Bobgnar | 27 May 2016 7:23 a.m. PST |
A friend is graduating high school and I want to get him some books on armor warfare. He ins interested in tanks but most knowledge is from the web. When I was that age, I enjoyed Brazen Chariots and Panzer Leader. What other such new books are there? I read those 50 years ago. Perhaps an American story. |
15mm and 28mm Fanatik | 27 May 2016 7:53 a.m. PST |
'Patton's Panthers' by Charles Sasser 'Death Traps' by Belton Cooper |
Hafen von Schlockenberg | 27 May 2016 8:27 a.m. PST |
Better run,28,you just poked a hornet nest! |
rmaker | 27 May 2016 8:31 a.m. PST |
Cooper is an interesting read, but it is well to remember that it is the 50+ year old memories of an ordnance officer who was never within 20 miles of the front, which, furthermore, are not borne out by the records of his unit. |
boy wundyr x | 27 May 2016 8:56 a.m. PST |
A second for Patton's Panthers, very readable. There's another couple that are more general histories of tanks in the last century: CLASH OF CHARIOTS: The Great Tank Battles by Tom Donnelly and Sean Naylor IRON FIST: Classic Armored Warfare Case Studies by Bryan Perrett And there are some nice coffee table books for WWII gearheads, lots of photos and stats, Amber has cheap "light" versions of these, usually discounted in the big box book stores. If you think he's interested in gaming with WWII tanks, there's: link |
15mm and 28mm Fanatik | 27 May 2016 9:14 a.m. PST |
DT is a harsh indictment of the Sherman tank, but that doesn't mean you can't keep an open mind and derive something useful from it. Just bear in mind that in the final analysis the Sherman's virtues of overwhelming numbers, speed/mobility, reliability and maintainability override its perceived weaknesses in armor protection and firepower (at least for the earlier variants). |
john lacour | 27 May 2016 9:29 a.m. PST |
Well, if you go along with Steve(I'm always right)Zaloga, coppers book is complete bs. He rips that book apart, any chance he gets. On the other hand, Mr Copper was there, was'nt he? I found Death Traps to be a fine read, and the man certainly was closer than 20 miles from the front. Read the book. Its worth it. |
troopwo | 27 May 2016 12:03 p.m. PST |
|
jdginaz | 27 May 2016 4:01 p.m. PST |
Mr. Zaloga's critic is pretty comprehensive so no there isn't much useful that can be gleaned form DT especially for someone fairly new to the subject. Remember Mr. Copper's job was to recover broken down knocked out tanks so his view of the Sherman was only of one side of the war. |
Marc33594 | 28 May 2016 6:46 a.m. PST |
Back on topic you might want to give "Steel Victory: The Heroic Story of America's Independent Tank Battalions at War in Europe" by Harry Yeide a look. Lots of first person accounts keeps this one moving right along. |
sebastien | 28 May 2016 9:47 a.m. PST |
|
Marc33594 | 28 May 2016 2:42 p.m. PST |
For those who would like to revisit a critique of Mr Cooper's book I highly recommend scrolling down on this previous topic and read Mark 1's input. Very well said. TMP link |
john lacour | 28 May 2016 7:13 p.m. PST |
Yes. Yes. Well, I have also met Zaloga, and the guys a know it all ass. Hmmm…A book by a guy that was there, or zaloga…I'll take the guy who was there. |
Marc33594 | 29 May 2016 5:27 a.m. PST |
These discussions about Cooper's book always seem to go the same way. One groups does not attack Mr Cooper but rather his "facts" pointing out multiple sources, not just Mr Zaloga, to support their criticism. The other side presents no objective data to support Mr Cooper. They always zero on on Mr Zaloga but present no objective data showing where he is incorrect. Rather it falls into the category of he is an ass. Ass or not has no relevance on his data (and for the record I too have met Mr Zaloga and found him a gentleman and a scholar). And Mr Zaloga is not alone in his assessments yet there have been no other books, data, or memoirs which bear out Mr Cooper's "facts". Mark 1 points out 10 errors on one page alone. And that page is hardly unique. Now do the same with a book on the topic by Mr Zaloga please. Or Mr Yeide. Or Mr Hunnington. Being present at an event doesnt mean you have it right. |
john lacour | 29 May 2016 1:55 p.m. PST |
So you are honestly saying Mr Cooper has no idea what he's talking about. Him being there and all… |
wrgmr1 | 29 May 2016 7:24 p.m. PST |
+2 for Ken Tout's books. Also Mailed Fist, by John Foley. He was a Churchill troop commander. |
Marc33594 | 30 May 2016 7:40 a.m. PST |
Another interesting one, from the Russian perspective. "Commanding the Red Army's Sherman Tanks: The World War II Memoirs of Hero of the Soviet Union Dmitriy Loza" translated and edited by James F. Gebhardt. |
Bobgnar | 31 May 2016 2:39 p.m. PST |
