- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: What was the best WWII tank?
Posted on 9/29/18 at 6:05 pm to athenslife101
Posted on 9/29/18 at 6:05 pm to athenslife101
The best tank is whichever one is used correctly. Hardly any laypeople or armchair historians understand the proper use of tanks in the WWII era and the Generals themselves at the outset of the war mostly didn’t either.
Hint: tanks are not for fighting other tanks. That’s insanely resource-wasteful. They’re not for fighting infantry alone either - they’re actually really vulnerable to infantry. Combined arms wins the day. That’s why the Sherman was so effective despite being supposedly undergunned and underarmored. It wasn’t meant to fight tanks in the first place. It was a combined arms tool. People who miss that point and go on and on about its weakness and think it was a terrible weapon don’t understand WWII tactics or the intended proper role of the tank. Actually the Sherman was very effective.
Hint: tanks are not for fighting other tanks. That’s insanely resource-wasteful. They’re not for fighting infantry alone either - they’re actually really vulnerable to infantry. Combined arms wins the day. That’s why the Sherman was so effective despite being supposedly undergunned and underarmored. It wasn’t meant to fight tanks in the first place. It was a combined arms tool. People who miss that point and go on and on about its weakness and think it was a terrible weapon don’t understand WWII tactics or the intended proper role of the tank. Actually the Sherman was very effective.
This post was edited on 9/29/18 at 6:18 pm
2
Posted on 9/29/18 at 6:09 pm to athenslife101
Whatever one a woman drove.
Posted on 9/29/18 at 6:15 pm to athenslife101
Tiger II and
Posted on 9/29/18 at 6:15 pm to rmnldr
quote:
M4 Sherman
Bested all in strategic and tactical flexibility.
The Panther had
1. Superior armor
2. Superior main gun
3. Superior range
4. Superior cross country maneuverability
5. Far less likely to burn when hit
Posted on 9/29/18 at 6:17 pm to athenslife101
I'm gonna go with the Sherman because it achieved what it was designed to do. It wasn't designed to take on other tanks or do heavy damage to defensive positions. It was designed to slice through enemy lines as quickly and as suddenly as possible and penetrate deep behind enemy lines. It was a purely offensive vehicle. The Allies used it to great effectiveness in Europe despite its poor record against the heavier German tanks.
Posted on 9/29/18 at 6:17 pm to Darth_Vader
You don’t understand what tanks were really FOR.
Posted on 9/29/18 at 6:19 pm to Cooter Davenport
The Sherman had a low velocity all purpose 75 mm cannon and the Panther a high velocity 75. What the tank was for was up to interpretation.
This post was edited on 9/29/18 at 6:20 pm
Posted on 9/29/18 at 6:23 pm to Cooter Davenport
quote:
The best tank whichever one is used correctly. Hardly any laypeople or armchair historians understand the proper use of tanks in the WWII era and the Generals themselves at the outset of the war mostly didn’t either.
Hint: tanks are not for fighting other tanks. That’s insanely resource-wasteful. They’re not for fighting infantry alone either - they’re actually really vulnerable to infantry. Combined arms wins the day. Spend plenty on anti-tank guns.
This is why the Sherman was no match for the Heavier German Tanks it came up against in France. Simply put, the Sherman was not designed to be a tank killer. The US Army Armor warfare doctrine at that time was the Sherman was to exploite breakthroughs made by the infantry and tear up the enemy rear areas. The role of killing tanks was left for the tank destroyers like these...
M10
M18
M36
These were the American tank killers, not the Sherman.
Posted on 9/29/18 at 6:25 pm to Cooter Davenport
quote:
You don’t understand what tanks were really
I’ve studied tanks for over 39 years.
I served as a tanker for over 10 years.
I fought in the First Gulf War as a tanker.
I’ve forgot more about tanks than you’ll ever know.
Posted on 9/29/18 at 6:29 pm to Arthur Cantrelle Jr
quote:
The Sherman had a low velocity all purpose 75 mm cannon and the Panther a high velocity 75. What the tank was for was up to interpretation.
Initially yes. It did have a low velocity 75. Later on it was given a somewhat better high velocity 76mm main gun. And the British fitted a 17 pounder high velocity gun in their “Firefly” version which proved quite capable against German armor, including the Tiger.
Posted on 9/29/18 at 6:30 pm to Darth_Vader
For what's worth, the Germans had the best looking tanks and uniforms.
Posted on 9/29/18 at 6:35 pm to haikarate
quote:
For what's worth, the Germans had the best looking tanks and uniforms.
The SS uniforms were designed by none other than Hugo Boss himself.
Posted on 9/29/18 at 6:35 pm to athenslife101
Every time I see WW2 tanks I think of my Dad. He was in North Africa under Patton. I would guess he was in Sherman M4. I remember him talk about just being scared as shite being in that thing among other stories.. He spoke fluent French and he some how got his arse transferred to the French army as a translator/liaison. Because of that y'all are blessed with my presence and bullshite....enjoy...
Posted on 9/29/18 at 6:36 pm to athenslife101
Posted on 9/29/18 at 6:38 pm to BobABooey
quote:
KV-2
For the dank memes
Posted on 9/29/18 at 6:45 pm to Athis
quote:
Every time I see WW2 tanks I think of my Dad. He was in North Africa under Patton. I would guess he was in Sherman M4. I remember him talk about just being scared as shite being in that thing among other stories.. He spoke fluent French and he some how got his arse transferred to the French army as a translator/liaison. Because of that y'all are blessed with my presence and bullshite....enjoy...
As bad of a reputation the Sherman has due to high losses in France, it actually acquitted itself quite well in North Africa against the MK. III & IV. It wasn’t until he Germans brought in Tigers during the later stages of the North African Campaign that the Sherman started being at a marked disadvantage.
But again, the American strategy was for Sherman’s to not get into tank v. tank battles. In fact, they sought to avoid them and keep the Sherman moving to do what they were designed to do, exploit and expand breakthroughs, not kill other tanks.
Posted on 9/29/18 at 6:48 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
The Panther had
1. Superior armor
2. Superior main gun
3. Superior range
4. Superior cross country maneuverability
5. Far less likely to burn when hit
And none of that mattered when Germany couldn’t produce enough of them, get them to the battlefield in quality numbers, or maintain them properly when in theater. The best German tank of WWII was the StuG 3 because they could produce them in quality numbers quickly and could maintain them being that it had a chassis they had been using from the start of the war. The Nazis’ focus on creating a superior tank instead of creating quality tanks in superior numbers drained and strained their already fragile industrial capacity.
ETA: this is all my opinion
I’m not as qualified as Darth (I have 0 qualifications actually) since he was actually a US army tanker
This post was edited on 9/29/18 at 6:53 pm
Posted on 9/29/18 at 6:51 pm to Darth_Vader
The Grant and Lee were praised by the British in the desert campaign due to their ungainly height. A trait that was less than ideal in other theaters of operation.
Posted on 9/29/18 at 6:58 pm to Darth_Vader
Thanks for the response..It's something to add to the family talk about my Dad.
Posted on 9/29/18 at 7:02 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
The role of killing tanks was left for the tank destroyers like these...
What's your opinion of the TD units? The standard belief over decades was that they were no good. Recently there's been more debate (at least among some military historians) as to their effectiveness. It's not a topic I have any expertise in. Just curious on the thoughts of someone who clearly knows what they're talking about.
From what I've read, Louisiana's 773rd TD battalion was pretty effective.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News