The Sherman tank's place in history (1 Viewer)

Currahee Chris

Sergeant Major
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,776
Alright-

figure I'd kick off a discussion around the most advanced tin can that ever stormed out of the US of A- The SHERMAN!! :)

From my understanding, tanks used to be produced and developed based on, in part, weight classes- I am sure each country had their own specs- but generally- there were three weight classes- light, medium and heavy. Each tank in these classes had a general roll to fill. The US sort of plodded around and offered up the Sherman to fill the "tank" roll.

Since the coldwar, the superpowers have moved to a Main Battle Tank (MBT) concept. The idea is that technology has advanced to the point where the hitting power of a king tiger can match the speed and manuerverability of a lexus (and even a jet airplane). These tanks can now perform all the roles of single purpose tanks back in WW2.

I have often felt like the Sherman, and her variants, was essentially the worlds first MBT. It saw action in the deserts of Africa, the winters of Bastogne and the humid hell of the island hopping with the Marines. I don't seem to recall seeing Panthers, Tigers or T34's being deployed in ALL of these types of battlefields- not that they probably couldn't, they just weren't (with the exception of the Tigger).

Anyone have any thoughts or follow my thinking here?
 
Alright-

figure I'd kick off a discussion around the most advanced tin can that ever stormed out of the US of A- The SHERMAN!! :)

From my understanding, tanks used to be produced and developed based on, in part, weight classes- I am sure each country had their own specs- but generally- there were three weight classes- light, medium and heavy. Each tank in these classes had a general roll to fill. The US sort of plodded around and offered up the Sherman to fill the "tank" roll.

Since the coldwar, the superpowers have moved to a Main Battle Tank (MBT) concept. The idea is that technology has advanced to the point where the hitting power of a king tiger can match the speed and manuerverability of a lexus (and even a jet airplane). These tanks can now perform all the roles of single purpose tanks back in WW2.

I have often felt like the Sherman, and her variants, was essentially the worlds first MBT. It saw action in the deserts of Africa, the winters of Bastogne and the humid hell of the island hopping with the Marines. I don't seem to recall seeing Panthers, Tigers or T34's being deployed in ALL of these types of battlefields- not that they probably couldn't, they just weren't (with the exception of the Tigger).

Anyone have any thoughts or follow my thinking here?

The good point about a Sherman was it a had a dual purpose gun witch could fire HE or armour piercing rounds witch for the British was a big + point as most only fired armour piercing rounds before the British fitted the six pounder gun to the Churchill & Cromwell tanks
 
The good point about a Sherman was it a had a dual purpose gun witch could fire HE or armour piercing rounds witch for the British was a big + point as most only fired armour piercing rounds before the British fitted the six pounder gun to the Churchill & Cromwell tanks

Ok- but was that due to the advances in munitions at the time or the simple fact that the other weapons couldn't fire multiple types of ordinance? I do not know. :eek:
 
This seems like a natural thread for Gary to comment on :)
 
Your US Patriot card has just been revoked :D:D Bad mouthing our weapons like that- shame on you!! :p
I am not bad mouthing all out weapons and I am not totally condemning the Sherman. The Sherman was a highly versatile weapon, with ease of manufacture, maintenance, cost, and especially the large numbers it was produced in. It was, however, an expedient design that was a generation behind the tanks of it's opponent in Europe. That it was a hardy tank that remained useful for years after WW2 is also to the plus side. But the thin armor and inferior standard gun made it a marginal weapon to duel with the various later war German designs like the Panther and the Tigers. The Sherman was ultimately a war winner because of many reasons such as numbers, tactics, air support, etc., but it was certainly not the weapon to battle the German tanks with any real chance of battlefield surviability. Now, the direct opposite of sending our men to battle in the Sherman, were our weapon systems such as the M-1 Garand or the P-47's and P-51's. These were the best on the field, something the Sherman cannot claim. -- Al
 
Your US Patriot card has just been revoked :D:D Bad mouthing our weapons like that- shame on you!! :p

