Zardnaar
Legend
A popular geek/internet thing.
Popular history around tank warfare in WWII tends to place a lot of weight on how good the Panther, Tiger, and Tiger II tanks were relative to the allied tank is specifically the Sherman. Recent history books and documentary's are starting to debunk the popular myths around the efficiency of the German tanks relative to the allied ones and I would argue the Sherman was actually probably the best overall tank of the war. On paper the German tanks did tend to have high velocity 75mm-88mm guns mounted on her StuG series, Panzer II, Panther, Tiger I and II and various tank destroyers. German tanks did tend to have excellent guns designed to knock out other tanks. The big problem there however was 80-95% of the time (accounts vary) Shermans were facing infantry instead of opposing tanks. The Shermans low velocity 75mm gun was better for that than the Panthers relatively anaemic HE shell.
Tiger fear was also very real. Everything form a Panzer II on up was misidentified as a Tiger. How often did Shermans encounter Tigers? Well once again accounts vary but for the Americans apparently they only encounters a Tiger 4 times in France. And one of those times the Tiger was on a train. Wittman's famous Tiger assault was vs the British and he died a few weeks after that incident. Tiger fear plus the fact that the end result of any of the German high velocity 75mm L/48 (Panzer IV), 75mm L/70 (Panther) or the 88mm L/36 (Tiger) or 88mm L/71 (Tiger II/Jagdpanzer) the end results were likely the same. While Shermans tanks have a reputation of burning they were no worse than any other contemporary medium tank (T-34, Panzer IV) and armor protection was often superior to most of what they were facing. Once they got wet ammo racks suvivabilty was better than their equivalents and the Sherman was used in Soviet Guard divisions which were their elite combat veterans divisions where they were more popular than things like the Churchill (AKA the tank of 5 dead comrades) tank also supplied under lend lease. In Korea they are decimated the North Korean T-34s supplied by the Soviets. Upgunned sherman variants with the 76mm and the the Sherman Firefly could also penetrate the German kitties from the front with Firefly being similar to the Panthers 75mm L/70 in performance on a tank that was more reliable, more manoeuvrable in most terrain. The Pershings and M36's 90mm was also a tiger killer with footage on youtube of them knocking out a Panther. Early model Panthers also had a tendency to catch fire without being hit and the mechanical problems of that tank were never solved by wars end. Something about fuel and hot engines being a bad combo.
But But But What About the Panther.
The Panther is a great looking tank with a very good gun at least in the anti tank role and it was mass produced by the Germans. That its about the only thing the tank had going for it. Due to fuel and mechanical problems the Germans tended to transport them by rail and in some cases it seems the tank had a 50/50 chance of breaking down before it emptied its fuel tank. Due to sighting problems it was also terrible on the offensive and it was semi useless in the infantry support role due to its weak high explosive shell (high velocity gun= thicker HE shell= less explosive). Had the Germans had them in 1940 the blitzkrieg would not have worked as the nimble German light tanks enabled the blitzkreig to work. Assuming the tank did not break down between the Ardennes and Paris. Had the Allies had the Panther it would have been semi useless most of the time due to being the wrong tool for the wrong job. And the Sherman would have been wrong for the Germans due to the defensive nature they were in. From the sides the PAnther only had 40mm of armor which was a bigger problem on the offensive. The Panthers excellent gun was best used on the defensive with pre arranged lines of fire- which was how it was used. After the the French did use captured Panthers but ended up dumping them due to all of the problems the tank had. If the tank was that good the Allies could have made more of them or cloned it or copied the good design features. This was something they were more than happy to do with Jets, submarines and rockets but the Panthers contribution to post war tank design was mostly limited to its commanders cupola. The last Panthers were phased out post war by the French due to better American tanks being available.
The Sherman post war.
I thought I would write this today before 2018 comes to a close. The reason? 2018 was the year the last Shermans were phased out of active service. Yes you read that right earlier in the year the last Shermans were phased out of active service by Paraguay who were using it as a training vehicle/ceremonial role. The Sherman continued to be used as a front line tank up until the 1970's with the upgunned Israeli Super Shermans with a 105mm gun being used in the middle east successfully against tanks that were supposed to replace them such as the M48 Patton, T-55 etc. The Panzer IV also last rumbled into combat in the Arab armies in 1967 (possibly 1973 not sure). It was theoretically possible the last Sherman and Panzer IV engaged in the deserts of the middle east. Several other Soviet WWII AFVs have also turned up in places such as Eastern Ukraine and Yemen.
In conclusion my argument is that the Sherman was overall one of the best tanks of the war and it had a very long post war life. It was no worse than other WW2 era medium tanks, could be upgunned by wars end/post war and of the 3 key attributes in a tank (speed, firepower armor) it was really only lacking firepower vs German heavy tanks in the short barrelled 75mm ones. Even then they could use their speed and manoeuvrability to flank the German kitties which is what happened in the Battle of Arracourt. The biggest threat to Allied tanks were German infantry and anti tank guns not the Panthers and Tigers with the workhorses of the German army being the StuG series of assault guns and tank destroyers along with the Panzer IV. It is debatable if more of the German kittehs were also destroyed by their own crews than were knocked out by the western Allies.
