Looking for some info here, gents. I think I've got some of the basics of this in a couple fo my sources, but throwing it out here anyway...

I am under the impression that there was at least one engagement when a M26 Pershing fought a Tiger I- and from what I remember, the Tiger I won the battle, but then proceeded to get itself stuck in a building and had to be abandoned.

Anything?

__________________
Seriously, all today is missing is free cotton candy and the annual Bay State Hooker Parade to make it any better.

OK, never mind! I did some more poking around and found a nice little website that gave some good details of the engagements.

http://3ad.com/history/wwll/article.index.htm

http://3ad.com/history/wwll/article....hing.ko.1a.htm
http://3ad.com/history/wwll/article....hing.ko.1b.htm

__________________
Seriously, all today is missing is free cotton candy and the annual Bay State Hooker Parade to make it any better.

AFAIK the only Pershing that really got destroyed in Europe was knocked out by a Nashorn.

__________________
If someone tries to remove the speck in your right eye, will you turn to him the other also?

The Pershing that was "knocked out" by the Tiger I was not destroyed- after repairs, it DID return to combat.

But... it WAS knocked out in combat by the Tiger. My not have been "destroyed", but the Tiger I won the battle.
interesting enough... the Tiger I that knocked out the Pershing was part of s.Pz.Kp. Hummel- the same heavy tak unit that fought against the allies at Arnhem.

__________________
Seriously, all today is missing is free cotton candy and the annual Bay State Hooker Parade to make it any better.

Yes, but as mentioned: A Nashorn DID destroy a Pershing...

__________________
If someone tries to remove the speck in your right eye, will you turn to him the other also?

Ok:

The Pershing saw combat with only 2 US Armored Divisions, the 3rd and the 9th. Distribution was made from the 599th Ordinance Battalion at Aachen to the two divisions as follows:
3rd: 1 tank each to D, E, H, and I Companies of the 32nd Armored Reginment and 1 tank each to companies D, E, H, and I of the 33rd Armored Regiment.

9th: 5 tanks to A Company 14th Tank Battalion, 1 tank to A Company, 2 to B Company and 2 to C Company of the 19th Armored Battalion.

3rd Armored crews finished training on the tank on 20 February 1945.
In one training demonstration Mr. "Slim" Price of the Abberdeen Proving Ground demonstrated the accuracy of the Pershing's gun by shooting German helments at 625 yards with single shots. This was part of the crew's gunnery training.

The first loss came on 25 February to 3rd Armored when the Pershing assigned to F Company 33rd Armd. Reg. was knocked out by a Tiger from about 100 yards. The first hit penetrated the turret through the coax MG port and killed both the gunner and loader. The second hit shot off the muzzle brake setting of the 90mm round in the gun and destroying the tube. The third hit glanced off the right side of the turret and knocked off the cuploa hatch which was open. The surviving crew backed away, getting the tank stuck in a pile of building debris, abandoning the tank.
This tank was nicknamed Fireball . This tank was repaired, the 90mm being replaced from one on an M 36 returning to service on 4 March 45.
One tank of the 14th Armored Battalion A Company lost one Pershing when it was struck by heavy artillery fire on 1 March 45. This tank was subsequently repaired and returned to service on 7 March.
Those are the only two losses, well sort of anyway, of Pershings in the ETO. So, one did get knocked out by a Tiger (which was subsequently destroyed in the action by other tanks present) and one by artillery fire. None got knocked out by a Nashorn, nor from the accounts I've read were any Nashorns encountered by Pershings.

See United States Tanks in World War II, George Forty and Pershing, a History of the Medium Tank T20 Series, Richard P. Hunnicutt

Hmmmm... now this is slightly confusing. The 3ad little website I found clearly states that one of the Pershings WAS knocked out by a Nashorn.
http://3ad.com/history/wwll/article....hing.ko.2a.htm
Has a couple photos of the ko'ed tank, and-

Sources listed-
Research Sources:
After The Battle magazine, issue #104
Pershing: A History Of The Medium Tank T-20 Series by Hunnicut.
Spearhead In The West published by the 3rd Armored Division, 1945
M-26/M-46 Pershing Tank 1943-1953 by Zaloga

This info is from the "official" website of the Third Armored Division...