You are going to have to revoke my US Patriot card as well. I researched the heck out of the Sherman in preparing to write my first novel. Here is a quote from the novel about the deficiencies of the Sherman as told by 82nd Airborne 1st Sgt. Rick Spinelli:

The British tank commander gave one of those dumb-looking limey salutes, and led his platoon of Shermans out into the field. As soon as the Shermans left the road, they started to bog down. They move fast on pavement, but their tracks are so thin they actually bear more weight per square inch than the much heavier German Panthers and Tigers. The tracks dug into the soft turf, throwing sod behind the tanks, which sank nearly to the top of the bogie wheels, moving forward at a snail’s pace.

The rest of the company weren’t in position to attack yet, so all we could do was open fire and hope that would warn the Brits off. Whether they heard us firing or not, the poor b@stards kept advancing across that field.
The 88’s and the Pak 40’s must have had the field pre-registered. They each fired once, and all six ‘Ronson’s’ brewed right the f_ck up. The high velocity shells would have penetrated the Sherman’s inadequate armor at 1,000 yards, much less 200. F_cking deathtraps. The platoon commander was blown from his cupola, landing with a sickening thud. The burning crewmen struggled to escape from the flaming hatches for a few moments, and then lay still. As the smoke wafted downwind, we gagged on the stench of burning human flesh. The entire tank platoon was wiped out. Thirty men burned in those metal coffins, without a single survivor.
 
Ok- but was that due to the advances in munitions at the time or the simple fact that the other weapons couldn't fire multiple types of ordinance? I do not know. :eek:
The other guns could not fire HE witch was a big problem in North Africa when they ran to anti tank guns :(
 
Here's another quote, this time from Aussie Captain Howard Woods, about the deficiencies and how easily these deficiencies could have been repaired:

“The 4th Light Horse was rotated to Ipswich, East Anglia to be rearmed and resupplied for the upcoming invasion. I dropped in as soon as I could get a pass.”

“How have things been going?”

“Not so good, Jack. We just got rearmed with M4A1 Shermans. We figured they would be worlds better than our old Crusaders, and believe me, Jack, they are, but they’re no match for what we’ll be up against.”

“That bad?”

“Bloody awful, mate. First of all, the bleedin’ Shermans are nine feet tall. They make a bloody big target, especially with the big star painted on the side of the turret as an aiming point. Next, the armor is thin, at most 91mm, and isn’t sloped, so not only will any of the guns on the German tanks and the German Anti-Tank guns easily penetrate the armor from 1,000 yards, we are also meat if a bloody infantryman sneaks up within 100 yards and hits us with a Panzerfaust or Panzershrek. Then there’s the fact that our tracks are so **** thin, we bog down the minute we leave the road, especially if the ground is wet. Last, but not least, all we’ve got is a low velocity 75mm gun. Bloody thing won’t penetrate the frontal armor on any of the larger German Tanks, even from point blank range.”

“Sounds pretty grim. Can anything be done?”

“There’s lots of things that could be done. The Brits have mounted a high velocity 17 pounder on the Sherman. You Yanks have a 90mm high-velocity gun that you mount on some of your tank destroyers built off a Sherman chassis. Both pack the punch we need.

Our mechanics tell us four inch track extenders will be made available once the winter comes to help deal with snow. If we had them now, it would at least help improve our off road performance somewhat.

I’ve seen several of the Jerry tanks with side skirts mounted on them. They’re light enough that they don’t interfere with the tank’s performance, but they’re effective in keeping the shaped charged fired from hand held antitank weapons from penetrating the tank. If half of our tanks had the bigger guns, and they all had side skirts and track extenders, we’d at least have a fighting chance.”

“So why haven’t they made the changes?”

When Colonel Cameron raised it with Lt. General Horrocks, he was told that official Allied doctrine was that tanks don’t engage tanks, tank destroyers engage tanks. Bloody pom.”

“Official Allied doctrine my @ss. That’ll work just fine, so long as somebody explains the rules to the f_ckin’ Nazis."
 
