tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-50651698518155984.post5090633510597109724..comments2023-12-18T07:47:05.398-07:00Comments on World War II in Pictures: The Ferdinand/Elefant Tank DestroyerUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-50651698518155984.post-67450771830806370482017-03-31T16:08:30.717-06:002017-03-31T16:08:30.717-06:00The Russians used the M4A2 Sherman tanks because t...The Russians used the M4A2 Sherman tanks because they could run on one engine and were a lot quieter than the T34. That way they could get closer to the German infantry. the German infantry would use the Panzerfausts and PanzerShreks to destroy Many T34s. The T34s were sent in to battle carrying infantry but they couldn't hear anything wile riding on the tanks. Also the M4A2 ran on diesel like the T34's and could go along way before breaking down. The Sherman's had lots of problems but they were reliable. they had to be designed for ship transport to Europe so they were limited on armor and because of the aircraft engines were very tall. They also had two major advantages over the T34, They all had a good radio and they had a very good field of view vs all models of the T34. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-50651698518155984.post-91883940311095838792017-03-22T21:00:25.482-06:002017-03-22T21:00:25.482-06:00Frans you have no idea what yourtalking about! Do ...Frans you have no idea what yourtalking about! Do some reading before you start making wild claims.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12664289067474110126noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-50651698518155984.post-1351901441216572142017-02-16T20:11:10.727-07:002017-02-16T20:11:10.727-07:00Totally agree. Totally agree. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-50651698518155984.post-22597024206997275192016-09-20T12:13:38.266-06:002016-09-20T12:13:38.266-06:00Well, I'm sorry to disappoint you, but the She...Well, I'm sorry to disappoint you, but the Sherman was actually a much better tank than the T-34, and that's why they were given to elite units exclusively.<br />The T-34 is probably the most over-estimated tank in history.<br />It all started when the Germans first invaded Russia and their PzKw III and PzKw 38t tanks, which were mainly armed with a 37mm AT gun, proved incapable of handling the simply much heavier T-34.<br />During the war Soviet propaganda further inflated the legend, and when the war ended the Soviet Union was in such a deplorable state that “maskirovka” went into overdrive to fool the West into believing the Soviet Union was much more military powerful than it really was.<br />And in the West self proclaimed “armoured warfare specialists”, who in reality probably wouldn't have been able to distinguish a drive sprocket from a turret hatch, parroted all this rubbish faithfully, creating a false image of the T-34 that would survive into our time, to be nowadays sold as fact by other publishers of questionable accuracy, like “the History Channel” for instance.<br />The truth is that the T-34 was a real death trap, something their disastrous loss-rate alone already proves beyond much doubt; Soviet industry produced almost 65,000 T-34's during the war, and was still barely capable to keep up with losses.<br />The T-34 was a flawed design, manufactured in a shoddy way, and the only reason the legend build around it survived is that the Soviet Union (barely) managed to win the war.<br />If you want to know what it's many flaws exactly were just say so, I'll be happy to enlighten you.<br />Fransnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-50651698518155984.post-69239223510093192422016-09-19T14:34:54.735-06:002016-09-19T14:34:54.735-06:00I have absolutely no dispute that the Red Army kne...I have absolutely no dispute that the Red Army knew a LOT about tanks that I don't know. The Germans did, too. The tank designers at Chrysler, the British tankers - all brilliant. I would certainly hope so, given that their lives depended on them.<br /><br />The Soviets used their equipment differently than the other powers. They used what they had - they had plenty of men. Quality really didn't matter, though they made excellent tanks and other equipment.<br /><br />There is absolutely no evidence that the Soviets thought that Shermans were better than their own tanks, or even as good as them. The Soviets got 4102 spanking new Shermans for free and used them - anyone would. I certainly would. The Red Army put the upgraded M4A2 76w tanks into Guards units alongside T-34s, sure. They did not "prefer" Sherman tanks, they basically just treated the Sherman tanks as "good enough" and filled open tank slots with them. Soviet soldiers took whatever they were given by the bureaucrats, just like many Soviet pilots flew biplanes throughout the war. <br /><br />The Soviets also used the P-39 and P-40 that they got via Lend Lease extensively, too. They basically used whatever they were given by the generous Allies. Their own fighters such as the Yak-9 and La-5 were good enough, but WWII was as much a battle of attrition as anything else. Just because they used the P-39 and P-40 fighters, though, does not mean they were terrific fighters.<br /><br />The Soviets who visited US factories and had a choice in the matter rejected the M3 and the M4A4. They didn't particularly like many Allied tanks. The Sherman just happened to be the best tank the Americans had, and they were the ones giving them for free. Anyone would take the best car they could get for free, even if it isn't a Porsche racecar. A Chevy would do just fine.<br /><br />This is a controversial subject and opinions differ, but interpreting Soviet use of these tanks in their Guards units as meaning they thought the Sherman tanks were great and the equal of their own tanks is absolutely unsupported. They used what they had on hand, filled open slots with them rather than let units get run down, and had no qualms about sending their men out in whatever. That was an attitude the Soviets displayed throughout the conflict. The Soviets were not particularly mindful of treating their grunts like kings, and riding a Sherman was certainly better than walking through the mud. For an army that intentionally would send out poorly armed new recruits in opening attacks simply to make the Germans expend ammunition, knowing they would get slaughtered, worrying about qualitative differences of tanks was not a priority.James Bjorkmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14749118745932210527noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-50651698518155984.post-21287496595796577122016-09-19T11:01:18.715-06:002016-09-19T11:01:18.715-06:00The Soviets issued their lend lease Shermans to th...The Soviets issued their lend lease Shermans to their elite tank units.<br />I guess they knew something you don't...Fransnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-50651698518155984.post-8845321260764449082016-07-29T01:41:14.134-06:002016-07-29T01:41:14.134-06:00The T-34 had 40-45 mm armour all around with very ...The T-34 had 40-45 mm armour all around with very few exceptions. The Sherman had 30 mmm except in the front. More importantly, the T-34 introduced sloped armour, while the Sherman was a very upright tank. THe sloped armour made the T-34's protection even greater.<br /><br />There is a reason that the Germans, who had absolutely no love for the Russians, admired the T-34 and found the Sherman to be a bit of a joke. Von Kleist called the T-34 "the finest tank in the world." I defy you to find any quotes by German tank experts like that about the Sherman.James Bjorkmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14749118745932210527noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-50651698518155984.post-82417924918506031652016-07-28T20:22:20.219-06:002016-07-28T20:22:20.219-06:00"tin can shermans"? actually even soviet..."tin can shermans"? actually even soviet soldiers said the sherman kept more rounds out than the T-34...<br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06329936338535094962noreply@blogger.com