Popular history around tank warfare in WWII tends to place a lot of weight on how good the Panther, Tiger, and Tiger II tanks were relative to the allied tank is specifically the Sherman. Recent history books and documentary's are starting to debunk the popular myths around the efficiency of the German tanks relative to the allied ones and I would argue the Sherman was actually probably the best overall tank of the war. On paper the German tanks did tend to have high velocity 75mm-88mm guns mounted on her StuG series, Panzer II, Panther, Tiger I and II and various tank destroyers. German tanks did tend to have excellent guns designed to knock out other tanks. The big problem there however was 80-95% of the time (accounts vary) Shermans were facing infantry instead of opposing tanks. The Shermans low velocity 75mm gun was better for that than the Panthers relatively anaemic HE shell.
Tiger fear was also very real. Everything form a Panzer II on up was misidentified as a Tiger. How often did Shermans encounter Tigers? Well once again accounts vary but for the Americans apparently they only encounters a Tiger 4 times in France. And one of those times the Tiger was on a train. Wittman's famous Tiger assault was vs the British and he died a few weeks after that incident. Tiger fear plus the fact that the end result of any of the German high velocity 75mm L/48 (Panzer IV), 75mm L/70 (Panther) or the 88mm L/36 (Tiger) or 88mm L/71 (Tiger II/Jagdpanzer) the end results were likely the same. While Shermans tanks have a reputation of burning they were no worse than any other contemporary medium tank (T-34, Panzer IV) and armor protection was often superior to most of what they were facing. Once they got wet ammo racks suvivabilty was better than their equivalents and the Sherman was used in Soviet Guard divisions which were their elite combat veterans divisions where they were more popular than things like the Churchill (AKA the tank of 5 dead comrades) tank also supplied under lend lease. In Korea they are decimated the North Korean T-34s supplied by the Soviets. Upgunned sherman variants with the 76mm and the the Sherman Firefly could also penetrate the German kitties from the front with Firefly being similar to the Panthers 75mm L/70 in performance on a tank that was more reliable, more manoeuvrable in most terrain. The Pershings and M36's 90mm was also a tiger killer with footage on youtube of them knocking out a Panther. Early model Panthers also had a tendency to catch fire without being hit and the mechanical problems of that tank were never solved by wars end. Something about fuel and hot engines being a bad combo.
But But But What About the Panther.
The Panther is a great looking tank with a very good gun at least in the anti tank role and it was mass produced by the Germans. That its about the only thing the tank had going for it. Due to fuel and mechanical problems the Germans tended to transport them by rail and in some cases it seems the tank had a 50/50 chance of breaking down before it emptied its fuel tank. Due to sighting problems it was also terrible on the offensive and it was semi useless in the infantry support role due to its weak high explosive shell (high velocity gun= thicker HE shell= less explosive). Had the Germans had them in 1940 the blitzkrieg would not have worked as the nimble German light tanks enabled the blitzkreig to work. Assuming the tank did not break down between the Ardennes and Paris. Had the Allies had the Panther it would have been semi useless most of the time due to being the wrong tool for the wrong job. And the Sherman would have been wrong for the Germans due to the defensive nature they were in. From the sides the PAnther only had 40mm of armor which was a bigger problem on the offensive. The Panthers excellent gun was best used on the defensive with pre arranged lines of fire- which was how it was used. After the the French did use captured Panthers but ended up dumping them due to all of the problems the tank had. If the tank was that good the Allies could have made more of them or cloned it or copied the good design features. This was something they were more than happy to do with Jets, submarines and rockets but the Panthers contribution to post war tank design was mostly limited to its commanders cupola. The last Panthers were phased out post war by the French due to better American tanks being available.
The Sherman post war.
I thought I would write this today before 2018 comes to a close. The reason? 2018 was the year the last Shermans were phased out of active service. Yes you read that right earlier in the year the last Shermans were phased out of active service by Paraguay who were using it as a training vehicle/ceremonial role. The Sherman continued to be used as a front line tank up until the 1970's with the upgunned Israeli Super Shermans with a 105mm gun being used in the middle east successfully against tanks that were supposed to replace them such as the M48 Patton, T-55 etc. The Panzer IV also last rumbled into combat in the Arab armies in 1967 (possibly 1973 not sure). It was theoretically possible the last Sherman and Panzer IV engaged in the deserts of the middle east. Several other Soviet WWII AFVs have also turned up in places such as Eastern Ukraine and Yemen.
In conclusion my argument is that the Sherman was overall one of the best tanks of the war and it had a very long post war life. It was no worse than other WW2 era medium tanks, could be upgunned by wars end/post war and of the 3 key attributes in a tank (speed, firepower armor) it was really only lacking firepower vs German heavy tanks in the short barrelled 75mm ones. Even then they could use their speed and manoeuvrability to flank the German kitties which is what happened in the Battle of Arracourt. The biggest threat to Allied tanks were German infantry and anti tank guns not the Panthers and Tigers with the workhorses of the German army being the StuG series of assault guns and tank destroyers along with the Panzer IV. It is debatable if more of the German kittehs were also destroyed by their own crews than were knocked out by the western Allies.
