I’ve never heard anyone wax lyrical and so fascinatingly about a tank gents. Is there anything you don’t know about the war? Another cracking episode. Makes you realise how important the battle for the Atlantic was in terms of shipping the numbers of the things over. Loved it as usual
Anyone looking to dig in more on the Sherman would do well to look up Chieftain’s videos on the development of the M4 and his “Myths of American” armor is fantastic. As far as books go Steven Zaloga’s Armored Thunderbolt is a wealth of knowledge on the M4. Highly recommend.
Loving your videos thank you. My late father-in-law was a driver/mechanic in a 75mm Sherman M4A4 tank with the Grenadier Guards, 2nd Bn, Guards Armoured Division, late 1944, when he was 18yrs old, to war’s end, followed by occupation forces in Germany until 1951. Would very rarely talk about his experiences, only time he spoke at length was on a joint visit to the Bovington Museum in the 1980s, where he stated he undertook a lot of his training. Next to the exact type of type of Sherman he drove was a bank of 5 Chrysler engines. Recall he stated during training he was shown into a large building where there was a huge heap of the 5 engines completely stripped down and he was given a strict time limit to rebuild all 5. Sadly he passed away in the early 2000s, I’m currently researching family history so if someone could point me in the direction to obtain his service record I would be very obliged.
If you Google service records there’s a link you can the MOD, where you can apply for service records if you’re next of kin. I’m planning on doing it for my grandad when I’ve got some time. I believe it can take a while though.
Excellent guys I totally agree. As ex Royal Armoured Corp, a reliable, easy to maintain and replace items, reasonably comfortable, tried and tested waggon, gets the vote every time. To Fight in an armoured vehicle is not just, drive and fire a big gun.
The fact that we built nearly 50,000 of those in the American midwest and shipped them all over the globe just floors me to this day. What a logistical flex that was!
There’s some great film footage of M3 and M4 factory production on RUclips. The efficiency of the production lines is pretty amazing. Even more so when you consider how quickly those lines were spun up.
Hi mate. My Grandfather fought at the end of WW2 and surrendered near Aachen. He once told us that he and his friends heared tons and tons of stories of fabulous German tanks and about new Wunderwaffen. The propaganda, the officers...stories, stories, stories. He always said then they realized that "hearing" about new, superior weapons mean nothing when you can see allied tanks EVERYWHERE, but you can't see your own. He surrendered with 5 of his mates. And what his buffled him the most was what he saw after that. They where brought to a prisoner camp...and they got a ice cream while stopping on the way. The weeks prior he only had thin soup and moldy bread.
It is overwhelming obvious that you both love your chosen subjects. Thank you for passing on your knowledge. Sometimes, the details that may be obvious to yourselves are an eye opener to us mere mortals. Keep going! Your audience demands more. 😊
You blokes are absolutely awesome! I could watch you both talking WW2 for days. Would so love to do a battlefield tour with you both. Keep up the good work.
Nice to see some love thrown at the Sherman. You guys had a very good point people too often don’t even consider. All of the equipment from America had to be shipped to Europe AND the Pacific. The Germans did not have this issue. This is also part of the reason the Japanese used smaller tanks. Comparing the overall requirements for the US in both theaters against the Germans is comparing apples to potatoes.
Funny you should mention potatoes; in Austria, Switzerland, and even parts of Bavaria, potatoes are more popularly referred to as "Erdapfel" (literally, "Earth apple"). This word has the same root as the French “pomme de terre” (apple of the Earth) and the Dutch “aardappel”, with all three originating from the Latin malum terrae.
Germany hadn't even considered American or Soviet production capacity in the run up to WWII. They were also over optimistic about their own capacity to churn out vehicles, and struggled to replace vehicle losses all through the war.
Brilliant stuff again lads. The Americans did eventually make a loader's hatch in later variants of the Sherman and issued kits to have them retroactively fitted to Shermans already in theatre.
Have to agree the Sherman was the best tank in WW2 .Simply due to ease of repair and production numbers .There is a myth that Shermans couldn't knock out a Tiger or Panther that's not true.
The 75mm was always in question about its firepower against the german big cats. With the addition of the upgunned(76mm) "Easy eight", Firefly and in some cases "Jumbo" the allies threw their hat in the ring. With its reliability, easy maintenance and mass production it has to be considered a winner in WW2. Enjoying the content fellas keep up the good work.
The 75mm gun was never designed to be an anti-tank gun coz the Sherman was an infantry support tank and mobile artillery piece. M10, M18, M26 were TDs. The 76mm Sherman and the Firefly were produced in relatively small numbers.
