The M10 Tank Destroyer

[shermanjr]

and soem early war tanks too likle panzer 3s and lees

[Butcher]

My Biggest problem with the M-10 is what everyone thinks, the open top would be easy to smoke it, however the Hetzer or stug-G would be interesting trade offs.

[Squire]

The Sherman Firefly had @ 50 percent of their loadout HE rounds (Sherman Firefly vs Tiger I p.27 Stephen A. Hart). As for the M10 I dont have the data in front of me but others hace posted that it too had HE loads issued so I will take them at their word.

Its true that under most circumstances they would have had an emphasis on AP loads but it would have depended on a variety of factors. Tank destroyers also need HE ammo to engage enemy anti-tank gun crews which were a constant threat and usually more of a presence than enemy tanks. You took them out with proximity shots as they were very hard to spot. It would have been unpractical and dangerous to be only carrying AP loads in the ETO. German TD units (most) also were issued with HE ammo for the same reasons. Enemy ATGs and infantry were always a threat.

Army manuals and TO & Es didn't mean a fart in the war.  As the war progressed and enemy armor became more scarce the proponderance of HE ammo would increase. US Army TD units were often pressed into a straight tank role just as the Shermans were pitted against enemy armor.  In the end "TD Command" was retired in the US Army as post war analysis revealed what the soldiers and commanders already knew; that you can't ask the enemy to adhere to some tactical doctrine you have laid out when they come down the road. I have pics of US M10s in Italy being used as stationary artillery peices. I doubt their battalion commander cared what the field manual said re the M10s approved loadout. They needed arty, the M10s were available, they got the tasking.

The same can be observed for many Allied mobile AA units. Most ended up firing at enemy infantry. Nobody follows neat and tidy rules when the bullets start to fly. You shoot back with what you have. Picture yourself sitting with an M16 Halftrack in December 1944 as a line of German infantry emerge from the treeline at 1200 yards. You aren't going to sit down and brew coffee and wait for the Luftwaffe to attack doctrine or no. Same for the M10 beside you.

 

[Rino]

     Well said Squire.

[SmokinLoon]

The Sherman Firefly had @ 50 percent of their loadout HE rounds (Sherman Firefly vs Tiger I p.27 Stephen A. Hart). As for the M10 I dont have the data in front of me but others hace posted that it too had HE loads issued so I will take them at their word. 

The British not only manufactured but also issued a 6 to 1 ratio for AP/APC to HE rounds for Firefly crews in 1944/1945 [Source- 17pdr Handbook, pg 22, 511-514].  Doctrine even showed that the Firefly would be kept back until it was needed to deal with German tanks.  The British Sherman and Cromwell tanks did most of the HE duty.  Also, just a reminder, I didnt say to not issue any HE, but rather keep the Firefly in its own category, one that it was actually used mostly for, as a TD.  That is done by keeping the HE in check (not having an all HE ammo loadout). True, as the war went on less AP ammo was fired and more HE was needed, no arguement there.  In AH, the Firefly isnt seen taking down towns or even standing back and hammering fields, it has taken a back seat to the M4/76mm in a major way.  It does not even have the HE destructive capability to keep pace with the Panzer IV or T34.  It isnt a huge issue for me, just something HTC may want to think about if they are going to dive into the TD realm.

**off to dig in my sources on the M10**     
 
 

[Scotty55OEFVet]

My Biggest problem with the M-10 is what everyone thinks, the open top would be easy to smoke it, however the Hetzer or stug-G would be interesting trade offs.

+1

What about the Russain SU series such as the SU-100...

"The SU-100 quickly proved itself to be among the best self-propelled anti-tank guns of World War II, able to penetrate 125 mm (4.9 in) of vertical armor from a range of 2,000 m (1.2 mi) and the sloped 85 mm (3.3 in) front armor of the German Panther from 1,500 m (0.93 mi).[citation needed] This was quite capable of defeating any German tank in service with the exception of the King Tiger"

[SmokinLoon]

+1

What about the Russain SU series such as the SU-100...

"The SU-100 quickly proved itself to be among the best self-propelled anti-tank guns of World War II, able to penetrate 125 mm (4.9 in) of vertical armor from a range of 2,000 m (1.2 mi) and the sloped 85 mm (3.3 in) front armor of the German Panther from 1,500 m (0.93 mi).[citation needed] This was quite capable of defeating any German tank in service with the exception of the King Tiger"

This this would be fun to have, but keep in mind it would have the slowest reload in AH.  Its main gun would be on par with the "big 3" currently in AH (Tiger, Panther, and Firefly).  No turret, either.  No MG for AA or anti-infantry use, either.  The Su-100 is high on my list of "wants" for AH, but I think the StuG III would be a more fitting turretless gv to add.  My opinion, of course.      

