Quote:
|
The british armour at the time was generally inferior to german tanks look at the crusadar and cromwell, the comet was under gunned and lightley armoured and the honey (AKA M5 stuart) was no good as a battle tank. the only good tank was the 75mm M4 sherman and the 17 pounder firefly . and the americans just look at there M10 wolverine what idiot would create a battle tank designed as a tank killer, design it with an open top, thats just asking for an enemy grenade. and don't get me stated on the pershing, the suppossed match the tiger
|
Righto. Well the Crusader was Inferior to many German tanks, though the 6pdr Improved it a bit. The Cromwell was just about on par with the Sherman. Basically the same gun, same Armour, engine ect ect. Comet? Under Gunned and Lightly armored? It had the 77mm (an improved version of the 17pdr) gun, which was about on par with the 88 as in the Tiger. It had 101mm of armour, which, very surprisingly, is the same amount as the Tiger 1. The 17pdr Firefly was just a regular Sherman with a 17pdr squeezed in. Sure, It had great hitting power, at expense of crew comfort and the Tanks Machine guns. As the 17pdr fired a poor HE shell, what is it going to do when facing German infantry with panzershreks and Panzerfousts? Not as much as the Regular Sherman, or The Cromwell. That is why only 1 was included with every tank squadron. The Stuart/Honey was a Reconnaissance tank. Designed to gather information, using it's speed to avoid combat. The M10 was not a tank. It was a Tank destroyer. American doctrine at the time was for the Tanks (with poor anti tank weapons) to break through while the TDs dealt with the enemy tanks. And as for asking for a German grenade, only a fool would send a tank destroyer into Infantry-infested areas. TDs are for open ground Tank vs Tank combat. Nuff said.
I am actually begining to enjoy informing these sort of people about this stuff. Used to hate it.
