Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rnd 4 - M4 Sherman (USA) vs Centurion (Britain)

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

  • Originally posted by JBark View Post
    What would I know better? That a tank with a crew blind to the field of combat is a good thing? That an engine that overheats after 30 minutes is good engineering? That a fragile final drive is not important?
    I may have never been inside the tank but I have seen MANY pictures of broken down Panthers which their crews abandoned. I'm not formally educated in military science but I do know that when tanks break down and are no longer part of the war it subtracts from a units combat effectiveness.
    This should be obvious. I think you should know better.
    Better is often more complicated to maintain, but it's record speaks volumes.

    Comment


    • I voted Yvonne De Carlo

      Comment


      • Originally posted by 101combatvet View Post
        Better is often more complicated to maintain, but it's record speaks volumes.
        I don't see you making a case for "better" other than to say you've been in one (I''m guessing it wasn't in combat while trying to fight for survival.) Hell, I don't see you making any case at all, not even one counter to the faults I've mentioned. It was more complicated because it was engineered badly, thus maintenance was more time consuming. This makes little sense for a combat vehicle that needs to be in the field, not in a maintenance yard or on a train because it is too fragile to move on its own power. You know that Guderian reported to his superiors in early 1945 that the crews have no confidence in the Panther because of its mechanical shortcomings (Jentz- Panther; Germany's Quest for yadda yadda, yadda.)

        Tell me about its record. Don't forget to include those engagements with 75mm toting Shermans where Panthers came out on the losing end.
        John

        Play La Marseillaise. Play it!

        Comment


        • Originally posted by JBark View Post
          I don't see you making a case for "better" other than to say you've been in one (I''m guessing it wasn't in combat while trying to fight for survival.) Hell, I don't see you making any case at all, not even one counter to the faults I've mentioned. It was more complicated because it was engineered badly, thus maintenance was more time consuming. This makes little sense for a combat vehicle that needs to be in the field, not in a maintenance yard or on a train because it is too fragile to move on its own power. You know that Guderian reported to his superiors in early 1945 that the crews have no confidence in the Panther because of its mechanical shortcomings (Jentz- Panther; Germany's Quest for yadda yadda, yadda.)

          Tell me about its record. Don't forget to include those engagements with 75mm toting Shermans where Panthers came out on the losing end.
          Yeah, I know the T-34 won the war. Just don't forget that German AFVs achieved a kill ratio of better than three to one against T-34s in direct combat.

          Comment


          • But we should compare such ratios to other Soviet AFV. Then the importance becomes more obvious

            posted from mobile
            One death is a tragedy; one million is a statistic.

            Comment

            Latest Topics

            Collapse

            Working...
            X