Jump to content


Photo

What The Sherman Could Have Been

Proposed WW2 and after mods

  • Please log in to reply
87 replies to this topic

#81 Harold Jones

Harold Jones

    Shaken but not deterred...

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,545 posts

Posted 21 March 2020 - 2116 PM

I think the foot soldiers would disagree with that.

I recall a German friend telling me that his WW2 veteran father told him that he saw more American tanks during the war than German ones.


  • 0

#82 seahawk

seahawk

    military loving leftist peace monkey

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,049 posts

Posted 22 March 2020 - 0234 AM

 

I think the foot soldiers would disagree with that.

I recall a German friend telling me that his WW2 veteran father told him that he saw more American tanks during the war than German ones.

 

That is the strategic aspect. Sure a unit of small gun Shermans is in deep shit when they meet a force of German big cats, but the infantry is in much less deep shit if they have small gun Shermans around and meet a German machine gun nest and infantry line. Less US tanks means more Hürtgen forrest fights.


  • 0

#83 Markus Becker

Markus Becker

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,255 posts

Posted 22 March 2020 - 0725 AM


I think the foot soldiers would disagree with that.

I recall a German friend telling me that his WW2 veteran father told him that he saw more American tanks during the war than German ones.

Of course. The German ones were all hiding from allied fighter bombers and spotter planes. :)

Jokes aside, you made so awfully many of them. More of the stopgap Lee/Grants were made than Panthers.
  • 0

#84 Adam_S

Adam_S

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,434 posts

Posted 23 March 2020 - 0619 AM

 

They were not satisfied with the solution of 76mm in the original turret, but post war such conversions served in Europe, India and few more places pretty well. So was it a case of "perfect is worst enemy of good enough" or something else?


My money is on that.

 

Given that the majority of the opposition the Sherman faced were infantry, antitank guns, panzer IVs and Stugs, would an all 76mm equipped force actually have been better than what the Allies had?


  • 0

#85 shep854

shep854

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,602 posts

Posted 23 March 2020 - 2123 PM

ISTR reading that the infantry preferred 75mm Shermans because the HE was considered more effective than the 76mm


  • 0

#86 Markus Becker

Markus Becker

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,255 posts

Posted 24 March 2020 - 0709 AM

They were not satisfied with the solution of 76mm in the original turret, but post war such conversions served in Europe, India and few more places pretty well. So was it a case of "perfect is worst enemy of good enough" or something else?

My money is on that.
Given that the majority of the opposition the Sherman faced were infantry, antitank guns, panzer IVs and Stugs, would an all 76mm equipped force actually have been better than what the Allies had?

Difficult to say, on the one hand the 75 had the more powerful HE shell, on the other the 76 had a not insignificant range and accuracy advantage. So much that M10 were used to support M4.

Edited by Markus Becker, 24 March 2020 - 0711 AM.

  • 0

#87 JWB

JWB

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 7,898 posts

Posted 24 March 2020 - 1133 AM

 

 

They were not satisfied with the solution of 76mm in the original turret, but post war such conversions served in Europe, India and few more places pretty well. So was it a case of "perfect is worst enemy of good enough" or something else?


My money is on that.

 

Given that the majority of the opposition the Sherman faced were infantry, antitank guns, panzer IVs and Stugs, would an all 76mm equipped force actually have been better than what the Allies had?

 

Absolutely not. 


  • 0

#88 Rich

Rich

    intellectual bully ilk

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,658 posts

Posted 24 March 2020 - 1248 PM

 

 

 

They were not satisfied with the solution of 76mm in the original turret, but post war such conversions served in Europe, India and few more places pretty well. So was it a case of "perfect is worst enemy of good enough" or something else?


My money is on that.

 

Given that the majority of the opposition the Sherman faced were infantry, antitank guns, panzer IVs and Stugs, would an all 76mm equipped force actually have been better than what the Allies had?

 

Absolutely not. 

 

That was not the opinion of 12th Army Group and the ETOUSA AFV&W Section. The overall shortage of medium tanks meant the theater delayed requesting the elimination of 75mm-armed medium tank shipments until 29 January 1945, the obsolescence of the 75mm-armed medium tank was recognized much earlier. In fact, on 12 May 1944, Eisenhower, acting on the recommendation of the AFV&W Section, recommended the War Department cease production of all 75mm and 76mm-armed medium tanks in 1945 in favor of 90mm and 105mm-armed medium tanks.


  • 0