One role that gets scanted is the airborne corp commander, General Boy Browning. Max Hasting’s new book on Operation Biting goes into more detail on his career than I have seen elsewhere. As an on-the ground Corp commander in Market-Garden it seems Browning was a complete bust. Hasting quotes a rather scathing view on Browning by Jim Gavin.
Browning wasn't responsible for the bad decisions in Market Garden. That was Brereton (his boss in First Allied Airborne Army), Williams of the USAAF and Hollinghurst of the RAF. Plus the individual Airborne commanders. Gavin made his own mistakes around Nijmegen.
Great stuff, but there are some misconceptions 1- Gun overhang. It was not to make shipment easier. For travel the turret was traversed to the 6 o'clock position and locked. No overhang. The 75 was picked because it was already around and fired a pretty good HE round. Tanks were breakthrough/ infantry support. TDs killed tanks 2- gun stabilizer. Kind of true. Most crews disconnected it as it was a safety concern. The gun could make unexpected movements in the turret. Crews just halted to shoot.
The best quote I heard about the Sherman came from a German tanker - a German tank was worth a 100 Sherman tanks, unfortunately there was a 101 Shermans
To me, the Sherman & I've ridden in plenty back in the early 1960's before training on Centurions, it's a symbol of how capital is always more important than human life. Better to fill the pockets of certain preferred rich to than accept a better design. It was all about the money & nothing has changed. - George Kush, UE,CD.
It's a minor point, but James' remark, right at the start, that the M4 is the second most produced tank in the history of armoured warfare is incorrect. Both T-34 and T-54/55 were produced in higher numbers.
One additional factor was the Allies' tank recovery and repair capability, mitigating losses and returning units to the fight. German units were most often just written off and abandoned in the field. This added greatly to force mobility and numerical superiority.
The Germans had their own excellent recovery and repair sections. It was only when the battlefields were overrun by the enemy that they couldn't recover and repair damaged armour.
Hi guys, great channel, great content. Will you be walking the route from the breakout to closing of the falaise gap? Moissy Ford, Chambois etc... Regards Pete
Thanks for the message Pete. We never rule anything out, although at the moment we are looking at areas in London affected by The Blitz, and we might be tempted to make a trip to the Ardennes.
Yes. Quesnay Wood/Estrees la Campagne is always ignored. The Canadian 28th Armoured Regiment lost a whopping 44 Shermans there on 9th August 1944, mostly to a small number of Tiger Is from Schwere SS Panzer Abteilung 101.
I think the M4 is technically the third most produced tank ever. Second is the T-54/T-55 with 96,500 - 100,000+ estimated being built across all variants and multiple countries
I would say the Sherman Firefly is my favourite allied tank ever because it can destroy much German tanks like the Tiger tank’ King Tiger’ Panther’ and Panzer iv’.
About the remark of a piano on a Sherman: in reality the Allied forces around Nijmegen (but probably everywhere) where unbelievable robbers. In the German army the punishment for looting was severe, even execution was possible. So in occupied territories in Western Europe the destruction and looting by German soldiers was relative small. And if it was done, it was on a typical German way: organised and with bureaucracy, like they did in Arnhem. But the Americans, Canadians and British forces (and in that order!) looted every house, every farm and every factory when they stayed a little longer on one place. All the villages in the front areas from Venlo up to Nijmegen and in the Betuwe, where the civilians were evacuated, were completely empty when the allied forces left in April 1945. There is a book about this subject that shows how widespread this behaviour was and how little officers (up to Eisenhower!) did to punish the soldiers or discourage this behaviour. People could understand that they stole things to use in the trenches, like mattresses and blankets. But they stole everything with even a minor value and if they couldn't take it with them to the next place, it was destroyed, burned or left in the field to rot. They opened almost every floor in the unoccupied houses to see if people had hidden their belongings. Eye witnesses saw how this looting only took a few days after September 17th to start. After the war, the USA and UK have paid a large sum of money to the Netherlands government to compensate some of the looting damage in the Venlo/Nijmegen area. But it was not a subject to talk about for the Dutch: the Allies were our liberators and heroes, the Germans the bad guys so much of the damage was blamed on the Germans. And if you had no personal experiences with this, it was not talked about. It is still a subject not popular to talk about because it contradicts the popular view of the allied soldier: all of them were heroes, weren't they? But yes, they even stole complete pianos!
Think the Panther and Tiger crews enjoyed their much more comfortable ride due to the suspension and Panther crews definitely enjoyed their crew compartment heaters in the Ardennes, while the Sherman crews froze their nuts off. There are flip sides to everything. It's not black and white.
