May 10th, 2012, 03:00 PM | #91 |
Banned!
Join Date: May 2008
Location: the south US near the west from Chicagoland born in the USA,just like the song says!
Posts: 3,719
Thanks: 13,008
Thanked 24,480 Times in 3,630 Posts
|
WWI grandadys of them all:
1)British MK5 2)Tsar Tank 1st Imperial Russian Tank 3)German Tank 15-20 man crew! Last edited by savage560; May 10th, 2012 at 07:21 PM.. |
May 10th, 2012, 10:16 PM | #92 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 346
Thanks: 5,131
Thanked 7,169 Times in 337 Posts
|
Quote:
The encounter at Villiers-Bocage involved 22 Armoured Brigade belonging to 4th County of London Yeomanry Division. The German opposition was the 2nd company of the SS 101st Heavy Panzer battalion, equipped with Tiger 1s. One of the Tiger 1s was crewed by Michael Wittman, a leading tank "ace". By June 1944, Wittman and has crew had already gained a 138 "kills" i.e. tanks knocked out, all gained on the Russian front. Further, another point not appreciated. Tiger 1 battalions were crewed by a high proportion of veterans -even in 1944. It was not a good day for 22nd Armored brigade. They lost 26 tanks (Shermans and Cromwells), 14 Half Tracks and 8 Bren Carriers, in addition to 230 men taken prisoner. The 101st lost three tigers. |
|
The Following 13 Users Say Thank You to mjm1963 For This Useful Post: |
May 10th, 2012, 10:34 PM | #93 |
Vintage Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 2,268
Thanks: 34,170
Thanked 26,750 Times in 2,159 Posts
|
Nope, well before Villers-Bocage. I was looking at 27th Armoured Brigade moving off the beach - behind schedule due to congestion - and getting bogged down at Lebisey etc. on 7-8 June and not getting anywhere near Caen. The Brigade was disbanded and dispersed in July.
|
May 10th, 2012, 10:47 PM | #94 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 346
Thanks: 5,131
Thanked 7,169 Times in 337 Posts
|
Quote:
Many thanks mjm1963 |
|
May 11th, 2012, 05:55 AM | #95 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: .. looking over your shoulder
Posts: 138
Thanks: 436
Thanked 1,579 Times in 116 Posts
|
Quote:
SOP was it would take a troop of 4 Shermans to destroy a Tiger: 3 were targets and the 4th had to rush around behind it and 'take it up the arse'. This worked only cos the Tiger had a particularly slow turret traverse and required the last Sherman to actually spot the Tiger and maneuver out of the way. So to take 3 Tigers, you would need 12 Shermans (technically you might get away with only 10!) There's more history about the Yeomanry:
__________________
Speaking as a regular lurker, without the hard work of others, I would be nothing and thank you a thousand times. Much is owed by many to the few - even a lurker can hit 'Thanks'. Full credit goes to the original scanner/capper for anything I post. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. |
|
The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to Lurkio For This Useful Post: |
May 11th, 2012, 08:18 AM | #96 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Here and there
Posts: 4,029
Thanks: 102,514
Thanked 93,972 Times in 4,024 Posts
|
Quote:
Apparently, once they'd encountered the Firefly, the SOP for the Germans when encountering British tanks (usual distribution being one Firefly to each troop of Shermans or Cromwells) quickly became to try and pick off the Firefly first. |
|
The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to Historian For This Useful Post: |
May 11th, 2012, 04:09 PM | #97 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 346
Thanks: 5,131
Thanked 7,169 Times in 337 Posts
|
Quote:
|
|
The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to mjm1963 For This Useful Post: |
May 11th, 2012, 04:31 PM | #98 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 346
Thanks: 5,131
Thanked 7,169 Times in 337 Posts
|
|
The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to mjm1963 For This Useful Post: |
May 11th, 2012, 05:41 PM | #99 |
Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 97
Thanks: 785
Thanked 1,351 Times in 97 Posts
|
The Sherman Firefly and the US Army long barrel A4s balanced the scale of armor superiority during the Allied invasion of Normandy and their push through France and Belgium.
During this period of the war, the German Army was mainly equiped with Panzer IVs, Sturmgeschütz IIIs and IVs, even with the addition of side skirt armor to dissipate the energy from a shaped charges or anti-tank rounds, these tanks still found themselves on more and more equal footing with the Shermans that they faced. The armor protection of the Panzer IV and Sturgeschütz left a lot to be desired, you are still dealing with the problems of thinner armor protection all around. It would make sense that they would try to take out the Fireflys first since they posed the greatest threat to the German armored forces, over half of all the tanks used by the Germans in the Western front during 1944 were Panzer IV. As the Normandy campaign dragged on the German Armored forces were also receiving Sturmgeschütz IIIs and IVs as replacements for the tanks they lost instead of Panzer IVs or Panthers, a self propelled gun is not equal to a tank in terms of manuverability and effectiveness. Last edited by Trintron; May 12th, 2012 at 12:11 AM.. Reason: I had to make a spelling correction... |
The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Trintron For This Useful Post: |
May 11th, 2012, 07:24 PM | #100 |
Former Staff
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 16,579
Thanks: 452,836
Thanked 222,657 Times in 16,567 Posts
|
The biggest problem with tanks is they break down too often. No one wants to admit it, but it's true. And you don't always get spare parts (or mechanics) when you need them, which is often
Don't allow your sons to serve in tanks. Tell them to serve in signals or intelligence or something else. They'll be better paid and less frustrated |
The Following 13 Users Say Thank You to palo5 For This Useful Post: |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|