Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Best Commanders Tank W Europe : Jan - Nov 44.

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Best Commanders Tank W Europe : Jan - Nov 44.

    Best Commanders Tank W Europe Jan - Nov 1944

    Which tank do you believe a general would prefer to use?

    Tiger 1


    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...Tiger_I).2.jpg

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_I

    Tiger 2


    http://s.hswstatic.com/gif/panzerkam...tiger-ii-1.jpg

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_II

    Pz IVH


    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...Kfz161-1-1.jpg

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzer_IV

    Panther G


    http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww...t_am_rhein.jpg

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panther_tank

    Sherman


    http://wiki.gcdn.co/images/thumb/1/1...an_Firefly.jpg

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M4_Sherman

    Cromwell/Challenger


    http://ww2photo.se/tanks/gb/crus/chall/08556.jpg

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cromwell_tank
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cruise...III_Challenger

    Churchill


    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...ocodile_01.jpg

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Churchill_tank
    55
    Tiger 1
    10.91%
    6
    Tiger 2
    1.82%
    1
    Panzer IV
    3.64%
    2
    Panther G
    16.36%
    9
    Sherman
    49.09%
    27
    Cromwell/Challenger
    9.09%
    5
    Churchill
    5.45%
    3
    Other
    3.64%
    2
    How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: http://grist.org/series/skeptics/
    Global Warming & Climate Change Myths: https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

  • #2
    I did nominate the IS-2 Stalin tank, until I remembered the "W Europe " proviso.Careless !!!!
    So I'll opt for the Sherman Firefly instead. Please change.
    Last edited by BELGRAVE; 14 Nov 16, 06:34.
    "I dogmatise and am contradicted, and in this conflict of opinions and sentiments I find delight".
    Samuel Johnson.

    Comment


    • #3
      A toss up between the Panther and Sherman. Went with the Sherman because of the logistics.
      My worst jump story:
      My 13th jump was on the 13th day of the month, aircraft number 013.
      As recorded on my DA Form 1307 Individual Jump Log.
      No lie.

      ~
      "Everything looks all right. Have a good jump, eh."
      -2 Commando Jumpmaster

      Comment


      • #4
        I'll take a bit more time to think on this one but my three top candidates are Sherman, Cromwell and Churchill; not necessarily in order of preference. My pick will be one of those three.
        Last edited by panther3485; 14 Nov 16, 09:06.
        "England expects that every man will do his duty!" (English crew members had better get ready for a tough fight against the combined French and Spanish fleets because that's what England expects! However, Scotland, Wales and Ireland appear to expect nothing so the Scottish, Welsh and Irish crew members can relax below decks if they like!)

        Comment


        • #5
          Panther G. Fast, well armored, and a match for almost anything it meets.

          Funny - why aren't Soviet tanks listed as well in this section? They were allied tanks going against the German armor.
          Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
            Panther G. Fast, well armored, and a match for almost anything it meets.

            The Panther is simply not reliable enough as a commanders tank.

            https://tankandafvnews.com/2015/02/0...r-reliability/

            Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
            Funny - why aren't Soviet tanks listed as well in this section? They were allied tanks going against the German armor.
            The poll is about W Europe. Next poll will simply be Europe Dec 44-May 45, which will include Soviet tanks as options.
            How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: http://grist.org/series/skeptics/
            Global Warming & Climate Change Myths: https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

            Comment


            • #7
              For the period of Cobra and The Great Swan, you would need a reliable medium/cruiser. That leaves two real options, the A27/A30 and the M4. The British tanks proved slightly more reliable than the Sherman, so would choose them in this case. However, for most of this period, the fighting is a hard slog, and with the lives of troops becoming more important as losses mount, you would need a tank as reliable as a Sherman with greater survivability.