@jasonmussett2129 Yeah there is a lot to consider. Overengineering doesn't necessarily mean bad. It can be argued that today's modern MBTs are highly complex and overengineered, but the crews wouldn't swap them for something simpler 🙂
Tommy Cooker "But our men in the tanks in Libya have been exposed to temperatures of 120° and 130° (54 C), whilst I understand apparatus attached to the German tanks will keep their temperature down to round about 80°. Most of our tanks-British-produced tanks-were equipped with a 2-pounder gun. The heavier American tanks, unfortunately too few in number, very excellent machines I believe, were equipped with good guns, but few if any of the British-produced tanks have 6-pounder guns on them. Our field guns, splendid as they are, 35-pounders, were confronted by German field guns which fire 15 rounds a minute as against our 4. The line of German 88 mm. and the heavier 105 mm. guns destroyed our tanks at the un-fortunate engagement of June 13. Those are facts known to the whole of the people and they demand an explanation." para 2 CONDUCT OF THE WAR. HL Deb 01 July 1942 vol 123 cc551-613
The 25 pdr field gun could fire at 6-8 rpm but could never keep up with an 88mm. However the Brit 17 pdr AT gun could fire at 10-20 rpm and keep up with the 88mm. Differences in performance depended on what round was being fired at what target
Is the height of the Sherman product of the French designers influence, I hear that the Lee/Grant M3 (from which the Sherman takes many design influences) was very much influenced by the French. I love these videos chaps, keep them coming!!
Ronson The only problem with the Ronson nickname is the explanation that this was due to the slogan “lights first every time.” The issue is that this slogan appears in almost no surviving print ads, and not in any ads from the period right before or during the war. The most common slogan used in print ads for the Ronson is “The World’s Greatest Lighter.” To a leaser extent, the slogan “Flip… It’s Lit… Release… It’s Out” or “Press… It’s Lit… Release… It’s Out” appears regularly. Nowhere does the slogan “lights first every time” appear, except in a single ad from 1929 which states “Lights every time.” Tank and AFV News From the Editor: Lights First Every Time?
The fact that the Ronson had an advertising slogan pointing out it lights every time in 1929 completely negates ANY point that there wouldn't have been such a saying in WW2.
Uh.. No I don't know that there Was any 1 tank that was best. Definitely not the Sherman in my opinion, maybe the 76mm or the Firefly versions were close
ARTICLE V The Government of the United Kingdom will return to the United States of America at the end of the present emergency, as determined by the President, such defense articles transferred under this Agreement as shall not have been destroyed, lost or consumed and as shall be determined by the President to be useful in the defense of the United States of America or of the Western Hemisphere or to be otherwise of use to the United States of America.
I get the impression from the likes of Steve Zaloga and Nick Moran that certainly if the Pershing had been pushed to be in the line by 1944, it would be a debut catastrophe on a par with the Panther at Kursk, but a LOT harder to send back to the factories or swap out for the updated models.
Centurion was a monster and the m-26 super Pershing was also formidable. In a tank engagement I think they would come out on top with a Tiger. Both had more powerful guns.
There was no pressing desire to design either the Centurion or Pershing until the Tiger I was met in Tunisia at the turn of 1942/43. It was only the appearance of the Tiger that changed the game.
@Greebs229 Panthers weren't a disaster at Kursk. This has become a modern myth. They were in fact quite successful in engaging and knocking out Soviet armour there. The Panthers gun and frontal armour proved itself to be effective. However the task was nigh on impossible. The Soviets had months of preparation, with deep lines of defensive belts. Minefields, trenches, anti tank gun emplacements. Even the so called mechanical problems are exaggerated. The battle report from von Lauchert, commander of the Panther regiment deployed there in two battalions shows that the Panthers out of action and in need of repair were mostly there due to battle damage (particularly the running gear and tracks due to mines and anti tank gun fire) than mechanical failure. Von Lauchert wrote that engine failures decreased after a few days. The engines were simply not 'run in' properly at the beginning. Von Lauchert also wrote that the transmissions did not suffer high amounts of failures and that the modifications done at Grafenwoer in Germany before the battle were successful. Only 2 Panthers caught fire and were total write offs before the battle began. This was due to leaking fuel seals, which were later rectified. The report in full can be found in the Tom Jentz book on the Panther, which remains the best ever work written on this tank. Cheers.
@@Bullet-Tooth-Tony-Well the King Tiger still outgunned and out armoured the 1945 Centurion and Pershing. Super Pershing was ungainly and nose heavy. Only one saw action in WW2. The Super Pershing v King Tiger encounter at Dessau has been discredited. No King Tigers were within 70 miles of Dessau. Nor are there any pictures of this, which would have been the case if it actually happened. It would have been a publicity coup.
