Author Topic: Myths of US armor.  (Read 1567 times)

Offline DaveBB

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1356
Myths of US armor.
« on: July 11, 2015, 09:57:13 AM »
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNjp_4jY8pY

Here are some myths about U.S. armor that are dispelled.  This is actually very good.  The U.S. armor board was not as incompetent as they have been made out to be. 

*Spoiler alert*
My favorite part was that the Army anticipated needing a bigger gun on the Sherman in the early months in 1942, and even mounted a long barreled 3" canon on the Sherman.  But they just couldn't get it to work in the cramped turret.  So they had to design a new turret for it (actually taken from the T-23).  It talks about tank destroyers also.  Their primary role was purely defensive. 
Currently ignoring Vraciu as he is a whoopeeed retard.

Offline BoilerDown

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1926
Re: Myths of US armor.
« Reply #1 on: July 12, 2015, 02:14:56 AM »
Really liked this video.  That guy has one of the best jobs in the world, I imagine.
Boildown

This is the Captain.  We have a lil' problem with our entry sequence so we may experience some slight turbulence and then... explode.

Boildown is Twitching: http://www.twitch.tv/boildown

Offline guncrasher

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17360
Re: Myths of US armor.
« Reply #2 on: July 12, 2015, 03:52:41 AM »
presented by a gaming company that changes RL stats to accommodate gaming needs.



semp
you dont want me to ho, dont point your plane at me.

Offline zack1234

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13213
Re: Myths of US armor.
« Reply #3 on: July 12, 2015, 04:06:30 AM »
 :rofl

 :)

 :rofl

There are no pies stored in this plane overnight

                          
The GFC
Pipz lived in the Wilderness near Ontario

Offline rabbidrabbit

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3907
Re: Myths of US armor.
« Reply #4 on: July 12, 2015, 06:42:38 AM »
presented by a gaming company that changes RL stats to accommodate gaming needs.



semp

Are you saying he lacks credibility because WOT adjusts stats of their not a simulator game for gameplay reasons?  I'm not sure I see a rational point to be made.

Offline FLOOB

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3054
Re: Myths of US armor.
« Reply #5 on: July 12, 2015, 07:14:46 AM »
Are you saying he lacks credibility because WOT adjusts stats of their not a simulator game for gameplay reasons?  I'm not sure I see a rational point to be made.

“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans” - John Steinbeck

Offline Treize69

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5597
      • http://grupul7vanatoare.homestead.com/Startpage.html
Re: Myths of US armor.
« Reply #6 on: July 12, 2015, 07:24:38 AM »
I'll believe what I read from actual historians, not a videogame company's shill, thanks.
Treize (pronounced 'trays')- because 'Treisprezece' is too long and even harder to pronounce.

Moartea bolșevicilor.

Offline PR3D4TOR

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2884
Re: Myths of US armor.
« Reply #7 on: July 12, 2015, 08:22:31 AM »
I do like the man and most of his videos are informative and fun. This is not one of them. While I agree that the Sherman has an undeservedly bad reputation The Chieftain is clearly cherry picking data to support his point of view here. He is also neglecting to mention some very important problems that plagued Allied tanks in the crucial period following D-day.

Most important was perhaps the quality problems with the APCBC ammo for the 75 mm and 76 mm guns. The infamous "shatter gap". A most unusual situation where rounds with too high an impact velocity would fail even though their penetration capability should be more than adequate. This phenomenon plagued the effectiveness of US 76mm and 3" guns against Tigers, Panthers and other vehicles with armor thickness above 70 mm. The caps of the APCBC ammunition turned out to be excessively soft. When these projectiles impacted armor which matched or exceeded the projectile diameter at a certain spread of velocities, the projectile would shatter and fail. In France Allied tankers often found themselves in the ridiculous situation of being too close to achieve penetration against German armor.

Another point I find very hard not to criticize is his extreme cherry picking of data on Tiger I encounters. Only three? Really? Some of the most famous and published tank actions in France after D-Day involved Tigers from the Heavy SS-Panzer Battalion 101. SS-Hauptsturmführer Michael Wittmann alone accounts for more Tiger battles in France than what The Chieftain claims as a total in his video. Including the battle where he died in a Tiger I, at the hands of a Sherman Firefly gunner.

"The Tigers now attacked from the flank against the Polish Armoured Division.  They opened fire from 1800 meters.  The first enemy tanks blew apart. The wave of Shermans which was rolling toward Cintheaux was smashed.  One Allied attack after another broke down in front of the thin front held by the handful of Tigers. The battle raged for hours. One of the Tiger commanders who survived reported that Wittmann's Tiger had destroyed three more enemy tanks."

He is also very careful in specifying Tiger I which I find deceitful since this model was out of production by this time of the war. Historians generally agree that the Tiger I and II had a 12:1 kill ratio against all models of the Sherman tank.
No gods or kings. Only Predator.

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6864
Re: Myths of US armor.
« Reply #8 on: July 12, 2015, 11:16:17 AM »
He is also very careful in specifying Tiger I which I find deceitful since this model was out of production by this time of the war.

The last Tiger Is were produced in Aug 1944. Whittmann was killed Aug 8 1944.

Being out of production does not mean it was not used anymore.

Offline PR3D4TOR

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2884
Re: Myths of US armor.
« Reply #9 on: July 12, 2015, 11:28:12 AM »
Sure, but him specifying the Tiger I is cherry picking data to make a point that is contrary to what was reality.
No gods or kings. Only Predator.

Offline DaveBB

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1356
Re: Myths of US armor.
« Reply #10 on: July 12, 2015, 02:57:02 PM »
I don't feel that he was cherry picking that data at all.  I felt it was a very informative, and interesting presentation.  I think it would be safe to say that most Shermans were knocked out of action by anti-tank guns.
Currently ignoring Vraciu as he is a whoopeeed retard.

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6864
Re: Myths of US armor.
« Reply #11 on: July 12, 2015, 04:09:56 PM »
Shermans fought against Tiger Is longer than they did Tiger IIs.

Offline PR3D4TOR

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2884
Re: Myths of US armor.
« Reply #12 on: July 12, 2015, 04:19:33 PM »
His time frame was D-Day to VE-Day. The Tiger II first saw combat with s.H.Pz.Abt. 503 in Normandy in July 1944.
No gods or kings. Only Predator.

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6864
Re: Myths of US armor.
« Reply #13 on: July 12, 2015, 04:54:42 PM »
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.

Offline Zimme83

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3073
Re: Myths of US armor.
« Reply #14 on: July 12, 2015, 05:10:24 PM »
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.
''The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge'' - Stephen Hawking