              That leaves one choice, the Churchill. The fact it comes with a whole load of specialist versions simply confirms this choice is probably correct.
              How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: http://grist.org/series/skeptics/
              Global Warming & Climate Change Myths: https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

              Comment


              • #8
                From a commander's POV, nothing comes close to the Sherman. The combination of reliability, an absolute necessity for the rapid advances made, availability in numbers, and flexibility of the main gun makes it the vehicle to have. In reliability and serviceability, nothing else comes close. You could swap out an engine or transmission in a Sherman in a day. No other tank comes close to that. The track system often lasted longer than the tank itself. A Sherman could have driven from Normandy to Berlin on a single set of tracks. Reliable and easy to maintain are critical qualities that the Sherman excels in.

                It was also eminently upgradable. The 76mm, 17 pdr, 105mm howitzer, several different rocket launchers, you-name-it could be installed on in the turret and add ons like bulldozer blades, mass rocket launchers, as a command post / observation post vehicle, and lots of other variants. It had the flexibility to do just about any job a tank was needed for.

                The Sherman was chosen even by the British for most engineering specialist tanks right behind the Chruchill... Flail, beach recovery, bridge layer, flamethrower, demolition (with 7.2" rocket launcher), etc. All the same stuff as the AVRE.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post
                  The Panther is simply not reliable enough as a commanders tank.

                  https://tankandafvnews.com/2015/02/0...r-reliability/



                  The poll is about W Europe. Next poll will simply be Europe Dec 44-May 45, which will include Soviet tanks as options.
                  I disagree about the reliability factor. I feel that the Panther was all around a better tank than, for example, the Sherman. It was at least the equivalent of the T-34. Had Germany/Hitler been wise enough to stop at the Panther, it could have been a devastating weapon, but so much money and effort was drained by the heavy tank program which turned out to be almost useless.

                  Anyway, that was my vote this time. The PzkIV was getting long in the tooth by this time, and not standing up well to newer tanks being fielded.
                  Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Down to the bone this one but I eventually went with the Panther over the Sherman.
                    In this time frame most of the Panthers automotive problems had been ironed out, the final drive was still problematic but ultimately I think that a tank dying of stripping its drive was considerably less dangerous to my precious crews than one dying of suddenly bursting into flames and incinerating them.
                    There was also the added bonus of it being a much better armed,armoured and mobile vehicle of course.
                    The Panther tank coupled with the plentiful allied logistics tail must be the tank commanders choice.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                      From a commander's POV, nothing comes close to the Sherman. The combination of reliability, an absolute necessity for the rapid advances made, availability in numbers, and flexibility of the main gun makes it the vehicle to have. In reliability and serviceability, nothing else comes close. You could swap out an engine or transmission in a Sherman in a day. No other tank comes close to that. The track system often lasted longer than the tank itself. A Sherman could have driven from Normandy to Berlin on a single set of tracks. Reliable and easy to maintain are critical qualities that the Sherman excels in.

                      It was also eminently upgradable. The 76mm, 17 pdr, 105mm howitzer, several different rocket launchers, you-name-it could be installed on in the turret and add ons like bulldozer blades, mass rocket launchers, as a command post / observation post vehicle, and lots of other variants. It had the flexibility to do just about any job a tank was needed for.

                      The Sherman was chosen even by the British for most engineering specialist tanks right behind the Chruchill... Flail, beach recovery, bridge layer, flamethrower, demolition (with 7.2" rocket launcher), etc. All the same stuff as the AVRE.
                      Oh come on TA,you can't be claiming that the M4's gun was a plus point can you?
                      By this point in the war every tank was armed with at least a 75mm gun capable of lobbing effective HE except they could also fire effective AP too.
                      The M4 was indeed well built and reliable but what point is there in building a tank so reliable that it could be expected to drive to Berlin without any major problem when the simple bald truth is that it would be killed within weeks of issue?
                      I have heard of a few M4's that survived the 10 month European campaign but not many,not many at all, so to say it could drive to Berlin while true is hardly indicative of its true worth on the battlefield.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                        From a commander's POV, nothing comes close to the Sherman.
                        An interesting opinion .

                        Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                        The combination of reliability, an absolute necessity for the rapid advances made,
                        Well that's not true. Churchills were as reliable, Cromwells more so during this period.