Of course it was the best, it worked in Africa, the Pacific Islands, the Aluetians, north west Europe... and so on. It could get anywhere and compete. No other vehicle could.
allies were told to burn a tank out if it was being abandoned, there were a lot of abandoned allied tanks...... lots of burnt out allied tanks.... you don't say 😂
I know it's fuel but the Sherman runs on diesel engines, so surely that would have had no bearing on brewing up? The German tanks were petrol which is far more flammable, but a naked flame will not set fire to diesel
Diesel may not be flammable in the same way as petrol, for example a spark won't make it go, but diesel will still brew up when exposed to heat and pressure, both of which are present when a fuel tank takes a hit. It's why in a diesel engine you find a Glow Plug that generates heat rather than a traditional Spark Plug like in petrol cars.
The Sherman M4A4 & Firefly variant used by UK & Commonwealth forces had a engine comprising of a bank of 5 Chrysler engines, that's a lot of oil to burn and flow into the crew compartment if hit on the rear.
Early versions used the Continental R-975 9 cilinder radial petrol engine (hence the high profile). Depending on the version there were then Ford V-8, Chrysler multibank and also some diesels. After the war many Shermans were converted to diesels. My favorite is the Firefly with it's 17 pounder and the original R-975.
Ammunition propellant is the reason they brew up so quickly, hence the innovation of wet stowage. Reduced the incidence of burning from 60-80% down to 10-15%
There was no top or best tank of WW2. Each nation had its own needs and parameters. Shermans wouldn't have served the Germans any better than what they had when the allies had numerical superiority, overwhelming air support and no lack of resources and well trained replacement crews. A British 21st Army Group medical report showed that the Cromwell was actually safer and more survivable than the Sherman, and other analysis showed it was more automotively reliable. Obviously the Cromwell wasn't the top tank of the war either.
Still pushing this nonsense. If easier to produce, maintain and operate are the criteria to judge a tank on then the Sherman is better than an Abrams or Challenger. We've been wasting billions on new technology when the good old Sherman would have been enough. Think this theory was literally annihilated on the Iraq battlefields when Western tanks wiped out the Russian 'Shermans' faster than they could reverse.
The Sherman M-50 and the Sherman M-51, both often referred to abroad as the Super Sherman, were modified versions of the American M4 Sherman tank that served with the Israel Defense Forces from the mid-1950s to early 1980s. The M-51 was also referred to as the Isherman (i.e. Israeli Sherman). However, the nicknames "Super Sherman" and "Isherman" were never officially used by the Israeli Defense Forces.
Absolutely nailed on post. It was Sherman production numbers that told just like the T-34. Not the merits of the tank itself. The Sherman was pretty good but not the best tank of WW2. There was no such thing. Each country had different requirements and parameters.
I’ve never heard anyone wax lyrical and so fascinatingly about a tank gents. Is there anything you don’t know about the war? Another cracking episode. Makes you realise how important the battle for the Atlantic was in terms of shipping the numbers of the things over. Loved it as usual
Thank you kindly! And thank you for watching.
Clearly you've never watched any of the Tank Museum's shorts and vids... 😃
@ 😂😂I know, I haven’t lived
@@seanbradley2134 And with a name like Bradley....
@@wessexdruid7598 yeah I know. Hopefully this podcast will keep plugging holes of my ignorance
Anyone looking to dig in more on the Sherman would do well to look up Chieftain’s videos on the development of the M4 and his “Myths of American” armor is fantastic. As far as books go Steven Zaloga’s Armored Thunderbolt is a wealth of knowledge on the M4. Highly recommend.
We always forget that they were ALL a target.
Loving your videos thank you. My late father-in-law was a driver/mechanic in a 75mm Sherman M4A4 tank with the Grenadier Guards, 2nd Bn, Guards Armoured Division, late 1944, when he was 18yrs old, to war’s end, followed by occupation forces in Germany until 1951. Would very rarely talk about his experiences, only time he spoke at length was on a joint visit to the Bovington Museum in the 1980s, where he stated he undertook a lot of his training. Next to the exact type of type of Sherman he drove was a bank of 5 Chrysler engines. Recall he stated during training he was shown into a large building where there was a huge heap of the 5 engines completely stripped down and he was given a strict time limit to rebuild all 5. Sadly he passed away in the early 2000s, I’m currently researching family history so if someone could point me in the direction to obtain his service record I would be very obliged.
If you Google service records there’s a link you can the MOD, where you can apply for service records if you’re next of kin. I’m planning on doing it for my grandad when I’ve got some time. I believe it can take a while though.
Excellent guys I totally agree. As ex Royal Armoured Corp, a reliable, easy to maintain and replace items, reasonably comfortable, tried and tested waggon, gets the vote every time. To Fight in an armoured vehicle is not just, drive and fire a big gun.
The fact that we built nearly 50,000 of those in the American midwest and shipped them all over the globe just floors me to this day. What a logistical flex that was!