...The Sherman was a highly versatile weapon, with ease of manufacture, maintenance, cost, and especially the large numbers it was produced in. It was, however, an expedient design that was a generation behind the tanks of it's opponent in Europe.

I think you guys may be missing my point a tad- though this hits on it a bit. in fact, I would challenge, by dumb luck more than anything, the Sherman was a generation ahead of it's contenders for some of the reasons you mention above- those are qualities of a Main Battle Tank (MBT) vs the traditional thinking of the weight classes of tanks.

Yeah Brad, I sort of had Gary in mind for this thread but Dave is who I am really looking for as I think he can summarize/clarify my point better. We've discussed it's flaws quite often, which is fine. I am looking at the Sherman from an Order of Battle/tactics perspective.

The point of armor is to exploit gaps in the opponents line and drive a wedge for infantry to advance. Tank on tank shootouts is really the last thing you want to use armor for. The germans had it, with the early panzers but following the panther, they got too big and tried to outgun everyones tanks. The US knew it's tanks weren't going to stop the german armor so they attained air superiority and destroyed the panzers from the sky. Nothing wrong with that as that is still, in theory, how it's being done today- even though the abrams can pop a cap in any tank on the field.
 
Here's a bit more about the problems with the Sherman and how they could have been fixed:

“Sir!”, Howard said, again giving their palm-forward salute. “If you would direct your attention to those derelict tanks over there, we will begin by demonstrating some captured German weaponry.”

The rusting hulks of three derelict early production M4 Shermans had been towed to the end of a firing range. Their narrow tracks had cut deep swathes scarring the verdant loam, and they were sunk to their bellies in the sodden turf. Five hundred yards away, at the near end of the field, stood the tall, sinister, unmistakable profile of an 8.8 cm Flugzeugabwehr-Kanone “Flak” 41 dual purpose gun, commonly referred to by the Allies simply as the dread “eighty-eight”, captured by the Brits in Tunesia. Emplaced adjacent to it was its little cousin, the Pak 40 anti-tank gun, its shorter, angled shield juxtaposed with the eighty-eight’s taller, wider shield conjuring up images of a ferret standing next to a mastiff.

At Howard’s signal, the ordinance crew chief shouted “fire in the hole,” and brought down his arm. The crew turned their faces away, covering their ears, as the gunner pulled the lanyard. As the eighty-eight recoiled, its shell screamed down range at 3,280 feet per second, more than 1,400 feet per second faster than a round from the Sherman’s 75mm main gun.

Sparks shot thirty feet in the air as the shell hit the frontal armor of the Sherman, penetrating it like a knife through hot butter. Sharp eyed observers noticed a second burst of sparks a microsecond later as the shell exited through the rear armor of the Sherman and buried itself in the wet turf.
“Field Marshal Slim,” Howard continued, “the Bosche have mounted an eighty-eight on their Tiger tanks, and they can knock out our Shermans from 1,000 yards. The Panther is armed with a 7.5 cm long barreled main gun, which, with a muzzle velocity of 3070 feet per second and flat trajectory, has even greater penetrating power. Note the effect of a shell from a similar 7.5 cm Pak 40 antitank gun,” nodding to the ordinance crew.

The smaller, more easily disguised canon fired, its shell less dramatically but equally effectively penetrating the derelict Sherman’s inadequate armor.
“As you are aware, Sir, both the Tiger and the Panther have far more effective armor, both thicker, and in the case of the Panther, sloped, making them more difficult to penetrate than the Armor of a Sherman. Please watch the effect of a shell from a Sherman armored with a short-barreled M2 75mm 31.5 caliber main gun with a muzzle velocity of 1850 feet per second.”

