I like how 49,000 here is larger and bolder than the 60,000 last page has. Talking about America and its PR power. lol
Mincemaker said:
What any German field commander dreads to see.
I might be biased here since I still think T-34 is superior in all aspect, except for space inside the tank to M4 Sherman. But I still think seeing some T-34 was what dreaded the German commanders more. Since those T-34 are good tanks, and never go in group lower than 10 tanks. Then after them are IS-2. After those IS-2 is a wall of SU-152.
That should be terrifying to see. Oh, wait, it shouldn't. Because no one would be making it off the line to tell the tale.
The Germans had too many problems in dealing with tanks.
Allied Lend-Lease tanks helped prop up the Russian defense in the very dark months around Moscow, until the Soviets could get their industry roaring again.
Then the tidal wave of Russian armor, T-34s en-masse throughout the rest of the war.
For the Western Allies, the US M4 Sherman was built in sufficient numbers to not only equip the American forces, it was being produced / licensed for other Allies. Even the British made large use of the Sherman.
According to wikipedia, these production numbers throughout the war:
Tiger I 1347 made. PzKpfw IV about 8500 made, which includes the earlier models that did not have the KwK 40/L48 gun (a good 75mm long gun). Panthers only 6000 of this "medium" tank were made. StuG III about 10086 of this very important assault gun were made. Tiger II 492 were made.
T-34 35488 were made T-34/85 23213 were made of this variant ALONE in 1944-45. I'm not even going to get into Soviet Self Propelled Guns and Light Tanks. IS-2 heavy tank 3854 were made for 1944-45 alone.
M4 33403 were made M4(76) 10883 made Leaving out all the Sherman derivatives and Light Tanks. In fact, Shermans even made their way to help prop up the Red Army's tank numbers. Google "Red Army Sherman" for some interesting pictures. M26 Pershing 2168 were made but way late for the war.
I haven't even touched what the British were producing. Germany was buried by the industrial powers of the world. The mountain of T-34s were shocking already, now combined that with America handing Shermans out like candy. It's too much.
I like how 49,000 here is larger and bolder than the 60,000 last page has. Talking about America and its PR power. lol
I might be biased here since I still think T-34 is superior in all aspect, except for space inside the tank to M4 Sherman. But I still think seeing some T-34 was what dreaded the German commanders more. Since those T-34 are good tanks, and never go in group lower than 10 tanks. Then after them are IS-2. After those IS-2 is a wall of SU-152.
That should be terrifying to see. Oh, wait, it shouldn't. Because no one would be making it off the line to tell the tale.
Considering as the Maus wasn't really even capable of fighting before the one that wasn't blown apart was captured by the Soviets, you really don't. As for the Tiger II, that whole "they were easy to maintain" thing Iowa was going on about counts for a lot. A Tiger didn't really have a guarantee they would make it to the front lines before breaking down, and there was basically no way to perform maintenance upon them, so they were seriously just abandoned by the side of the road the first time that their notorious suspension broke down. There's also the whole part about Tigers getting outnumbered 100-to-1, which didn't help the survivability rate, either.
In general, I'd agree that the T-34 was a better tank in terms of contribution to the war effort for the cost (quantity has a quality all its own), but you'd still rather be in a Sherman (especially the late-war Jumbos), yourself.
Did Germany just have problems with all of their land vehicles?
No, the earlier Panzers weren't as bad, and supported tons of remodels and variations based upon their chasis like the aforementioned StuG III and IV. The problem was that the Germans just kept trying to build their tanks bigger and BIGGER AND BIGGER regardless of whether they had an engine or a suspension system that could actually run the stupid things.
The thing about conversations regarding WW2 tanks is that people are just naturally attracted to the bloated monstrosities regardless of the fact that cheap and reliable could field 100 times the tanks as the desperation ploys.
Certain types of games also color how people view them, as well. They make it so that you have only one tank or six slots for tanks, regardless of size or cost, so the bigger the tank, the better. (Why of course, every minor skirmish can be fought with 4 Yamatos or Montanas on each side!) Nevermind that in real terms, you could field, again, 100 T-34s or M4s against a single Tiger II, and light vehicles actually have a use for scouting before the shells fly. They also ignore the whole "engine catches fire on a sunny day" thing. You don't see players spam battleships all day everyday in an RTS, but Zerg rushing the cheap stuff is a viable tactic.
I like how 49,000 here is larger and bolder than the 60,000 last page has. Talking about America and its PR power. lol
Think of it this way. I am a German Commander in the Western Front and I keep seeing a field covered in Shermans so frequently I get stomach ulcers. So I requested a transfer to the Eastern Front, thinking that I can be rid of the nightmare of 'Shermans Shermans Everywhere'.