There’s some great film footage of M3 and M4 factory production on RUclips. The efficiency of the production lines is pretty amazing. Even more so when you consider how quickly those lines were spun up.
Hi mate.
My Grandfather fought at the end of WW2 and surrendered near Aachen.
He once told us that he and his friends heared tons and tons of stories of fabulous German tanks and about new Wunderwaffen. The propaganda, the officers...stories, stories, stories.
He always said then they realized that "hearing" about new, superior weapons mean nothing when you can see allied tanks EVERYWHERE, but you can't see your own.
He surrendered with 5 of his mates. And what his buffled him the most was what he saw after that. They where brought to a prisoner camp...and they got a ice cream while stopping on the way.
The weeks prior he only had thin soup and moldy bread.
It is overwhelming obvious that you both love your chosen subjects. Thank you for passing on your knowledge. Sometimes, the details that may be obvious to yourselves are an eye opener to us mere mortals. Keep going! Your audience demands more. 😊
I’m so glad I found this series.
A good reliable tank and made much more effective with the British 17 pounder.
To quote a line from Band of Brothers from Webster "Say hello to Ford & General E'fin Motors!"
You blokes are absolutely awesome! I could watch you both talking WW2 for days. Would so love to do a battlefield tour with you both. Keep up the good work.
Thanks Sean.
01:10 "Simplify (and add lightness)" - Colin Chapman.
Nice to see some love thrown at the Sherman. You guys had a very good point people too often don’t even consider. All of the equipment from America had to be shipped to Europe AND the Pacific. The Germans did not have this issue. This is also part of the reason the Japanese used smaller tanks. Comparing the overall requirements for the US in both theaters against the Germans is comparing apples to potatoes.
Funny you should mention potatoes; in Austria, Switzerland, and even parts of Bavaria, potatoes are more popularly referred to as "Erdapfel" (literally, "Earth apple"). This word has the same root as the French “pomme de terre” (apple of the Earth) and the Dutch “aardappel”, with all three originating from the Latin malum terrae.
Germany hadn't even considered American or Soviet production capacity in the run up to WWII. They were also over optimistic about their own capacity to churn out vehicles, and struggled to replace vehicle losses all through the war.
Amazing knowledge to share with us as usual, thank you Gents 👍👍
Thank you sir!
Brilliant stuff again lads. The Americans did eventually make a loader's hatch in later variants of the Sherman and issued kits to have them retroactively fitted to Shermans already in theatre.
Have to agree the Sherman was the best tank in WW2 .Simply due to ease of repair and production numbers .There is a myth that Shermans couldn't knock out a Tiger or Panther that's not true.
George Dring took out two Tigers in one day.
You guys are hilarious,love the series,keep it up!
Thanks! Will do!
Really enjoyed the video mate that's my favourite tank
The 75mm was always in question about its firepower against the german big cats. With the addition of the upgunned(76mm) "Easy eight", Firefly and in some cases "Jumbo" the allies threw their hat in the ring. With its reliability, easy maintenance and mass production it has to be considered a winner in WW2. Enjoying the content fellas keep up the good work.
The 75mm gun was never designed to be an anti-tank gun coz the Sherman was an infantry support tank and mobile artillery piece. M10, M18, M26 were TDs. The 76mm Sherman and the Firefly were produced in relatively small numbers.
The 75mm also had problems frontally against the Jagdpanzer IV and even the little Hetzer.
One role that gets scanted is the airborne corp commander, General Boy Browning.
Max Hasting’s new book on Operation Biting goes into more detail on his career than I have seen elsewhere. As an on-the ground Corp commander in Market-Garden it seems Browning was a complete bust. Hasting quotes a rather scathing view on Browning by Jim Gavin.
Browning wasn't responsible for the bad decisions in Market Garden. That was Brereton (his boss in First Allied Airborne Army), Williams of the USAAF and Hollinghurst of the RAF. Plus the individual Airborne commanders.
Gavin made his own mistakes around Nijmegen.
Great stuff, but there are some misconceptions
1- Gun overhang. It was not to make shipment easier. For travel the turret was traversed to the 6 o'clock position and locked. No overhang. The 75 was picked because it was already around and fired a pretty good HE round. Tanks were breakthrough/ infantry support. TDs killed tanks
2- gun stabilizer. Kind of true. Most crews disconnected it as it was a safety concern. The gun could make unexpected movements in the turret. Crews just halted to shoot.
Thank you for sharing your expertise. And thank you for watching the channel!
You’ve included some US centric prepositions. EG TD’s were a significant part of US doctrine and not universal.
The best quote I heard about the Sherman came from a German tanker - a German tank was worth a 100 Sherman tanks, unfortunately there was a 101 Shermans
Simply Brilliant- Love it!