Howard waived to a 4th Light Horse crew in a running M4A1 Sherman. The commander’s body jerked as he gently kicked the right shoulder of his driver, who turned the tank to the right, pulled it to the beginning of the range, and stopped. The tank commander gave the verbal command “load armor piercing”, the loader rammed a shell home, the turret turned slightly, and the main gun elevated. At the command “Fire!”, the entire tank rocked backwards with the recoil, and the shell, which unlike the far faster German shells, was visible to the naked eye, arched down range to the target. At a little more than 500 yards, the shell ricocheted off the frontal armor of the derelict Sherman with a resounding metallic clang.

“Our 75mm shells will fail to penetrate the frontal armor of a Tiger or a Panther at even point blank range. Field Marshal, your British ordinance experts have managed to mount a 17 pounder anti-tank gun in the turret of a Sherman tank, creating the Firefly variant,” Howard said, pointing towards the tanks of his platoon. The 17 pounder has a muzzle velocity of 3,950 feet per second, and can penetrate 135mm of armor at 1,800 meters. Sir, if you would again focus your attention down the range,” Howard said, signaling to one of the tanks in his platoon.

The modified Firefly, whose tracks were nearly twice as wide, and which was equipped with thin metal side skirts similar to those I had seen on the Panzer IV’s I had encountered on the Biazza ridge, started forward, turned, and came to a stop fully 250 feet short of the beginning of the range. Its main gun, twice as long as the main gun on the ordinary Sherman, fired, flames bursting out the front and the two holes in its unusual, globular, muzzle break as the tank rocked violently from the recoil. Its armor piercing shell ripped through the Sherman like a rock through a plate glass window, then tore through the rear, sparks flying forty feet in the air each time.

“The Yanks have a 90mm gun mounted in their new M36 ‘Slugger’ tank destroyers, with a muzzle velocity of 2,800 feet per second which, while not quite as good, with American industrial might, could be mounted on Shermans in far greater numbers.”

“Sir, right now there is one Firefly for every troop of ordinary Sherman tanks in commonwealth armored divisions. The Yanks completely lack a tank with adequate firepower. Field Marshal, if every other tank were armed with a gun adequate to engage the heavier German tanks we will be facing, a lot more of these men will get home to Oz.”

Field Marshal Slim, obviously impressed, nodded, and enquired, “but what about these other modifications, the wider tracks and the side skirts?”

“Sir, the Sherman weighs 37-1/2 tons, and its tracks exert a ground pressure of over 14 pounds per square inch. The earlier Shermans, many of which are still in service, are equipped with a Continental R975C1 radial engine with 400 hp, providing a power to weight ration of ten horsepower per ton. The M4A3 substitutes a 500HP Ford GAA V-8, which is lower, more powerful and less finicky than the Continental radial. This provides for excellent mobility on the road, but the narrow tracks bear more weight per square inch than the much heavier seventy-ton Tiger and forty-eight ton Panther tanks, so the Sherman has very poor off-road performance, often bogging down. These tanks are fitted with track extenders, called “duckbills” which add about four inches to the track’s width. The tanks still lack the off-road traction of the German tanks, but at least with the track extenders there is some improvement."
 
And a bit more:

"Finally, the sideskirts. For that sir, we need to perform another demonstration,” Howard said, waiving to a group of Aussies, two carrying what looked like baseball bats and the other four each servicing an oversized bazooka mounted with a shield. One of the men carrying the baseball-bat like Panzerfaust and one Panzershrek team double timed it down the range towards the derelict Shermans, the other leisurely approached the closer modified Firefly Shermans.

As the second teams stood, leaning on their weapons, the first teams approached the ruined Shermans down range. The toy soldier-sized Panzershreck team stopped about 100 yards from one of the scrapped Shermans, the man carrying the weapon kneeled down, while the loader stood behind him, servicing the weapon. The loader tapped him on the shoulder, then stepped safely to the side, as the kneeling figure took aim and fired. The projectile pierced the Sherman’s flank, another imaginary tank crew burning in my mind’s eye.

Next, the man with the Panzerfaust advanced to about thirty yards from the derelict tanks, pointed the weapon and fired. Its projectile also easily penetrated, and another imaginary tank crew bit the dust.

