|
|
Forums - Research / WW2 |
This WW2 forum is intended for asking and discussing reference or historical related issues pertaining to WW2 (1939-1945) subjects. |
| Topics | 3259 |
| Messages | 14492 |
|
|
| Subject: | Re: Whats so good about the Sherman? |  |
| Date: | Mar 21, 2008 |
| From: | Georg Eyerman | |
Paul,
From a tactical/technical standpoint the Sherman was the ultimate expression of the doctrine of the U.S. Army in 1940-41. Tanks were exploitation weapons (hence the need for a tank destroyer force) and Sherman's robust and simple design made it quite capable of eating up the enemy once the front line was broken through (like the drive across France and in Germany). It had a mature drive-train, something that most other wartime designs couldn't claim, thanks to its predecessor, the M-3 Lee. The simplicity and standardization of the design allowed 50,000+ to be built (and that's just gun tanks alone!) which is roughly HALF of the ENTIRE AFV production of Nazi Germany from 1934-1945.
Yes, the Sherman's armor was too thin in 1944, but was respectable in 1942 when arrived in Africa. Also, remember that the average American vehicle had traveled 5000 miles on average before it fired it's first shot. They had to transported on trains and ships to get to the war zone. Every pound and inch mattered with supply lines that long. Also, the 75mm gun on the Sherman was great for soft targets, which was the primary target most tanks face. It's HE round was great and would definitely ruin your day if you were caught in the blast radius.
The Sherman wasn't sexy and it wasn't sleek. It was a workman's tank and did yeoman's service through the war and well beyond. There were 4 different engines that were used and three different guns, not to mention 4 different hulls and about a million subtle variations on this theme. The Sherman has no problem standing on the pantheon with the only other tank of WW2 that can make claims like this: the T-34. Hope that helps.
Regards,
Georg |
| |
|
|
 | Whats so good about the Sherman? - Paul Ramsden - Mar 21, 2008 |
| . . . Re: Whats so good about the Sherman? - Gazza Hollett - Mar 21, 2008 |
| . . . Re: Whats so good about the Sherman? - Otto Huuskonen - Mar 21, 2008 |
| . . . Re: Whats so good about the Sherman? - Georg Eyerman - Mar 21, 2008 |
| . . . . . . Re: Whats so good about the Sherman? - Fred Schwarz - Mar 21, 2008 |
| . . . "Pssst! Paul,...come closer.... - mike foncannon - Mar 21, 2008 |
| . . . Re: Whats so good about the Sherman? - Dan - Mar 21, 2008 |
| . . . It all depends on how you look at it. - Hans Haase - Mar 21, 2008 |
| . . . Re: Whats so good about the Sherman? - tom deimling - Mar 21, 2008 |
| . . . Re: Whats so good about the Sherman? - Gary Cooper - Mar 21, 2008 |
| . . . "fairly rubbish" - Roy Chow - Mar 21, 2008 |
| . . . I read an article several years back where a Panzer General was interviewed - Steve Kubik - Mar 21, 2008 |
| . . . Sheer Numbers. n/t - Jim Johnson - Mar 21, 2008 |
| . . . "Death Traps" - J.Giglio - Mar 21, 2008 |
| . . . . . . Re: "Death Traps" - Fred Schwarz - Mar 22, 2008 |
| . . . Re: Whats so good about the Sherman? - Rob Feehan - Mar 21, 2008 |
| . . . . . . Re: Whats so good about the Sherman? - Johannes Allert - Mar 22, 2008 |
| . . . . . . . . . Re: Whats so good about the Sherman? - Roy Chow - Mar 22, 2008 |
| . . . . . . . . . Re: Whats so good about the Sherman? - Fred Schwarz - Mar 22, 2008 |
| . . . . . . . . . . . . Re: Whats so good about the Sherman? - Brian Hanley - Mar 22, 2008 |
| . . . Relatively silly topic of discussion - Glenn Gerson - Mar 22, 2008 |
| . . . . . . Re: Relatively silly topic of discussion - Brian Hanley - Mar 23, 2008 |
| . . . Re: Whats so good about the Sherman? - Mike Spivey - Mar 23, 2008 |
| . . . Discussed before - Martin Dogger - Mar 23, 2008 |
| . . . . . . Re: Discussed before - Rob Feehan - Mar 23, 2008 |
| . . . . . . . . . Re: Discussed before - Dan - Mar 23, 2008 |
| . . . . . . . . . Re: Discussed before - Mike Spivey - Mar 23, 2008 |
| . . . Re: Whats so good about the Sherman? - rob galassi - Mar 24, 2008 |
| . . . Shermanaholic - Historical Perspective - James Wechsler - Mar 24, 2008 |
| . . . Shermanaholic - Modeler's Perspective - James Wechsler - Mar 24, 2008 |
| . . . . . . Re: Shermanaholic - Modeler's Perspective - Edward Hall - Mar 24, 2008 |
| . . . . . . . . . Soooooo....... was it any good then? - Dave Williams - Mar 24, 2008 |
| . . . . . . Centurion - Paul A. Owen - Mar 24, 2008 |
| . . . . . . . . . Re: Centurion - James Wechsler - Mar 24, 2008 |
| . . . As you said... - Paul A. Owen - Mar 24, 2008 |
|
|
