st of 1945, same Panthers overran an American anti-tank position on the Weser-Elbe Canal.

In addition, it is reported that single unit equipped with Jagdpanthers also received and used infrared night-vision devices.

Crews of infrared night-vision devices mounted vehicles were also armed with MP44 assault rifles fitted with infrared night-vision device - Vampir (Vampire)."

[Kieren]

Yikes! Those guys had guts to be that close to a Panther.

Great stuff, Badger. Keep it coming!

[eye]

T 34 with a 76 mm is a even match for a mk IV. A sherman even with a 76mm is easy meat for a mk IV with its great 75mm. The only shermans that could compete are the firefly and the jumbo conversion. I bet we get a sherman first.

[-lynx-]

I'm sorry gents - I feel overwhelmed with all the data/dates/names about operational use of stabilized guns/night vision optics etc in WW2 tanks...

I do not at all say that all of the above was not available/developed/designed etc at the time what I'm saying that from that point of view (however rudimentary) ICBMs and cruise missiles were widely used by Germany as well as jet fighters by the US, Britain and Germany...

Gun stabilizers? <badger>: "...Despite the tests and the official position, most crews interviewed preferred to fire from a stable (halted) position..." I wonder why? Did they really prefer to stop the tank (instantly creating a fat juicy target) to fire their gun or did they actually prefer to take the risk but to get a chance to destroy the enemy with that shot no matter what the "official position" was on the subject? Somehow I do not think that those brave men were bent on suicide...

Lots of staff was developed/used in WW2 - including radars and helicopters. But can we really even compare all that stuff to what's working today? Sherman with gun stabiliser and whatever else is as close to, say, M1 (with actually _working_ gun stabiliser) as a 262 is to, say, F15.

Lets just keep to the stuff that was out there fighting the enemy on the front lines in every day battles and not what could have been used if some ideal laboratory conditions existed.

And while we're at it - there's no hourly charges in AH - bring on engine problems, gunjams, 30% 109s crashing while landing due to crap landing gear etc.

Otherwise Ki84, if introduced, would be a uberplane it was _not_ in real life. Mind you - it could have well been - if the engines were performing and reliable etc but it was not!!! Same goes to all tank guns stabilizers...


------------------
-lynx-
13 Sqn RAF

[Mox]

I'm starting to think Badger needs to have his own forum.

Keep up the posting Badger I'm enjoying the tank information.

<S>

Mox
The Wrecking Crew

[hblair]

What mox said. Very interesting reading badger. Nice to hear from a guy who knows firsthand the in's and out's of tank warfare.