Taking the baseball bat shaped weapon from the man standing close by the Firefly Shermans, Howard said, “Sir, this is the Panzerfaust, the single most dangerous weapon an Allied tanker is going to face. Several variants exist, the Panzerfaust 30, 60, 100 and 150. They all have the same penetration capability of 200mm of armor at 90 degrees, the difference being their effective range. The Panzerfaust 30 has an effective range of 30 meters, while the Panzerfaust 60 is effective up to 60 meters. The 100 and 150 versions are effective up to 100 and 150 meters respectively.

The Panzerfaust fires a projectile which is essentially a small rocket with stabilizer fins containing a shaped charge. The shaped charge works by focusing the explosive energy of the warhead into a jet stream. The gases expelled impact the target at a speed of over 26,000 feet per second, with a force in excess of 10 million kg per square cm. For maximum effectiveness, the shaped charge has to be detonated at an optimum distance to the target; too close and the gases have not yet formed, too far and the molten gas loses its energy as it is dispersed with distance.

That’s where these side skirts come in. Side skirts sufficient to deflect the high velocity artillery shells fired from the eighty-eight and 7.5 cm canons we demonstrated earlier would weigh far too much, crippling the Sherman’s already suspect off-road performance. These side skirts, however, made from thin, light materials, have virtually no adverse effects on the tank’s performance. By making the shaped charges detonate further from the tank’s armor, however, they render the shaped charges fired from the Panzerfaust and the Panzershreks impotent.” Howard tossed the Panzerfaust back to the infantryman and called out, “okay boys, let ‘em have it.”

“There are men and that tank, Captain,” Slim pointed out sternly.

“Yes, sir, just like when we face Jerry,” Howard said, nodding to the man with the Panzerfaust, then trotting over to mount the tank and take his place in the cupola.

Once Howard closed the hatch, and the tank was completely buttoned down, the private with the Panzerfaust positioned himself thirty yards away and fired.

Slim, flinching when the projectile struck the side skirt, ran towards the tank, only stopping when the commander’s hatch opened and Howard’s smiling face poked through.

“Safe as houses, Sir. As you can see, the molten gases poked a nasty hole through the thin metal of the side skirt, but the projectile went off well outside its optimum range. The burning gases and metal ruined me paint finish, but didn’t penetrate the armor at all.

It took my mechanics about sixteen man hours to rig up and mount each set of side skirts. We used thin scrap cut from the thin top decks of knocked out or mechanically disabled tanks. Sir, if you gave the order, by the end of the spring, every tank in the division could be equipped with side skirts and track extenders, and every second tank could be a Firefly. It would mean the difference between living and dying for more than half of these men.”
 
The other guns could not fire HE witch was a big problem in North Africa when they ran to anti tank guns :(

Cheers- I see now mate. That sort of concept is alien to me as I am better versed with more modern weapons systems which can pretty much fire multiple types of munitions. That is a good point, again, one which helps support my posiiton of the Sherman as the worlds first MBT :) Multiple munitions capabilities are trademarks of MBTs.
 
Louis- don't rely on the statements of a grunt topkick to allow you to form an opinion on the shermie :p
 
I sense that Gary may not agree with you Louis :D

In the past, when Gary and I had disagreements, he had a bunch of technical information that I lacked. That's why I did my research. Gary may not agree with my conclusions, but he will be hard pressed to find any of the facts I cite in support of my conclusions to be inaccurate.
 
Louis- don't rely on the statements of a grunt topkick to allow you to form an opinion on the shermie :p

I didn't Chris. I quoted from a real combat veteran for effect in my novel, but all of the information provided came from detailed research.
 
Anyone read Belton Cooper's book, "Death Traps"? He was in tank recovery and repair with the US Army in Europe. Guess what the title refers to. -- Al
 
Anyone read Belton Cooper's book, "Death Traps"? He was in tank recovery and repair with the US Army in Europe. Guess what the title refers to. -- Al

isn't he credited with the hedgerow cutters? the name is familiar.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top