__________________
Seriously, all today is missing is free cotton candy and the annual Bay State Hooker Parade to make it any better.

I stand corrected. Three were knocked out and one by a Nashorn.

TA, only luck that I found that website!

It is a neat one tho... very nice work with providing a few photos of each of the Pershings in question. Very nicely done!

Neat stories, too.

They've also got one article "coming soon" on the "Super Pershing".. and the little bit that's there now makes the clear suggestion that the one (?) Super Pershing that did make it to the ETO actually saw far more action than has been thought.

Definetely gonna have to keep watching that one... that woudl be some damn interesting info, I bet!

[img]smile.gif[/img]

__________________
Seriously, all today is missing is free cotton candy and the annual Bay State Hooker Parade to make it any better.

Interesting, I have often wondered how some of the VERY late war allied tanks would have done against some of the German beasties. I mean what about a Centurion Vs. a Tiger? Tiger 2? How about a JS2 or even JS 3? Very interesting to think about.

__________________
There's no honorable way to kill, no gentle way to destroy. There is nothing good in war. Except its ending.

Only one "Super Pershing" was actually built for the ETO and saw service there (albeit without engaging anything of significance). Don't have the particulars right off. Will see if I can post those later.....

Super Pershing vs. King Tiger - Dessau
On this site, there is the only combat between Super Pershing and Tiger - it seems that experimental American tanks were tougher than their German equivalents.

I think that account says more about the training and experience of the particular crews than the general toughness of the tanks.

It appears that the King Tiger' gunner hadn't estimated the range properly, and that the driver may have made a mistake in attempting to move out forwards. The Pershing crew didn't make as many errors, and killed the Tiger with a shot to the thin underbelly.

The Pershing probably was the better tank, but this battle seems to have gone to the better crew.

And don't forget that the Pershing had an improved Rand gyroscopic main gun stabilizer, which was a true "run and gun" system, and should NOT be confused with the early model on the Shermans. The German tanks always needed to be stopped to make an accurate shot.

__________________
Happy Trails,
Clint.

Pershing and JSIII,

the by far two best MBT's produced and having seen action during WWII.

Regards
Kruska

Hey Kruska,

I had always thought that the IS III never actually saw combat in WWII. There was some confusion about whether it did or did not, but most of the sources I have consulted said it saw no combat. Do you have a source?

__________________


"If you want peace work for justice" -Pope Paul VI

Jon

The JS-III didn't quite make it to see any combat during WWII according to Zaloga.

Also I have to disagree with Kruska; the Pershing was too unreliable & underpowered to be a good MBT. And the JS-III still featured too slow a gun, poor optics, poor crew comfort and a less than ideal turret positioning to be considered a good MBT. But the JS-III was however extremely well armoured, and certainly one of the best armoured tanks developed during the war.

The best candidates for best MBT developed during the war are the German Panther & British Centurion in my opinion. They both featured an excellent blend of firepower, protection & mobility.

There had been a bitter argument over the dependability of Perhsing and Pather G tanks and it left a bad taste in our mouths. It would be best to talk about this in a more appropriate thread. Would you like to bring this argument to the top 10 tank thread?

If the Pershing was considered underpowered, wouldn't the Panther be six feet under in terms of mechanical overstress?

The Panther Tank's bad reliability

The Pershing was unreliable and underpowered for an American tank.

Acker,

You should read Jentz's books on the Panther. Fact is it became a very reliable tank in the end. The Pershing however suffered from some very serious reliability issues and was from a operational reliability point of view even worse than the German Tiger Ausf.B.

But let us leave it at that, I guess we're straying abit offtopic.

well you have to think it was the first time a different tank had been used by the united states and the pershing had,nt been made until later in the war therefore leaving no room for improvement of the m26 pershing