To me, the Sherman & I've ridden in plenty back in the early 1960's before training on Centurions, it's a symbol of how capital is always more important than human life. Better to fill the pockets of certain preferred rich to than accept a better design. It was all about the money & nothing has changed. - George Kush, UE,CD.
It's a minor point, but James' remark, right at the start, that the M4 is the second most produced tank in the history of armoured warfare is incorrect. Both T-34 and T-54/55 were produced in higher numbers.
One additional factor was the Allies' tank recovery and repair capability, mitigating losses and returning units to the fight. German units were most often just written off and abandoned in the field. This added greatly to force mobility and numerical superiority.
The Germans had their own excellent recovery and repair sections. It was only when the battlefields were overrun by the enemy that they couldn't recover and repair damaged armour.
Hi guys, great channel, great content. Will you be walking the route from the breakout to closing of the falaise gap? Moissy Ford, Chambois etc... Regards Pete
Thanks for the message Pete. We never rule anything out, although at the moment we are looking at areas in London affected by The Blitz, and we might be tempted to make a trip to the Ardennes.
I look forward to the blitz vid. That will prompt a trip to the V rocket launch sites. Keep up the good work.
Yes. Quesnay Wood/Estrees la Campagne is always ignored. The Canadian 28th Armoured Regiment lost a whopping 44 Shermans there on 9th August 1944, mostly to a small number of Tiger Is from Schwere SS Panzer Abteilung 101.
Use the Sherman to get rid of granny in her Suzuki 😂. Great chat as usual, gentlemen.
It for this very reason we will be worried if James ever gets his wish-list Sherman.
Excellent, chaps.
I think the M4 is technically the third most produced tank ever. Second is the T-54/T-55 with 96,500 - 100,000+ estimated being built across all variants and multiple countries
Quite a tall profile when compared to a stug which must have been concerning in the bocage. Great vantage but with downsides.
I dunno, fear factor of the sherman is its not 1, where the hell are the other 2 or 5 or 20, where there's one there are many, tigers... not so much
Gunter Grossman said as soon as he saw a Sherman (Firefly) knock out a Panther at 900yds he knew the war was over.
The Panther could knock the Sherman Firefly out at 2,000 yards or more.
I would say the Sherman Firefly is my favourite allied tank ever because it can destroy much German tanks like the Tiger tank’ King Tiger’ Panther’ and Panzer iv’.
Four mechanical items won WW2 for the Allies: the Jeep, the Sherman, the T34 and the P38 can opener. All characterised by simplicity and reliability.
Depends of the fuel type. Diesel fuel (T35) is much harder to set alight than petrol (Sherman). I agree with Al... The Comet was a better tank
how many in service before 1945 ?
About the remark of a piano on a Sherman: in reality the Allied forces around Nijmegen (but probably everywhere) where unbelievable robbers. In the German army the punishment for looting was severe, even execution was possible. So in occupied territories in Western Europe the destruction and looting by German soldiers was relative small. And if it was done, it was on a typical German way: organised and with bureaucracy, like they did in Arnhem.
But the Americans, Canadians and British forces (and in that order!) looted every house, every farm and every factory when they stayed a little longer on one place. All the villages in the front areas from Venlo up to Nijmegen and in the Betuwe, where the civilians were evacuated, were completely empty when the allied forces left in April 1945. There is a book about this subject that shows how widespread this behaviour was and how little officers (up to Eisenhower!) did to punish the soldiers or discourage this behaviour. People could understand that they stole things to use in the trenches, like mattresses and blankets. But they stole everything with even a minor value and if they couldn't take it with them to the next place, it was destroyed, burned or left in the field to rot. They opened almost every floor in the unoccupied houses to see if people had hidden their belongings. Eye witnesses saw how this looting only took a few days after September 17th to start.
After the war, the USA and UK have paid a large sum of money to the Netherlands government to compensate some of the looting damage in the Venlo/Nijmegen area. But it was not a subject to talk about for the Dutch: the Allies were our liberators and heroes, the Germans the bad guys so much of the damage was blamed on the Germans. And if you had no personal experiences with this, it was not talked about. It is still a subject not popular to talk about because it contradicts the popular view of the allied soldier: all of them were heroes, weren't they?
But yes, they even stole complete pianos!
The Germans took my granny’s bike, the yanks stole our watches and standing clock..
Does it have a BV?
Oh no guys! Talking about the suspension of a Panther, showing a Tiger?😮
Our mistake using the clip from Fury in this part of the video. Good spot.
Both the Tiger and the Panther were overengineered, the Sherman was so much simpler
Think the Panther and Tiger crews enjoyed their much more comfortable ride due to the suspension and Panther crews definitely enjoyed their crew compartment heaters in the Ardennes, while the Sherman crews froze their nuts off.
There are flip sides to everything. It's not black and white.
