Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

Myths of WWII - Armor

Discussion in 'Armor and Armored Fighting Vehicles' started by JBark, Mar 14, 2011.

  1. George Patton

    George Patton Canadian Refugee

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2010
    Messages:
    3,075
    Likes Received:
    1,057
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    And theoretically a Sherman firing HVAP could take a Panther or Tiger out from the side or rear at distances exceeding that. Your point is?
     
  2. belasar

    belasar Court Jester Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    7,989
    Likes Received:
    1,030
    And a B-17 a mile up carpet bombing can as well or a battleship 10 miles offshore....
     
  3. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,291
    Likes Received:
    1,223
    Location:
    Michigan
    And a Sherman firing HEAT could take them out from the front at over 6,000m. Which is just about as pointless as the original post.
     
    George Patton likes this.
  4. Sheldrake

    Sheldrake Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2013
    Messages:
    1,434
    Likes Received:
    353
    Location:
    London UK
    Source?
     
  5. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,291
    Likes Received:
    1,223
    Location:
    Michigan
  6. KodiakBeer

    KodiakBeer Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    6,066
    Likes Received:
    1,550
    Location:
    The Arid Zone
    In the end (and I apologize if this is covered earlier in the thread), only tanks that arrive at the battle count. A Sherman was far more reliable, and far easier to repair in the field, than any German tank. Allied armor already outnumbered German armor, and when significant portions of German armor were sitting, broken, along some muddy road fifty miles from the front, that loss hurt. And when those Panthers and Mark IVs went down, it was far more likely they'd have to be transported to a repair facility, and that presented another enormous problem since the allies controlled the air. A broken Sherman could usually be repaired where it sat and be back on the road in 24 hours or less.

    .
     
  7. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,291
    Likes Received:
    1,223
    Location:
    Michigan
    The US also seams to have produced and distributed spares in greater proportion than the Germans. This was probably even more critical in regards to motor transport than tanks as the Germans were using such a wide variety of such vehicles, significant numbers even coming from their opponents.
     
  8. harolds

    harolds Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2011
    Messages:
    1,435
    Likes Received:
    203
    From what I've read over the years, most armored divisions (American and German) had recovery teams that pulled damaged and/or broken down vehicles to a tank recovery area where it would be safe to work on. Minor breakdowns such as a broken track or road wheel were repaired on the spot if possible because this was crew-level maintenance. When a tank was taken to the regimental or divisional workshop, the tank was usually back in operation from one to three days. The Germans took their really messed up tanks back to a rear depot to be totally rebuilt. I think that many American units may have scavenged parts out of heavily damaged vehicles but then abandoned them since it was easier just to get a new tank.

    In the 1942-43 period the Germans did have real problems with tank repair because the Nazi bureaucrats insisted that all parts go to make new vehicles. I read somewhere that when Guderian was recalled from retirement there were nine months worth of production in depots waiting repair. Guderian got most of the big problems squared away while he was Inspector of Armored Troops.
     
    lwd likes this.
  9. Sheldrake

    Sheldrake Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2013
    Messages:
    1,434
    Likes Received:
    353
    Location:
    London UK
    This uses ORS 2 and 4 and comes to the conclusion that the losses to AFVs were due to the infantry and tank destroyers. The AFVs vehicles claimed to be KO by 105mm were HEAT - i.e. direct fire. Sure lots of soft vehicles were KO by HE and HE made life difficult for AFVs crews.
     
  10. scott livesey

    scott livesey Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2018
    Messages:
    71
    Likes Received:
    29
    A short book on German tank maintenance CMH pub 104-7 by General Burkhart H. Mueller-Hillebrand an armored corps and armored army chief of staff. You don't have to dig, facts are laid out quite nicely, only 52 pages. Highlights:
    When Tiger production started, they only made one spare drive train for every 10 tanks. Within a short time, most of the Tigers were lost or sidelined due to lack of parts.
    When Panther production started, they were rushed into the field without testing. Soon, all 325 surviving tanks were shipped to a special built tank rework center for major repairs.
    scott
     
    Last edited: Jun 19, 2019
    von Poop likes this.
  11. von Poop

    von Poop Waspish WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2006
    Messages:
    6,066
    Likes Received:
    1,663
    Location:
    Perfidious Albion
    I approve this message.

    Lukas Friedl's 'Repairing The Panzers' books are very good on German efforts to keep vehicles rolling, but despite all the photographs, official directives & some titanic efforts by maintenance teams contained therein, the operation beyond those immediate field Werkstatts always feels a bit pony in comparison to the Western allies' considered & more carefully resourced systems, no matter the theatre. And so many 'waiting for basic parts' in the contemporary reports the books contain. (I'm not even slightly up on Soviet repair/maintenance regimes - hence 'Western' there.)
     
  12. Mussolini

    Mussolini Gaming Guru WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2000
    Messages:
    5,721
    Likes Received:
    557
    Location:
    Festung Colorado
    Reading (listening) to the 'Spearhead' book.

    Its mentioned that a Panther traveling on road for 62 miles would then require major repair to the Panther due to its suspension being shot. The chapter I just read is from a Panther Crewmans perspective, as the tanks were shipped my rail from point to point, instead of being driven.

    Lots of mention of their Shermans having to wait for the Panthers to move closer in order to get kill shots, while the Panthers could get kill shots on them from much further away. The 75mm Shermans helped a little with this, but it seems the Pershing was introduced to be a Panther-Killer.
     
  13. scott livesey

    scott livesey Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2018
    Messages:
    71
    Likes Received:
    29
    Spare parts, maintenance, and reliability have been mentioned. The another would be crew training. American armored divisions usually had almost 2 years of training before they were shipped to Europe. After the Normandy campaign, lots of German crewman on the Western Front only had several months of training.
     

Share This Page