[Rob52240]

Don't sweat the open top.  M3's have open tops, M8's may as well have an open top, LVT's, Jeeps and 251s have no tops but they still have their use in the game.

The M-18 would be great for anytime you have air superiority and enemy tanks to fight.

It was classified as a tank destroyer.
It was not classified as a "we'd better not build this since it has an open top"

[Scotty55OEFVet]

Don't sweat the open top.  M3's have open tops, M8's may as well have an open top, LVT's, Jeeps and 251s have no tops but they still have their use in the game.

The M-18 would be great for anytime you have air superiority and enemy tanks to fight.

It was classified as a tank destroyer.
It was not classified as a "we'd better not build this since it has an open top"

lol +1

[iron650]

For all you guys saying no because the open top I found something on the wiki about the M18:  "The open-topped turret (a characteristic which it shared with the M10) left the crew exposed to snipers, grenades, and shell fragments."
So both tanks have the same open-turret yet some of you would say yes to the M18.

Not a reliable resource so here's an aerial view: (M18)

[321BAR]

For all you guys saying no because the open top I found something on the wiki about the M18:  "The open-topped turret (a characteristic which it shared with the M10) left the crew exposed to snipers, grenades, and shell fragments."
So both tanks have the same open-turret yet some of you would say yes to the M18.

Not a reliable resource so here's an aerial view: (M18)

(Image removed from quote.)

the open turret has no reasoning behind why it should not be included (either vehicle). The reasoning some of us would take the M-18 over the M-10 is that we basically have the M-10 as of now in game in the form of the M4/76 with an older M4/75 chassis. The M-18 adds basically an M8 speed demon with a large gun to the game with tracks and HP and torque to give it oomph the M8 doesnt have <S>

[SmokinLoon]

the open turret has no reasoning behind why it should not be included (either vehicle). The reasoning some of us would take the M-18 over the M-10 is that we basically have the M-10 as of now in game in the form of the M4/76 with an older M4/75 chassis. The M-18 adds basically an M8 speed demon with a large gun to the game with tracks and HP and torque to give it oomph the M8 doesnt have <S>

As soon as it stops, it gets sent back to respawn though.  The M18 may have a gun to compete with, and some speed (48mph) to rely on, but with 13mm (at best) for hull armor and 25mm on the turret mantlet, it isnt going to take much to send it packing.   

[iron650]

As soon as it stops, it gets sent back to respawn though.  The M18 may have a gun to compete with, and some speed (48mph) to rely on, but with 13mm (at best) for hull armor and 25mm on the turret mantlet, it isnt going to take much to send it packing.   

So it's basically like an M8 that's upgunned. So once it stops it's dead. The M10 might have more of a chance against enemies stopped.

[Squire]

Doctrine even showed that the Firefly would be kept back until it was needed to deal with German tanks.

No arguement that they would try to keep them focused on enemy armor or the possibility of enemy armor but war is war and it would not be possible under all circumstances to do that. Fireflys are an integral part of a Sherman troop in Sherman units or deployed as a troop in a Cromwell squadron in Cromwell units. On the line of advance there are no guarantees as to whats around the next hill, hedgegrow, village, ect. You cant sit around all day waiting for a textbook engagement when your orders are to get moving. Also enemy counter attacks have a nasty habit of getting in the way of such niceties.

As for the exact quantity of HE rounds sources vary as they do ( nothing like a good source skirmish  ) but as in all things real life would rule as king in the field and not some manual or doctrine as to what was listed as to quantity. I doubt many AFVs in the field in NW Europe in 1944 had everything just so; like infanteers, tankers would do what they felt they needed to to fight and to live another day.

An interesting discussion  in any event.

...Oh +1 to the M10 in the game, it was a major Allied AFV in WW2 and deserves a place at some point.

[321BAR]

As soon as it stops, it gets sent back to respawn though.  The M18 may have a gun to compete with, and some speed (48mph) to rely on, but with 13mm (at best) for hull armor and 25mm on the turret mantlet, it isnt going to take much to send it packing.   

one... the one thing about tank destroyers is fire and maneuver. you get behind the enemy, shoot, and freaking SCOOT. With this tactic an M8 can rack up over 10 kills in a sortie... what would an M8 with a 76mm do?

two... one way of not dieing is not getting shot.

three... where did you get 48mph? i have only heard 60mph on road (which is all we use in here)

So it's basically like an M8 that's upgunned. So once it stops it's dead. The M10 might have more of a chance against enemies stopped.

yet again the M-10 is only an M4/76mm Sherman with an older chassis based on the 75mm so there is still no point for adding it unless for diversity's sake (aka the first TD in game).

Adding something fast and hard hitting is something new and feasible. The M-18 is much more a vehicle to have over the M-10