@lyndoncmp5751 totally agree
@jasonmussett2129 Yeah there is a lot to consider. Overengineering doesn't necessarily mean bad. It can be argued that today's modern MBTs are highly complex and overengineered, but the crews wouldn't swap them for something simpler 🙂
@lyndoncmp5751 Absolutely. As Stalin said 'quantity has a quality all of its own.' I would rather have been in a Panther than a Sherman 🤔
strength in numbers
"Quantity has a Quality all of its own." Soviet doctrine.
@@wessexdruid7598 good comment
Tommy Cooker "But our men in the tanks in Libya have been exposed to temperatures of 120° and 130° (54 C), whilst I understand apparatus attached to the German tanks will keep their temperature down to round about 80°. Most of our tanks-British-produced tanks-were equipped with a 2-pounder gun. The heavier American tanks, unfortunately too few in number, very excellent machines I believe, were equipped with good guns, but few if any of the British-produced tanks have 6-pounder guns on them. Our field guns, splendid as they are, 35-pounders, were confronted by German field guns which fire 15 rounds a minute as against our 4. The line of German 88 mm. and the heavier 105 mm. guns destroyed our tanks at the un-fortunate engagement of June 13. Those are facts known to the whole of the people and they demand an explanation."
para 2
CONDUCT OF THE WAR.
HL Deb 01 July 1942 vol 123 cc551-613
_Thirty_ five pounders??
@@wessexdruid7598 Fat Finger Trouble followed by failure to proof read before hitting 'send'.. 3 is next to 2.
The 25 pdr field gun could fire at 6-8 rpm but could never keep up with an 88mm. However the Brit 17 pdr AT gun could fire at 10-20 rpm and keep up with the 88mm. Differences in performance depended on what round was being fired at what target
Is the height of the Sherman product of the French designers influence, I hear that the Lee/Grant M3 (from which the Sherman takes many design influences) was very much influenced by the French. I love these videos chaps, keep them coming!!
The height is a result of having a driveshaft running from engine at back to gearbox at front. The turret basket has to rotate above that.
Ronson The only problem with the Ronson nickname is the explanation that this was due to the slogan “lights first every time.” The issue is that this slogan appears in almost no surviving print ads, and not in any ads from the period right before or during the war. The most common slogan used in print ads for the Ronson is “The World’s Greatest Lighter.” To a leaser extent, the slogan “Flip… It’s Lit… Release… It’s Out” or “Press… It’s Lit… Release… It’s Out” appears regularly. Nowhere does the slogan “lights first every time” appear, except in a single ad from 1929 which states “Lights every time.”
Tank and AFV News
From the Editor: Lights First Every Time?
The fact that the Ronson had an advertising slogan pointing out it lights every time in 1929 completely negates ANY point that there wouldn't have been such a saying in WW2.
Uh.. No
I don't know that there Was any 1 tank that was best.
Definitely not the Sherman in my opinion, maybe the 76mm or the Firefly versions were close
Thank you fellas for fighting the still persistent Nazi propaganda that they had the best kit!
The Sherman certainly wasn't the best kit.
How are we even still talking about this?? 😂 Of course the M4 Sherman is the best tank of the war. 🎉🎉🎉
1:24 Not a Panther, but never mind, details aren't important on the internet. Anyway it was close.
Now I want both you guys to bring out your own ‘top trumps’!
Knowing that you only pay for lend lease stuff if you still have it at the end of the war, it's probably good that it wasn't built to last!
ARTICLE V
The Government of the United Kingdom will return to the United States of America at the end of the present emergency, as determined by the President, such defense articles transferred under this Agreement as shall not have been destroyed, lost or consumed and as shall be determined by the President to be useful in the defense of the United States of America or of the Western Hemisphere or to be otherwise of use to the United States of America.
Could the Centurion and Pershing have been developed sooner? Would they have made a significant difference in 1944?
I get the impression from the likes of Steve Zaloga and Nick Moran that certainly if the Pershing had been pushed to be in the line by 1944, it would be a debut catastrophe on a par with the Panther at Kursk, but a LOT harder to send back to the factories or swap out for the updated models.
Centurion was a monster and the m-26 super Pershing was also formidable. In a tank engagement I think they would come out on top with a Tiger. Both had more powerful guns.
There was no pressing desire to design either the Centurion or Pershing until the Tiger I was met in Tunisia at the turn of 1942/43.
It was only the appearance of the Tiger that changed the game.
@Greebs229
Panthers weren't a disaster at Kursk. This has become a modern myth. They were in fact quite successful in engaging and knocking out Soviet armour there. The Panthers gun and frontal armour proved itself to be effective. However the task was nigh on impossible. The Soviets had months of preparation, with deep lines of defensive belts. Minefields, trenches, anti tank gun emplacements.
