Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Sherman in the Eastern Front, did it matter?

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

  • The Sherman in the Eastern Front, did it matter?

    Just a simple poll on the Sherman and its effect, if any, on the Eastern Front.
    You can just about relate this to anything, from comparing the Sherman to the T-34 to what the Russian crews thought about them and as to how they were deployed. Feel free to take this wherever you want to go, within reason though......

    Cheers

    Tom
    31
    It did'nt change a thing!
    19.35%
    6
    It did change something.......
    22.58%
    7
    It was better than nothing!!
    48.39%
    15
    I have no idea????
    0.00%
    0
    It does'nt matter to me in the least.
    3.23%
    1
    I'm just checkin' out the poll results is all.
    6.45%
    2

  • #2
    It was better than nothing.

    Mass scale armored attacks could make it's weight better felt in large numbers. And the Sherman was about in the same class as the T-34/76-41
    as in speed and armament. The T34 could function in extreme enviroments,
    did not had the problem getting started as the German Mark 3+4. Also could use diffrent sort's of fuel. It was even said, that it could run on Vodka.
    I'm not sure how the Sherman could compare to this feat, probably offered more personal comfort to the crews, I do not know.

    Comment


    • #3
      Maybe the polish miniseries:
      "4 Tankmen & a Dog" (Pancerni I Pies)
      could give you some answers. You know, I'm the video Dude from Canada.
      They are driving the T34's from 1944 - 1945, some in their Armored Division had Shermans and Valentines.

      Comment


      • #4
        I have heard the logistics organization that took the Sherman tanks from the ports or Persian railhead appreciated the leather covered seat pads very much. They invariablly stripped these to use for glove leather. At least thats the story.

        Comment


        • #5
          Haha! I remember "4 Tankmen & a Dog"! Wow. There is a book by HSU recepient, Col. Yuri Loza called "Commanding the Red Army's Sherman Tanks", maybe check it out...I haven't read it but I have his other book "Fighting For The Soviet Motherland" although I didn't finish it because the translation is very dry and it's mainly all just short recollections, some 2nd and 3rd hand, but not bad overall.

          Comment


          • #6
            Extraction from the official report of the 1st Gds. Mechanised Corps commander, who had Shermans in use.
            Jan 1945, TsAMO archive
            ************
            ...Been fast tanks M4-A2 had good indices during marches along the roads and plain landscape.
            There were isolated instances of breakages. At the same time those tanks showed the next serious disadvanatages:

            a) Can go at speed not more than 5-10 km and at high speed they has large skidding, especially tanks with mettallic tracks;

            b) Moving at speed greater than 10km with turning in any direction has trend to turnover

            c) On a small slopes can't move without additional towing facilities, e.g. prime-movers.

            d) A large turning radius is a character of the tank design what redices tank manoeuvrability on battlefield;

            e) It has large specific pressure on the tracks that reduces passibility of tanks...

            Following this experience it's reasonable to supply them with rubber tracks in any
            season having reserve spur for those and equip with this tank model those units, which operatees at medium-cross-country
            ******************

            Regards
            Alex
            If you fire a rifle at the past, the future will fire a cannon at you.....

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by amvas View Post
              Extraction from the official report of the 1st Gds. Mechanised Corps commander, who had Shermans in use.
              Jan 1945, TsAMO archive
              ************
              ...Been fast tanks M4-A2 had good indices during marches along the roads and plain landscape.
              There were isolated instances of breakages. At the same time those tanks showed the next serious disadvanatages:

              a) Can go at speed not more than 5-10 km and at high speed they has large skidding, especially tanks with mettallic tracks;

              b) Moving at speed greater than 10km with turning in any direction has trend to turnover

              c) On a small slopes can't move without additional towing facilities, e.g. prime-movers.

              d) A large turning radius is a character of the tank design what redices tank manoeuvrability on battlefield;

              e) It has large specific pressure on the tracks that reduces passibility of tanks...

              Following this experience it's reasonable to supply them with rubber tracks in any
              season having reserve spur for those and equip with this tank model those units, which operatees at medium-cross-country
              ******************

              Regards
              Alex
              Alex:

              Great information, kak obyichna. I read somewhere that a German POW told his US interrogator that "One German tank is equal to five American tanks. Unfortunately, you always seemed to have six tanks around." I think the Sherman is the classic example of "quantity has a quality all its own."