So I get to the Eastern Front and what do I see? T-34s and...SHERMANS!
Think of it this way. I am a German Commander in the Western Front and I keep seeing a field covered in Shermans so frequently I get stomach ulcers. So I requested a transfer to the Eastern Front, thinking that I can be rid of the nightmare of 'Shermans Shermans Everywhere'.
So I get to the Eastern Front and what do I see? T-34s and...SHERMANS!
I will puke blood right there.
Yeah, I would totally puke blood too. lol
On that note though, it might be information bias on my part, but I remember that the Soviet didn't like M4 Shermans that much. Of course, given how they got T-34s running first, which made the German repond with better tank designs like Panther or at least, longer gun on Pz4, which in turn, made early designs of Sherman effectively overcome. I think it's also information bias at the time too. That they didn't like Shermans since T-34s were more regular and talked about as being superior. Leading to Shermans not well liked, generally speaking.
It's like how the American talked badly of T-34 tanks they had to do trial runs and testing too. The point is to make troops think their own stuff was better than stuff they get from others. The same still happens today with AR15/M16/M4 and AK. Russians like AK better since they can still shoot properly after all the stuff you can throw at it. A Spetnaz I got to speak to even asked me back "Why would you want a gun that often choke on its own as something you rely on in battle?" when I asked him about the M4. But then, as I heard, Americans like M4 better because "You can grab the next magazine to reload while dropping mags just by a push, unlike AK".
As someone who does study history, the 2 fronts weren't that close in conditions, and I never see a chance of the performing in the same condition so yeah, I can't say for sure. But I still think T-34 would be a worse nightmare.
And I can't help but think you guys in the west might have been a little biased as well. lol I can't deny it on my part too though, given all I read was written to give Soviet better points.
That probably has more to do with the conditions on the respective fronts then anything to do with the tanks themselves. From what I recall, Soviet M4 crews suffered just as much as T-34 crews.
That probably has more to do with the conditions on the respective fronts then anything to do with the tanks themselves. From what I recall, Soviet M4 crews suffered just as much as T-34 crews.
Depends on the model of both the M4 and the T-34 as early models of both, especially the T-34 with the original turret, weren't exactly consumer friendly. That said Soviet tank crews suffered more through lack of training than the shortcomings of their vehicles.
While the T-34/85 might have been a better tank killer than the M4, it was built to be produced and thrown directly onto the front lines with very little thought given to ease of maintenance or anything like that. The M4 as a complete system was a better at being a tank than the T-34. It was much easier to maintain, it was designed to make use of existing parts from other tanks and vehicles because the nearest factory for repairs and overhauls was several thousand miles and at least one ocean away, it could run for much longer with fewer faults than its counterparts, a crew had a much better chance of survival, especially after wet racks became a thing, and it could hold its own against anything it was likely to meet on the battlefield.
Oh and as one German 88 gun commander put it when he was captured in Italy: 'They just kept sending Shermans and we kept destroying them'
However when asked if that was the case how did he come to be captured: 'We ran out of ammunition. They didn't run out of tanks'
I like how 49,000 here is larger and bolder than the 60,000 last page has. Talking about America and its PR power. lol
I might be biased here since I still think T-34 is superior in all aspect, except for space inside the tank to M4 Sherman. But I still think seeing some T-34 was what dreaded the German commanders more. Since those T-34 are good tanks, and never go in group lower than 10 tanks. Then after them are IS-2. After those IS-2 is a wall of SU-152.
That should be terrifying to see. Oh, wait, it shouldn't. Because no one would be making it off the line to tell the tale.
If we're talking 1942 the Sherman had better penetration iirc, it also had better optics for both commanders and gunners
Welcome to the Allied Hall!We have been waiting for you.If one speaks of WWII American tanks, it simply has to be the M4 Sherman!Now, now.You damn cheater! American Empire Playbook!A term used for simply throwing money at Kancolle to achieve your goals, based on the sheer amount of resources used by the US Military in WWII compared to JapanNow, now.While if you were to go by the catalog specs, it would be brushed off as a poor showing of common mediocrity, this tank's true value lies elsewhere!Putting together all the Sherman variants, in the end there was a grand total of about 49,000 tanks produced!And here you are.The M4 Sherman was outstanding when it came to production and maintenance, was easy to operate, and had few breakdowns... It was a perfected industrial product!It was thrown en masse all over the place, and supported the front through sheer numbers!It has made its appearance!