Even the so called mechanical problems are exaggerated.
The battle report from von Lauchert, commander of the Panther regiment deployed there in two battalions shows that the Panthers out of action and in need of repair were mostly there due to battle damage (particularly the running gear and tracks due to mines and anti tank gun fire) than mechanical failure.
Von Lauchert wrote that engine failures decreased after a few days. The engines were simply not 'run in' properly at the beginning. Von Lauchert also wrote that the transmissions did not suffer high amounts of failures and that the modifications done at Grafenwoer in Germany before the battle were successful.
Only 2 Panthers caught fire and were total write offs before the battle began. This was due to leaking fuel seals, which were later rectified.
The report in full can be found in the Tom Jentz book on the Panther, which remains the best ever work written on this tank.
Cheers.
@@Bullet-Tooth-Tony-Well the King Tiger still outgunned and out armoured the 1945 Centurion and Pershing.
Super Pershing was ungainly and nose heavy. Only one saw action in WW2. The Super Pershing v King Tiger encounter at Dessau has been discredited. No King Tigers were within 70 miles of Dessau. Nor are there any pictures of this, which would have been the case if it actually happened. It would have been a publicity coup.
Of course it was the best, it worked in Africa, the Pacific Islands, the Aluetians, north west Europe... and so on. It could get anywhere and compete. No other vehicle could.
Sorry to be picky guys but there were no leopard 2s in WW2.
allies were told to burn a tank out if it was being abandoned, there were a lot of abandoned allied tanks...... lots of burnt out allied tanks.... you don't say 😂
I know it's fuel but the Sherman runs on diesel engines, so surely that would have had no bearing on brewing up? The German tanks were petrol which is far more flammable, but a naked flame will not set fire to diesel
Diesel may not be flammable in the same way as petrol, for example a spark won't make it go, but diesel will still brew up when exposed to heat and pressure, both of which are present when a fuel tank takes a hit. It's why in a diesel engine you find a Glow Plug that generates heat rather than a traditional Spark Plug like in petrol cars.
The Sherman M4A4 & Firefly variant used by UK & Commonwealth forces had a engine comprising of a bank of 5 Chrysler engines, that's a lot of oil to burn and flow into the crew compartment if hit on the rear.
Early versions used the Continental R-975 9 cilinder radial petrol engine (hence the high profile). Depending on the version there were then Ford V-8, Chrysler multibank and also some diesels. After the war many Shermans were converted to diesels.
My favorite is the Firefly with it's 17 pounder and the original R-975.
British crews preferred the petrol-engined variants to the later diesels, for their performance.
Ammunition propellant is the reason they brew up so quickly, hence the innovation of wet stowage. Reduced the incidence of burning from 60-80% down to 10-15%
There was no top or best tank of WW2. Each nation had its own needs and parameters.
Shermans wouldn't have served the Germans any better than what they had when the allies had numerical superiority, overwhelming air support and no lack of resources and well trained replacement crews.
A British 21st Army Group medical report showed that the Cromwell was actually safer and more survivable than the Sherman, and other analysis showed it was more automotively reliable. Obviously the Cromwell wasn't the top tank of the war either.
Ditch…..culvert……😊
Asked and answered previously - James needs to read the comments!
It's now our running joke as there was such brilliant discussions on here when James couldn't remember the difference during our Normandy series.
No it wasn't but a great piece of rhyming slang
Still pushing this nonsense.
If easier to produce, maintain and operate are the criteria to judge a tank on then the Sherman is better than an Abrams or Challenger.
We've been wasting billions on new technology when the good old Sherman would have been enough. Think this theory was literally annihilated on the Iraq battlefields when Western tanks wiped out the Russian 'Shermans' faster than they could reverse.
The Sherman M-50 and the Sherman M-51, both often referred to abroad as the Super Sherman, were modified versions of the American M4 Sherman tank that served with the Israel Defense Forces from the mid-1950s to early 1980s. The M-51 was also referred to as the Isherman (i.e. Israeli Sherman). However, the nicknames "Super Sherman" and "Isherman" were never officially used by the Israeli Defense Forces.
Absolutely nailed on post.
It was Sherman production numbers that told just like the T-34. Not the merits of the tank itself. The Sherman was pretty good but not the best tank of WW2. There was no such thing. Each country had different requirements and parameters.
“This is the embodiment of the thinking of American mass production”
It is the dialectic opposite of the Nazi mentality.
And who won? Just sayin’
What point are you making?
@@Chris-lr2qbI was wondering that myself.
Who won? The British Commonwealth, USSR and USA. In other words the COMBINED allies.
Nothing is the best in range of an AP lark ✌️
Designed so that any farm boys could easily service them in the field