I thought I would go with Tank by Ken Trout as there was no bad discussion but It was a bit steep in price:( Hardcover from $137.27 USD Paperback from $92.47 USD So I went to Clash of Chariots but on Amazon we find poor ratings with this ""Clash of Chariots" is a shoddy piece of scholarship and writing. My guess is the author's could never decide on who their audience really was." so I went with"ron Fist Classic Armoured Warfare Case", no reviews but only $30. USD |
Thomas Thomas | 01 Jun 2016 12:30 p.m. PST |
Both Cooper and Zaloga are worth reading but both must be read with caution. Zaloga is very pro-allied and tends to select only battles and data that support his the M4 was really a great tank theory. With this in mind his data is useful as at least a starting point. Because Cooper has undermined Zaloga's theory, he attacks him without relent on every bit of trivia he can uncover. Cooper was not a rivet counter and gets some technical stuff wrong. Cooper doesn't have the perspective of an historian but it was his business to repair tanks and he spoke to tankers and understood their perspective in having to use an under gunned tank. I suspect you want a book re interesting tank battles. Yeidle's work is fun though very pro-US. Otto Caus' Tigers in the Mud is fun but very pro-German. Stuff by Kenneth Macksey and Dennis Showalter (try Hitler's Panzers – a name marketer's love) are better balanced but in being so become less rock em sock em fun. TomT |
Jemima Fawr | 03 Jun 2016 6:47 a.m. PST |
Bonkers prices… New from £807.00 GBP???!!! Still, the paperback prices are a bit better here: link |
Mark 1 | 05 Jun 2016 10:34 p.m. PST |
So you are honestly saying Mr Cooper has no idea what he's talking about. Him being there and all… Was he there? Where is this "there" that he was? He writes that the reason the Pershing was delayed was that Patton didn't want it. He writes that the US Army could have rolled ashore on D-Day with Pershings, except for Patton's interference. How was he "there"? Was he on Patton's staff? No. Was he at Ordnance working on tank development? No. Was he at the Armnor Board working on new tank acceptance testing? No. Was he at SHAEF issuing/reviewing materials planning? No. Was he at SHAEF working on D-Day logistics planning? No. SO where exactly was he, that makes him "there"? He says Shermans were death traps. Did he provide any data on the number of crew deaths per tank destroyed in Sherman crewss compared to Cromwell crews? No. Panther crews? No. Pz IV crews? No. Tiger crews? No. Did he provide any data on what percentage of Shermans deployed were destroyed in action? No. on Cromwells? No. On Panthers? No. Pz IVs? No. Tigers? No. He spouts off some big numbers on the number of Shermans lost. Where did he find these numbers? Did he do research into primary documents? No. Was he at 3rd Army or 1st Army or ANY Army HQ compiling or reviewing the reports on vehicle attrition rates? No. He didn't see Shermans winning. He didn't see Panthers torn up and splashed all over with blood inside. So where was he that he was "there"? He was a jr. officer who's job was to recover tanks. The Shermans he saw usually had holes in them and blood inside. If you've ever cleaned up the mess created by what modern war movies glibly portray as pink mist, you'd know it sucks. It's a terrible job. It messes you up. And after terrible days "at the office" he probably sat around trading stories with whoever was within earshot. So he accumulated a collection of all the hearsay in the REMF community, and 50 years later regurgitated it into a book. And now we should consider it the revealed truth. Because he was "there". Because the guys in the U.S. Army Ballistics Research Laboratory (BRL) that methodically compiled the data from all of the daily AARs of both the 3rd and 4th US Armored Divisions from August to December of 1944 in their study and analysis of tank vs. tank engagements weren't "there" enough for us to consider their information credible.* We'd rather accept the 50 year old recollections of a guy who never participated in combat with or around Sherman tanks. Because he was "there". Is that the "there" are we talking about? *The BRL report, written in 1954, provides extensive data on combat results when US3AD and US4AD Shermans met Panthers in combat. That data was presented as part of the research in Osprey's Duel #13: Panther vs Sherman, Battle of the Bulge 1944 by Steven Zaloga. BTW – no, I wasn't there, and don't claim I was. I am an avid reader of first-hand accounts by those who were there. If Cooper wrote of the day-to-day challenges of AFV recovery and rear-area life in ETO I'd probably be a fan. But what he wrote is way beyond his "there" credentials. -Mark (aka: Mk 1) |