Tango01 | 23 Dec 2021 8:55 p.m. PST |
""The Battle of the Bulge exposed deficiencies in the M4 so glaringly obvious, what became known as the Sherman Tank Scandal would be splashed across front pages all over the Allied world." THE SHERMAN TANK — who hasn't cheered it in Hollywood epics like A Bridge Too Far, Band of Brothers, or The Pacific? Just when all hope seemed lost, a column of Shermans arrives in the nick of time to save embattled American soldiers. Great cinematic moments like these are spot on, aren't they? The Sherman was the tank that won the war, right? Well, not exactly…" Main page link Armand
|
Editor in Chief Bill | 23 Dec 2021 10:12 p.m. PST |
the mighty M4 Sherman???? I missed that myth. |
deadhead | 24 Dec 2021 2:09 a.m. PST |
We have a much better discussion currently running here; TMP link |
UshCha | 24 Dec 2021 3:29 a.m. PST |
Yup usual drivel, not understanding what a tank has to do. Losing a few more tanks is small beer to having a tank that lest face it most of the time is saving more infantry lives than its losing tank lives. Much better thread a as deadhead pointed out. |
Starfury Rider | 24 Dec 2021 3:32 a.m. PST |
There are also a couple of threads on exactly the same link as I recall. Gary |
mkenny | 24 Dec 2021 3:35 a.m. PST |
The author ( Christian M. DeJohn) was very active online when his book was published and he used aliases to attack and denigrate anyone who criticised his work. The book itself was extremely badly referenced and in fact full of lies and invention. |
walkabout | 24 Dec 2021 6:34 a.m. PST |
Here is an article showing the problems with Chrisitian M. DeJohns book link |
Totenkopf | 24 Dec 2021 9:12 a.m. PST |
the mighty M4 Sherman???? grin I missed that myth. You weren't the only one. |
Griefbringer | 24 Dec 2021 9:58 a.m. PST |
There are also a couple of threads on exactly the same link as I recall. You wouldn't be thinking of these ones? TMP link TMP link |
Buck215 | 24 Dec 2021 10:48 a.m. PST |
"Mighty" and "M4 Sherman" in the same sentence just does not go together. |
0ldYeller | 24 Dec 2021 11:23 a.m. PST |
I have never understood that anyone called the Sherman "mighty" or even thought it was a great tank. It had serious problems – but was easily massed produced and, I believe, easily maintained (relative to some of the more complicated German models). It was quantity over quality issue. Seems like this dude made up an issue to write a book about – which seems to be a trend these days. The Sherman "myth"? – never heard of it. |
Frederick | 24 Dec 2021 11:45 a.m. PST |
The Sherman was a good tank – maybe not a great one, but a good one – as I recall some British tankers issued with Cromwells were nostalgic for their Shermans Plus – I mean, who won? |
mkenny | 24 Dec 2021 11:54 a.m. PST |
Seems like this dude made up an issue to write a book about He made an 'issue' of everything. Sued his teacher because his Thesis (which became the book) was rejected as rubbish and sued Carlisle because he applied for a job there and didn't get it. He rampaged through forums savagely attacking anyone who found fault with his book (i.e.nearly everyone) and he came across as a very unpleasant vindictive man. |
Baranovich | 24 Dec 2021 12:18 p.m. PST |
I forget what show it was on, but I recall a WWII tank crew veteran describing the Sherman as a metal "government issue coffin". |
14Bore | 24 Dec 2021 4:25 p.m. PST |
Seems the equation of firepower, mobility and protection the Sherman gave up firepower maybe some protection for mobility, the Panther and even more Tiger had all kinds of protection and firepower but hardly get out of their own way for breaking down. |
OSCS74 | 24 Dec 2021 4:52 p.m. PST |
I missed that myth also. I also think anyone with any knowledge of WW2 tactics understands why the Sherman was kept in mass production. |
Bunkermeister | 24 Dec 2021 5:48 p.m. PST |
Some people seem to think tanks fight 1 to 1 on a pool table smooth flat surface. They are part of a combined arms team of artillery, infantry, air support and logistics. Take out any of those and the Sherman is inadequate. But it did what it was designed do to, be mass produced, shipped overseas, in all environments from desert to snow to rain forest and with other US and Allied forces fight the enemy and win. It did that. Would the US have been better off with 50,000 Tiger II or Panther thanks? I think not. Mike Bunkermeister Creek Bunker Talk blog |
Disco Joe | 24 Dec 2021 7:20 p.m. PST |
So Armand is reposting what he has already posted twice before then. |
Marc33594 | 25 Dec 2021 6:35 a.m. PST |
Walkabout's link really tells you all you need to know about this book. I find it deliciously ironic Mr DeJohn urged AMPS (which is an excellent group to join if interested in armor by the way with a very good magazine) to review the book! |
Florida Tory | 25 Dec 2021 7:12 a.m. PST |
I found the Soviet officer Dmitriy Loza's views, based on his experience commanding Shermans, to be persuasive. He argues that the Sherman was the best tank of the war, but it had to b be used properly. I particular, he thinks head forward charges straight into the enemy were unwise. link Rick |
Blaubaer | 25 Dec 2021 8:07 a.m. PST |
Hello, once I read the Sherman tanks lost the smallest crewnumbers per lost tank, in competition with T34, Pzkw 4 and maybe Panther. The Sherman have a lot of internal space, an escape hatch for anyone (even in the ground), good radio communication, good engines and a good gun (75 mm). A lot of spare parts, fuel & ammunition. Easy to maintain & use. A very good tank, at its time. Sebastian |
alexpainter | 25 Dec 2021 8:32 a.m. PST |
The Sherman hadn't been build to go toe to toe with an enemy heavy tank (non-existent when it was on the drawing board!, the most powerful tank in the axis arsenal in the early '42 was the PzIV, and the M4 was more than apt to confront it, it was build as a mass produced,well armed, easy to fix/mantain all purpose tank, think about the crap the brits had in the desert! Also remember what logistical nightmare would've been changing landing barges/crafts, pontoon bridges and all the other systems to accomodate an heavier tank, different spare parts, pratically what the germans were struggling with their "wunderpanzers". Mostly the enemy heavies were confronted by the CAS aircrafts, the artillery or the TD. |
SBminisguy | 25 Dec 2021 11:24 a.m. PST |
|
Wolfhag | 25 Dec 2021 11:58 a.m. PST |
After wasting much time I quit clicking on any click bait link that has "myth", "everything you know about XYZ is wrong, "the 10 things you need to know about XYZ" in the title. They are normally a rehashed old article with a specific bias. Journalism is dying a slow death in search of clicks. You can do better than this Tango. Wolfhag |
Legion 4 | 25 Dec 2021 12:01 p.m. PST |
Well in the PTO the M4 was nicknamed "the Panther of the Pacific" … But of course the IJFs' AFVs were not very high tech. And yes, alexpainter +1
|
Griefbringer | 25 Dec 2021 12:38 p.m. PST |
After wasting much time I quit clicking on any click bait link that has "myth", "everything you know about XYZ is wrong, "the 10 things you need to know about XYZ" in the title. That is a wise decision. Though these kinds of headlines are not anything particularly new, having been around the press at least since the 1980's if not earlier – though back then the term "click-bait" did not exist. |