              It's too bad the US didn't latch onto the T-34 design early in the war; US production capacity and the Soviet tank design would have been a formidable combination in 1942.

              Regards,
              Jon
              "There are only two professions in the world in which the amateur excels the professional. One, military strategy, and, two, prostitution."
              -- Maj. Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower

              (Avatar: Commodore Edwin Ward Moore, Republic of Texas Navy)

              Comment


              • #8
                Very good info Alex, but a question for ya...

                If the was a "factor" in the Sherman being shipped to the Eastern front, all 3,664 of them. Might it be that an effect might be seen in the 1943, 1944 time period, rather than in 1945? But this might be the regards of the tank from when it first appeared on the battlefield, or something else.....

                Next, I have heard that the 76mm Sherman made a showing over there as well, would you, or anyone else know some of those figures and dates by chance?

                And finally, for now, radios, would'nt that make a big impact on having more tanks in the 43-44 time when there were more send and reciever radios in certain Tankovy Batalons?

                Cheers, food for thought, and discussion!!

                Tom

                Comment


                • #9
                  It's too bad the US didn't latch onto the T-34 design early in the war; US production capacity and the Soviet tank design would have been a formidable combination in 1942.
                  Funny you mention that, I have gamed a "What If" campaign with Canada buying Russian Tank technology instead of US. Basically having T-34's gunned with CW/US guns and Western Optics and Radios. A RAM MkI carrying a 6pdr makes for a handy early war Panzer Killer, the excellent armour allowing for the "RAM MKI" to close to make the 6pdr quite effective. Need I tell you how the MkIII with the 17pdr fared!?.

                  Sorry to jump topic how back to our previously scheduled thread.
                  ..............
                  Eternal War(gaming) Armoured Struggle Car Bob

                  History does not record anywhere at any time a religion that has any rational basis.
                  Lazarus Long

                  Draw the blinds on yesterday and it's all so much scarier....
                  David Bowie

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Jon Jordan View Post

                    It's too bad the US didn't latch onto the T-34 design early in the war; US production capacity and the Soviet tank design would have been a formidable combination in 1942.

                    Regards,
                    Jon
                    There were a T34 & KV sent to the US sometime in 1942, or maybe early 1943. I've been ransacking my shelves here for a copy of a magazine artical on that event, & cant find it. It had extracts from the report of the US ordinance engineers who examined it.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      A Few Thousand Tanks

                      A few thousand tanks (although inferior) definately helped, but everything the Soviet Union could get helped them to stem the fascist invasion. Also the primary effort against the fascist invaders was always the soviet force.Allied support was negligable in comparison. I'm sure the tanks offered better protection to some,as well as causing more casualties, but it was ultimately the superiority of the red forces and sacrifice of the soviet people that won it. That and the corruption of fascism in general.
                      The mind of man knows no employment more worthy of its powers than the quest of
                      righteousness in human affairs; no goal of its labours that is superior to the discovery of the good in the guidance of life.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Thanks for joining in!!

                        Interesting thoughts, I would say that by mid 1944 and on through 1945, they might not have needed them as much, although they had some big losses of their T-34 types, so filling some holes with ready made medium tanks might be appreciated by a Russian tanker that might otherwise have been on "foot" patrol.......

                        Cheers, welcome to the ACG site and this forum, enjoy your time here!!

                        TRDG

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I don't understand this topic , how couldn't they help? Even 1 soldier , even 1 single soldier more means bigger firepower, we are talking about thousands of tanks here..

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            There were a T34 & KV sent to the US sometime in 1942, or maybe early 1943. I've been ransacking my shelves here for a copy of a magazine artical on that event, & cant find it. It had extracts from the report of the US ordinance engineers who examined it.

                            I've read the T-34 one on battlefield.ru. It wasn't very long and I think the consensus was that the tank was "good" and that's about it. But I don't remember a whole lot about it.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by 5thGuards View Post
                              I don't understand this topic , how couldn't they help? Even 1 soldier , even 1 single soldier more means bigger firepower, we are talking about thousands of tanks here..
                              I must say 5th Guards that you can not be wrong no matter what the Russian Tankers thought of them, MORE Firepower is always good as long as you have it. Period. I voted accordingly.
                              Eternal War(gaming) Armoured Struggle Car Bob

                              History does not record anywhere at any time a religion that has any rational basis.
                              Lazarus Long

                              Draw the blinds on yesterday and it's all so much scarier....
                              David Bowie

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X