                        Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                        availability in numbers,
                        Irrelevant for this poll. Numbers reflect as much about a countries economic capacity as to the tank itself. That said, the US would not have mass produced a substandard tank, they simply produced the most capable tank their shipping could easily handle.
                        Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                        and flexibility of the main gun makes it the vehicle to have.
                        Both tanks had a similar 75mm MV dual purpose weapon at this time as their main armament. The US 76mm M1 gun was probably a better AT weapon at longer ranges than the 6pdr, but the latter had plentiful APDS making it equal to the Firefly at medium and short ranges.

                        Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                        In reliability and serviceability, nothing else comes close. You could swap out an engine or transmission in a Sherman in a day. No other tank comes close to that. The track system often lasted longer than the tank itself. A Sherman could have driven from Normandy to Berlin on a single set of tracks. Reliable and easy to maintain are critical qualities that the Sherman excels in.
                        Except in British service, where Churchills had equal, and Cromwells had superior reliability to Shermans. Cromwell servicing was every 250 miles maximum, many elements requiring 500 miles or even less. It should be noted that reliability topped British requirements in a tank design from at least 1943, and probably earlier.

                        Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                        It was also eminently upgradable. The 76mm, 17 pdr, 105mm howitzer, several different rocket launchers, you-name-it could be installed on in the turret and add ons like bulldozer blades, mass rocket launchers, as a command post / observation post vehicle, and lots of other variants. It had the flexibility to do just about any job a tank was needed for.
                        Upgradable is irrelevant. We are looking at specific time periods and campaigns. As for weapons, the Sherman never really had a package better than the A27/A30. The Sherman never had a better all round set of weapons comparred to the Churchill, except for the Firefly for AT duties. The Churchill wins against against soft targets with its AVRE and Crocodile variants.

                        Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                        The Sherman was chosen even by the British for most engineering specialist tanks right behind the Chruchill... Flail, beach recovery, bridge layer, flamethrower, demolition (with 7.2" rocket launcher), etc. All the same stuff as the AVRE.
                        Sherman flail tanks were extremely important, but to compare the Sherman overall as comparable with the Churchill as a truly effective battlefield afv would be wrong. US manufacturing capacity meant Shermans were available for such roles, but not necessarily the best choice.

                        The Sherman deserves to be considered one of the very best tanks of WW2. However, by this time period, it was nearly best by its sell by date. The same could be said of the Churchill, but I don't recall any Sherman units wanting to keep their tanks when they could be upgraded with something their generals considered more appropriate.

                        Churchill probably wins against the Sherman, given the nature of the campaign.
                        Last edited by Nick the Noodle; 14 Nov 16, 15:25.
                        How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: http://grist.org/series/skeptics/
                        Global Warming & Climate Change Myths: https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by flash View Post
                          Down to the bone this one but I eventually went with the Panther over the Sherman.
                          In this time frame most of the Panthers automotive problems had been ironed out, the final drive was still problematic but ultimately I think that a tank dying of stripping its drive was considerably less dangerous to my precious crews than one dying of suddenly bursting into flames and incinerating them.
                          There was also the added bonus of it being a much better armed,armoured and mobile vehicle of course.
                          The Panther tank coupled with the plentiful allied logistics tail must be the tank commanders choice.
                          Plentiful logistics does not counter the problems this tank has. The fault lies in the fact that it was too heavy for a medium at the time, and technology was not quite yet there. If the US cannot create a reliable 45 ton medium in 1945, there is no way the Nazi's can do so in 43 or even 45.
                          How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: http://grist.org/series/skeptics/
                          Global Warming & Climate Change Myths: https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Regarding tank design, the Panther proves that an afv is only as strong as its weakest element.

                            This is why tanks such as the Sherman, T-34 and Panzer IV tend to top best tanks of WW2, and with good reason.
                            How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: http://grist.org/series/skeptics/
                            Global Warming & Climate Change Myths: https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I like the Tiger I as a commander's tank.

                              Pruitt
                              Pruitt, you are truly an expert! Kelt06

                              Have you been struck by the jawbone of an ASS lately?

                              by Khepesh "This is the logic of Pruitt"

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X