Myths of US armor.

[PR3D4TOR]

s.Pz.Abt. 503 was transferred to Normandy with 33 Tiger I and 12 Tiger II (almost all with Porsche turrets), reaching action in early July 1944. In Sept, it was sent to Hungary.

Your point? (If you have one.)

[DaveBB]

I cannot say that the film contributed to the humanity in any greater way. Was a lot of obvious thing in it. German armour was greatly outnumbered and always short on fuel and ammo. The superior tanks couldn't compensate for the overwhelming numbers of Allied Tanks/aircrafts/and so on. Quantity is also quality. Not even if the Germans had a hundred Abrams they would have won in France. A tank is no good if u don't get fuel and ammo to it.

Shermans were comparable to PzKw IV And they matched each other fairly well. With the support they had the Shermans could compensate for the fact that they were inferior to Panthers and Tigers.

Like aircraft, the training and skill of the crews mattered.  He mentioned the large scale action of Panthers vs Shermans (which I have read about elsewhere).  20 Shermans were destroyed, while 80 Panthers were destroyed. 

[FBKampfer]

Once Germany posted Panzer Lehr into a combat slot, their goose was cooked for armored warfare. Much in the same way they couldn't train pilots to be much use late in the war.

[MiloMorai]

Your point? (If you have one.)

Thought it would be obvious but since it isn't for some people, Allied tanks would be 3 times more likely to come across a Tiger I than a Tiger II, at least for 503.

[Zimme83]

Like aircraft, the training and skill of the crews mattered.  He mentioned the large scale action of Panthers vs Shermans (which I have read about elsewhere).  20 Shermans were destroyed, while 80 Panthers were destroyed.

No he even admit he was wrong, it was 80 armoured veichles, not 80 panthers

[PR3D4TOR]

Thought it would be obvious but since it isn't for some people, Allied tanks would be 3 times more likely to come across a Tiger I than a Tiger II, at least for 503.

In July 1944 yes. In January 1945 though. How many Tiger I took part in the Ardennes offensive? None. After August 1944 the Tiger I numbers would dwindle to almost nothing leaving the Tiger II the only Tiger, with a few notable exceptions, the Allies would meet in combat until VE-Day, 8th May 1945.

[MiloMorai]

In July 1944 yes. In January 1945 though. How many Tiger I took part in the Ardennes offensive? None. After August 1944 the Tiger I numbers would dwindle to almost nothing leaving the Tiger II the only Tiger, with a few notable exceptions, the Allies would meet in combat until VE-Day, 8th May 1945.

4th Company of sPzAbt 506 was equipped with Tigers Is and took part in the Ardennes battle.

[Zimme83]

Normandy was also very ill suited for Tank operations and Panthers lost their advantage in engaging at long ranges.

And as said, quality of German tanks meant nothing against the superior numbers of Allied tanks.
For ex Operation Cobra in july -44: 2.451 allied tanks and tank destroyers vs 190 on the German side. 13 to 1 for the Allied side. They could probably  just have charged head on against Tigers and Panthers and still have enough tanks left to kill them when they got within range to do so.

[FLOOB]

One of the myths about WWII US armor vehicles is that it is an interesting subject.

[guncrasher]

germany always had the better tanks.  been many accounts of german tankers that they say their tanks where so superior to the allieds that it would take 2 allied tanks to kill 1 german.  problem was is that the allied always seem to have 3 around.


semp

[DaveBB]

The German Cats were always breaking down.  Tanks do not operate in a vacuum.  Under a very specific set of circumstances they were better.  That being purely defensive, not having to cross any bridges, not having to be transported by rail, not having to perform road marches, and not having to have quick maintenance done on the road wheels.

Even when the M-26 was about as reliable as the Panther, the War Department would not release the M-26 into ETO as being unfit for combat. 

[MiloMorai]

https://www.benning.army.mil/training/eArmor/2001/SEP_OCT/ArmorSeptemberOctober2001web.pdf

pg 38

more myths of American armour.

[Ack-Ack]

Even when the M-26 was about as reliable as the Panther, the War Department would not release the M-26 into ETO as being unfit for combat.

The Pershing saw limited combat during the war in Europe, though in small numbers. The small number of Pershings in theater had nothing to do with the War Department considering it unfit for combat, it's operational delay was due to design and production problems.  The US Army wanted more but because of the delays in the M-26 program, only 20 were ready for deployment and were split between the 3rd and 9th AD's.

[MiloMorai]

The Pershing saw limited combat during the war in Europe, though in small numbers. The small number of Pershings in theater had nothing to do with the War Department considering it unfit for combat, it's operational delay was due to design and production problems.  The US Army wanted more but because of the delays in the M-26 program, only 20 were ready for deployment and were split between the 3rd and 9th AD's.

The link I posted has some info on the Pershing.

[Bodhi]

He is presenting a lot of his summaries as fact.  I don't think that the vast amount of data out there actually agrees with him on a lot of his summaries.